. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Aug 31.

Published in final edited form as: Econ Polit Wkly. 2013 Aug 31;48(35):http://www.epw.in/consequences-gender-imbalance/effect-male-surplus-intimate-partner-violence-india.html.

Table 3.

Multilevel analysis of sex ratio and physical violence against women in India, National Family Health Survey, India, 2005–06 (N = 63,330)

	Model 1 Kick/drag/beat		Model 2 Punch		Model 3 Slap		Model 4 Push/shake/throw		Model 5 Twist/pull

	b	SE	b	SE	B	SE	b	SE	b	SE
FIXED EFFECTS:
Explanatory variables
Level 2
Female-to-male sex ratio	−.002	.001	−.002^*	.001	−.002^*	.001	−.002^*	.001	−.003^*	.001
Region (ref=north)
South	.287^**	.060	.031	.059	.248^**	.045	.006	.055	.248^**	.053
East	.308^**	.071	.370^**	.068	.319^**	.056	.238^**	.065	.278^**	.064
Northeast	.019	.073	.008	.070	.122^*	.054	.047	.065	−.086	.065
Level 1
Woman’s status
Years of education	−.087^**	.005	−.096^**	.005	−.086^**	.003	−.084^**	.004	−.101^**	.004
Educ diff (husb–wife)	−.356^**	.004	−.037^**	.004	−.031^**	.003	−.040^**	.004	−.037^**	.004
Paid work	.373^**	.033	.316^**	.034	.239^**	.024	.315^**	.031	.281^**	.030
Age	−.022^**	.002	−.016^**	.002	−.028^**	.001	−.017^**	.002	−.017^**	.002
# of sons	.093^**	.014	.078^**	.014	.090^**	.010	.091^**	.013	.086^**	.013
Household Standard of living (ref=high)
Low	.729^**	.049	.629^**	.050	.507^**	.035	.560^**	.046	.623^**	.045
Medium	.482^**	.042	.425^**	.043	.325^**	.029	.448^**	.039	.417^**	.038
Caste (ref=other caste)
Scheduled caste	.358^**	.047	.252^**	.047	.230^**	.034	.203^**	.044	.242^**	.042
Scheduled tribe	−.026	.063	−.103	.063	−.051	.045	−.077	.058	−.073	.056
Other backward caste	.164^**	.044	.081	.044	.049	.031	.100^*	.040	−.054	.049
Intercept	−2.717^**	.147	−2.595^**	.143	−.836^**	.108	−2.254^**	.134	−2.024^**	.131
−2 Log likelihood	371088		371090		312867		356359		353871

^**

p < .01,

p < .05