Table 3.

The association of Alter’s IPV acceptance on Ego’s IPV acceptance conditional on relationship overlap

	Model 1 Alter IPV w/all interactions	Model 2 Alter IPV w/all interactions + HH	Model 3 women only	Model 4 men only
Alter IPV	0.35****	−0.06	0.12	−0.49*
	(0.10)	(0.14)	(0.17)	(0.23)
Non-Nominated In-House Alter* Alter IPV		1.03***	1.06**	1.26**
		(0.25)	(0.33)	(0.38)
Nominated In-House Alter* Alter IPV		1.52***	1.64***	1.65***
		(0.26)	(0.34)	(0.42)
Mother* Alter IPV	0.97****	0.55	0.24	1.23**
	(0.29)	(0.30)	(0.37)	(0.51)
Father* Alter IPV	0.73**	0.39	−0.01	1.06
	(0.36)	(0.37)	(0.48)	(0.61)
Sibling* Alter IPV	0.16	0.33	0.03	1.00**
	(0.22)	(0.23)	(0.26)	(0.43)
Spouse* Alter IPV	0.88***	−0.20	−0.19	−0.11
	(0.30)	(0.32)	(0.47)	(0.48)
Important Matters* Alter IPV	0.38*	−0.07	−0.32	0.38
	(0.21)	(0.21)	(0.28)	(0.33)
Trust* Alter IPV	0.67***	0.11	0.08	0.22
	(0.21)	(0.23)	(0.29)	(0.40)
Talk* Alter IPV	0.72****	0.25	−0.20	1.07**
	(0.19)	(0.20)	(0.25)	(0.36)
Church* Alter IPV	0.40*	0.28	−0.02	0.60
	(0.22)	(0.22)	(0.25)	(0.47)
Health Advice* Alter IPV	0.29	0.11	−0.20	0.69
	(0.22)	(0.22)	(0.28)	(0.39)
Income	−0.34**	0.32*	−0.18*	−0.63**
	(0.13)	(0.13)	(0.16)	(0.24)
Age	0.01*	0.01	0.02	0.00
	(0.01)	(0.01)	(0.01)	(0.01)
Gender Male	−0.55***	−0.57**
	(0.20)	(0.21)
Demographic Controls	Y	Y	Y	Y
Stratify			Female	Male
Num. obs.	9621	9621	5274	4347
Num. clust.	832	832	449	382

Multiple observations of the same individual adjusted for using GEE. Results of regressions of dependent variable equal to 1 if the subject accepted IPV, 0 otherwise and standard errors reported in parentheses

^**** p < 0.001, ^*** p < 0.01, ^** p < 0.05, ^* p < 0.10, complete model with all interaction terms in Additional file 1: Table S3