Table 3.

Bivariate and Multivariable Associations between State-Level Gender Inequality and State-Level Prevalence Estimates of Intimate Partner Violence among Women and Men in the 50 U.S. States and D.C., 2010.

	Women						Men
	Any IPVe		Physical IPV		Psychological IPV		Any IPVe		Physical IPV		Psychological IPV
	B (SE)	R2	B (SE)	R2	B (SE)	R2	B (SE)	R2	B (SE)	R2	B (SE)	R2
Gender Inequality Indexa,d	1.03 (.50)	.05	0.83 (.52)	.03	1.76 (.56)	.15	−.28 (.62)	.01	.04 (.56)	.02	1.52 (.70)	.07
p-value	.05		.12		.003		.65		.28		.03
Gender Inequality Indexb,c,d	.84 (.51)	.10	0.49 (.50)	.15	1.61 (.57)	.16	−.59 (.61)	.06	−.28 (.55)	.08	1.33 (.72)	.11
p-value	.15		.32		.007		.33		.61		.07

^aBivariate association.

^bMultivariable association.

^cAdjusting for median income (in $1000 increments).

^dRegression coefficients can be interpreted as one standard deviation increase in the Gender Inequality Index value is associated with an increase or decrease in the prevalence of IPV victimization.

^eAny Form of IPV, refers to contact sexual, physical, and stalking victimization by an intimate partner.