Table 5.
Mechanism 1: Women’s resources |
Mechanism 2: Family formation |
Mechanism 3: Partner’s resources |
Mechanism 4: Attitudes |
|||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Literate | Employed | Occupa- tional prestigea |
Married as teen |
1st birth as teen | Years of schooling |
Occupa- tional prestigeb |
IPV is OKd | |||||||||
Estimated years of education | .01 | *** | .01 | .38 | *** | −.05 | *** | −.05 | *** | .34 | *** | .30 | *** | −.01 | ** | |
(.00) | *** | (.01) | (.04) | (.01) | (.01) | (.04) | (.03) | (.00) | ||||||||
Constant | .83 | 0.71 | *** | .48 | 1.03 | *** | .99 | *** | 6.33 | *** | 1.04 | ** | .17 | *** | ||
(.04) | (0.06) | (.43) | (.06) | (.06) | (.38) | (.34) | (.03) | |||||||||
N | 14,825 | 14,835 | 7,586 | 14,836 | 14,836 | 14,743 | 10,336 | 14,592 |
Note: All models adjust for ethnolinguistic background, childhood location; number of siblings, history of family violence, and state of residence.
Robust standard errors in parentheses, clustered by survey cluster
p<0.001,
p<0.01,
p<0.05,
p<0.1
Occupational prestige is calculated among employed respondents only.
Partner’s occupational prestige is calculated among ever-married and currently partnered respondents only. Observations in 2012 and between August and December 2010 are not included in this measure (information was not collected at these times).
Difference in occupational prestige is calculated among ever-married and currently partnered respondents where both the respondent and her partner were listed as having an occupation and where information on each of their occupations was available.
Attitudinal questions toward IPV were only asked in Peru starting in 2005. Only observations from 2005 onward are included in this measure.