Table 3.
Associations Between IPV and Related Circumstances and Sexual Orientation, Immigration Status, and Socioeconomic Status.
| Descriptive Results | Logistic Regression Results | Descriptive Results | Logistic Regression Results | Descriptive Results | Logistic Regression Results | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||||||||
| Model 2: Sexual Orientation | Model 3: Immigration Status | Model 4: Socioeconomic Status | |||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| Heterosexual | Sexual Minority | Non- immigrant | Immigrant | Not Living in Poverty | Living in Poverty | ||||
| n (%)a | n (%)a | AOR (95% Cl) | n (%)a | n (%)a | AOR (95% Cl) | n (%)a | n (%)a | AORA (95% Cl) | |
| IPV from current partner past-12-month | 1,1 13 (6.0) | 69 (37.5) | 8.13*** (5.89, 1 1.21) | 1,133 (6.1) | 61 (16.2) | 2.19*** (1.62, 2.97) | 1,000 (5.6) | 133 (18.1) | 3.53*** (2.87, 4.34) |
| IPV from previous partner past-12-month | 861 (8.6) | 88 (60.3) | 14.20*** (9.59, 21.03) | 907 (9.0) | 49 (23.8) | 2.23*** (1.51,3.29) | 779 (8.2) | 147 (25.7) | 3.74*** (2.97, 4.70) |
| Police non-involvement following the mostserious incident of IPV from current partner past-12-month | 482 (94.1) | 13 (59.1) | (.03, .27) | 471 (92.4) | 26 (96.3) | 1.44 (.21, 10.01) | 417 (93.7) | 53 (82.8) | 24*** (.11,.56) |
| Police non-involvement following the most serious incident of IPV from previous partner past-12-month | 150 (57.9) | 8 (53.3) | 1.05 (.28, 3.94) | 155 (57.4) | 3 (75.0) | 2.47 (.13,46.89) | 127 (57.0) | 21 (52.5) | 2.15† (.88, 5.29) |
| Worrying about IPV from current partner past-12-month | 521 (1.8) | 33 (7.6) | 4.89*** (3.36, 7.13) | 533 (1.8) | 27 (4.4) | 2.22*** (1.47, 3.36) | 453 (1.6) | 70 (5.8) | 4 15*** (3.20, 5.39) |
| Worrying about IPV from previous partner past-12-month | 1,772 (7.1) | 75 (12.9) | 1.84*** (1.43, 2.36) | 1,806 (7.1) | 61 (1 1.7) | 1.62*** (1.23, 2.13) | 1,568 (6.7) | 232 (15.4) | 2.61*** (2.24, 3.04) |
Note. AOR = Adjusted odds ratio.
All models adjusted for individual-level age, relationship status, and type of living area. Model 2 also adjusted for immigration status and socioeconomic status. Model 3 also adjusted for sexual orientation and socioeconomic status.
Model 4 also adjusted for sexual orientation and immigration status.
a
Weighted percentages.
†
p < .10.
***
p < .001.