Ideal Partner Vs. Actual Partner: Do Discrepancies Predict Violence Perpetration in Community Women?

Introduction: The ideal standards model suggests that individuals have expectations for their romantic partners’ traits or characteristics. When standards are met relationship satisfaction tends to be higher. However, romantic partners may not always meet the expectations set by their counterparts, resulting an actual-ideal discrepancy. Research on the ideals standard model posits that when an actual-ideal discrepancy exists, it is likely to direct behavior within the relationship. Yet few studies have examined the role of actual-ideal discrepancies and their influence on intimate partner violence (IPV). We examined the role of actual-ideal discrepancy on IPV perpetration among low income, ethnically diverse community women.

Methods: Data were from Project HOW: Health Outcomes of Women, a longitudinal study conducted over 6 waves from 1995–2003. Wave 6 data were analyzed (N = 565). Participants varied by ethnicity (African American (AA) 40%; Mexican American (MA) 32%; European American (EA) 28%). Marshall’s Severity of Violence Against Men Scales was used to assess participants’ perpetration of threats and physical violence against their romantic partner. To determine actual-ideal discrepancy, women indicated how important it is for a romantic partner/relationship to have each of 39 qualities. Women were then asked how much their current romantic partner/relationship meets this description.

Results: A factor analysis of discrepancy scores revealed 5 subscales representing discrepancies on: companionship, relational investment, conflict, time, and others’ approval. We examined the effects of actual-ideal discrepancies on AA, EA, and MA women’s IPV perpetration in a series of multiple regressions. Actual-ideal discrepancies significantly predicted women’s perpetration of threats for AA women (R² = .051, F(5, 220) = 2.385, p = .039), and EA women (R² = .138, F(5, 152) = 4.860, p < .001), but not for MA women, (R² = .025, F(5, 175) = .914, p = .474). For physical violence, actual-ideal discrepancies predicted women’s perpetration for AA women (R² = .076, F(5, 219) = 3.608, p = .004) , and EA women (R² = .105, 1F(5, 152) = 3.567, p = .004). Once again, MA women’s actual-ideal discrepancy did not predict their physical violence perpetration, (R² = .007, F(5, 175) = .225, p = .937).

Conclusion: These results show the importance of actual-ideal discrepancies in IPV perpetration as well as highlight ethnic differences in the degree to which actual-ideal discrepancies may drive violent behaviors. These findings have implications for differentiating between ethnicities in research and program development, and highlight the potential for cognitive behavioral methods in IPV prevention.