Dating Violence Myths Scale (DaVi-M)

Abstract

The Dating Violence Myths Scale (DaVi-M; Toplu-Demirtaş et al., 2023) is a 9-item inventory developed to assess misperceptions, overgeneralizations, or widely held beliefs related to dating violence (DV). Its construction involved three studies using cross-sectional and longitudinal data, with evaluation conducted on separate samples of emerging adults, primarily college students, including both dating and non-dating individuals. The scale’s psychometric properties, including factor analysis, reliability, and validity, have been reported for these items.

Keywords

Dating Relationships; Dating Violence Myths; Myths on Victims/Survivors; Sexual Violence; Young Adults; Adult Attitudes; Myths; Emerging Adulthood; Dating Violence.

Authors

Toplu-Demirtaş, Ezgi; Soysal, Demet Esra; Aracı-İyiaydın, Ayşegül; Mesut, Cansel

---

Purpose

The questionnaire’s primary purpose is to advance research on the prevalent myths surrounding dating violence.

Validity

Construct Validity: The findings from the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) provided acceptable evidence for the construct validity of the DaVi-M, confirming its proposed three-factor structure.
Concurrent Validity: Dating violence myths showed a significant correlation with psychological DV perpetration, with r(160) = .301, p < .05. Irrational romantic beliefs and DV myths were also found to be related, r(160) = .250, p < .05. Additionally, the results indicated that dating emerging adults who held more myths about DV tended to accept psychological aggression within their relationships, r(160) = .399, p < .05.
Predictive Validity: The scale demonstrated predictive validity among both dating and non-dating emerging adults, predominantly college students, through longitudinal data.

Reliability

Internal Consistency: Cronbach’s alphas were computed to assess the internal consistency of the factors and the overall scale. The coefficients for the individual factors were .647 for Factor 1, .610 for Factor 2, and .604 for Factor 3. These values were below the commonly recommended minimum of .70 (Nunnally, 1978). This lower reliability might be attributed to the limited number of items per factor, as further reliability analyses did not show improvement upon item deletion. The Cronbach’s alpha for the full 9-item scale was .680.

Factor Analysis

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA): The scree plot indicated a three-factor solution, with a distinct break after the third factor. The EFA also identified three factors with eigenvalues greater than 1, collectively accounting for 57.53% of the total variance. All items loaded onto their respective factors with factor loadings exceeding .30.
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA): The χ2 test of the model was not statistically significant, with χ2 (24, N = 330) = 30.476, (p = .169). The obtained χ2/df ratio was 1.270, which is less than the recommended value of 3 (Kline, 2005). The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) was .029 (90% confidence interval [CI] [.000, .056]), which is lower than the .05 threshold for a perfect fit (Browne & Cudeck, 1993). The standardized Root Mean Square Residual (RMR) was .037, below the proposed cutoff value (Hu & Bentler, 1999). The Comparative Fit Index (CFI) was .989, exceeding the suggested value (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Overall, the fit indices for the DaVi-M indicated a perfect model fit.

Instrument: Dating Violence Myths Scale (DaVi-M)

Test Type: Original Inventory/Questionnaire
Format: Electronic administration method.
Language Available: English and Turkish.
Population Group: Human (Male, Female).
Age Group: Adulthood (18 yrs & older), Young Adulthood (18-29 yrs), Thirties (30-39 yrs).
Population Details: Respondents primarily consisted of college student samples of emerging adults in Turkey. The age range was 18-30 years. Gender identities reported included Female, Male, and Nonbinary.
Test Methodology: The methodology involved Test Validity (Concurrent Validity, Construct Validity, Predictive Validity), Test Reliability (Internal Consistency), and Factor Analysis (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Exploratory Factor Analysis).

Keywords

Dating Relationships; Dating Violence Myths; Myths on Victims/Survivors; Sexual Violence; Young Adults.

Authors

Toplu-Demirtaş, Ezgi

• Affiliation: MEF University

• Email addresses: [email protected]

• Correspondence Address: MEF University, Ayazaga Cad. No: 4, Maslak, Sarıyer, İstanbul, Turkey, 34396, [email protected]

• Author ORCID Identifier: No data is Available

Soysal, Demet Esra

• Affiliation: MEF University

• Email addresses: No data is Available

• Correspondence Address: No data is Available

• Author ORCID Identifier: No data is Available

Aracı-İyiaydın, Ayşegül

• Affiliation: TED University

• Email addresses: No data is Available

• Correspondence Address: No data is Available

• Author ORCID Identifier: No data is Available

Mesut, Cansel

• Affiliation: MEF University

• Email addresses: No data is Available

• Correspondence Address: No data is Available

• Author ORCID Identifier: No data is Available

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

• Permissions: May be used for Research/Teaching purposes.

• Fee: No fee is required.

• Test Year: 2023.

References

Toplu-Demirtaş, E., Soysal, D. E., Aracı-İyiaydın, A., & Mesut, C. (2023). Making the myths of dating violence visible: Developing a new scale and testing its psychometrics through cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(13-14), 8136–8161. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605231153890

Items of the Dating Violence Myths Scale (DaVi-M)

The DaVi-M is a 9-item scale.
Factors and Subscales:

• Myths on victims/survivors

• Dating relationships

• Sexual violence

Myths on victims/survivors

• Jealousy and possessiveness in a dating relationship are a sign of love. (Item 1)

• In a good dating relationship, partners spend all their time together. (Item 3)

• If the person says yes to a behavior, it is unacceptable to change their minds later. (Item 16)

Dating relationships

• Even if there is violence, those in a relationship are private, others should not interfere. (Item 13)

• The person subjected to violence must have acted in a way that caused it. (Item 10)

• If a woman refuses an offer, she is coy. (Item 14)

Sexual violence

• Constantly checking on the partner is a sign of caring and affection. (Item 2)

• Saying yes to sexual behavior in a dating relationship means giving consent to the same behavior every time. (Item 15)

• People are often exposed to sexual violence by people they do not know. (Item 19)

The specific items of the scale are available in the source reference: Toplu-Demirtaş, E., Soysal, D. E., Aracı-İyiaydın, A., & Mesut, C. (2023). Making the myths of dating violence visible: Developing a new scale and testing its psychometrics through cross-sectional and longitudinal evidence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(13-14), 8136–8161. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605231153890 (Table 1, Page 8143).