Construct Validity of the Korean Women's Abuse Intolerance Scale

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Domestic violence against married women has persisted throughout Korean history. However, very little empirical research has been conducted in Korea about domestic violence, its causes, or women's responses. OBJECTIVE: To develop and test psychometrically the Korean Women's Abuse Intolerance Scale (KWAIS) to measure women's propensity or desire to leave abusive husbands in Korea. METHODS: The first phase of the investigation involved qualitative research to explore the themes of women's responses to domestic violence and the development of the instrument. The second phase was a preliminary study conducted to examine women's responses to domestic violence. In the third phase, construct validity of the scale was established, using a sample of 184 married women living in Korea. RESULTS: The KWAIS adequately supported the underlying theory of women's responses to domestic violence, demonstrating strong content validity, high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha of .98), and criterion-related validity evidenced by significant correlations that supported hypotheses among abuse intolerance and abuse (r = .69), traditional family ideology (r = -.78), marital satisfaction (r = -.85), attitude toward power ascription (r = .63), and collectivism (r = -.88). Factor analysis yielded a four-factor structure, explaining 78.4% of the common variance. Factor loadings ranged from .65 to .93. DISCUSSION: The findings for the psychometric properties of the KWAIS established its potential as a research instrument in measuring Korean women's propensity or desire to leave abusive husbands. Future studies need to focus on determining the predictive validity of the KWAIS and evaluating cross-cultural differences in women's propensity or desire to leave abusive husbands.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.