Are we there yet? Australians’ attitudes towards violence against women & gender equality: Summary findings from the 2017 National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey (NCAS)

About the NCAS

The National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey, or NCAS, tells us:

• about people’s understanding of, and attitudes towards, violence against women;
• about their attitudes towards gender equality;
• what influences their attitudes;
• if there has been a change over time; and
• whether people are prepared to intervene when witnessing abuse or disrespect towards women.

The 2017 NCAS collected information through mobile and landline telephone interviews with a representative sample of 17,500 Australians aged 16 years and over.

The Australian Government Department of Social Services (DSS) funds the NCAS as part of the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010-2022 (the National Plan).¹ The 2017 NCAS is closely aligned with Change the Story: A shared framework for the primary prevention of violence against women and their children in Australia (Change the Story),² which was developed to support achievement of the National Plan goals. The NCAS also complements the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Personal Safety Survey (PSS), which asks people about their experiences of violence.

The NCAS is the world’s longest-running survey of community attitudes towards violence against women. It was initially developed on behalf of the Australian Government in 1995, drawing on an earlier 1987 survey. The last two national surveys took place in 2009 and 2013³ (led by VicHealth). Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS) is proud to be leading the 2017 NCAS in collaboration with our research partners.

The NCAS is a resource for anyone wanting to understand and prevent violence against women. It can be used by educators, policymakers, program planners, researchers, journalists and students.

About this summary

This is a summary of the 2017 NCAS results, focusing on the Australian community as a whole.

Findings for young people, those from non-English speaking backgrounds, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians are in dedicated reports (to be released early in 2019). Further detailed findings and methodological information about the NCAS can be found on the ANROWS website.

In partnership with:

Why survey attitudes to violence against women and gender equality?

Physical and sexual violence against women are prevalent problems with significant health, social and economic costs for women and their children, as well as society as a whole.^3-4 Gender inequality and disrespect of women increase the likelihood of this violence occurring.⁶

There is evidence that violence against women can be prevented before it occurs by addressing the underlying factors that cause the problem.² Prevention action complements but is separate from responses after violence has occurred. However, both forms of action are required to reduce the prevalence of violence over time.

Australian governments have made significant efforts to reduce violence against women and promote gender equality and respect. However, 1 in 4 Australian women have experienced intimate partner violence since the age of 15, and 1 in 5 have experienced sexual violence.⁷ Also, 1 in 6 Australian women have experienced stalking and more than half have experienced sexual harassment.^8-10

While affecting women across the social spectrum, this violence is either more prevalent and/or more severe and prolonged among young women, women with disabilities and women with limited access to resources such as education, housing, income and employment, as well as among women from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, rural and regional and some culturally and linguistically diverse communities.¹¹

Attitudes are shaped by the world around us, including through our families and friends, communities and institutions such as schools and the media.¹² As a reflection of this world, attitudes may serve as a barometer. They are one way of telling us whether progress is being made and where we may need to focus future effort.

Many factors contribute to violence. Attitudes that endorse violence and disrespect towards women and gender inequality are among these factors, as discussed further in this summary.

This summary was led by Violeta Marticorena Politoff and designed by Holly Windle, with art direction by Eleanor Shepherd.

This summary is based on the main 2017 NCAS report: Australians’ attitudes to violence against women and gender equality. Findings from the 2017 National Community Attitudes Survey towards Violence against Women Survey by Webster, K., Diemer, K., Honey, N., Mannix, S., Mickle, J., Morgan, J., Parkes, A., Politoff, V., Powell, A., Stubbs, J. & Ward, A.

The 2017 NCAS questionnare

The questionnaire from the 2013 survey was redeveloped for 2017, retaining as many questions as possible to measure changes over time. The NCAS Questionnaire Framework provides an overview of the questionnaire (page 7).

The core of the survey (represented in the centre cells) involves components^[2] made up of questions designed to find out about people’s knowledge of violence against women (25 questions), attitudes towards gender equality (19 questions), attitudes towards violence against women (35 questions and two scenarios) and bystander intentions if witnessing violence or disrespect towards women (two scenarios).

Each component is further divided into themes. These reflect different aspects of knowledge and different ways attitudinal support for gender inequality and endorsement of violence against women can be expressed. The main themes are described in greater detail in the box on page 18. The themes in the ‘bystander’ component (page 7) reflect the conditions known to increase the chances that people will take positive action as bystanders to violence and disrespect.

As well as measuring people’s responses to individual questions, selected overall concepts are gauged using 15 composite measures (these may be referred to as scales or constructs). These are made up from selected questions using statistical methods to ensure they measure the concept accurately.^[3]

The first component in the NCAS Framework, the knowledge component has one composite measure that gauges people’s overall understanding that violence against women extends beyond physical violence to also include psychological, social and financial means of control and intimidation. There are composite measures to gauge attitudes towards gender equality and violence against women overall, as well as the themes in each of these components. Drawing on questions from the bystander component, there is a composite measure of people’s overall intention to take positive action if they witness violence or disrespect towards women.

Many factors influence knowledge and attitudes. Increasing understanding of these factors is an aim of the NCAS. The factors included in the 2017 NCAS are shown in the far left cells in the NCAS Questionnaire Framework. Information is collected from survey participants to measure each of these factors. This is then used in the analysis of their responses to the questions in the four core survey components. This includes questions about themselves such as their age, occupation, education and whether they have a disability. Among the new factors measured in the 2017 NCAS are:

• people’s levels of prejudice on the basis of other attributes (sexual orientation, Aboriginality, ethnicity and disability);
• their support for violence in general; and
• the gender composition of their friendship networks and workplaces.

NCAS Questionnaire Framework

NCAS Questionnaire Framework

Factors demographic, contextual & attitudinal factors that may be associated with and influence attitudes	Questionnaire components made up of questions in themes	Composite measures made from groups of questions to measure an overall concept
Demographic factors Gender Age Household composition Education Labour force status Occupation of respondent and main household income earner Postcode Self-identified disability Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander status Country of birth of respondent and their mother and father Year of arrival Language other than English spoken at home English language proficiency Contextual factors Gender make-up of a person’s social networks Attitudinal factors Prejudice Attitudes Construct (PAC) – Prejudice towards people on the basis of ethnicity, Aboriginality, sexuality and disability General Violence Construct (GVC) – Support for the use of violence in general	Knowledge of violence against women Definition / nature of the problem Violence & the law Patterns & consequences Contributing factors Knowledge of resources	Understanding Violence Against Women Scale (UVAWS)
	Attitudes towards gender equality Undermining women’s independence and decision-making in public life private life Promoting rigid gender roles, stereotypes and expressions Condoning male peer relations involving aggression & disrespect Denying gender inequality is a problem	Gender Equality Attitudes Scale (GEAS) and scale themes
	Attitudes towards violence against women Excusing the perpetrator and holding women responsible Minimising violence against women Mistrusting women’s reports of violence Disregarding the need to gain consent	Community Attitudes Supportive of Violence Against Women Scale (CASVAWS) and scale themes
	Bystander action When witnessing abuse or disrespect towards women Intentions Confidence Anticipation of social support	Intention to Act Construct (ITAC)
	Social norms** Measured by what people think others think or what is expected of them Social norms pertaining to violence against women and gender equality ** Not measured in the 2017 NCAS. Subject to future development.	–

Key to symbols across this report

Positive change between the 2013 and the 2017 NCAS. The difference between these years is statistically significant, p≤.01.

^ Difference between men and women is statistically significant, p≤.01.

* Difference between survey year and 2017 is statistically significant, p≤.01.

º Difference between 2009 and 2013 is statistically significant, p≤.01.

– Question not asked.

Ω There is a significant difference of less than one percent between 2013 and 2017. This is not apparent in the figure as all values have been rounded.

Note: percentages for individual questions may not add to 100% as the small percentage who chose not to answer are not included.

Change in knowledge and attitudes over time

Responses to individual questions show that the majority of Australians have a good understanding of violence against women, support gender equality, reject attitudes supportive of violence against women, and say they would act, or would like to act, when witnessing abuse or disrespect towards women. There was an improvement between 2013 and 2017 on 27 of the 36 questions asked in both survey waves.

To measure change over time at an overall level, statistical modelling was used to account for the fact that not every question was asked in every survey wave. Using the composite measures, each respondent was given a score based on their answers to questions in the composite measures. An average for the Australian population was then calculated. Scores range from 1 to 100.

Changes in understanding of violence against women over time, 2009, 2013, 2017

Changes in understanding of violence against women over time, 2009, 2013 and 2017. Mean scores for the UVAWS – a higher score indicates a better understanding of violence

Sample	2009	2013	2017
All	64*	64*	70
Men	59*^	60*^	66^
Women	69*	68*	74

Changes in attitudinal support for gender equality over time, 2009, 2013, 2017

Changes in attitudinal support for gender equality over time, 2009, 2013 and 2017. Mean scores for the GEAS – higher scores indicate higher attitudinal support for gender equality/rejection of inequality in that theme

Sample	2009	2013	2017
All	64*º	64*	66
Men	61*^	61*^	64^
Women	68º	66*	68

Changes in attitudinal support for violence against women over time, 2009, 2013, 2017

Changes in attitudinal support for violence against women over time, 2009, 2013 and 2017. Mean scores for the CASVAWS – A lower score is better and indicates lower attitudinal support for violence against women

Sample	2009	2013	2017
All	36*	36*	33
Men	37*^	37*^	35^
Women	35*	35*	32

Between 2013 and 2017 there was positive change on all three composite measures.^[4]

• The average score for Australians on the measure of understanding violence against women increased from 64 to 70 (ranging from 1 to 100, with 100 indicating the highest level of understanding).
• The score for attitudinal support for gender equality increased from 64 to 66 (with 100 indicating the highest level of support for gender equality).
• On the measure of attitudinal support for violence against women, the average score fell from 36 to 33 (this is a positive result with 1 representing the lowest level of endorsement of violence-supportive attitudes).
• Both men and women have improved on all three measures since 2013, however there are gender differences on the three measures. Men have a lower level of understanding of violence against women, a lower level of support for gender equality, and a higher level of attitudinal support for violence against women.

Changing attitudes and improving knowledge takes time. The current results show that Australians’ knowledge of, and attitudes towards, violence against women and gender equality are gradually improving. In spite of this progress, there remain areas of concern.

Knowledge of violence against women

Knowledge of violence against women is among the factors influencing attitudes^13-15 and is an important resource for both affected individuals and those around them to identify and respond constructively to the problem.^16-17 Knowledge of the law is important in encouraging individuals to report violence when it occurs and can play a role in shaping positive social norms that take violence seriously.¹⁸

Understanding that certain behaviours are a form of domestic violence/violence against women (% always, usually or sometimes violence)

Physical forms of violence

Action	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Slaps or pushes to cause harm or fear	97	97	97*Ω	97	Significant
Forces the other partner to have sex	94*	97	96	97
Tries to scare/control by threatening to hurt other family members	–	98	97	98
Throws or smashes objects to frighten or threaten	91*	97	96	96

Non-physical forms of violence

Action	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Repeatedly criticises to make partner feel bad or useless	71*	85*	85*	92	Significant
Controls social life by preventing partner from seeing family/friends	74*	83*	85*	91	Significant
Controls the other partner by denying them money	62*	71*	70*	81	Significant
Repeatedly keeps track of location, calls or activities through mobile phone or other devices without consent	–	–	–	84
Stalking by repeatedly following/watching at home/work	–	90*	89*	92	Significant
Harassment by repeated emails, text messages	–	85*	85*	90	Significant

Knowledge of the prevalence of violence against women (% agree)

Statement	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Violence against women is common in our community	–	74	68*	72	Significant

Understanding of sexual violence (% agree)

Statement	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
If a woman doesn’t physically resist – even if protesting verbally – then it isn’t really rape	–	–	10*	7	Significant
Many allegations of sexual assault made by women are false	–	–	–	16
It is a criminal offense for a man to have sex with his wife without her consent	–	–	–	81
Women are more likely to be raped by someone they know than by a stranger	76*	70*	64	64

Knowledge of resources (% agree)

Statement	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
If I needed to get outside advice or support for someone about a domestic violence issue, I would know where to go	–	62	57*	60	Significant

Knowledge of the gendered pattern of intimate partner violence

Understanding the patterns of intimate partner violence is important because it reflects knowledge of the nature, severity and dynamics of violence itself. The response to intimate partner violence from someone who believes this form of violence tends to be mutual violence between two people with equal power is likely to be very different to someone who understands that a large proportion of intimate partner violence involves unequal, gendered power dynamics. As well as impacting individuals’ responses to intimate partner violence, this understanding may influence the level of policy attention and resourcing given to address intimate partner violence affecting women, relative to that affecting men. The NCAS asked respondents about their knowledge of the gendered pattern of domestic violence.

Does knowledge reflect the evidence?

Who is more likely to commit domestic violence?

The evidence

• Men are more likely than women to perpetrate intimate partner violence, and are more likely to use frequent, prolonged and extreme violence.^7,19-22
• Men are more likely than women to sexually assault their partner.²³
• Men are more likely than women to subject their partner to controlling and coercive behaviours.^24-25
• Women are more likely than men to use violence against their partner in self-defence or in response to a loss of control or dignity from ongoing violence or control by their partner.^21,26-30

What Australians believe

While most Australians (64%) recognise that mainly men, or men more often, commit acts of domestic violence, the percentage who recognise this has dropped 7 percentage points since the 2013 NCAS. This decline has been occurring since 1995, when 86% recognised this fact. In 2009, recognition was down to 74% and it dropped a further 3 percentage points to 71% in 2013.

Does knowledge reflect the evidence?

Who is more likely to suffer physical harm from domestic violence?

The evidence

• Women are more likely than men to suffer physical harm, including injuries requiring medical treatment, time off from work and days in bed.^20,31
• Women are more likely than men to be the victims of domestic homicide.^32-33

What Australians believe

While most Australians (81%) recognise that women are more likely to suffer physical harm from domestic violence, the percentage who recognise this has dropped 5 percentage points since the 2013 NCAS. This decline has been occurring since 2009, when 89% recognised this fact. In 2013, recognition was down to 86%.

Does knowledge reflect the evidence?

Who is more likely to experience fear from domestic violence?

The evidence

• Women are more likely than men to report experiencing fear as a result of violence.^19,24,34-35

What Australians believe

Less than half (49%) of Australians recognise that levels of fear from domestic violence are worse for women, and there has been no statistically significant change since 2013. This is a 6 percentage point decline from 2009, when 55% of respondents recognised that levels of fear are worse for women.

What are violence-supportive attitudes?

Individuals who hold such attitudes are not necessarily violence prone or would openly condone violence against women. However, when such attitudes are expressed by influential individuals or are held by a large number of people, they can contribute to a culture in which violence is at best not clearly condemned, or at worst, is actively condoned or encouraged.

What are attitudes that undermine gender equality?

Attitudes to gender inequality

Promoting gender equality is pivotal to reducing violence against women. Gender inequality, and attitudes supporting gender inequality, provide the social conditions in which violence against women is more likely to occur.⁶ This is a position supported by key expert bodies^36-38 and which underpins both the National Plan and Change the Story. Monitoring changes in attitudes to gender equality over time is an important way of tracking the conditions that increase the likelihood of violence against women.

Achieving gender equality is also important for other reasons, including its link to the wellbeing of women, men and their families, the protection and promotion of human rights, and its benefits for wider society, including improved productivity, creativity and economic development.^39-40

The aspects of gender equality found to be linked to violence against women have been identified in research compiled for Change the Story. NCAS questions to measure these attitudes were selected from existing studies.

Promoting rigid gender roles, stereotypes and expressions (% agree)

Attitude	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
If a woman earns more than her male partner, it is not good for the relationship	–	–	8
A man should never admit when others have hurt his feelings	–	–	6
When a couple start dating, the woman should not be the one to initiate sex	–	–	10
I think it is embarrassing for a man to have a job that is usually filled by a woman	–	–	6
A woman has to have children to be fulfilled	11*	12*	8	Significant

Undermining women’s independence and decision-making in public life (% agree)

Attitude	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
In the workplace, men generally make more capable bosses than women	–	–	14
Men, rather than women, should hold positions of responsibility in the community	–	–	10
On the whole, men make better political leaders than women	23*	27*	14	Significant
Women are less capable than men of thinking logically	–	–	6

Undermining women’s independence and decision-making in private life (% agree)

Attitude	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Men should take control in relationships and be the head of the household	18	19*	16	Significant
Women prefer a man to be in charge of the relationship	27	28*	25	Significant

Condoning male peer relations involving aggression and disrespect towards women (% agree)

Attitude	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
I think there’s no harm in men making sexist jokes about women when they are among their male friends	–	–	24
I think it’s okay for men to joke with their male friends about being violent towards women	–	–	2
I think it’s natural for a man to want to appear in control of his partner in front of his male friends	–	–	34

Denying gender inequality is a problem (% agree)

Attitude	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Many women exaggerate how unequally women are treated in Australia	–	–	40
Many women mistakenly interpret innocent remarks or acts as being sexist	–	–	50
Many women fail to fully appreciate all that men do for them	–	–	36
Women often flirt with men just to be hurtful	–	–	20
Discrimination against women is no longer a problem in the workplace in Australia	11	13*	10	Significant

Which aspects of gender equality are most widely supported by Australians?

To find out which aspects of gender equality are more or less likely to be supported by Australians overall, each respondent was given a score based on their answers to questions in each theme. An average for the Australian population was then calculated. The NCAS questions are framed to ask about gender inequality, but the scores for the composite measures have been calculated to indicate the level of support for gender equality. Scores range from 1 to 100, with 1 signifying the lowest level of support for gender equality (a negative result).

This information is useful, as it tells us which aspects of attitudes to gender equality most need to be addressed in prevention programs and interventions.

Relative levels of support for gender equality by themes^ (means)^[5]

Relative attitudinal support for gender equality, by theme^, 2017.
Mean scores for the GEAS themes – higher scores indicate higher attitudinal support for gender equality/rejection of inequality in that theme

GEAS theme	All	Men	Women
Rejecting male peer relations involving aggression & disrespect towards women	79+	76<	82+
Rejecting rigid gender roles, stereotypes & expressions	79˘	76<	80˘
Promoting women’s independence & decision making in public life	79+	75˘	82+
Promoting women’s independence & decision-making in private life	74˘	69˘	79˘
Recognising gender inequality is a problem	61˘	58˘	63˘

Note: There may be statistically significant differences between values that are less than 1 percentage point. These are not apparent in the figure above due to rounding.

^ All differences between men and women are statistically significant, p≤.01.

˘ Difference between this theme and all other themes in this sample is statistically significant, p≤.01.

+ Difference between this theme and ‘rejecting rigid gender roles, stereotypes and expressions’, ‘promoting women’s independence and decision-making in private life’, and ‘recognising gender inequality is a problem’ in this sample is statistically significant, p≤.01.

< Difference between this theme and ‘promoting women’s independence and decision-making in private life’, ‘promoting women’s independence and decision-making in public life’, and ‘recognising gender inequality is a problem’ in this sample is statistically significant, p≤.01.

Attitudes to violence against women

As explained, attitudes can be used to monitor progress. Attitudes may also contribute to violence against women indirectly because they influence social norms or expectations of what is acceptable behaviour. These expectations in turn influence behaviour itself.¹³ In this way, community attitudes can influence how professionals respond to violence against women, as well as the responses of neighbours, friends, family members and work colleagues. Holding violence-supportive attitudes can influence whether women experiencing violence seek help. Such attitudes may be adopted by men who use violence to excuse their behaviour.

The four themes in this component have been formed by synthesising hundreds of prior studies on attitudes towards violence against women, selecting groups of questions that reflect them, and then confirming through the NCAS that they reflect the way the Australian public thinks about violence against women.

Excusing the perpetrator and holding women responsible (% agree)

Attitudes excusing the perpetrator and holding women responsible for abuse or managing its consequences

Attitude	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
A lot of what is called domestic violence is really just a normal reaction to day-to-day stress and frustration	–	–	–	20
Domestic violence can be excused if it results from people getting so angry that they temporarily lose control	–	20*	22*	12
Domestic violence can be excused if the violent person was themselves abused as a child	–	–	12*	8	Significant
Domestic violence can be excused if, afterwards, the violent person genuinely regrets what they have done	–	25*	21*	14	Significant
Sometimes a woman can make a man so angry that he hits her when he didn’t mean to	–	–	–	21
Women who flirt all the time are somewhat to blame if their partner gets jealous and hits them	–	–	–	14

Attitudes concerning the family and intimate partner violence

Attitude	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Domestic violence is a private matter to be handled in the family	18*	14	17*	12	Significant
It’s a woman’s duty to stay in a violent relationship in order to keep the family together	–	8*	9*	4	Significant

The role of alcohol or other drugs in excusing the perpetrator or holding women responsible

Attitude	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Domestic violence can be excused if the victim is heavily affected by alcohol	–	9*	11*	5	Significant
Domestic violence can be excused if the offender is heavily affected by alcohol	–	8*	9*	5	Significant
A man is less responsible for rape if he is drunk or affected by drugs at the time	–	8	9	8
If a woman is raped while she is drunk or affected by drugs she is at least partly responsible	–	18*	19*	13	Significant

Minimising violence against women (% agree)

Minimising the impacts and consequences of recurring intimate partner violence

Statement	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
A female victim who does not leave an abusive partner is partly responsible for the abuse continuing	–	–	–	32
I don’t believe it’s as hard as people say it is for women to leave an abusive relationship	–	–	–	16
If a woman keeps going back to her abusive partner then the violence can’t be very serious	–	–	–	12
It’s acceptable for police to give lower priority to domestic violence cases they’ve attended many times before	–	–	–	12
Women who stay in abusive relationships should be entitled to less help from counselling and support services than women who end the relationship	–	–	–	11
In domestic situations where one partner is physically violent towards the other it is entirely reasonable for the violent person to be made to leave the family home	–	90*	89	87

Minimising sexual violence by claiming that women lie

Statement	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
If a woman claims to have been sexually assaulted but has no other physical injuries she probably shouldn’t be taken too seriously	–	–	–	6
Women who wait weeks or months to report sexual harassment are probably lying	–	–	–	9
Women who wait weeks or months to report sexual assault are probably lying	–	–	–	11

Minimising violence against women by placing it beyond the law

Statement	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Women who are sexually harassed should sort it out themselves rather than report it	20*	13*	12*	7	Significant
In my opinion, if a woman reports abuse by her partner to outsiders it is shameful for her family	–	–	–	13
It is a serious problem when a man tries to control his partner by refusing her access to their money	–	–	–	81

Mistrusting women’s reports of violence (% agree)

Statement	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Many women tend to exaggerate the problem of male violence	–	–	–	23
Women going through custody battles often make up or exaggerate claims of domestic violence in order to improve their case	–	51*	53*	43	Significant
A lot of times, women who say they were raped had led the man on and then had regrets	–	–	38*	31	Significant
It is common for sexual assault accusations to be used as a way of getting back at men	–	–	–	42

Disregarding the need to gain consent (% agree)

Statement	1995 (%)	2009 (%)	2013 (%)	2017 (%)	Significant
Women find it flattering to be persistently pursued, even if they are not interested	–	–	–	23
If a woman sends a nude image to her partner, then she is partly responsible if he shares it without her permission	–	–	–	30
Women often say ‘no’ when they mean ‘yes’	18*	14*	16*	12	Significant
Since some women are so sexual in public, it’s not surprising that some men think they can touch women without permission	–	–	–	21
If a woman is drunk and starts having sex with a man, but then falls asleep, it is understandable if he continues having sex with her anyway	–	–	–	10
When a man is very sexually aroused, he may not even realise that the woman doesn’t want to have sex	–	–	–	28
Rape results from men not being able to control their need for sex	–	35	43*	33	Significant

Circumstances in which people justify non-consensual sex

In the 2017 NCAS two scenarios were introduced to investigate whether or not Australians would justify non-consensual sex in different circumstances. Scenarios were used to test two questions:

1) Are Australians more likely to justify non-consensual sex among a married couple (a context in which people sometimes believe women forgo their sexual autonomy), as opposed to people that just met?

2) Are Australians more likely to justify non-consensual sex in a circumstance where a woman had initiated intimacy as opposed to when she did not? This tests the belief that when a woman consents to one element of sexual expression, she is automatically consenting to any further sexual activity.

The scenarios asked respondents to:

Text alternative for two scenarios

Scenario 1

A married couple have just been at a party

When they go home the man kisses his wife and tries to have sex with her. She pushes him away but he has sex with her anyway.

Question	Agreed (%)
Do you agree that the man is justified in his behaviour?	4
What if she had taken him into the bedroom and started kissing him before pushing him away? Do you agree that the man would have been justified in having sex with her anyway?	15

2017 (n=8,817)

Scenario 2

A man and woman who just met at a party

They get on well. They go back to the woman’s home and when they get there he kisses her and tries to have sex with her. She pushes him away but he has sex with her anyway.

Question	Agreed (%)
Do you agree that the man is justified in his behaviour?	3
What if she had taken him into the bedroom and started kissing him before pushing him away? Do you agree that the man would have been justified in having sex with her anyway?	13

2017 (n=8,925)

Both scenarios describe criminal offences. These findings are significant because they indicate that a concerning proportion of Australians are unclear about what constitutes consent, and the line between consensual sex and coercion.^41-42 Non-consensual sex can range from rape or coerced sex, to non-consensual acts within an initially consensual sexual encounter. Gendered power dynamics, expectations and stereotypes related to sexuality influence how consent is understood and negotiated (e.g. men are seen as sexually aggressive, or ‘in control’, while women are often portrayed as passive or submissive in sexual matters). These dynamics and expectations can contribute to some people failing to see the need to gain consent or to recognise that consent must always be an ongoing and respectful process of negotiation. Ensuring ongoing positive consent is important as people have the right to change their minds, or the situation may change to one where they are no longer comfortable

Which aspects of attitudinal support for violence against women are most widely supported by Australians?

To investigate which aspects of attitudinal support for violence against women are more or less likely to be supported by the community overall, an average score for the Australian population was developed for each theme using the same approach as for the gender equality themes (page 21). Scores range from 1 to 100, with 1 signifying the lowest level of endorsement of attitudes supportive of violence against women (a positive result).

This information is useful, as it tells us which aspects of violence-supportive attitudes most need to be addressed in prevention programs and interventions.

Relative endorsement of attitudes supportive of violence against women by themes^ (means)^[6]

Relative attitudinal support for violence against women, by theme^, 2017. Mean scores for the

CASVAWS themes – A lower score is better and indicates lower attitudinal support for violence against women

CASVAWS theme	All	Men	Women
Mistrusting women’s reports of violence	35˘	38˘	33˘
Disregarding the need to gain consent	26˘	26˘	25˘
Minimising violence against women	25˘	28˘	23˘
Excusing the perpetrator & holding women responsible	22˘	25˘	20˘

^ All differences between men and women are statistically significant, p≤.01.

˘ Difference between this theme and all other themes is statistically significant, p≤.01.

Bystander action

Encouraging the community to take action in response to witnessing abuse and disrespect towards women has been identified as a promising approach for the prevention of violence against women for a number of reasons. Firstly, only a very small proportion of violence comes to the attention of police and other relevant authorities. Secondly, many of the precursors to violence are not in themselves officially able to be sanctioned and thirdly, disapproval shown by those around us has been found to be one of the most effective forces to prevent violence against women.¹⁷

The 2017 NCAS included questions on respondents’ anticipated responses should they witness two scenarios in a social setting.^[7] These focus on verbal abuse and disrespect of women rather than physical violence itself.

Scenario 1

A male friend was insulting or verbally abusing a woman he was in a relationship with

Would you be bothered?

Response	Agreed (%)
Yes, would be bothered	98

If you were bothered, what would you do?

Response	Agreed (%)
Would act	70
Like to act – but wouldn’t know how	22
Feel uncomfortable – not act	5

If you were to act, do you think you would have the support of your friends?

Response	Agreed (%)
All or most friends	69
Some	22
Few, if any	7

Scenario 2

A male friend told a sexist joke about women

Would you be bothered?

Response	Agreed (%)
Yes, would be bothered	76

If you were bothered, what would you do?

Response	Agreed (%)
Would act	45
Like to act – but wouldn’t know how	13
Feel uncomfortable – not act	18

If you were to act, do you think you would have the support of your friends?

Response	Agreed (%)
All or most friends	55
Some	29
Few, if any	11

Demographic factors influencing understanding and attitudes

The previous sections explored knowledge and attitudes in the community as a whole. This section examines differences among particular groups and contexts. This is done by comparing the proportion of people in the higher and lower categories of knowledge and attitudinal support for violence and gender equality. This information is useful as it can help to target efforts to prevent violence against women.

Demographic differences (listed in the NCAS Questionnaire Framework) were generally modest and varied across the composite measures.^[8]

However, those more likely to have either:

• Lower understanding of violence against women (UVAWS)
• Lower support for gender equality (GEAS)
• Higher attitudinal support for violence against women (CASVAWS)
• Lower intention to act when confronted with abuse or disrespect towards women (ITAC)

Are:

• people aged 65 years plus
• men
• people in highly male dominated occupations
• people with mainly male friends
• people experiencing one or more forms of disadvantage (e.g. low education, living in a disadvantaged area, being unemployed)

Predictors of attitudinal support for violence against women

A statistical technique (multiple linear regression analysis) was used to assess which factors measured in the 2017 NCAS were the strongest predictors of attitudinal support for violence against women. This technique measures the strength of influence of each factor after the influence of other factors has been taken into account. All of the demographic, contextual and attitudinal factors in the survey were included in the analysis.

The six strongest predictors of attitudes towards violence against women are in the figure below. Having a low level of support for gender equality is the strongest predictor of attitudinal support for violence, followed by having a low level of understanding of violence against women, holding prejudicial attitudes towards people based on other attributes, and having a high level of support for violence in general. Demographic factors are relatively weaker predictors of attitudes towards both gender equality and violence against women. However, of the demographic factors, age (being 65 years plus) and education level (not having a tertiary education) are the two strongest demographic predictors of attitudes towards violence against women.

The analysis also investigated the extent to which attitudes to gender equality themes predict whether people hold attitudes supportive of violence against women. Attitudes ‘denying gender inequality is a problem’ and ‘promoting rigid gender roles, stereotypes and expressions’ have the first and second strongest influence on attitudes towards violence against women, after the influence of the other themes was taken into account (see figure below).

When investigating which of the gender equality themes most strongly predicts people’s intention to act as bystanders, the 2017 NCAS found that attitudes in the theme of ‘condoning male peer relations involving aggression and disrespect towards women’ are the strongest.

^[9][10]

Top 6 predictors of attitudinal support for violenceⁱ

Predictor	Contribution to variance explained (%)
Attitudes to gender equality (GEAS)	54
Understanding of violence against women (UVAWS)	10
Prejudiced attitudes (PAC)	9
Attitudes to violence in general (GVC)	8
Age	4
Education	3

Influence of gender equality themes in predicting attitudinal support for violence^ij

Predictor	Contribution to variance explained (%)
Denying gender inequality is a problem	40
Promoting rigid gender roles, stereotypes and expressions	21
Undermining women’s independence and decision-making in public life	14
Undermining women’s independence and decision-making in private life	13
Condoning male peer relations involving aggression and disrespect towards women	11

The findings: Factors to keep in mind

The 2017 NCAS survey was developed, implemented and analysed using rigorous, well accepted methods and procedures. It has a large sample size and includes both mobile and landline interviewing. This helps ensure the sample is as diverse and representative as possible. As a periodic survey, the NCAS is able to measure changes in knowledge and attitudes over time. However, as is the case with all research, the NCAS has some limitations, as follows:

• It is not possible to reach everyone contacted by the randomly generated telephone numbers. Approximately half (49%) of those reached agreed to participate. The technical term for this is the ‘cooperation rate’. The response rate is a more exacting standard and takes into account all randomly generated numbers that were called and could have resulted in an interview.^[11] That is, it includes all numbers that were never answered, not just those where someone answered. the response rate for NCAS was 17 percent. This is comparable, if not better than, other similar surveys across the world. Response rates are challenging to interpret in a rapidly changing telecommunications era where many people screen unknown phone numbers and never answer the calls made. Sample weighting was used to correct the impact of any known imbalances in the sample.
• Well-established statistical modelling was used to investigate some of the more complex questions. As with any statistical modelling, some assumptions were made (e.g. in measuring change over time at the overall level, see page 10).
• Although cognitive testing of the questions was undertaken to be sure they were well understood, responses to surveys on complex social issues can be influenced by language proficiency, or cultural differences. Some people may give an answer based on what they believe is socially acceptable, rather than what they really think.
• When a relationship is found between two variables (e.g. attitudes and education), it is important to be aware that this does not necessarily mean that one causes the other.

More information and methodological details can be found in the NCAS Methodology Report on the ANROWS website.

Implications for policy & practice

Attitudes are one way of measuring progress in addressing the factors leading to violence against women. Positive change in people’s understanding of violence against women, attitudes to gender equality and attitudes to violence against women suggests that Australia is ‘on-track’ to achieving positive changes in these factors. Continued effort is needed to ensure that these changes are ultimately reflected in reductions in violence, and that gains are not lost to negative influences. As a range of factors influence violence against women, not just attitudes, there is a need for a coordinated approach using many different strategies to prevent violence against women.

In prioritising effort to strengthen knowledge, attitudes and bystander intentions, there would be benefits in:

• addressing the gaps in knowledge of violence against women, in particular, information about help-seeking, the gendered nature and dynamics of intimate partner violence, and the greater risk of sexual assault by a known person, compared to sexual assault by a stranger.
• addressing all aspects of gender inequality, with a focus on challenging rigid gender roles and identities and the idea that gender inequality is no longer a problem. The latter is especially important, because, of the five gender equality themes, it is the strongest predictor of attitudes supportive of violence against women.
• a greater focus in prevention programming on achieving gender equality in the private sphere.
• promoting attitudes that foster a mutually respectful approach to consent in sexual relations, and challenging the idea that women use claims of violence to gain tactical advantage.
• addressing barriers to bystander action by informing people that they are likely to be supported by more of their friends than they might think, by strengthening their knowledge and attitudes and by focusing on people who feel uncomfortable and would like to act but say they would not know how.
• addressing attitudes that ‘condone male peer relations involving aggression and disrespect of women’ to encourage bystander action, as this is the gender equality theme most strongly predicting people’s intention to act (especially among men).

The significance of attitudes in themes suggestive of ‘backlash’ indicate the need to build strategies to address ‘backlash’ into prevention programs and policy.

The strongest predictors of attitudinal support for violence against women in order of influence are having a low level of support for gender equality, a low understanding of violence against women, holding prejudicial attitudes towards people based on other attributes, and having a high level of support for violence in general. This suggests that these attitudes, and the norms, cultures and practices supporting them, should have greater emphasis in prevention than factors associated with a person’s demographic characteristics (e.g. their age or gender). Although the results suggest there would be a benefit in increasing access to higher education.

The influence of attitudes to gender equality on attitudes to violence against women supports the recommendation of expert bodies that a gender transformative approach to preventing violence against women is needed.⁵¹ The approach is one that promotes equal and respectful relationships between men and women as a key to reducing this violence. There are likely to be benefits in integrating means to address other forms of prejudice and discrimination into prevention efforts, as well as challenging the use of violence as a practice.

The fact that there were relatively small differences between people based on their demographic characteristics suggests the need for prevention strategies that reach the whole population. However, the survey does show some grounds for targeting to:

• men and boys;
• men and women in male dominated workplaces and social networks;
• older people; and
• people with a low level of education and/or experiencing other forms of disadvantage.

Of course, people’s knowledge, attitudes and bystander intentions are not the only factors linked to violence against women, and therefore are not the only rationale for targeting. Other criteria are necessary to determine where to target prevention effort, such as whether violence against women is more prevalent in a particular group, or whether a group is affected by other conditions linked to violence against women.

There is a need for further research, in particular qualitative research, to better understand why certain attitudes are held or are changing. Longitudinal designs would help to foster understanding of factors influencing knowledge and attitudes. Many other research questions could be explored using the NCAS data base.

There is also scope to improve NCAS’s capacity to meet its aims. People’s behaviour is strongly influenced by their beliefs about what they believe is expected of them. Referred to as social norms, these could be measured in future surveys. Other possibilities include questions to assess:

• the wider community’s attitudes towards violence and inequality affecting particular groups of women, such as young women or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women;
• the influence of other factors on attitudes (e.g. people’s media consumption habits and preferences or measures of social cohesion); and
• attitudes within and towards particular organisational contexts such as sporting clubs, schools or universities.

The NCAS findings provide some cause for optimism, although certainly not for complacency. Although knowledge and attitudes are tracking in the direction of positive change, there are areas investigated in the NCAS that raise cause for concern. The findings in this report will be useful to guide future action to identify and address these areas, with the aim of building cultures of safety, respect and equality for all Australians.

Footnotes

1. ‘High’ and ‘low’ classify respondents relative to one another. It would be wrong to say that any group has a high or low level of support in absolute terms. ↑
2. The fifth component listed in the NCAS Questionnaire Framework ‘social norms’, was not measured in the 2017 NCAS. Measurement of social norms is subject to future development in the NCAS. ↑
3. Composite measures were developed using Rasch and Factor Analysis. Further information can be found in the 2017 NCAS Methodology Report on the ANROWS website. ↑
4. As the Intention to Act Construct (ITAC) is new for the current 2017 NCAS, data on change over time are not available. ↑
5. The data used in this figure are means, not percentages. They rank the themes relative to one another, rather than showing an absolute level of attitudinal support for each theme in the population. ↑
6. The data used in this figure are means, not percentages. They rank the themes relative to one another, rather than showing an absolute level of attitudinal support for each theme in the population. ↑
7. Percentages may vary from totals due to rounding and do not add to 100% due to a small proportion of respondents that did not respond to the question. ↑
8. ‘High’ and ‘low’ classify respondents relative to one another. It would be wrong to say that any group has a high or low level of support in absolute terms. ↑
9. Figures indicate the percentage of variance explained. ↑
10. Percentages do not equal 100% due to rounding. ↑
11. The American Association for Public Opinion Research holds the industry standard for calculating response rates and is the formula used for this study. There are four possible AAPOR response rates that can be used to measure the performance of a project. The AAPOR3 calculation is used in the NCAS, consistent with previous years. More information available at: https://www.aapor.org/ ↑

Endnotes

1. Council of Australian Governments. (2011). The National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children: Including the first three-year action plan. Canberra: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services & Indigenous Affairs.
2. Our Watch, ANROWS, & VicHealth. (2015). Change the Story: A shared framework for the primary prevention of violence against women and their children in Australia. Melbourne: Our Watch.
3. VicHealth. (2014). Australians’ attitudes to violence against women. Findings from the 2013 National Community Attitudes towards Violence Against Women Survey (NCAS). Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.
4. Webster, K. (2016). A preventable burden: Measuring and addressing the prevalence and health impacts of intimate partner violence in Australian women. Sydney: ANROWS.
5. KPMG. (2016). The cost of violence against women and their children. Retrieved 10 June 2018 from www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/08_2016/the_cost_of_violence_against_women_and_their_children_in_australia_-_summary_report_may_2016.pdf
6. Webster, K., & Flood, M. (2015). Framework foundations 1: A review of the evidence on correlates of violence against women and what works to prevent it. Melbourne: ANROWS & VicHealth.
7. Cox, P. (2015). Violence against women in Australia: Additional analysis of the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Personal Safety Survey, 2012. Sydney: ANROWS.
8. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2017). Personal safety, Australia, 2016. (Cat. no. 4906.0). Canberra: ABS.
9. Australian Human Rights Commission. (2017). Change the course: National report on sexual assault and sexual harassment at Australian universities. Retrieved 10 June 2018 from www.humanrights.gov.au/about/publications
10. Australian Human Rights Commission. (2018). Everyone’s business: Fourth national survey on sexual harassment in Australian workplaces. Retrieved 2 October 2018 from www.humanrights.gov.au/about/publications
11. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2018). Family, domestic and sexual violence in Australia 2018. (Cat. no. FDV 2). Canberra: AIHW.
12. Flood, M., & Pease, B. (2009). Factors influencing attitudes to violence against women. Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 10 (2), 125–142.
13. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2004). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. A. Albarracin, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes (pp. 173-222). New York: Psychology Group, Taylor and Francis.
14. Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guildford Press.
15. Fazio, R. (1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: The MODE model as an integrative framework. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 75-109.
16. Carlson, B. E., & Worden, A. P. (2005). Attitudes and beliefs about domestic violence: Results of a public opinion survey: I. Definitions of domestic violence, criminal domestic violence, and prevalence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20(10), 1197-1218.
17. Powell, A. (2011). Review of bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women. Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.
18. Salazar, L. K., Baker, C. K., Price, A. W., & Carlin, K. (2003). Moving beyond the individual. Examining the effects of domestic violence policies on social norms. American Journal of Community Psychology, 32(3-4), 253-263.
19. Bagshaw, D., Chung, D., Couch, M., Lilburn, S., & Wadham, B. (2000). Reshaping responses to domestic violence. Canberra: Office for the Status of Women, Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.
20. Belknap, J., & Melton, H. (2005). Are heterosexual men also victims of intimate partner abuse? VAWnet National Electronic Network on Violence Against Women, Applied Research Forum. Retrieved 10 June 2018 from https://vawnet.org/material/are-heterosexual-men-also-victims-intimate-partner-abuse
21. Holtzworth-Munroe, A. (2005). Male versus female intimate partner violence: Putting controversial findings into context. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1120-1125.
22. Kimmel, M. S. (2012). The gender of desire: Essays on male sexuality. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
23. Swan, S. C., Gambone, L. J., Van Horn, M. L., Snow, D. L., & Sullivan, T. P. (2012). Factor structures for aggression and victimization among women who used aggression against male partners. Violence Against Women, 18(9), 1045-1066.
24. Caldwell, J. E., Swan, S. C., & Woodbrown, V. D. (2012). Gender differences in intimate partner violence outcomes. Psychology of Violence, 2(1), 42.
25. Hamberger, L. K., & Larsen, S. E. (2015). Men’s and women’s experience of intimate partner violence: A review of ten years of comparative studies in clinical samples; Part I. Journal of Family Violence, 30(6), 699-717.
26. Cercone, J. J., Beach, S. R., & Arias, I. (2005). Gender symmetry in dating intimate partner violence: Does similar behavior imply similar constructs? Violence and Victims, 20(2), 207.
27. Dobash, R. E., Dobash, R. P., Cavanagh, K., & Lewis, R. (2004). Not an ordinary killer – Just an ordinary guy: When men murder an intimate woman partner. Violence Against Women, 10(6), 577-605.
28. Larance, L. Y., & Miller, S. L. (2016). In her own words: Women describe their use of force resulting in court-ordered intervention. Violence Against Women, 23(21), 1356-1559.
29. Mennicke, A., & Kulkarni, S. (2016). Understanding gender symmetry within an expanded partner violence typology. Journal of Family Violence, 31(8), 1013-1018.
30. Velonis, A. J. (2016). ‘He never did anything you typically think of as abuse’: Experiences with violence in controlling and non-controlling relationships in a non-agency sample of women. Violence Against Women, 22(9), 1031-1054.
31. Myhill, A. (2015). Measuring coercive control: What can we learn from national population surveys? Violence Against Women, 21(3), 355-375.
32. Australian Domestic and Family Violence Death Review Network. (2018). Australian Domestic and Family Violence Death Review Network: Data report. Sydney: Domestic Violence Review Team.
33. Chan, A., & Payne, J. (2013). Homicide in Australia: 2008-09 to 2009-10 National Homicide Monitoring Program Annual Report. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
34. Headey, B., Scott, D., & De Vaus, D. (1999). Domestic violence in Australia: Are women and men equally violent? Australian Social Monitor, 2(3), 57.
35. National Crime Prevention. (2001). Young people and domestic violence: National research on young people’s attitudes and experiences of domestic violence. Canberra: Crime Prevention Branch, Commonwealth Attorney General’s Department.
36. World Health Organization. (2010). Preventing intimate partner and sexual violence against women: Taking action and generating evidence. Geneva: WHO.
37. Michau, L., Horn, J., Bank, A., Dutt, M., & Zimmerman, C. (2015). Prevention of violence against women and girls: Lessons from practice. The Lancet, 385(9978), 1672-1684.
38. United Nations Women. (2015). A framework to underpin action to prevent violence against women. Retrieved 10 June 2018 from https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/publications/2015/11/prevention-framework
39. VicHealth. (2017). Behavioural Insights and gender equality. Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.
40. VicHealth. (2017). Gender Equality, Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2017-2019. Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.
41. Muehlenhard, C. L., Humphreys, T. P., Jozkowski, K. N., & Peterson, Z. D. (2016). The complexities of sexual consent among college students: A conceptual and empirical review. The Journal of Sex Research, 53(4-5), 457-487.
42. Warren, P., Swan, S., & Allen, C. T. (2015). Comprehension of sexual consent as a key factor in the perpetration of sexual aggression among college men. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 24, 897-913.
43. Brandt, M. J. (2011). Sexism and gender inequality across 57 societies. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1413-1418.
44. Gracia, E., & Merlo, J. (2016). Intimate partner violence against women and the Nordic paradox. Social Science & Medicine, 157, 27-30.
45. Whaley, R., Messner, S., & Veysey, B. (2013). The relationship between gender equality and rates of inter- and intra-sexual lethal violence: An exploration of functional form. Justice Quarterly, 30(4), 732-754.
46. Hald, G. M., Malamuth, N. M., & Yuen, C. (2010). Pornography and attitudes supporting violence against women: revisiting the relationship in nonexperimental studies. Aggressive Behavior, 36(1), 14-20.
47. Malamuth, N., Addison, T., & Koss, M. (2000). Pornography and sexual aggression: Are there reliable effects and can we understand them? Annual Review of Sex Research, 11, 26-91.
48. Davis, A. C., Carrotte, E. R., Hellard, M. E., & Lim, M. S. (2018). What behaviors do young heterosexual Australians see in pornography? A cross-sectional study. The Journal of Sex Research, 55(3), 310-319.
49. Lim, M. S., Agius, P. A., Carrotte, E. R., Vella, A. M., & Hellard, M. E. (2017). Young Australians’ use of pornography and associations with sexual risk behaviours. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 41(4), 438-443.
50. Our Watch, & ANROWS. (2017). Counting on change: A guide to prevention monitoring. Melbourne: Our Watch.
51. World Health Organization. (2013). 16 ideas for addressing violence against women in the context of the HIV epidemic – a programming tool. Retrieved 20 July 2017 from https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/violence/vaw_hiv_epidemic/en/