Young Australians’ attitudes to violence against women and gender equality

Findings from the 2017 National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey (NCAS)

In partnership with:

Suggested citation

Politoff, V., Crabbe, M., Honey, N., Mannix, S., Mickle, J., Morgan, J., Parkes, A., Powell, A., Stubbs, J., Ward, A., & Webster, K., (2019). Young Australians’ attitudes to violence against women and gender equality: Findings from the 2017 National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey (NCAS) (ANROWS Insights, Issue 01/2019). Sydney: ANROWS.

This report was designed by Holly Windle, with art direction by Eleanor Shepherd.

Acknowledgements

This material was produced with funding from the Australian Government. Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS) gratefully acknowledges the financial and other support it has received from the government, without which this work would not have been possible. ANROWS led the project in collaboration with The University of Melbourne, University of New South Wales, RMIT University and the Social Research Centre as research partners. ANROWS is indebted to all these research partners, as well as to the many research, practice and policy experts from across Australia who contributed to the 2017 survey through the project’s advisory structures. We are particularly grateful to our collaborators from R4Respect (led by YFS, Brisbane) who have provided invaluable insights on the findings in this report. We are also grateful to Rachael Burgin for her contributions in finalising this report.

ANROWS acknowledges the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth) for its consistent support, with John Fulcher, Renee Imbesi and Kate O’Halloran in particular making contributions. Thanks are extended to Dr Stuart Ross and Dr Walter DeKeseredy for their thoughtful review of this report as part of ANROWS peer review processes, and for their helpful suggestions for strengthening it.

Acknowledgement of Country

ANROWS acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the land across Australia on which we work and live. We pay our respects to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elders past, present and future, and we value Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elders past, present and emerging. We value Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories, cultures and knowledge.

Acknowledgement of lived experiences of violence

It is also important to acknowledge the lives and experiences of the women and children affected by domestic violence and sexual assault.

Caution: Some people may find parts of this content confronting or distressing.

Recommended support services include 1800 RESPECT – 1800 737 732 and Lifeline – 13 11 14.

Young Australians’ attitudes to violence against women and gender equality: Findings from the 2017 National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey (NCAS)/ Violeta Marticorena Politoff et al.
Sydney, NSW: ANROWS.
Pages ; 30 cm. (ANROWS Insights, Issue 01/2019)

I. Women – Violence against – Australia – Public opinion. II. National Community Attitudes Towards Violence Against Women Survey (Australia : 2017). III. Family violence – Australia – Public opinion – Statistics. IV. Gender mainstreaming – Public opinion – Statistics.

I. Politoff, Violeta Marticorena. II. Crabbe, Maree. III. Honey, Nikki. IV. Mannix, Samantha. V. Mickle, Justine. VI. Morgan, Jenny. VII. Parkes, Alexandra. VIII. Powell, Anastasia. IX. Stubbs, Julie. X. Ward, Andrew. XI. Webster, Kim.

ISBN: 978-1-925372-99-1 (print) | 978-1-925925-00-5 (online)

Creative Commons Licence

Attribution Non-Commercial CC BY-NC 4.0 International https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0

Please note that there is the potential for minor revisions of this report. Please check the online version at https://ncas.anrows.org.au for any amendment.

The findings and views reported in this paper are those of the authors and cannot be attributed to the Australian Government, or any Australian state or territory government.

With support from

Contents

About this report

1 Executive summary

Violence against young women

The NCAS

The 2017 NCAS

Changes in knowledge and attitudes over time

Specific areas of concern

Differences between the younger and older cohorts

Predictors of attitudes among young people

Implications for policy and practice

2 Introduction

About the NCAS

Violence against young women – nature, prevalence and impacts

Attitudes that are violence supportive and undermine gender equality

Why a focus on young people’s attitudes to violence against women and gender equality?

The contemporary context for young Australians

3 Methodology

About the NCAS young people sample

Approach to analysing data

The 2017 NCAS questionnaire

4 Findings

Change in young people’s knowledge and attitudes over time

Young Australians’ knowledge of violence against women

Gender and age cohort differences

Young Australians’ attitudes to gender equality

Gender and age cohort differences

Young Australians’ attitudes to violence against women

Gender and age cohort differences

Bystander action

Are there differences between young Australians and older Australians?

Demographic factors influencing young people’s understanding and attitudes

Predictors of attitudinal support for violence against women

5 Conclusion

The findings: Factors to keep in mind

Implications for policy and practice

References

About this report

This report presents key findings from the 2017 National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey focusing on results for young Australians aged 16-24. It also presents the reflections of young people on the findings. These were sought through a workshop held in Logan, Queensland, in 2018 involving five youth ambassadors from a diverse range of backgrounds. The ambassadors were associated with R4Respect (run by YFS), an education and prevention strategy led by young people in Logan and surrounds to promote the values, skills and knowledge needed for respectful relationships.

Key themes that were raised by participants in the workshop are represented in quote boxes throughout the report.

Findings for the community as a whole, people from non-English speaking backgrounds and for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians are explored in dedicated reports. These, along with further detailed findings and methodological information, can be found on the ANROWS website www.ncas.anrows.org.au.

1 Executive summary

Violence against young women

Intimate partner violence, sexual assault, sexual harassment and stalking are prevalent problems with serious consequences for women, their children and wider society (Victorian Health Promotion Foundation (VicHealth), 2014; Webster, 2016). This violence affects women across the life cycle, but is more prevalent among, and has a particular and far-reaching impact upon, young women (Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 2017a; Brown et al., 2009; Cox, 2015; Dillon, Hussain, & Loxton, 2015; Hooker, Theobald, Anderson, Billet, & Baron, 2017).

• Young women in the 18-24 year age group are the most likely to have experienced violence in the 12 months prior to the 2016 Personal Safety Survey (PSS), which measures experiences of violence (ABS, 2017b).
• The number of young women (18-24) who experienced sexual violence in the year previous to the 2013 PSS was twice the national average (Cox, 2015).
• An estimated 38 percent of women aged 18-24 years experienced sexual harassment in the 12 months prior to the 2016 PSS, compared to 16 percent of men aged 18-24 and 15 percent of women aged 45-54 (ABS, 2017b).

Young women are also particularly affected by sexual harassment taking place on the streets and in other public places (Johnson & Bennett, 2015; Plan International Australia, 2018), through technology and social media (Henry, Powell, & Flynn, 2017), and in schools and universities (Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), 2017). In addition, young people may be exposed to domestic violence perpetrated against their mothers (Heinze, Stoddard, Aiyer, Eisman, & Zimmerman, 2017). Perpetration of violence is understood to be more likely when men are young (Fulu, Jewkes, Roselli, & Garcia-Moreno, 2013).

Many factors contribute to this violence and arise at the individual, relationship, community, organisational and societal levels. Gender inequality and the disrespect of women increase the likelihood of this violence occurring (Council of Australian Governments (COAG), 2011; Garcia-Moreno et al., 2015). There is evidence that violence against women can be prevented before it occurs by addressing the underlying factors that cause the problem. 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.

Young people have been identified as a particular focus in both The National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010-2022 (the National Plan) (COAG, 2011) and Change the story: A shared framework for the primary prevention of violence against women and their children in Australia (Change the story) (Our Watch, ANROWS & VicHealth, 2015). Further, there has been increased government effort to establish respectful relationships curriculum in all schools across the country, as well as heightened attention at universities (AHRC, 2017). This is due in part to the higher prevalence and particular impact of violence on young women as discussed above. More positively, since adolescence and young adulthood are life cycle stages when gender identities, roles and relationships are being formed, supporting young men and women to establish positive gender expressions and relationship practices has many benefits. It can help to reduce the risk of violence and abuse in the present, prevent future harm and maximise the prospects of a violence-free environment for future generations.

Attitudes towards gender inequality and violence against women are among the many factors that contribute to this violence. Indirectly, they can influence the responses of service providers, as well as those of family, friends, neighbours and work colleagues of those affected. Attitudes can also influence perpetrators and women subject to violence. Since attitudes reflect the world around us, measuring these over time is one way to monitor progress towards addressing the problem.

The NCAS

The National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey (NCAS) is a periodic telephone survey (mobile and landline) of a representative sample. In 2017 more than 17,500 Australians aged 16 years and over were surveyed about their:

• knowledge of violence against women;
• attitudes towards this violence and gender equality; and
• intentions if they were to witness abuse or disrespect towards women.

The NCAS is one of the main mechanisms for measuring progress against the six National Outcomes outlined in the National Plan (COAG, 2011), another is the PSS (ABS, 2017b). Previous waves of the NCAS were conducted in 1995, 2009 and 2013.

The 2017 NCAS

Although as many questions as possible from the 2013 questionnaire were retained, a substantial redevelopment was undertaken for the 2017 NCAS, with key outcomes being:

• the capacity to measure and understand the ways Australians think about violence against women and gender equality, recognising that attitudinal support for these concepts can take many different forms;
• the use of composite measures (made up of groups of questions) to gauge understanding, attitudes and people’s intention to act as overall concepts;
• new measures used to increase understanding of factors shaping knowledge, attitudes and intention to act, including measures of (a) the gender composition of a person’s social network, (b) prejudice on the basis of disability, sexuality, ethnicity, and Aboriginality, and (c) attitudes towards violence in general; and
• better alignment with the National Plan (COAG, 2011) and Change the story (Our Watch et al., 2015).

Implications for policy and practice

The positive changes in the overall measures of understanding of violence against women and attitudes to this violence and gender equality found among young people were also found in the population as whole. They suggest that Australia is ’on track’ to achieve positive changes in factors contributing to violence against women. Nevertheless, a sizeable minority of young Australians hold attitudes that may contribute to violence against women. Contrary to the predictions of some theorists, young people do not hold more positive attitudes towards violence and gender equality than people aged 25-64 years. Further, as there has yet to be a reduction in this violence itself (ABS, 2017b), continued effort is needed.

A range of factors influence violence against women, not just attitudes. Further, attitudes themselves are shaped by influences in people’s day-to-day environments (Pease & Flood, 2008). Recognising that action to address these influences is needed, expert bodies propose an approach that incorporates multiple strategies, implemented across different sectors and settings and targeted to individuals and families as well as communities, organisations and society-wide institutions (Garcia-Moreno et al., 2015; Heise, 1998; Michau, Horn, Bank, Dutt, & Zimmerman, 2015; Our Watch et al., 2015; VicHealth, 2007; 2011; 2017b; UN Women, 2015; World Health Organization (WHO), 2002). Plans to implement such an approach and support primary prevention of violence against women can be found in the National Plan (COAG, 2011) and its successive Action Plans (Australian Department of Social Services, 2014; 2016) and in the Change the story framework (Our Watch et al., 2015).

Preventing violence perpetrated or experienced by young people requires a two-fold approach. As well as addressing norms and practices among young people themselves, attention needs to be given to norms, structures and practices in the wider community and environments, as these also influence young people’s experiences, attitudes and behaviours.

It is also important that efforts to prevent violence against women among young people are framed with their particular social experiences in mind. Young people prefer less ’top-down passive learning’ and more action-based, interactive and peer-to-peer learning (Noonan & Charles, 2009; Weisz & Black, 2010; Wyn & White, 2013). Benefits are likely through:

• educational settings, especially schools (Flood, Fergus, & Heenan, 2009; Gleeson, Kearney, Leung, & Brislane, 2015);
• sports and active recreation settings (Flood & Dyson, 2007);
• media and popular culture (Keith, 2013; Squires, Kohn-Wood, Chavous, & Carter, 2006), in particular social media (American Psychological Association (APA), 2010; Crabbe & Corlett, 2011; Draper, 2011; Papadopoulos, 2010; Phippen, 2009);
• the family (APA, 2010; Papadopoulos, 2010); and
• peer contexts.

In prioritising efforts to strengthen knowledge, attitudes and bystander intentions^[3] among young people, there would be benefits in:

• addressing the gaps in knowledge of violence against women, particularly information about help seeking, the gendered nature and dynamic of partner violence, and the greater risk of violence by a known person than a stranger;

I think the gender analysis has been erased from our understanding of domestic violence. It’s either you commit domestic violence or you don’t, but it ignores that men have been socialised to exercise power and control in relationships.
– R4Respect youth ambassador

• 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;
• a greater emphasis on achieving gender equality in the private sphere, such as in intimate relationships, the sexual double standard and the division of household labour;
• promoting attitudes that foster a mutually respectful approach to gender relations and challenge the idea that women lie about violence or use violence as a way to gain tactical advantage over men; and
• addressing barriers to bystander action by informing young 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 young people who would like to act but say that they would not know how.

When you see sexism or disrespect it can be difficult to act but I think if you’re able to – go for it – because if no one else is going to do it then you may as well just make that first step.
– R4Respect youth ambassador

The strongest predictors of young people holding attitudes supportive of violence against women are (in order of influence):

• having a low level of support for gender equality;
• having a low level of understanding of violence against women;
• holding prejudicial attitudes towards people on the basis of other attributes; and
• having a high level of support for the use of violence in general.

This suggests that these attitudes, and the norms, structures and practices supporting them, should have greater emphasis in prevention than demographic factors such as a person’s age or gender.

The influence of attitudes to gender equality on attitudes to violence against women supports recommendations that a gender transformative approach – which promotes equal and respectful relationships between men and women as key to reducing violence against women – is needed (WHO, 2013). There are likely to be benefits in integrating means to address other forms of prejudice and discrimination in prevention efforts, as well as challenging the use of violence as a practice.

There were relatively small differences between young people based on their demographic characteristics. This suggests the need for prevention strategies that reach the whole population. However, the survey suggests some grounds for targeting:

• young men and boys;
• young people in male-dominated social contexts; and
• young people experiencing disadvantage.

There’s not enough messaging about how men can contribute to changing how we conceptualise gender equality.
– R4Respect youth ambassador

The NCAS findings provide some cause for optimism, although certainly not for complacency. Although the composite measures show that understanding and attitudes towards violence against women and gender equality among young people are tracking in the direction of positive change overall, some areas investigated in the NCAS raise cause for concern. The findings in this report will be useful to identify and address these areas with the aim of building cultures of safety, respect and equality for all Australians.

2 Introduction

About the NCAS

The National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey (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 in knowledge or attitudes; 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) (COAG, 2011).

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) (Our Watch et al., 2015), 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 past two national surveys took place in 2009 and 2013 (led by VicHealth). Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS) is proud to lead 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, for example, by educators, policymakers, program planners, researchers, journalists and students.

Violence against young women – nature, prevalence and impacts

Violence against women is a prevalent problem with significant health, social and economic costs for women and their children, as well as society as a whole (VicHealth, 2014; Webster, 2016). Gender inequality and disrespect of women increases the likelihood of this violence occurring (COAG, 2011; Garcia-Moreno et al., 2015).^[4]

Violence against women is defined by the United Nations (1993) as:

any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.

Although this violence can take many forms, the NCAS focuses on four forms: sexual assault, partner violence, sexual harassment and stalking. This is because they are the most prevalent forms of violence against women in Australia.

Australian governments have made significant efforts to reduce violence against women and promote gender equality and respect. However, approximately one in four Australian women over the age of 18 have experienced intimate partner violence^[5] since the age of 15, and one in five have experienced sexual violence (Cox, 2015; ABS, 2017). Also, one in six Australian women have experienced stalking and more than half have experienced sexual harassment (ABS, 2017b; AHRC, 2017; 2018).

Although this violence affects women across the life cycle, it is more prevalent among, and has a particular impact upon, young women (ABS, 2017a; Brown et al., 2009; Cox, 2015; Dillon et al., 2015; Hooker et al., 2017).

• Young women in the 18-24 year age group are the most likely to have experienced violence in the 12 months prior to the 2016 PSS (ABS, 2017b).
• The number of young women (18-24) who had experienced sexual violence in the year previous to the 2012 PSS was twice the national average (Cox, 2015).
• An estimated 38 percent of women aged 18-24 years had experienced sexual harassment in the 12 months prior to the 2016 PSS, compared to 16 percent of men aged 18-24 and 15 percent of women aged 45-54 (ABS, 2017b).

Recent research has also highlighted the prevalence and impact of sexual harassment among young women. Sexual harassment occurs on the streets and in other public places (Johnson & Bennett, 2015; Plan International Australia, 2018), through technology and social media (Henry, Powell, & Flynn, 2017), and in schools and universities (AHRC, 2017). In addition, young people may also be exposed to domestic violence perpetrated against their mothers (Heinze et al., 2017).

Although violence against women happens across the social spectrum, it is either more prevalent and/or more severe and prolonged among 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 (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2018).

Although less is known about the characteristics of the perpetrators of violence against women in Australia, international evidence suggests that young women are especially vulnerable to violence in dating relationships (Kann et al., 2016). Meanwhile, a cross-country study concerned with factors associated with perpetration of sexual violence found that among adult men who have engaged in behaviours constituting sexual violence (relationship unspecified), half did so for the first time before reaching the age of 20 (Fulu et al., 2013).

Partner violence and sexual assault have serious consequences for all women (Ayre, Lum On, Webster, Gourley, & Moon, 2016), and these can be especially serious for young women (Decker et al., 2014; Hooker et al., 2017). This is because this violence occurs at a life cycle stage when young women are developing their identities and establishing themselves in relationships, education and careers. Adverse experiences at this stage can have far-reaching impacts on women’s health, in particular their mental health (Ayre et al, 2016; Choi, Weston, & Temple, 2017), and for their progression in education and paid employment (Banyard, Potter, & Turner, 2011; McDonald & Flood, 2012). These are impacts that may persist into their adult lives (Adam et al., 2011). Young women subjected to violence have a higher risk of being victimised again in adulthood (Jouriles, Choi, Rancher, & Temple, 2017).

The impacts of violence are not confined to young women directly exposed to it. Studies show that a large proportion of women fear this violence, and it curtails their activities as a consequence (ABS, 2017a; Vera-Gray, 2016). This in turn impacts upon their participation in social, civic and economic activity, ultimately compromising the achievement of gender equality.

Attitudes that are violence supportive and undermine gender equality

Many factors contribute to violence against women, including the characteristics of individuals and the dynamics of their relationships, as well as norms, structures and practices in communities, organisations and society-wide institutions such as the media. Gender inequality and disrespect of women have been identified as particular factors increasing the likelihood of this violence occurring (Garcia-Moreno et al., 2015).

Attitudes are shaped by the world around us, including through our families and friends, communities and institutions (Flood & Pease, 2009; Pease & Flood, 2008). 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. For this reason, attitudes are important to monitor. Attitudes that endorse violence and disrespect towards women and gender inequality are also among the many factors associated with violence against women. Indirectly, they can influence the responses of service providers, as well as those of family, friends, neighbours and work colleagues of those affected. Attitudes can also influence perpetrators and women subject to violence. The evidence for this is discussed in the report of the national sample on the ANROWS website. Attitudes towards violence against women and gender equality are discussed in greater detail in Box 2-2.

Why a focus on young people’s attitudes to violence against women and gender equality?

Young people have been identified as a particular focus in both the National Plan (COAG, 2011) and Change the story (Our Watch et al., 2015), and there has been increased government effort to establish respectful relationships curriculum in all schools across the country, as well as heightened attention at universities (AHRC, 2017). This is due in part to the higher prevalence and particular impact of violence on young women as discussed earlier. More positively, since adolescence and young adulthood are life cycle stages when gender identities, roles and relationships are being formed, supporting young men and women to establish positive gender expressions and relationship practices has many benefits. It can help to reduce the risk of violence and abuse in the present, prevent future harm and maximise the prospects of a violence-free environment for future generations.

Addressing violence among young people will involve addressing norms, practices and structures in the wider community and society that contribute to violence, since these influence young women’s risk of violence and contribute to the attitudes and practices of young people. These are documented in other NCAS reports (VicHealth, 2014; Webster et al. 2018a). In summary, there are three interrelated clusters of influences, including those associated with:

• gender, and the way we understand gender roles, relationships and identities (i.e. what it means to be a man or a woman);
• the use of violence as a practice (e.g. the adequacy of legal sanctions against violence, how violence is represented in the media. At an individual level people who have a history of exposure to violence as witness, victim or perpetrator are more likely to hold attitudes supporting violence against women); and
• other conditions that intersect or interact with factors related to gender and violence to shape or magnify their influence (e.g. entrenched social and economic inequality, prejudice and discrimination on the grounds of other attributes or particular cultural influences).

The attitudes of the community as a whole have been documented in the NCAS report of findings for the national sample available on the ANROWS website. This report complements this data by exploring knowledge and attitudes among young people as a sub-population.

Attitudes are understood to be particularly influenced by social conditions to which people are exposed in their formative years (Martinez & Khalil, 2013). From the 1960s, there was a progressive liberalising of attitudes towards gender and sexuality in high-income countries (Cotter, Hermsen, & Vanneman, 2011; van Egmond, Baxter, Buchler, & Western, 2010). Such attitudes have also been shown to become more liberal in low and middle-income countries, largely correlated with increasing economic and human development (Martinez & Khalil, 2013). Drawing on this evidence, some theorists predict that young people are more likely than older cohorts to hold liberal values towards gender and sexuality. This is based on the assumption that with increasing development and modernisation, most societies have become increasingly more progressive in their approaches to gender relations.

In contrast, other experts argue that young people are exposed to many of the same factors that influence attitudes towards gender equality and violence against women as people in other age groups but that these may have a particular impact on young people owing to their age and stage of development. It is predicted that this may increase the likliehood of young people holding troubling attitudes towards gender relations and violence against women. Among these are that:

• Young people are at a life stage when their values and gender expressions (i.e. what it means to be masculine or feminine) are being formed. Values of respect, equality and non-violence and a more flexible understanding of gender roles, relationships and identities are important foundations for forming respectful, non-violent relationships both in the present and later in life (Chandra-Mouli et al., 2017). Exposure to cultures supporting violence against women and gender inequality may work against these foundations being built (Chandra-Mouli et al., 2017). Values and gender identities formed at this stage can persist and influence experiences into the life-course (Chandra-Mouli et al., 2017; Flood & Fergus, 2008).
• Moral and psychological development takes place gradually. Young people are dealing with complex issues involved in gender and sexual identities that they may not necessarily have the moral and psychological capacities to deal with (Somerville, 2016). This is a particular issue for young men who generally mature somewhat later than young women (Reniers, Murphy, Lin, Bartolome, & Wood, 2016).
• Young people have limited personal experience to draw on to navigate gender roles, identities and relationships. Being closely bound to family and peers, they may have access to fewer countervailing influences. As a result, young people may be especially vulnerable to adopting heavily gendered scripts promoted through peer and popular cultures (Seabrook, Ward, Cortina, Giaccardi, & Lippman, 2017).
• Many of the factors implicated in the formation of attitudes to gender equality and violence against women relate to consumption and leisure, which have particular significance in the lives of young people (Connolly, Friedlander, Pepler, Craig, & Laporte, 2010). The media has been identified as playing a role in shaping attitudes towards violence against women (Flood & Pease, 2009). Much media targeted to young people reflects and reinforces especially stereotyped views of gender relations (Holtzman & Sharpe, 2014).
• The contemporary context (discussed below) is often the only world known to young people, who have less prior life experience to call upon than their older counterparts.

The contemporary context for young Australians

As discussed above, some theorists maintain that as societies develop and modernise, they tend towards more egalitarian gender relations and this in turn is reflected in more liberal attitudes, especially among the young because their formative years are more heavily influenced by modernisation. In contrast, other researchers suggest that there have been signs of a levelling in attitudes towards gender and sexuality since the 1990s in post-industrial societies. They propose that this may reflect a stalling of the revolution in gender relations (Cotter et al., 2011; van Egmond et al., 2010). Still other research suggests the possibility of a mixed picture, with a number of contemporary trends that may influence, both negatively and positively, the attitudes of young Australians towards gender and sexuality.

Among these trends is the growing sense among young people that gender equality has been achieved and that feminism was a movement required by generations past (Baker, 2008; Calder-Dawe & Davey, 2016; Scharff, 2012). This in turn can result in contradictions whereby young people may be both more likely to support public markers of equality (such as women in leadership and equal pay), while remaining less aware of inequalities in more subtle forms such as in interpersonal relationships (Baker, 2008; Chung, Zufferey, & Powell, 2012; Harris, Honey, Webster, Diemer, & Politoff, 2015). Further, while many experts in promoting gender equality argue the need to address women’s particular experiences and the historical and contemporary factors contributing to inequality, evidence shows that young people prefer language and interventions that privilege ’equality for all’ (Calder-Dawe & Davey, 2016), rather than those that focus specifically on women.

A differential in attitudes between gender inequality in the public sphere and inequality in the private sphere of intimate relationships, the family and the household is emerging in survey research in Europe and the United States. Attitudes towards gender equality in the public sphere show a continuous liberalising trend, whereas attitudes towards gender equality in private life have either plateaued or rebounded (Donnelly et al., 2016; Pepin & Cotter, 2018). Some caution is warranted in applying international research to the Australian context (Perales, Philipp, & Baxter, 2017). However, it is possible that this pattern may also be the case among young people in Australia.

The current generation of young people has been positioned in public discourse as the ‘gender fluid’ generation (Marsh, 2016); that is, a generation for whom gender identities, expressions and sexualities are expressed in increasingly diverse ways (Bragg, Renold, Ringrose, & Jackson, 2018; McGlashan & Fitzpatrick, 2017). Indeed, this shift has been characterised by some observers as a ’gender revolution’ (National Geographic, 2017). This growing awareness and appreciation of gender diversity may signal increasing commitment from young people towards achieving social outcomes such as gender equality (Bragg et al., 2018). However, some experts have argued it may also be happening in ways that reinforce traditional gender binaries and power relations (Bragg et al., 2018; Markowitz & Puchner, 2016; McGlashan & Fitzpatrick, 2018; Scrine, 2017).

Smartphones, social media and other digital media are accessible to young people, unlike in previous generations. These technologies have many benefits, with young people using online platforms to share and document experiences of sexual harassment and violence (Keller, Mendes & Ringrose, 2018; Retallack, Ringrose, & Lawrence, 2016). This has been most evident during movements such as #metoo, which have provided a space for a diverse range of women to participate in and respond to public debate (Mendes, Ringrose, & Keller, 2018). Similarly, young people are using social media sites to seek out relationships, and information on sexuality and sexual identity otherwise lacking in formal learning institutions (deRidder & Van Bauwel, 2015). However, these technologies may also have negative impacts on young people’s attitudes and practices. For example, studies show that women and gender relations are often portrayed in highly stereotyped ways in contemporary online platforms and content, including pornography, dating apps, social media and gaming culture (Fox & Tang, 2017; Shaw, 2015). Social media platforms may also serve as sites for gender-based violence, harassment and bullying (Powell & Henry, 2017).

Dating practices for young people differ markedly from previous generations, and social media and dating apps such as Tinder are being used by up to 90 percent of young people aged 18-30 (Newett, Churchill, & Robards, 2017). Some research suggests that the proliferation of dating applications has in turn contributed to a ’hook-up’ culture of casual sexual encounters, including one-night stands and other related activity, without emotional bonding or long-term commitment (Hobbs, Owen, & Gerber, 2017). This is a contested and emerging area of research (Newett et al., 2017). Some researchers suggest such changes in intimacy allow for greater flexibility of gender and sexual identity (Byron & Albury, 2018), while others highlight continuing sexual violence and harassment commonly experienced via these platforms (Hess & Flores, 2018; Thompson, 2018).

In recent decades there has also been a dramatic increase in exposure to pornography among children and young people, especially young men (Horvath, Alys, Massey, Pina, Scally, & Adler, 2013). Young people are accessing pornography at a younger age and more frequently than in the past (Lim, Agius, Carrotte, Vella, & Hellard, 2017). In addition, much contemporary pornography has been found to contain violent imagery and to represent gendered sexual scripts, which are evident in wider societal cultures, in particularly extreme forms (Bridges et al., 2010; Klaassen & Peter, 2015). Although sexualised imagery and gendered scripts have long been represented in mainstream media and other artistic and cultural forms, they have become increasingly more ubiquitous and extreme, especially in media forms commonly accessed by young people (Horvath et al., 2013). The extent to which pornography is harmful is contested (see, for example, Horvath et al., 2013; Peter & Valkenburg, 2016). However, a growing body of evidence suggests that pornography – in particular, violent pornography – is linked to negative attitudes towards gender relations and relationship practices and the proclivity for violence (Antevska & Gavey, 2015; DeKeseredy & Corsianos, 2016; Marston & Lewis, 2014; Wright, Tokunga, & Kraus, 2015). Some studies also suggest a link with an increased risk of perpetrating or being a victim of violence (Peter & Valkenburg, 2016).

The 2013 NCAS found, using composite measures, that young people had poorer understanding and attitudes towards violence against women than an older cohort (people aged 35-64 years). However, there were no overall differences between the cohorts in attitudes towards gender equality. There had been no change on any of the three measures between 2009 and 2013 overall. However, attitudes towards violence against women had improved among young men (Harris et al, 2015).

3 Methodology

About the NCAS young people sample

To form the NCAS sample as a whole, people aged 16 years and over were randomly selected from across Australia and invited to participate in a 20-minute telephone interview. The consent of a parent or guardian was sought for respondents aged under 18 years. Forty percent of the interviews were conducted with people on landline telephones and 60 percent with people on their mobile phones. Interviewing on both landlines and mobile phones enables participation from a broader range of people than landline interviewing only.

This report focuses on knowledge and attitudes among young people. This is defined as people aged 16-24 years. This age range is widely recognised as defining the parameters of young people. There were 1561 people in this age group in the randomly selected telephone sample. However, the number of interviews achieved with people aged 16-17 years was lower than anticipated. Accordingly, a booster sample of an additional 200 people aged 16-17 years was formed. These 200 young people were approached through families registered with an existing panel established to engage people in research. The young people in the booster sample completed a survey with the same questions as the telephone survey. However, they completed it online. The online survey was conducted over two weeks in January and February 2018. Data from the online booster sample were put together with data from the telephone interviews with young people. Weighting adjustments were made to minimise any effects the two different ways of collecting data may have had on the representativeness of the sample.

The sample used for this report comes from these combined sources and has 1,761 people aged 16-24 years, including 794 young women and 964 young men.^[6]

Approach to analysing data

In most analyses, results are given for young men and young women, as well as for the sample of young people as a whole.

Findings for young people were compared with an older cohort in most analyses. For this comparison, consideration was initially given to forming a cohort or cohorts distinguished by the different social experiences of people from different eras. However, no apparent consensus could be found in the literature on which to make this distinction. An initial review of the data showed that the age group most likely to vary from other ages was people aged 65 years and older. This was also found in the analyses of the national NCAS sample (see Webster et al., 2018a). Accordingly, the sample was divided into three cohorts:

• young people aged 16-24 years;
• people aged 25-64 years; and
• people aged 65 years and older.

People aged 65 years and older varied in a similar way from both other cohorts, so, for simplicity, when reporting findings for individual questions, young people are compared only with people aged 25-64 years. As very few differences were found between people aged 16–24 years and those 25-64 years for individual questions, when they are found they are reported in the text only (rather than comparisons between the two age cohorts being routinely presented in the tables). Differences were found between the three age cohorts for some composite or ’overall’ measures, and these are shown in the relevant tables and figures.

All the differences between groups (e.g. men and women, young people and older people) noted in this report:

• Have been tested for statistical significance at the p ≤ 0.01 level. Significance testing makes sure that any differences are not occurring due to chance.^[7]
• Have been assessed to make sure that only differences that are both statistically significant and notable in size are reported. This is because a difference between groups can be statistically significant but trivial in size. This was achieved using the Cohen’s test of effect size. A Cohen’s threshold of 0.2 has been applied. Difference between variables that are both significant and notable in size are denoted in tables and figures using symbols.
• Are based on a base size of at least 30. Results based on base sizes smaller than this are not reported. This is because findings from small numbers have a higher probability of being due to chance. Findings from sample sizes greater than 30 but less than 100 are noted with the Δ symbol when given in either the text or a table and should be treated with caution.^[8]

Where there are no differences that meet the thresholds for significance and effect presented above, but a trend is apparent in the data, this may be noted.

The exception to the above are data exploring change over time at the overall level (measured using the composite measures). Here, significance testing at the p ≤ 0.05 level is used and the Cohen’s threshold is not applied. This is because attitudes change slowly, such that even small changes between surveys are important. These same tests and thresholds are used in all the other NCAS reports.

The 2017 NCAS questionnaire

The questionnaire from the 2013 survey was redeveloped for 2017, retaining as many questions as possible to measure changes over time. More detail on survey design and construction of the measures used in analysis in this report can be found in the NCAS methodology report (Webster et al., 2018b) on the ANROWS website. The NCAS Questionnaire Framework (Figure 3-1) provides an overview of the questionnaire.

The core of the 2017 survey (represented in the centre cells in Figure 3-1) involves four components.^[9] The first is made up of questions designed to find out about people’s knowledge of violence against women (25 questions). The second is concerned with attitudes towards gender equality (19 questions), the third with attitudes towards violence against women (35 questions and two scenarios), and the fourth with intentions if witnessing abuse or disrespect towards women (two scenarios).

Each component is further divided into themes. These themes reflect different aspects of knowledge and different ways attitudinal support for gender equality and violence against women can be expressed. The themes can be seen in Figure 3-1 and are described in greater detail in Box 2-2. The themes in the ’Bystander action’ component reflect the conditions that are known to increase the chances that bystanders will take positive action to abuse and disrespect.^[10]

As well as measuring people’s responses to individual questions, overall concepts are gauged using 15 composite measures (these may be referred to as scales or constructs). These comprise selected questions using statistical methods (Rasch and factor analysis) to ensure they measure the concept accurately.^[11]

The first component in the NCAS Questionnaire Framework, the knowledge component (‘Knowledge of violence against women’) has one composite measure that gauges people’s overall understanding that violence against women extends beyond physical violence and forced sex to also include psychological, social and financial means of control and intimidation.^[12] 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 (‘Bystander action’), there is a composite measure of people’s overall intention to take positive action if they witness abuse or disrespect towards women.^[13]

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 Figure 3-1. Information is collected from survey participants to measure each factor. This is then used in the analysis of their responses to the questions in the four core survey components. This includes questions about the people, 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.

Composite measures are used to measure prejudice and support for violence in general.

Figure 3-1: 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.	–

4 Findings

As discussed in Chapter 3, respondents were asked to respond to a number of individual statements or questions in four components (‘Knowledge of violence against women’; ‘Attitudes towards gender equality’; ‘Attitudes towards violence against women’; ‘Bystander action’). Responses to these questions show that the majority of young Australians have a good knowledge 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 20 of the 36 questions asked in both survey waves. These results are reported in detail in this chapter.

Answers to the individual statements and questions were also used to measure the concepts in each of the four components overall (referred to as composite measures). 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 measures. An average for young people was then calculated. Scores range from one to 100. In the case of the measures of understanding of violence against women and attitudes to gender equality, a higher score indicates a greater level of understanding and more favourable attitudes towards gender equality. In contrast, for the measure of attitudes towards violence against women, a higher score indicates less favourable attitudes.

It is important to note that mean scores are not the same as percentages. The approach is used to compare findings (in this case, findings between survey waves) relative to one another, rather than to measure concepts of concern in an absolute sense.

Change in young people’s knowledge and attitudes over time

The report of the 2013 NCAS showed that between 2009 and 2013 there was no change among young people on the overall measures of understanding of violence against women, and attitudes to gender equality. There was a small improvement in attitudes to violence against women among young men (Harris et al., 2015).

Figure 4-1: Changes in understanding of violence against women and attitudes to gender equality and violence against women over time (means)

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

Year	All	Men	Women
2009 (n=882)	58*	53*^	62*
2013 (n=1,923)	58*	55*^	61*
2017 (n=1,761)	65	62^	70

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 – A higher score indicates greater support for gender equality

Year	All	Men	Women
2009 (n=882)	65*†	62*^	68*
2013 (n=1,923)	63*	62*^	65*
2017 (n=1,761)	66	63^	69

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

Year	All	Men	Women
2009 (n=882)	36*	37*^	35*
2013 (n=1,923)	37*	38*^	35*
2017 (n=1,761)	33	35^	31

Note: 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.

* Difference between survey year and 2017 is statistically significant, p≤0.05.

† Difference between 2009 and 2013 is statistically significant, p≤0.05.

^ Difference between men and women is statistically significant, p ≤0.05.

Young Australians’ knowledge of violence against women

Knowledge of violence against women is among the factors influencing attitudes (Ajzen & Fishbein, 2004; Chaiken & Trope, 1999; Fazio, 1990) and is an important resource for both affected individuals and those around them to identify and respond constructively to the problem (Carlson & Worden, 2005; Powell, 2011). 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 (Salazar, Baker, Price, & Carlin, 2003). Providing access to knowledge at an early age can help to provide a sound foundation for young people to develop positive attitudes and relationship practices.

Table 4-1 compares 2013 and 2017 survey findings for each question of knowledge of violence against women for respondents aged 16-24 years.

Table 4-1: Knowledge of violence against women by survey year and gender, respondents aged 16-24 years

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

Physical forms of violence

Action	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
Slaps or pushes to cause harm or fear	97	98	97	99
Forces the other partner to have sex**	97	95	95	96
Tries to scare/control by threatening to hurt other family members**	98	99	98	100
Throws or smashes objects to frighten or threaten**	97	96	96	97

Non-physical forms of violence

Action	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
Repeatedly criticises to make partner feel bad or useless#	82	90†	88	93
Controls social life by preventing partner from seeing family/friends#	82	91†	86^	96
Controls the other partner by denying them money	59	76†	70^	83
Repeatedly keeps track of location, calls or activities through mobile phone or other devices without consent**	–	86	79^	93
Stalking by repeatedly following/watching at home/work	87	90	87^	94
Harassment by repeated emails, text messages#	82	89†	84^	94

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

Statement	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
Violence against women is common**	60	67	57^	78

Understanding of sexual violence (% agree)

Statement	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
If a woman doesn’t physically resist – even if protesting verbally – then it isn’t really rape**	9	5	5	4
Many allegations of sexual assault made by women are false**	–	14	18^	10
It is a criminal offense for a man to have sex with his wife without her consent**	–	88	87	90
Women are more likely to be raped by someone they know than by a stranger**	57	63	60	66

Knowledge of resources (% agree)

Statement	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
If I needed to get outside advice or support for someone about a domestic violence issue, I would know where to go**	54	60	62	58

** Asked of a quarter of the sample in 2017.

# Asked of half the sample in 2017.

^ Difference between men and women is statistically significant, p ≤0.01 and reaches the 0.2 Cohen’s threshold.

† Difference between 2013 and 2017 is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

– Question not asked in 2013.

Young Australians’ knowledge of the gendered pattern of partner violence

An awareness of the gendered patterns of 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 partner violence involves unequal, gendered power dynamics. As well as impacting individuals’ responses to partner violence, this understanding may influence the level of policy attention and resourcing given to address partner violence affecting women relative to that affecting men. Respondents to the NCAS were asked about their knowledge of the gendered pattern of partner violence (Figure 4-2).

Figure 4-2: Young Australian’s knowledge of the gendered pattern of intimate partner violence

Young Australian’s knowledge of the gendered pattern of intimate partner violence

Who is more likely to commit domestic violence?

The evidence

Men are more likely than women to perpetrate partner violence, and are more likely to use frequent, prolonged and extreme violence.ⁱ

Men are more likely than women to sexually assault their partner.ⁱⁱ Men are more likely than women to subject their partner to controlling and coercive behaviours.ⁱⁱⁱ

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.^iv

What Young Australians Believe _(n=428)

While many young people (60%) recognise that mainly men, or men more often commit acts of domestic violence, the number of young people that recognise this has dropped 11 percentage points since the 2013 NCAS (71%). This decline has been occurring since 2009, when 75% of young people recognised this fact. Young women (67%) are more likely than men (52%) to be aware. The number of young people suggesting that men and women are equally likely to perpetrate domestic violence has increased from 23% in 2009 to 36% in 2017.

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.^v

Women are more likely than men to be the victims of domestic homicide.^vi

What Young Australians Believe _(n=428)

While most young Australians (75%) recognise that women are more likely to suffer physical harm from domestic violence, the number of young people who recognise this has dropped 12 percentage points since the 2013 NCAS (87%). This decline has been occurring since 2009, when 90% of young people recognised this fact. The number of young people suggesting that this harm is experienced equally by men and women has increased from 6% in 2009 to 19% in 2017.

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.^vii

What Young Australians Believe _(n=428)

Less than half (40%) of all young Australians recognise that levels of fear from domestic violence are worse for women, and this number has declined by 10 percentage points since 2013. This decline has been occurring since 2009, when 54% of young people recognised this fact. The number of young people suggesting fear from domestic violence is experienced equally by men and women has increased from 45% in 2009 to 56% in 2017.

i Cox, 2015; Bagshaw, Chung, Couch, Lilburn, & Wadham, 2000; Belknap & Melton, 2005; Holtzworth-Munroe, 2005; Kimmel, 2012.

ii Swan, Gambone, Van Horn, Snow, & Sullivan, 2012.

iii Caldwell, Swan, & Woodbrown, 2012.

iv Holtzworth-Munroe, 2005; Cercone, Beach, & Arias, 2005; Dobash, Dobash, Cavanagh, & Lewis, 2004; Larance & Miller, 2016; Mennicke & Kulkarni, 2016; Velonis, 2016.

v Belknap & Melton, 2005; Myhill, 2015.

vi Australian Domestic and Family Violence Death Review Network, 2018; Chan & Payne, 2013.

vii Bagshaw et al., 2000; Caldwell, Swan, & Woodbrown, 2012; Heady, Scott, & De Vaus, 1999; National Crime Prevention, 2001.

Young Australians’ attitudes to gender equality

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 (for a review see Webster & Flood, 2015). This is a position supported by many expert bodies (Michau et al., 2015; UN Women, 2015; WHO, 2010) and which underpins both the National Plan (COAG, 2011) and Change the story (Our Watch et al., 2015). 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 families, the protection and promotion of human rights, and benefits for the wider society, including improved productivity, creativity and economic development (VicHealth, 2017a; 2017b). The aspects of gender inequality found to be linked to violence against women have been identified in research compiled for Change the story. Table 4-2 shows 2013 and 2017 results for the questions asked in the NCAS to measure these attitudes, which were adapted from existing studies.

Table 4-2: Attitudes to gender equality by survey year and gender, respondents aged 16-24 years

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

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
If a woman earns more than her male partner, it is not good for the relationship#	–	5	5	6
A man should never admit when others have hurt his feelings	–	4	5	4
When a couple start dating, the woman should not be the one to initiate sex#	–	7	9	5
I think it is embarrassing for a man to have a job that is usually filled by a woman#	–	5	6	3
A woman has to have children to be fulfilled#	7	6	8	4

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

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
In the workplace, men generally make more capable bosses than women#	–	13	17^	8
Men, rather than women, should hold positions of responsibility in the community#	–	11	14	8
On the whole, men make better political leaders than women	24	13†	16	10
Women are less capable than men of thinking logically	–	6	8	4

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

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
Men should take control in relationships and be the head of the household	22	17†	22^	12
Women prefer a man to be in charge of the relationship	35	31	36^	26

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

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
I think there’s no harm in men making sexist jokes about women when they are among their male friends#	–	22	30^	14
I think it’s okay for men to joke with their male friends about being violent towards women	–	4	5	2
I think it’s natural for a man to want to appear in control of his partner in front of his male friends#	–	43	43	43

Denying gender inequality is a problem (% agree)

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women (n=794)
Many women exaggerate how unequally women are treated in Australia#	–	45	52^	37
Many women mistakenly interpret innocent remarks or acts as being sexist#	–	49	57^	41
Many women fail to fully appreciate all that men do for them#	–	29	33	25
Women often flirt with men just to be hurtful	–	15	20^	11
Discrimination against women is no longer a problem in the workplace in Australia	14	11†	15^	6

# Asked of half the sample.

† Difference between 2013 and 2017 is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

^ Difference between men and women is statistically significant, p ≤0.01 and reaches the 0.2 Cohen’s threshold.

– Question not asked in 2013.

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

To find out which aspects of gender equality are more or less likely to be supported by young Australians overall, each respondent was given a score based on their answers to questions in each theme. An average for all young people was then calculated and the results are shown in Figure 4-3. Scores range from 1 to 100, with 1 signifying the lowest level of support for gender equality (a very poor result). This information is useful because it tells us which aspects of attitudes to gender equality most need to be addressed in prevention programs and interventions.

Figure 4-3: Relative attitudinal support for gender equality among respondents aged 16-24 years, by themes^ (means)

Relative attitudinal support for gender equality among respondents aged 16-24 years, 2017. Mean scores for the GEAS themes – higher scores indicate higher attitudinal support for gender equality/rejection of inequality in that theme. N=1759

Theme	All (%)	Men (%)	Women (%)
Rejecting male peer relations involving aggression & disrespect towards women	78~	74~	83+
Rejecting rigid gender roles, stereotypes & expressions	81˘	78˘	84+
Promoting women’s independence & decision-making in public life	79<	75<	83+
Promoting women’s independence & decision-making in private life	71˘	68˘	75˘
Recognising gender inequality is a problem	62˘	58˘	66˘

Note: 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.

^ All differences between men and women are statistically significant, p≤0.01.

˘ Difference between this theme and all other themes in this sample is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

~ Difference between this theme and all other themes in this sample, with the exception of ‘Promoting women’s independence & decision-making in public life’, is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

+ Difference between this theme and ‘Promoting women’s independence & decision-making in private life’ and ‘Recognising gender inequality is a problem’ in this sample is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

< Difference between this theme and all other themes in this sample, with the exception of ‘Rejecting male peer relations involving aggression & disrespect towards women’, is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

Given the higher level of support for women’s decision-making in public life compared with decision-making in private life, this distinction was further explored by creating two new themes using all the questions measuring attitudinal support for gender equality (rather than just those looking at decision-making). Questions were divided into those concerned with public life and those concerned with private life. The distinction between young people’s attitudes towards gender equality in public life and gender equality in private life was confirmed (Figure 4-4). That is, young people were found to have higher levels of attitudinal support for gender equality in public life overall than for gender equality in private life.

Figure 4-4: Relative levels of support for gender equality among respondents aged 16-24 years, in public and private^Ω life^{^} (means)

Relative levels of support for gender equality among respondents aged 16-24 years, in public and private^Ω life^{^}. Mean scores for the GEAS themes – higher scores indicate higher attitudinal support for gender equality/rejection of inequality in that theme. N=1759

Theme	All (%)	Men(%)	Women (%)
Gender equality in public life	76	72	80
Gender equality in private life	66	63	69

Note: 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.

Ω Difference between public and private in each sample is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

^ Difference between men and women is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

I think there’s been such a push for public gender equality – equality in the workplace, being paid the same amount – but there’s not so much of a push in private life. I think for some men they’re like, “equality in the workplace? Yeah whatever, I’m all for it”; but in the private areas they’re like “it’s a bit too close to home, no thank you.” Like now it’s affecting me personally, I don’t agree with it.
– R4Respect youth ambassador

Young Australians’ attitudes to violence against women

As explained above, 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 (Ajzen & Fishbein, 2004). 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.^[15]

The four themes in this component were 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 these themes are similar to the way the Australian public thinks about violence against women (Table 4-3).^[16]

When we go into schools we talk to young people about, “Is it okay to have your partner’s Facebook password in this case or in this case?” and they always say, “It’s more okay if you know that person has cheated in the past” or things like that. People use those as excuses to control women.
– R4Respect youth ambassador

Table 4-3: Attitudinal support for violence against women by survey year and gender, respondents aged 16-24 years

Excusing the perpetrator and hold women responsible (% agree)

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

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women n=794)
A lot of what is called domestic violence is really just a normal reaction to day-to-day stress and frustration	–	16	20^	11
Domestic violence can be excused if it results from people getting so angry that they temporarily lose control	24	11†	13	10
Domestic violence can be excused if the violent person was themselves abused as a child	14	8†	10	6
Domestic violence can be excused if, afterwards, the violent person genuinely regrets what they have done	26	19†	23^	15
Sometimes a woman can make a man so angry that he hits her when he didn’t mean to	–	20	22	17
Women who flirt all the time are somewhat to blame if their partner gets jealous and hits them	–	11	14	9

Attitudes concerning the family and partner violence

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women n=794)
Domestic violence is a private matter to be handled in the family	22	16†	20^	12
It’s a woman’s duty to stay in a violent relationship in order to keep the family together	9	4†	5	3

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

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women n=794)
Domestic violence can be excused if the victim is heavily affected by alcohol	9	5†	6	4
Domestic violence can be excused if the offender is heavily affected by alcohol	10	6†	7	5
A man is less responsible for rape if he is drunk or affected by drugs at the time**	10	8	9	6
If a woman is raped while she is drunk or affected by drugs she is at least partly responsible	18	13†	15	11

Minimising violence against women (% agree)

Minimising the impacts and consequences of recurring partner violence

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women n=794)
A female victim who does not leave an abusive partner is partly responsible for the abuse continuing	–	34	39^	28
I don’t believe it’s as hard as people say it is for women to leave an abusive relationship	–	14	19^	10
If a woman keeps going back to her abusive partner then the violence can’t be very serious	–	13	17^	9
It’s acceptable for police to give lower priority to domestic violence cases they’ve attended many times before	–	10	13	8
Women who stay in abusive relationships should be entitled to less help from counselling and support services than women who end the relationship	–	12	14	9
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**	89	86	83	88

Minimising sexual violence by claiming that women lie

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women n=794)
If a woman claims to have been sexually assaulted but has no other physical injuries she probably shouldn’t be taken too seriously	–	5	6	5
Women who wait weeks or months to report sexual harassment are probably lying**	–	7	11^	3
Women who wait weeks or months to report sexual assault are probably lying	–	9	13^	5

Minimising violence against women by placing it beyond the law

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women n=794)
Women who are sexually harassed should sort it out themselves rather than report it**	10	4†	5	3
In my opinion, if a woman reports abuse by her partner to outsiders it is shameful for her family	–	9	12	6
It is a serious problem when a man tries to control his partner by refusing her access to their money**	–	79	78	80

Mistrusting women’s reports of violence (% agree)

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women n=794)
Many women tend to exaggerate the problem of male violence	–	24	31^	18
Women going through custody battles often make up or exaggerate claims of domestic violence in order to improve their case**	52	37†	49^	26
A lot of times, women who say they were raped had led the man on and then had regrets	39	25†	32^	18
It is common for sexual assault accusations to be used, as a way of getting back at men	–	37	45^	29

Disregard women’s right to consent (% agree)

Attitude	2013 Total (n=1,918)	2017 Total (n=1,761)	2017 Men (n=964)	2017 Women n=794)
Women find it flattering to be persistently pursued, even if they are not interested**	–	18	24^	13
If a woman sends a nude image to her partner, then she is partly responsible if he shares it without her permission**	–	28	30	26
Women often say ‘no’ when they mean ‘yes’	20	12†	14	11
Since some women are so sexual in public, it’s not surprising that some men think they can touch women without permission	–	17	18	16
When a man is very sexually aroused, he may not even realize that the woman doesn’t want to have sex	–	28	30	27
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	–	7	8	6
Rape results from men not being able to control their need for sex**	40	28†	29	28

** Asked of quarter of the sample.

† Difference between 2013 and 2017 is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

^ Difference between men and women is statistically significant, p ≤0.01 and reaches the 0.2 Cohen’s threshold.

– Question not asked in 2013.

Circumstances in which young 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 had 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 once a woman consents to one element of sexual expression, she is automatically consenting to further sexual activity.

Figure 4-5: Impact of situational factors on attitudes towards consent among respondents aged 16-24 years, 2017

Impact of situational factors on attitudes towards consent among respondents aged 16-24 years, 2017. N=869

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?	5
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

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?	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?	14

Both scenarios describe criminal offences. These findings are significant because they indicate that a concerning proportion of young Australians are unclear about what constitutes consent, and the line between consensual sex and coercion (Muehlenhard, Humphreys, Jozkowski, & Peterson, 2016; Warren, Swan, & Allen, 2015).

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) (Hust, Rodgers, & Bayly, 2017). These dynamics and expectations can contribute to some people failing to see the need to gain consent or to assuming that if a person consents to one thing, they are consenting to any sexual contact, rather than recognising that consent must always be an ongoing and respectful process of negotiation. Ensuring ongoing positive consent is important because 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 young 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 described above for the gender equality themes.

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 because it tells us which aspects of violence-supportive attitudes most need to be addressed in prevention programs and interventions.

Figure 4-6: Relative endorsement of attitudes supportive of violence against women among respondents aged 16-24 years, by themes,^ 2017 (means)

Relative endorsement of attitudes supportive of violence against women among respondents aged 16-24 years, 2017. Means scores for the CASVAWS themes – A lower score is better and indicates lower attitudinal support for violence against women. N= 1760

Theme	All	Men	Women
Mistrusting women’s reports of violence	34˘	38˘	30˘
Disregarding the need to gain consent	25+	26µ	23˘
Minimising violence against women	25+	28˘	22>
Excusing the perpetrator & holding women responsible	24+	27µ	22>

Note: 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.

^ All differences between men and women are statistically significant, p≤0.01.

˘ Difference between this theme and all other themes in this sample is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

+ Difference between this theme and ‘Mistrusting women’s reports of violence’ in this sample is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

µ Difference between this theme and ‘Mistrusting women’s reports of violence’ and ‘Minimising violence against women’ in this sample is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

> Difference between this theme and ‘Mistrusting women’s reports of violence’ and ’Disregarding the need to gain consent’ in this sample is statistically significant, p ≤0.01.

Bystander action

There are limitations to the role the community can play in addressing physical violence against women once this violence is occurring. There are two reasons for this:

• Much of this violence occurs in private, beyond the gaze of the public, family and friends.
• There may be risks for all involved in intervening in physical violence.

However, there may be promise in encouraging the community to take action if witnessing abuse and disrespect towards women.^[17] There are three main reasons for this. First, these may be precursors to, or risk factors for, physical violence. Second, many of the precursors to violence are not in themselves officially able to be sanctioned (e.g. through laws or regulations), and, third, disapproval shown by those around us has been found to be one of the most effective forces to prevent abuse and disrespect, and thereby violence, against women (Powell, 2011). Interventions to increase bystander interventions are especially indicated among men, for whom peer influences have been found to be particularly influential (DeKeseredy & Schwartz, 2013).

I’ve been in situations where you’re just waiting for someone to stand up and push, and you’re like, if someone stands up I’m going to stand up with them, but then everyone’s too scared.
– R4Respect youth ambassador

The 2017 NCAS included questions on respondents’ anticipated responses should they witness two scenarios in a social setting: a male friend telling a sexist joke and a male friend verbally abusing his partner.

Figure 4-7: Reactions among respondents aged 16-24 years to scenarios involving the telling of a sexist joke and the verbal abuse of a partner in a social setting, 2017

Reactions among respondents aged 16-24 years to scenarios involving the telling of a sexist joke and the verbal abuse of a partner in a social setting, 2017

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	97

If you were bothered, what would you do?

Response	Agreed (%)
Would act	71
Like to act – but wouldn’t know how	22
Feel uncomfortable – not act	4

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

Response	Agreed (%)
All or most friends	70
Some	20
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	73

If you were bothered, what would you do?

Response	Agreed (%)
Would act	37
Like to act – but wouldn’t know how	16
Feel uncomfortable – not act	19

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

Response	Agreed (%)
All or most friends	58
Some	28
Few, if any	3

2017 (n=439)**

Note: 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.

** Asked of a quarter of the sample.

Are there differences between young Australians and older Australians?

In the sections above, any differences between people aged 16-24 years and people aged 25-64 years and over were noted for each individual question. There are no significant differences between the cohorts in each of the individual questions gauging bystander intentions, and only a small number of differences between the cohorts in questions gauging knowledge and attitudes meet the thresholds for significance and effect used in this report. However, where these occurred, they indicated that young people had a lower level of understanding, a lower level of support for gender equality and a higher level of support for violence against women than people aged 25-64 years.

Differences between these two age cohorts, as well as people aged 65 years and over, were explored at the composite level (Figure 4-8 to 4-11). This is done by comparing the proportion of people in each age cohort in the higher and lower categories of understanding, attitudes towards violence against women and gender equality and intention to act as a bystander. It was found that:

• Young people are more likely to have a low understanding of violence against women compared to those aged 25-64 years and 65 years plus.
• Young people are more likely than those aged 65 years plus to support gender equality, and have a similar level of support to those aged 25-64 years.
• Young people are less likely than those aged 65 years plus to endorse attitudes supportive of violence against women. They have a similar level of support to those aged 25-64 years.
• Young people are less likely than people aged 25-64 years to have a high intention to act as a bystander.

Figure 4–8: Understanding attitudes towards violence against women by age cohort (UVAWS), 2017 (%)

Understanding attitudes towards violence against women by age cohort (UVAWS), 2017 (%)

Age	HIGH understanding (%)	LOW understanding (%)
16-24	22	33
25-64	36‡	24
65+	34‡	23

Figure 4–9: Support for gender equality by age cohort (GEAS), 2017 (%)

Support for gender equality by age cohort (GEAS), 2017 (%)

Age	HIGH support (%)	LOW support (%)
16-24	27	27
25-64	28	22
65+	12‡	38

Figure 4–10: Endorsement of attitudes supportive of violence by age cohort (CASVAWS), 2017 (%)

Endorsement of attitudes supportive of violence by age cohort (CASVAWS), 2017 (%)

Age	LOW endorsement (%)	HIGH endorsement (%)
16-24	27	25
25-64	29	20
65+	12	44‡

Figure 4–11: Intention to act by age cohort** (ITA), 2017 (%)

Intention to act by age cohort** (ITA), 2017 (%)

Age	HIGH intention (%)	LOW intention (%)
16-24	16	28
25-64	25‡	26
65+	21	29

16-24 years (n=1,761) 25-64 years (n=10,810) 65+ years (n=5,162)

‡ Difference between this age group and those aged 16-24 years is statistically significant, p≤0.01 and reaches the 0.2 Cohen’s threshold.

** Asked of a quarter of the sample.

Demographic factors influencing young people’s understanding and attitudes

The previous sections of this chapter explore knowledge and attitudes among young people, along with differences between young men and young women and between young people and people aged 25-64 years. This section examines differences between young people in particular groups and contexts. This is done by comparing the proportion of young people with different demographic characteristics in the higher and lower categories of understanding, attitudinal support for violence and gender equality, and intention to act as a bystander. This information is useful because it can help to assess whether efforts to prevent violence against women need to be targeted to particular groups.

Differences are reported for factors listed in the NCAS Questionnaire Framework that are relevant to young people and where sample sizes were sufficient to do so (i.e. sufficient to enable base sizes of 30 or more for each variable being compared).

This included comparing respondents aged 16-24 years by:

• age (in three categories, 16-17 years, 18-20 years, 21-24 years). This was included to investigate the extent of change in attitudes with age among young people;
• occupation of the main income earner in their household, as an indicator of socio-economic status;
• whether they are employed or unemployed;
• whether they live in a capital city or elsewhere;
• the gender composition of their social network – this measure was included on the basis of prior research showing that attitudes supportive of violence against women and gender equality are more likely to be found in male-dominated social networks (DeKeseredy & Schwartz, 2013);
• the type of household they live in – whether they live in a group household or with a partner or others or whether they live alone; and
• area disadvantage.^[18]

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 are the strongest predictors of attitudinal support for violence against women among young people. This technique measures the strength of influence of each factor after the influence of other factors has been taken into account. All the demographic, contextual and attitudinal factors in the survey were included in the analysis.

Figure 4-12a shows the six strongest predictors of attitudes supportive of violence against women among young people. 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 violence against women among young people. However, of the demographic factors, country of birth/length of time in Australia and English language proficiency are the two strongest demographic predictors of attitudes towards violence against women.^[20]

The analysis also investigated the extent to which attitudes in each of the gender equality themes predict whether young 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 (Figure 4-12b).

Top 6 predictors of attitudinal support for violence among respondents aged 16-24 years, 2017^§

Predictor	Contribution to variance explained (%)
Attitudes to gender equality (GEAS)	61
Understanding of violence against women (UVAWS)	10
Prejudiced attitudes (PAC)	8
Attitudes to violence in general (GVC)	6
Country of birth/length of time in Australia	5
English language proficiency	4

Influence of gender equality themes in predicting attitudinal support for violence, 2017^¤

Predictor	Contribution to variance explained (%)
Denying gender inequality is a problem	42
Promoting rigid gender roles, stereotypes and expressions	17
Undermining women’s independence and decision-making in public life	15
Undermining women’s independence and decision-making in private life	15
Condoning male peer relations involving aggression and disrespect towards women	12

§ These figures are expressed as a percentage of the variance explained by the model. The percentage of variance explained by the model overall is 59%. Percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding.

¤ These figures are expressed as a percentage of the variance explained by the model. The percentage of variance explained by the model overall is 54%. Percentages may not equal 100% due to rounding.

5 Conclusion

The findings: Factors to keep in mind

The 2017 NCAS 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:

• 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 as described in the introduction to Chapter 4).
• 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. The relationship could be the other way around, the factors may influence each other, or there may be a third factor that is common to both but not included in the study.
• A range of factors can distort results when survey researchers and participants do not share a common social experience.

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.^[21] That is, it includes all numbers that were never answered, not just those where someone answered. The response rate for the NCAS was 17 percent. This is comparable, if not better than, other similar surveys across the world (Dutwin & Lavrakas, 2016; Keeter, Hatley, Kennedy, & Lau, 2017; Kohut, Keeter, Doherty, Dimock, & Christian, 2012; Riggle, Rostosky, & Reedy, 2005; Shih & Fan, 2008). 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.

A further consideration is the high threshold used in all NCAS reports to identify results that are statistically significant (p ≤ 0.01). The high threshold is likely to have had minimal impact on comparisons between the two age cohorts, where the differences were very small and the sample sizes were sufficient. However, a high threshold has a particular impact when sample sizes are small. Many of the differences evident in the tables and figures may be statistically significant at lower threshold of p ≤ 0.05, which is generally used in social science reporting.

As noted above, the findings in 2017 are similar to those in 2013, although in contrast to the 2013 study, no variation was found between the younger and older cohort in the composite measure of attitudes towards violence against women. Direct comparisons cannot be made between these findings because:

• The older cohort used in 2017 (25-64 years) was different from that used in 2013 reporting (35-64 years). This was for reasons described on page 18.
• In 2017 a more stringent approach was used to report differences between groups across all NCAS reports. In 2013 results were reported if they were statistically significant, whereas in 2017 only results that were significant and substantial in size (measured via Cohen’s test of effect size) were reported. In 2017 the difference between the younger and older cohorts in the proportion with low support for gender equality and high endorsement of attitudes supportive of violence against women were statistically significant. However, since they did not meet the effect size threshold (i.e. the test showed that the difference was negligible) they are not reported as findings.

More information and methodological details can be found in the NCAS methodology report (Webster et al., 2018b) on the ANROWS website.

Implications for policy and practice

Attitudes are one way to measure progress in addressing the factors leading to violence against women. Results for the community as a whole reported elsewhere (ANROWS, 2018; Webster et al., 2018a) show positive changes in people’s understanding of violence against women, attitudes to gender equality and attitudes to violence against women. The findings in this report show that this is also the case for young Australians. This suggests that Australia is ’on track’ to achieving positive changes in factors contributing to violence against women. Nevertheless, a sizeable minority of young Australians hold attitudes that contribute to violence against women. Further, as there has yet to be a reduction in this violence itself (ABS, 2017b), continued effort is needed.

Although some theorists predict that younger people will have more liberal attitudes towards violence against women and gender equality than those in the older cohort (people aged 25-64), this was not found to be the case. Indeed, no differences between the two age cohorts on either the measure of attitudes to gender equality or of attitudes towards violence against women met the thresholds for statistical significance and effect size used in this report. When significant differences were found between the two age cohorts for individual questions, in all instances young people were more likely than those in the cohort of people aged 25-64 years to give less favourable responses.

A multi-level, multi-strategy approach

A range of factors influence violence against women, not just attitudes (for a review of these factors, see Webster & Flood, 2015). Further, attitudes themselves are shaped by influences in people’s day-to-day environments (Pease & Flood, 2009). Action to address these influences will be needed to change attitudes and behaviours. Recognising this, expert bodies propose an approach that incorporates multiple strategies, implemented across different sectors and settings and targeted to individuals and families, as well as communities, organisations and society-wide institutions (Garcia-Moreno et al., 2015; Heise, 1998; Michau et al., 2015; Our Watch, ANROWS, & VicHealth, 2015; VicHealth, 2007; 2011; 2017b; UN Women, 2015; WHO, 2002). Plans for implementing such an approach and supporting primary prevention of violence against women can be found in the National Plan (COAG, 2011) and its successive Action Plans (Australian Department of Social Services, 2014; 2016) and in the Change the story framework (Our Watch et al., 2015).

Young people’s attitudes and experiences are shaped by the world they encounter in their families, communities and institutions such as schools and universities. This means that preventing violence perpetrated or experienced by young people requires a two-fold approach. As well as addressing norms and practices among young people themselves, attention needs to be given to norms, structures and practices in the wider community and environments that influence young people’s attitudes and experiences.

You can’t be tackling sexism and disrespect from one angle, it has to come from the media, from other people, from different avenues.
I could be in the locker room with a friend and say I don’t agree with something. I have a sit down, talk to them and say, “Hey, this is how I feel”. But then we could go out into the field and our own coach is saying, “Stop playing like a freaking girl…” and then it’s just like “man I had a work in progress dude and you’re ruining it!”.
– R4Respect youth ambassador

The context for young people

The NCAS can tell us what attitudes people hold, but not why they hold them or why they are changing. However, it does provide some clues. Overall, the findings for young Australians are very similar to those found among Australians of other ages. This suggests that many of the factors influencing attitudes in the community as a whole also influence those of young Australians. For this reason, many of the implications discussed in the report of the NCAS findings for the community as a whole (Webster et al., 2018a) are also likely to be relevant to young people.

Nevertheless, a particular focus on young people and environments influencing their attitudes towards, and experiences of, violence is warranted, given:

• overall, that young people have a lower level of understanding of violence against women;
• that young people’s attitudes towards violence against women and gender equality are not more positive than people older than them, as would be expected based on some theories;
• the prevalence of violence among young women relative to other age groups;
• the likelihood (based on international research) that the risk of men perpetrating violence against women is higher when men are young (Fulu et al., 2013);
• the far-reaching implications of traumatic experiences occurring in adolescence and early adulthood;
• the potential to support young people to establish positive gender expressions and safe and respectful relationships that will have enduring benefits into adulthood; and
• That there are a number of factors influencing attitudes that may particularly affect young people (e.g. young people’s high level of media exposure).

It is important that efforts to prevent violence against women among young people are framed with their particular social experiences in mind. Research indicates that young people prefer strategies that are less ’top-down passive learning’ and more action-based, interactive and peer-to-peer (Noonan & Charles, 2009; Weisz & Black, 2013; Wyn & White, 2013). Benefits are likely to be achieved through a focus on particular settings influencing young people’s attitudes and practices, including:

• educational settings, especially schools (Flood et al., 2009; Gleeson et al., 2015);
• sports and active recreation settings (Dyson & Flood, 2007);
• media and popular culture (Keith, 2013; Squires et al., 2006), in particular social media (APA, 2010; Crabbe & Corlett, 2011; Draper, 2011; Papadopoulos, 2010; Phippen, 2009);
• the family (APA, 2010; Papadopoulos, 2010); and
• peer contexts.

Priority issues

In prioritising effort to strengthen knowledge, attitudes and bystander intentions^[22] among young people, there would be benefits in:

• Addressing the gaps in knowledge of violence against women, particularly in relation to help seeking, the gendered nature and dynamic of partner violence, and the greater risk of violence by a known person than a stranger. As indicated above, the survey cannot tell us why people hold certain attitudes. More research would be required. One possible reason for the decline in knowledge of the greater impact that partner violence has on women than men (see Figure 4-2) is people believing that improvements in gender equality mean that men and women are now equal. This may lead to the mistaken belief that men and women are now equally likely to be victims of domestic violence, and that the impacts of this violence are the same for both men and women.
• Addressing all aspects of gender equality, with a focus on challenging rigid gender roles and identities and the idea that gender equality is no longer a problem. The latter is especially important because, among the five gender inequality themes, it was the strongest predictor of attitudes towards violence against women. Further, attitudes in this theme are also the most widely held among young people.
• Placing greater emphasis on achieving gender equality in the private sphere, such as in intimate relationships, the sexual double standard and the division of household labour.

It’s a lot easier to say we see women and men as equal – that we’ll tick a quota box – but then in those other private aspects it’s much harder. I feel like the private things are hard to change.
– R4Respect youth ambassador

• Promoting attitudes that foster a mutually respectful approach to gender relations and challenge the idea that women lie about violence or use violence as a way to gain tactical advantage over men.
• Addressing barriers to bystander action by informing young 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 young people who would like to act but say that they would not know how.

Strengthening support for gender equality

As discussed in the introduction to this report, many factors influence attitudes towards violence against women and these fall into three clusters, including factors associated with gender, the use of violence as a practice, and other conditions that intersect or interact with gender and violence to shape or magnify their influence. Strengthening attitudes among young people will involve attending to this range of influences. Among the influences explored in this study, the strongest predictors of young people holding attitudes supportive of violence against women, in order of influence, are having a low level of support for gender equality, having a low level of understanding of violence against women, holding prejudicial attitudes towards people on the basis of other attributes and having a high level of support for the use of violence in general. This suggests that these attitudes, and the norms, structures and practices supporting them, should have greater emphasis in prevention than demographic factors such as a person’s age or gender.

The influence of attitudes to gender equality on attitudes to violence against women supports the recommendation of expert bodies that a gender transformative approach is needed (WHO, 2013). This approach is one that promotes equal and respectful relationships between men and women as key to reducing this violence. There are likely to be benefits in integrating means to address other forms of prejudice and discrimination in prevention efforts, as well as challenging the use of violence as a practice. Given evidence from other research – that people who witness or experience interpersonal violence are more likely to hold attitudes supportive of violence against women – there is also a need for strategies to reduce children and young people’s exposure to interpersonal violence.

A whole of community approach and targeting

The fact that there are relatively small differences between young people based on their demographic characteristics suggests the need for prevention strategies that reach all young people. However, the survey suggests some grounds for targeting:

• young men and boys;
• young people in male-dominated social contexts; and
• young people experiencing disadvantage, including those living alone.

There is a large group of guys out there I think who feel like women do owe them, so they really victim blame a lot. I think it’s pretty normal.
– R4Respect youth ambassador

The NCAS findings provide some cause for optimism, although certainly not for complacency. Although the composite measures show that understanding and attitudes towards violence against women and gender equality among young people are tracking in the direction of positive change overall, areas investigated in the NCAS raise cause for concern. The findings in this report will be useful to identify and address these areas with the aim of building cultures of safety, respect and equality for all Australians.

References

Adam, E. K., Chyu, L., Hoyt, L. T., Doane, L. D., Boisjoly, J., Duncan, G. J., & McDade, T. W. (2011). Adverse adolescent relationship histories and young adult health: Cumulative effects of loneliness, low parental support, relationship instability, intimate partner violence, and loss. Journal of Adolescent Health, 49(3), 278-286.

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, NY: Psychology Group, Taylor and Francis.

Allen, L. (2005). Sexual subjects: Young people, sexuality and education. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

American Association of Public Opinion Research (AAPOR). (2016). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (9th ed.). Oakbrook Terrace, IL: AAPOR.

American Psychological Association (Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls) (APA). (2010). Report of the APA Task Force on the sexualization of girls. Retrieved 20 July 2018 from https://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/girls/report-full.pdf

Antevska, A., & Gavey, N. (2015). ‘Out of sight and out of mind’: Detachment and men’s consumption of male sexual dominance and female submission in pornography. Men and Masculinities, 18(5), 605-629.

Australian Department of Social Services. (2014). Second Action Plan 2013-2016 of the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010-2022. Canberra: DSS.

Australian Department of Social Services. (2016). Third Action Plan 2016-2019 of the National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010-2022. Canberra: DSS.

Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety. (2018). 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) (Research to policy and practice, 03/2018). Sydney, NSW: ANROWS.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2017a). ABS survey shows decline in rates of violence. Retrieved 17 May 2018 from www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/by%20Subject/4906.0~2016~Media%20Release~ABS%20survey%20shows%20decline%20in%20rates%20of%20violence%20(Media%20Release)~3

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2017b). Personal safety, Australia, 2016. (Cat. no. 4906.0) Retrieved 20 July 2018 from www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/4906.0

Australian Domestic and Family Violence Death Review Network. (2018). Australian and Family Violence Death Review Network: Data report. Retrieved 20 July 2018 from www.coronerscourt.vic.gov.au/resources/e7964843-7985-4a25-8abd-5060c26edc4d/website+version+-+adfvdrn_data_report_2018_.pdf

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

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

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2018). Specialist homelessness services annual report 2016-17. Canberra: AIHW.

Ayre, J., Lum On, M., Webster, K., Gourley, M., & Moon, L. (2016). Examination of the burden of disease of intimate partner violence against women in 2011: Final report. Sydney: ANROWS.

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.

Baker, J. (2008). The ideology of choice. Overstating progress and hiding injustice in the lives of young women: Findings from a study in North Queensland, Australia. Women’s Studies International Forum, 31(1), 53–64.

Banyard, V., Potter, S., & Turner, H. (2011). The impact of interpersonal violence in adulthood on women’s job satisfaction and productivity: The mediating roles of mental and physical health. Psychology of Violence, 1(1), 16-28.

Belknap, J., & Melton, H. (2005). Are heterosexual men also victims of intimate partner abuse? Retrieved 20 November 2018 from https://vawnet.org/material/are-heterosexual-men-also-victims-intimate-partner-abuse

Bragg, S., Renold, E., Ringrose, J., & Jackson, C. (2018). ’More than boy, girl, male, female’: Exploring young people’s views on gender diversity within and beyond school contexts. Sex Education, 18(4),1-15.

Bridges, A., Wosnitzer, R., Scharrer, E., Sun, C., & Liberman, R. (2010). Aggression and sexual behavior in best-selling pornography videos: A content analysis update. Violence Against Women, 16(10), 1065-1085.

Brown, A., Cosgrave, E., Killackey, E., Purcell, R., Buckby, J., & Yung, A. R. (2009). The longitudinal association of adolescent dating violence with psychiatric disorders and functioning. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(12), 1964-1979.

Burgin, R. (2019). Persistent narratives of force and resistance: Affirmative consent as law reform. British Journal of Criminology, 59(2), 296-314 .

Byron, P., & Albury, K. (2018). ’There are literally no rules when it comes to these things’: Ethical practice and the use of dating/hook-up apps. In Digital Intimate Publics and Social Media (pp. 213-229). Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.

Calder-Dawe, O., & Davey, N. (2016). Making sense of everyday sexism: Young people and the gendered contours of sexism. Women’s Studies International Forum, 55, 1–9.

Caldwell, J. E., Swan, S, C., & Woodbrown, D. V. (2012). Gender differences in intimate partner violence outcomes. Psychology of Violence, 2(1), 42–57.

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.

Carmody, M. (2015). Sex, ethics, and young people. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

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), 207-218.

Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual process theories in social psychology. New York, NY: Guildford Press.

Chan, A., & Payne, J. (2013). Homicide in Australia: 2008-09 to 2009-10 National homicide monitoring program annual report. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

Chandra-Mouli, V., Plesons, M., Adebayo, E., Amin, A., Avni, M., Kraft, J. M., Lane, C., Brundage, C., Kreinin, T., Bosworth, E., Garcia-Moreno, C., & Malarcher, S. (2017). Implications of the global early adolescent study’s formative research findings for action and for research. Journal of Adolescent Health, 61(4), S5-S9.

Choi, H. J., Weston, R., & Temple, J. R. (2017). A three-step latent class analysis to identify how different patterns of teen dating violence and psychosocial factors influence mental health. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(4), 854-866.

Chung, D., Zufferey, C., & Powell, A. (2012). Preventing violence against women in the workplace. Melbourne: VicHealth.

Connolly, J., Friedlander, L., Pepler, D., Craig, W., & Laporte, L. (2010). The ecology of adolescent dating aggression: Attitudes, relationships, media use, and socio-demographic risk factors. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 19(5), 469-491.

Cotter, D., Hermsen, J. M., & Vanneman, R. (2011). The end of the gender revolution? Gender role attitudes from 1977 to 2008. American Journal of Sociology, 117(1), 259-89.

Council of Australian Governments. (2011). The National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010-2022: Including the First Action Plan of the National Plan. Canberra: FAHCSIA.

Cox, P. (2015). Violence against women in Australia: Additional analysis of the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Personal Safety Survey, 2012. Sydney: ANROWS.

Coy, M., Kelly, L., Vera-Gray, F., Garner, M., & Kanyeredzi, A. (2016). From ‘no means no’ to ‘an enthusiastic yes’: Changing the discourse on sexual consent through sex and relationships education. In V. Sundaram & H. Sauntson (Eds.), Global perspectives and key debates in sex and relationships education: addressing issues of gender, sexuality, plurality and power (pp. 84-99). London: Palgrave Pivot.

Crabbe, M., & Corlett, D. (2011). Eroticising inequality: Technology, pornography and young people. Redress, 20(1), 11.

Crowe, J., & Sveinsson, L. (2017). Intimidation, consent and the role of holistic judgments in an Australian rape law. University of Western Australia Law Review, 42(1), 136-154

Decker, M. R., Peitzmeier, S., Olumide, A., Acharya, R., Ojengbede, O., Covarrubias, L., & Brahmbhatt, H. (2014). Prevalence and health impact of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence among female adolescents aged 15-19 years in vulnerable urban environments: A multi-country study. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55(6 Suppl), S58-67. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.08.022

DeKeseredy, W. S. (2018). Sexual assault on the college campus. In P. Lussier, & E. Beauregard (Eds.), (2018). Sexual offending: A criminological perspective (pp. 204-219). New York, NY: Routledge.

DeKeseredy, W. S., & Corsianos, M. (2016). Violence against women in pornography. New York, NY: Routledge.

DeKeseredy, W. S., & Schwartz, M. D. (2013). Male peer support and violence against women: The history & verification of a theory. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.

de Ridder, S. & Van Bauwel, S. (2015). Youth and intimate media cultures: Gender, sexuality, relationships, and desire as storytelling practices in social networking sites. European Journal of Communications Research, 20(3), 319-340.

Dillon, G., Hussain, R., & Loxton, D. (2015). Intimate partner violence in the young cohort of the Australian longitudinal study on women’s health: Urban/rural comparison and demographic associations. Advances in Mental Health, 13(1), 18-29.

Dobash, R. E., Dobash, R. P., Cavanagh, K., & Lewis, R. (2004). ‘Not an ordinary killer – when men murder an intimate woman partner. Violence Against Women, 10(6), 577-605.

Donnelly, K., Twenge, J. M., Clark, M. A., Shaikh, S. K., Beiler-May, A., & Carter, N. T. (2016). Attitudes toward women’s work and family roles in the United States, 1976–2013. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(1), 41-54.

Draper, N. (2011). Is your teen at risk? Discourses of adolescent sexting in United States television news. Journal of Children and Media, 6(2), 221–236.

Dutwin, D., & Lavrakas, P. (2016). Trends in telephone outcomes, 2008-2015. Survey Practice, 9(3). Retrieved 20 February 2019 from https://www.surveypractice.org/article/2808.pdf

Fazio, R. H. (1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: The MODE model as an integrative framework. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 75-10), San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Fileborn, B. (2011). Sexual assault laws in Australia (ACSSA resource sheets). Retrieved 10 June 2018 from https://aifs.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/rs1.pdf

Flood, M., & Dyson, S. (2007). Sport, athletes, and violence against women. NTV Journal, Summer, 37-46.

Flood, M. & Fergus, L. (2008). An assault on our future: The impact of violence on young people and their relationships. Retrieved 25 January 2014 from www.whiteribbon.org.au/uploads/media/23546WhiteRibbonYouthSummary.pdf

Flood, M., Fergus, L., & Heenan, M. (2009). Respectful relationships education: Violence prevention and respectful relationships education in Victorian secondary schools. Melbourne: Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.

Flood, M. G., & Pease, B. (2009). Factors influencing attitudes to violence against women. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 10(2), 125-142.

Fox, J., & Tang, W. Y. (2017). Women’s experiences with general and sexual harassment in online video games: Rumination, organizational responsiveness, withdrawal, and coping strategies. New Media and Society, 19(8), 1290-1307.

Fulu, E., Jewkes, R., Roselli, T., & Garcia-Moreno, C. (2013). Prevalence of and factors associated with male perpetration of intimate partner violence: Findings from the UN multi-country cross-sectional study on men and violence in Asia and the Pacific. Lancet Global Health, 1(4),187-207.

Garcia-Moreno, C., Zimmerman, C., Morris-Gehring, A., Heise, L., Amin, A., Abrahams, N., Montoya, O., Bhate-Deosthali, P., Kilonzo, N., & Watts, C. (2015). Addressing violence against women: A call to action. The Lancet, 385(9978), 1685-1695.

Gleeson, C., Kearney, S., Leung, L., & Brislane, J. (2015). Respectful relationships: Education in schools. Melbourne: Our Watch.

Marsh, S. (2016, March 23). The gender fluid generation: Young people on being male, female or non-binary. The Guardian. Retrieved 20 February 2019 from www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/mar/23/gender-fluid-generation-young-people-male-female-trans

Harris, A., Honey, N., Webster, K., Diemer, K., & Politoff, V. (2015). Young Australians’ attitudes to violence against women: Findings from the 2013 National Community Attitudes towards Violence Against Women Survey for respondents 16–24 years. Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.

Headey, B., Scott, D., & De Vaus, D. (1999). Domestic violence in Australia: Are men and women equally violent? Australian Social Monitor, 2, 57-62.

Heenan, M., & Murray, S. (2006). Study of reported rapes in Victoria 2000–2003: Summary research report. Melbourne: State of Victoria, Department of Human Services.

Heinze, J. E., Stoddard, S. A. , Aiyer, S. M., Eisman, A. B., & Zimmerman, M. A. (2017). Exposure to violence during adolescence as a predictor of perceived stress trajectories in emerging adulthood. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, Mar-Apr, 49, 31–38. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2017.01.005

Heise, L. L. (1998). Violence against women: An integrated, ecological framework. Violence Against Women, 4(3), 262-290. doi:10.1177/1077801298004003002

Henry, N., Powell, A., & Flynn, A. (2017). Not just ’revenge pornography’: Australians’ experiences of image-based abuse: A summary report. Melbourne: RMIT University.

Hess, A., & Flores, C. (2018). Simply more than swiping left: A critical analysis of toxic masculine performances on Tinder Nightmares. New Media and Society, 20(3), 1085-1102.

Hobbs, M., Owen, S., & Gerber, L. (2017). Liquid love? Dating apps, sex, relationships and the digital transformation of intimacy. Journal of Sociology, 53(2), 271–284. doi:10.1177/1440783316662718

Holtzman, L., & Sharpe, L. (2014). Media messages: What film, television, and popular music teach us about race, class, gender, and sexual orientation (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Holtzworth-Munroe, A. (2005). Male versus female intimate partner violence: Putting controversial findings into context. Journal of Marriage and Family Violence, 67(5), 1120-1125.

Hooker, L., Theobald, J., Anderson, K., Billet, P., & Baron, P. (2017). Violence against young women in non-urban areas of Australia: A scoping review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. doi.org/10.1177/1524838017725752

Horvath, M. A., Alys, L., Massey, K., Pina, A., Scally, M., & Adler, J. R. (2013). Basically…porn is everywhere: A rapid evidence assessment on the effects that access and exposure to pornography has on children and young people. Project report. London: Office of the Children’s Commissioner for England.

Hust, S. J. T., Rodgers, K. B., & Bayly, B. (2017). Scripting sexual consent: Internalized traditional sexual scripts and sexual consent expectancies among college students. Family Relations, 66(1), 197-210. doi:10.1111/fare.12230

Johnson, M., & Bennett, E. (2015). Everyday sexism: Australian women’s experiences of street harassment. Canberra: The Australia Institute.

Jouriles, E. N., Choi, H. J., Rancher, C., & Temple, J. R. (2017). Teen dating violence victimization, trauma symptoms, and revictimization in early adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Health, 61(1), 115-119.

Kann, L., McManus, T., Harris, W. A., Shanklin, S. L., Flint, K. H., Hawkins, J., Queen, B., Lowry, R., Olsen, E. O., Chyen, D., Whittle, L., Thornton, J., Lim, C., Yamakawa, Y., Brener, N., & Zaza, S. (2016). Youth risk behaviour surveillance: United States, 2015. Morbidity and Morality Weekly Report. Surveillance Summaries, 65(6).

Keeter, S., Hatley, N., Kennedy, C., & Lau. A. (2017). What low response rates mean for telephone surveys. Washington, DC: Pew Research Centre. Retrieved 20 February 2019 from www.pewresearch.org/methods/2017/05/15/what-low-response-rates-mean-for-telephone-surveys/

Keith, T. (2013). Breaking down the bro code. In S. Tarrant (Ed.), Men speak out: Views on gender, sex and power (pp.299-304). New York, NY: Routledge.

Keller, J., Mendes, K., & Ringrose, J. (2018). Speaking ’unspeakable things’ Documenting digital feminist responses to rape culture. Journal of Gender Studies, 27(1), 22-36. doi:10.1080/09589236.2016.1211511

Kelly, L. (2010). The (in)credible words of women: False allegations in European rape research. Violence Against Women, 16(12), 1345-1355.

Kimmel, M. (2012). The gender of desire: Essays on male sexuality. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Klassen, M. J., & Peter, J. (2015). Gender (in)equality in internet pornography: A content analysis of popular pornographic internet videos. Journal of Sex Research, 52(7), 721-735.

Kohut, A., Keeter, S., Doherty, C., Dimock, M., & Christian, L. (2012). Assessing the representativeness of public opinion surveys. Washington, DC: Pew Research Centre.

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.

Larcombe, W. (2011). Worsnop v The Queen: Subjective belief in consent prevails (again) in Victoria’s rape law. Melbourne University Law Review, 35(2), 697-716.

Larcombe, W., Fileborn, B., Powell, A., Hanley, N., & Henry, N. (2016). ’I think it’s rape and I think he would be found not guilty’: Focus group perceptions of (un)reasonable belief in consent in rape law. Social and Legal Studies, 25(5), 611-629.

Lim, M. S. C., Agius, P. A., Carrotte, E. R., Vella, A. M., & Hellard, M. E. (2017). Young Australians’ use of pornography and associations with sexual risk behaviours. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 41(4), 438-443. doi:10.1111/1753-6405.12678

Markowitz, L., & Puchner, L. (2016). Troubling the ontological bubble: Middle school students challenging gender stereotypes. Journal of Gender Studies, 25(4), 413-426.

Marston, C., & Lewis, R. (2014). Anal heterosex among young people and implications for health promotion: A qualitative study in the UK. BMJ Open, 4(8), e004996.

Martinez, P. R., & Khalil, H. (2013). Battery and development: Exploring the link between intimate partner violence and modernization. Cross-Cultural Research, 47(3), 231-267.

McDonald, P., & Flood, M. (2012). Encourage, support, act: Bystander approaches to sexual harassment in the workplace. Sydney: Australian Human Rights Commission.

McGlashan, H., & Fitzpatrick, K. (2017). LGBTQ youth activism and school: Challenging sexuality and gender norms. Health Education, 117(5), 485-497.

McGlashan, H, & Fitzpatrick, K. (2018). ‘I use any pronouns, and I’m questioning everything else’: Transgender youth and the issue of gender pronouns. Sex Education, 18(3), 239-252.

Mendes, K., Ringrose, J., & Keller, J. (2018). #MeToo and the promise and pitfalls of challenging rape culture through digital feminist activism. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 25(2), 236-243. doi:10.1177/1350506818765318

Mennicke, A., & Kulkarni, S. (2016). Understanding gender symmetry within an expanded partner violence typology. Journal of Family Violence, 31(8), 1013-1018.

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.

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.

Myhill, A. (2015). Measuring coercive control: What can we learn from national population surveys? Violence Against Women, 21(3), 355-375.

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.

National Geographic. (2017). Gender revolution. Retrieved 10 December 2018 from www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/01/

Newett, L., Churchill, B., & Robards, B. (2017). Forming connections in the digital era: Tinder, a new tool in young Australian intimate life. Journal of Sociology, 53(3), 346-3361. doi:1440783317728584

Noonan, R. K., & Charles, D. (2009). Developing teen dating violence prevention strategies: Formative research with middle school youth. Violence Against Women, 15(9), 1087-1105.

Our Watch, VicHealth, & ANROWS. (2015). Change the Story: A shared framework for the primary prevention of violence against women and their children in Australia. Melbourne: Our Watch.

Papadopoulos, L. (2010). Sexualisation of young people review. Retrieved 20 November 2018 from https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/10738/1/sexualisation-young-people.pdf

Pease, B., & Flood, M. (2008). Rethinking the significance of attitudes in preventing men’s violence against women. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 43(4), 547-561.

Pepin, J. R., & Cotter, D. A. (2018). Separating spheres? Diverging trends in youth’s gender attitudes about work and family. Journal of Marriage and Family, 80(1), 7-24.

Perales, F., Philipp M, L., & Baxter, J. (2017). Birth cohort, ageing and gender ideology: Lessons from British and Australian panel data. Life Course Centre Working Paper Series (No. 2017-01). Brisbane: Institute for Social Science Research, The University of Queensland.

Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2016). Adolescents and pornography: A review of 20 years of research. The Journal of Sex Research, 53(4-5), 509-531.

Phippen, A. (2009). Sharing personal images and videos among young people. Southwest Grid for Learning. Retrieved 18 December 2018 from webfronter.com/surreymle/devonesafety/other/Sexting%20report%20-%20andy%20phippen.pdf

Plan International Australia. (2018). Sexism in the city: Young women speak up about street harassment in Sydney. Melbourne: Plan International Australia.

Powell, A. (2010). Sex, power and consent: Youth culture and the unwritten rules. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Powell, A. (2011). Review of bystander approaches in support of preventing violence against women. Melbourne: VicHealth.

Powell, A., & Henry, N. (2017). Sexual violence in a digital age. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Reniers, R. L. P., Murphy, L., Lin, A., Bartolome, S. P., & Wood, S. J. (2016). Risk perception and risk-taking behaviour during adolescence: The influence of personality and gender. PLoS ONE (11)4, 1-14. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0153842

Retallack, H., Ringrose, J., & Lawrence, E. (2016). ’Fuck your body image’: Teen girls’ Twitter and Instagram feminism in and around school. In J. Coffey, S. Budgeon, & H. Cahill (Eds.), Learning bodies (pp. 85-103). Singapore: Springer.

Riggle, E. D., Rostosky, S. S., & Reedy, C. S. (2005). Online surveys for BGLT research: Issues and techniques. Journal of Homosexuality, 49(2), 1-21. doi: 10.1300/J082v49n02_01

Salazar, L. F., 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.

Scharff, C. (2012). Repudiating feminism: Young women in a neoliberal world. London: Routledge.

Scrine, E. (2017). ‘Dear future husband’: Young people’s critical exploration of gender and sexuality in pop music videos. Networking Knowledge: Journal of the MeCCSA Postgraduate Network, 10(3), 6-26.

Seabrook, R. C., Ward, M. L., Cortina, L. M., Giaccardi, S., & Lippman, J. R. (2017). Girl power or powerless girl? Television, sexual scripts, and sexual agency in sexually active young women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 41(2), 240-253. doi.org/10.1177/0361684316677028

Shaw, A. (2015). Gaming at the edge: Sexuality and gender at the margins of gaming culture. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Shih, T-H., & Fan, X. (2008). Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys: A meta-analysis. Field Methods, 20(3), 249-271.

Somerville, L. H. (2016). Searching for signatures of brain maturity: What are we searching for? Neuron, 92(6), 1164-1167.

Squires, C. R., Kohn-Wood, L. P., Chavous, T., & Carter, P. (2006). Evaluating agency and responsibility in gendered violence: African American youth talk about violence and hip hop. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 55(11-12), 725-737.

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. doi:10.1177/1077801212461429

Tharp, A. T., DeGue, S., Valle, L. A., Brookmeyer, K. A., Massetti, G. M., & Matjasko, J. L. (2013). A systematic qualitative review of risk and protective factors for sexual violence perpetration. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 14(2), 133-167.

Thompson, L. (2018).‘I can be your Tinder nightmare’: Harassment and misogyny in the online sexual marketplace. Feminism and Psychology, 28(1), 69-89.

Tolman, D. L. (2009). Dilemmas of desire: Teenage girls talk about sexuality. London: Harvard University Press.

UN Women. (2015). A framework to underpin action to prevent violence against women. Retrieved 10 June 2018 from https://www.unwomen.org/-/media/headquarters/attachments/sections/library/publications/2015/prevention_framework_unwomen_nov2015.pdf?la=en&vs=5223

United Nations. (1993). Declaration on the elimination of violence against women. New York, NY: United Nations Department of Public Information.

van Egmond, M., Baxter, J., Buchler, S., & Western, M. (2010). A stalled revolution? Gender role attitudes in Australia, 1986-2005. Journal of Population Research, 27(3), 147-168. doi:10.1007/s12546-010-9039-9

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.

Vera-Gray, F. (2016). Men’s stranger intrusions: Rethinking street harassment. Women’s Studies International Forum, 58, 9-17. doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2016.04.001

VicHealth. (2007). Preventing violence before it occurs: A framework and background paper to guide primary prevention of violence against women in Victoria. Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.

VicHealth. (2011). Preventing violence against women in Australia: Research summary: Addressing the social and economic determinants of mental and physical health. Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.

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.

VicHealth. (2017a). Behavioural insights and gender equality. Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.

VicHealth. (2017b). Gender equality, health and wellbeing strategy 2017-2019. Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.

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.

Webster, K. (2016). A preventable burden: Measuring and addressing the prevalence and health impacts of intimate partner violence in Australian women. Sydney: ANROWS.

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.

Webster, K., Diemer, K., Honey, N., Mannix, S., Mickle, J., Morgan, J., Parkes, A., Politoff, V., Powell, A., Stubbs, J., & Ward, A. (2018a). Australians’ attitudes to violence against women and gender equality. Findings from the 2017 National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey (NCAS) (Research report, 03/2018). Sydney: ANROWS.

Webster, K., Diemer, K., Honey, N., Mannix, S., Mickle, J., Morgan, J., Parkes, A., Politoff, V., Powell, A., Stubbs, J., & Ward, A. (2018b). NCAS methodology report: Survey redevelopment and implementation of the 2017 National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey (NCAS) (ANROWS Insights, 12/2018). Sydney: ANROWS.

Weisz, A. N., & Black, B. M. (2010). Peer education and leadership in dating violence prevention: Strengths and challenges. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 19(6), 641-660.

World Health Organization. (2002). World report on violence and health. Geneva: WHO.

World Health Organization. (2010). Preventing intimate partner and sexual violence against women: taking action and generating evidence. Geneva: WHO.

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://bit.ly/1PIpTip

Wright, P. J., Tokunaga, R. S., & Kraus, A. (2015). A meta-analysis of pornography consumption and actual acts of sexual aggression in general population studies. Journal of Communication, 66(1), 183-205.

Wyn, J. & White, R. (2013). Youth and society. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Endnotes

1. This composite measure gauges one aspect of knowledge of violence against women, being understanding that this violence extends beyond physical violence and forced sex to also include psychological, social, emotional and financial forms of abuse designed to intimidate and control. Questions ask about other aspects of knowledge. However, this is the only composite measure in the knowledge component of the questionnaire. ↑
2. The Intention to Act Construct (ITAC) is new for the current 2017 NCAS, so data on change over time are not available. ↑
3. Noting the scope, strengths and limitations of bystander approaches as discussed in ’Bystander action’ in Chapter 4. ↑
4. Exploration of the complex range of factors contributing to violence against women is beyond the scope of this report. A number of reviews of the international evidence have been conducted. For a list and synthesis of these and factors to consider in drawing on the evidence base, see Webster
   & Flood, 2015. ↑
5. Includes current and former co-habitating partners and girlfriend/boyfriend in dating relationships. ↑
6. The difference between the sum of men and women and the total is accounted for by people who did not identify a gender or who did not respond to the question on gender. ↑
7. A threshold for statistical significance of p ≤ 0.05 is commonly used in social science research. The level p ≤ 0.01 used in this report is a more stringent threshold (i.e. one providing a higher level of certainty that results are not due to chance) and is particularly helpful with large samples where small changes can be significant but not necessarily meaningful. ↑
8. To maximise the number of questions asked in the 2017 NCAS, selected questions were asked of only one half or one quarter of the sample. These were mainly in the ’knowledge’ and ’bystander’ components. This was not a barrier to analysis for the national sample as a whole, given the overall sample size. However, a disadvantage is that sample sizes were insufficient for some questions for some of the smaller groups within the sample, including the sample of people aged 16-24 years. ↑
9. 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. ↑
10. For reasons outlined in Chapter 4, the NCAS focuses on bystander responses to precursors to/risk factors for physical violence, rather than physical violence itself. ↑
11. Further information on the methodology used can be found in the NCAS methodology report (Webster et al., 2018b). ↑
12. Note that although there are five themes in the knowledge component of the questionnaire, a composite measure has been made for just one of these, as shown in Figure 3-1. It was not possible to develop a measure for all the themes in the knowledge component within the bounds of the questionnaire due to the number of questions that would be required. ↑
13. There are strengths and limitations of approaches to improve the responses of bystanders. These are discussed in ’Bystander action’ in Chapter 4. ↑
14. The Intention to Act Construct (ITAC) is new for the current NCAS, so data on change over time are not available. ↑
15. See the NCAS main report (Webster et al., 2018a) on the ANROWS website for a more detailed discussion of the influence of attitudes supportive of violence against women, and relevant evidence. ↑
16. This was achieved using Rasch and factor analysis, described in greater detail in the NCAS methodology report (Webster et al., 2018b) and in summary in the main report (Webster et al., 2018a). Both documents are available on the ANROWS website. As a result of these analyses there are some differences between the reporting themes used in 2013 and those in 2017. ↑
17. The term ’promising’ is used in this context because more research and evaluation are required to explore whether positive change achieved through bystander programs in the short term are sustained. There has also been some debate in the literature about the strengths and weaknesses of contemporary bystander programs. For further discussion, see DeKeseredy (2018) and contributions to the December 2018 issue of Violence Against Women (Volume 24, Issue 15). ↑
18. This was measured using the Socioeconomic Index for Areas score developed by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This index summarises information about the economic and social conditions of people and households within an area, including both relative advantage and disadvantage measures. Quintiles have been used, with a low score indicating most disadvantaged and a high score indicating most advantaged. This index takes into account area-based factors such as occupational status, educational attainment, home ownership, employment status, jobless households, disability status and the proportion of lone parent households. See Section 12 of the NCAS main report (Webster et al., 2018a) on the ANROWS website for further discussion and data on the gender composition of Australian occupations. ↑
19. Δ Results to be treated with caution because they are based on a small number of responses (i.e. between 30 and 100). See ‘Approach to analysis’ for further explanation. ↑
20. Attitudes among people from non-English speaking backgrounds are explored in a separate report: Attitudes towards violence against women and gender equality among people from non-English speaking countries: Findings from the 2017 NCAS (Webster et al., 2019). ↑
21. The American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR, 2016) 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. ↑
22. Noting the scope, strengths and limitations of bystander approaches as discussed in ’Bystander action’ in Chapter 4. ↑