Masculinity is linked to power, control, strength, and protection, and cultural norms create a gap between these traits and recognition of male intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization. This study examined how these norms shape police officers’ attitudes toward male victimization. A structured questionnaire including the Ambivalence Toward Men Inventory (AMI) and a Perception Toward Male Victimization (PMV) scale was administered to a convenience sample of 228 police officers in NCT Delhi, India. Female officers (M = 37.5, SD = 8.13) exhibited greater hostility, whereas male officers (M = 41.0, SD = 8.78) displayed higher benevolence toward men. AMI and PMV scores were positively correlated (r = 0.57, p < .0001), such that greater ambivalence toward men was associated with lower recognition of male victims. Demographic variables had limited influence, though being married, living in a joint family, or having a rural background was associated with greater conformity to traditional masculinity and lower victim recognition; rural background (β = 0.29, p < .001) and children of both genders (β = 0.87, p < .001; β = 0.42, p < .05 for victim recognition) were the strongest predictors. Among the officers surveyed, ambivalence toward men emerges as a barrier to recognition of male IPV victims, pointing to gender-sensitive, demographic-tailored training as a direction worth testing. Because recruitment was by convenience, these estimates describe the sample rather than the Delhi police force or Indian police officers generally.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gautam et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: