Impact of the Spread of Mass Education on Domestic Violence against Wives

Abstract

This paper investigates the association between mass education and domestic violence

against wives in rural Nepal. Previous research on domestic violence in South Asian societies

reveals the important influence of prevailing patriarchal ideology and the subordinate status of

women within the family. However, the recent spread of mass education is likely to have

important consequences in the opposite direction. Using data from 1,778 currently married

women and their husbands from the Chitwan Valley Family Study in Nepal, we test the

consequences of spread of mass education for domestic violence against wives. The results show

that women’s childhood access to school, their parents’ schooling, and women’s own and their

husbands' schooling each tend to reduce wives’ likelihood of experiencing domestic violence.

Indeed husbands’ education is a particularly powerful force reducing domestic violence against

wives. These associations explain the historical declines in the incidence of domestic violence

against wives in Nepal.

Key words: (Domestic violence, Education, Marriage, Social change)

1

Rarely do we have opportunities for empirical insights into the forces driving variation in

women’s exposure to domestic violence from representative studies of the general population in

rapidly changing Asian societies. Many recent studies indicate high levels of domestic violence

against women worldwide (Diop-Sidibe, Campbell, & Becker, 2006; Naved, Azim, Bhuiya, &

Persson, 2006; WHO, 2001), with the highest level and most severe forms of domestic violence

in the South Asian region (Carvalho, 2007; Naved et al., 2006; Panday, Dutt, & Banerjee, 2008).

Research has documented significant social, physical, and mental health consequences for

victims of domestic violence (Devries et al., 2011; Ellsberg, Jansen, Heise, Watts, & García-

Moreno, 2008; Naved & Akhtar, 2008; Stephenson, Koenig, & Ahmed, 2006). Despite high

levels of violence against women in South Asia, most empirical evidence on domestic violence

comes from Western, industrialized societies and little is known about the forces shaping

domestic violence in South Asia (Koenig, Stephenson, Ahmed, Jejeebhoy, & Campbell, 2006;

Naved et al., 2006; Panday et al., 2008). To address this gap we investigate the association

between Western-oriented, mass education and domestic violence against wives. Because

women experience a disproportionately high level of domestic violence compared to men

(Bagheri, Nabavi, & Hosseinzadeh, 2009; Pradhananga & Shrestha, 2009; Yount, Halim, Hynes,

& Hillman, 2011), our investigation focuses on physical violence against married women.

This study advances our knowledge of domestic violence against wives in two important

ways. First, we provide a new theoretical framework for the study of variation in the incidence of

interpersonal violence that focuses on education. This theoretical framework identifies

multidimensional connections between the spread of Western-oriented, mass education and the

incidence of domestic violence against wives. This new framework is fundamentally multilevel,

grounded in the idea that changes in the community educational context restructure individual-

2

level opportunities and constraints, which in turn affect individual behavior (Alexander, 1988;

Coleman, 1990; Durkheim, 1984 [1893]). The framework is also intergenerational, identifying

mechanisms across generations that may shape the incidence of domestic violence. We develop

hypotheses regarding variation in community educational context, individual and family

participation in schooling, and domestic violence against wives. Building on the life course

perspective, this framework acknowledges the importance of change over time at multiple levels

as well as the sequencing of these changes, allowing us to order various dimensions of

educational variation over the lifetimes of respondents (Axinn & Barber, 2001; Elder, 1985). We

consider women’s own, their husbands’, their parents’, and their in-laws’ educational

experiences as mechanisms linking educational opportunity to individual-level experiences of

domestic violence.

Second, we use unusually detailed educational measures from a contemporary, large-

scale South Asian panel study to conduct empirical tests of the framework. Because most studies

of the spread of mass education are historical, significant empirical limitations preclude the

exploration of important theoretical issues regarding consequences of mass education (Barber &

Axinn, 2004; Caldwell, Reddy, & Caldwell, 1988; Khaniya & Kiernan, 1994). In a setting where

the spread of mass education occurred recently, however, it is possible to gather direct

information about its spread, consequences, and the individual-level behaviors that produced

those consequences. By using measures of childhood exposure to education at the community

level, variations in parental, husbands’, and wives’ educational experiences, and the incidence of

domestic violence, we provide comprehensive empirical estimates of the multidimensional,

educational factors producing variations in domestic violence against wives. We use data from

the Chitwan Valley Family Study (CVFS) in Nepal. The CVFS data feature measures of multiple

3

dimensions of individual and parental experiences from identical but separate interviews with

husbands and wives, providing a unique opportunity to investigate the influence of both the

perpetrator’s and the victim’s characteristics.

Theoretical Framework

Scholars argue that the high levels and severe forms of domestic violence in South Asia

are linked to the prevailing patriarchal ideology, a major component of the South Asian, cultural

configuration (Ahmad, Riaz, Barata, & Stewart, 2004; Cain, Khanam, & Nahar, 1979; Johnson,

1995; Srinivas, 1952). This cultural configuration evolved through Hindu religious doctrines that

emphasize strong hierarchal relations based on gender (male supremacy over women), caste

(high caste Hindus over low caste Hindus), and seniority (seniors over juniors) (Carvalho, 2007;

Majumdar, 2003; Naved et al., 2006; Panday et al., 2008). For example, according to Manusmriti

(9.3), one of the most regarded Hindu religious scripts, a woman is protected by her father in

childhood, by her husband in youth, and by her sons in old age, and is never fit for independence.

Once a woman is married, she becomes the property and responsibility of her husband. Her life

is supposed to be devoted to her husband’s service and taking care of his children.

Although Hindu ideology is presumed to be originally associated with the Indo-Aryan

group, they persuaded others to follow their religion and customs (Adhikari, 1998; Regmi,

1999). In many parts of South Asia this ideology has become pervasive even among other non-

Indo-Aryan groups through the adoption of values, beliefs, and customs of the high caste Hindus

who are guided by Sanskrit scholarship—a process often referred as “sanskritization.” As a

result, both as an ideological and normative force, Hindu religious doctrine has played an

important role in both marriage and marital relationships, including domestic violence against

women (Acharya & Bennett, 1981).

4

Until the mid-1950s, Nepal was socially, politically, and economically isolated from

other countries (Berreman, 1972; Bista, 1972). The people of Nepal had little exposure to and

interaction with people who had vastly different views and beliefs about social relationships—

people who believed in independence and personal freedom, gender equality, marital

relationships based on individual choice, and did not believe in a caste system (Macfarlane,

1986; Smith, 1973). Since the mid-1970s, Nepal has experienced dramatic social and economic

change (English, 1985; Panday, 1999). Nepal also started receiving a large portion of its

development budget in foreign aid targeted at the improvement of living conditions of the rural

poor through improvement in education systems and rural infrastructure (Panday, 1999). The

result has been a dramatic spread of formal education, wage work, transportation and

communication infrastructure, and the mass media. The first signs of the consequences of these

social changes include increasing participation in education, exposure to mass media, access to

health services, transportation and communication technology (Beutel & Axinn, 2002; Jamison

& Lockheed, 1987). Among the other aspects of social change, exposure to community

educational context and educational experiences have had dramatic consequences for many

dimensions of family change, including marriage timing, marital arrangements, childbearing and

marital relationships (Allendorf & Ghimire, Forthcoming; Ghimire, Axinn, Yabiku, & Thornton,

2006; Hoelter, Axinn, & Ghimire, 2004).

Spread of Mass Education

The spread of mass education has been an important component of social change

worldwide and a powerful vehicle for the spread of Western ideas in South Asia (Caldwell,

1982; Caldwell et al., 1988; English, 1985; Thornton, 2005). Since the 1950s, schools have

spread quickly in Nepal with enrollments in school rising quickly, and female enrollment rapidly

5

catching up to male enrollment (Beutel & Axinn, 2002; Stash & Hannum, 2001). Because the

Nepalese educational system and course materials were adopted from the British educational

system (sometimes via India), the new school environment provided exposure to Western ideas

and values such as individual freedom, equality, independence, and consensual and late marriage

(Sharma, 1994). In Nepal, the spread of mass education also gave women new skills and

credentials, providing a completely new route to economic independence from families and

husbands (Axinn & Barber, 2001). This change gave women new opportunities to react to

violence by leaving the household. A powerful force for change, we expect that multiple

dimensions of this mass education may have independent consequences for domestic violence

against wives. However, in all dimensions we predict the direction of these consequences is

toward lower likelihood of domestic violence against wives.

Community Educational Context. The community educational context may be associated

with domestic violence against wives in two ways. First, at the very beginning of the spread of

mass education in a setting like Nepal, exposure to educational institutions during childhood

shapes individuals’ long-term personality characteristics independent of their educational

experiences (Axinn & Yabiku, 2001). In a Hindu context, young people who had exposure to

nearby schools in early childhood will be more likely to have exposure to male-female

interactions outside of family settings, building interaction skills based on consensual behavior

rather than patriarchal relationships. Children in such settings are also more likely to be exposed

to values that discourage domestic violence against wives even if they themselves do not go to

school. Together these factors are likely to then shape their social interactions later in life,

including less domestic violence against wives.

6

Second, the spread of schools is linked to the education of individuals across the life

course (Elder, 1985; Axinn & Barber, 2001). For parents or children to have the opportunity to

go to school, schools must be located nearby, or parents must send their children to live near

schools. In rural Nepal, families sometimes send children great distances so they can attend

school, but the majority of rural families do not have the resources necessary to take advantage

of distant schooling opportunities (Acharya & Bennett, 1981; Brauner-Otto, Forthcoming; Stash

& Hannum, 2001). As schools become available in a community, individuals will be more likely

to attend school, thereby increasing the educational attainment of both parents and children over

time (Beutel & Axinn, 2002; Jamison & Lockheed, 1987). As we describe below, by making

education more available to individuals, the spread of schools unleashes a powerful chain of

individual experiences that shape the likelihood of domestic violence against wives.

Hypothesis 1: Proximity to school during childhood should reduce domestic violence

against wives.

Parents’ Education. A large body of literature has documented important

intergenerational influences of education (Cleland & Rodriguez, 1988; Marini 1978; Thornton et

al., 2007). This literature identifies socialization, social control and similarity of social position

as mechanisms that combine to make parents an extraordinarily influential dimension of

children’s lives (Bengtson, 1975; Gecas & Seff, 1990; Smith, 1988; Axinn and Thornton, 1993).

Through these mechanisms it is likely parental education will influence children, including

children’s domestic violence against wives. In the Nepalese setting educated parents are more

likely to hold values and beliefs discouraging domestic violence against wives among their sons

and increasing intolerance of domestic violence among their daughters. Because behavior of

husbands is a crucial determinant of women’s experience of domestic violence (Majumdar,

7

2003; Panday et al., 2008), a woman’s parent-in-laws’ educational experiences may affect her

experience of domestic violence. But the education of women’s own parents may also be

relevant, either because it shapes women’s own behavior toward their husbands in ways that

discourage husbands’ violent acts or because it shapes the parents’ willingness to have their

daughter participate in the selection of her husband (Ghimire et al., 2006). Thus, both parent-in-

law and parental educational experiences may have consequences for domestic violence in this

setting. In both cases, more highly educated parents are expected to reduce the likelihood of

domestic violence against wives.

Hypothesis 2: Parental education (both wife’s own parents and her in-laws) should

discourage domestic violence against wives.

Wife’s Own and Her Husband’s Education. Finally, women’s and their husbands’

educational experiences are likely to be associated with the incidence of domestic violence

against wives in ways that are independent of both community context and parental experience.

At least three different mechanisms are relevant, beginning with the formation of the marriage

itself.

First, recent evidence indicates that education increases youth participation in spouse

choice (Ghimire et al., 2006). Changes toward more involvement of young people in the

selection of their own spouse are associated with change the nature of marital relationships,

leading to more communication and affection and less disagreement and conflict between

spouses (Rindfuss & Morgan, 1983; Thornton & Lin, 1994). The increase in communication and

affection and reduction in disagreement and conflict is likely to encourage mutual respect and

equality within marriages (Allendorf & Ghimire, Forthcoming; Ghimire et al., 2006; Hoelter et

al., 2004), which in turn is likely to reduce domestic violence against wives.

8

Second, scholars argue that increased education promotes young people’s independence,

increasing the adoption of new ideas and values. In the Nepal setting, this change is likely in the

direction away from historical Hindu ideas regarding the patriarchal basis for marital

relationships and toward more Western ideas regarding independence, equality, and interpersonal

relations based on mutual consent as the basis for marriage (Allendorf & Ghimire, Forthcoming;

Hoelter et al., 2004). Young peoples’ adoption of these new ideas and values will likely

discourage violence against wives.

Third, scholars also argue that education in the South Asian context increases a woman’s

autonomy relative to her husband, mother-in-law, or other key household members (Dyson &

Moore, 1983; Mason, 1987). If so, more highly educated women may have the means to mitigate

domestic violence and more highly educated husbands may expect their wives to have these

means. Economic independence and social autonomy produced by increasing education may be

an especially powerful force determining domestic violence in South Asia.

Hypothesis 3: Both women’s own and their husband’s educational attainment will

discourage domestic violence against wives.

Of course, by its nature, domestic violence toward wives is a behavior of a woman’s

husband that may be independent of any of her characteristics or experiences including her

parent’s characteristics or her in-law’s characteristics. For some, community context, parental

background, and women’s own ideas and options may be entirely irrelevant to the violent actions

of husbands. Because of this, it is possible that husbands’ own characteristics and experiences

are substantially more powerful determinant of the incidence of domestic violence than other

factors. If exposure to education in Western-oriented schools propagates the idea that domestic

violence is unacceptable, then husbands with more education may be significantly less likely to

9

commit acts of domestic violence than husbands with less education. Even if education merely

teaches men that in current circumstance women have options for reacting to domestic violence

they did not have before, such as leaving the household or contacting police, it is also possible

that independent of their ideas about the acceptability of domestic violence toward their wives

husbands with more education may be significantly less likely to commit acts of domestic

violence than husbands with less education. Finally, the links between educational opportunity

and schooling experience, parental education and their children’s schooling experience, and

women’s education and choices of husbands (educationally assortative mating practices

strengthened by arranged marriage) all mean that if husbands’ educations are a particularly

powerful force predicting domestic violence toward wives, husbands’ education may be the

mechanism that explains the observed association between every other dimension of educational

context and experience and domestic violence against wives. Schools nearby in childhood

increase husbands’ schooling, higher in-law education increases husbands’ schooling, higher

parental education increases the chance parents favor the choice of a husband with more

schooling, and higher women’s education increases the chance women favor the choice of a

husband with more schooling.

Hypothesis 4: The observed associations between community educational context, wives’

parents’ educations, husbands’ parents’ educations and wives’ own educations and domestic

violence against wives are partially explained by husbands’ educations.

A small number of factors are especially likely to affect both individuals’ educational

experiences and domestic violence, with the potential to render observed associations spurious.

These include the historical time period (birth cohort), ethnicity, and factors associated with the

nature and timing of the marriage itself. To focus our empirical tests on the four hypotheses

10

identified here, we will estimate multivariate models that include measures of these factors, as

described below.

Method

Data

The data used to test our hypotheses came from a study of 171 communities scattered

throughout the Western Chitwan Valley that closely resemble the characteristics of the entire

Chitwan Valley population (Barber et al., 1997).

Once a community was selected, a household census along with a household relationship

grid was administered in all households in the selected communities. All individuals aged 15 to

59 residing in the sampled households and their spouses, who may be living elsewhere and

outside of the age range of 15-59, were interviewed using a standardized questionnaire and a life

history calendar (LHC) with a 97 % response rate. This process yielded a sample of 1,913

currently married women. Because a small number of women (30) married more than once, we

included the couples married only once. Out of these 1,913 women, 1,783 women had their

husbands interviewed using the same survey instruments. Out of 1,783 women, five wives and

two husbands had missing information, which resulted in a sample of 1,778 wives.

In the standardized interviews, individuals were asked questions about their family

background, personal characteristics, experiences, and childhood community context. The LHC

portion of the survey collected information on residence, marriage, childbearing, schooling,

travel, and work experience (Axinn, Pearce, & Ghimire, 1999). Because the outcome—domestic

violence against wives—is measured retrospectively and the timing and frequency of violence is

not available, in order to maintain temporal order we limited the wives’ and husbands’

experiences to premarital experiences.

11

Measuring domestic violence

The outcome of interest is domestic violence against wives. Despite worldwide

engagement in understanding and addressing this issue, there is no single accepted definition.

The main point of contention is that violence against women is perceived differently in different

societies. Some urge a broad definition that includes any act of omission that causes harm to

women or keeps them in a subordinate position. For example, Article 2 of the United Nations

Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (1993) states:

“Violence against women shall be understood to encompass, but not be

limited to, the following: (a) Physical, sexual and psychological violence

occurring in the family, including battering, sexual abuse of female children in

the household, dowry-related violence, marital rape, female genital mutilation

and other traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and

violence related to exploitation; (b) Physical, sexual and psychological

violence occurring within the general community, including rape, sexual

abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation at work, in educational institutions

and elsewhere, trafficking in women and forced prostitution; (c) Physical,

sexual and psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the State,

wherever it occurs” (Rauschning, Wiesbrock, & Lailach, 1997:355).

In spite of declarations against domestic violence and social actions designed to reduce it,

many cultures—including the one we study here—have beliefs, norms, and social institutions

that legitimize the subordination of women (Mathur, 2004; Yount et al., 2011). For example, an

occasional slap or blow performed by an outsider would be punishable, but the same action

would often go unchallenged or even be considered routine behavior when performed by the

12

husband (Heise, Ellsberg, & Gottemoeller, 1999). Thus, the concept of domestic violence not

only includes many potential dimensions but also varies by cultural contexts, making it difficult

to measure. Moreover, there is reason to suspect that it is under-reported to survey interviewers.

Because of these complexities, in this study we focus on physical violence—a common and less

ambiguous form of domestic violence. Many of our respondents admit being hit to our

interviewers. Our research includes months of direct observation and unstructured interviewing

to investigate the survey responses, and our interpretations of the results are informed by this

ethnographic investigation. Our approach is consistent with the interpretation that the individuals

who responded “yes” to having been hit are vastly more likely to have experienced domestic

violence than those who responded “no” to this question.

Domestic violence is measured by women’s responses to the question in the private

individual interview, “Has your husband ever beaten you?” If the respondent answered

affirmatively, this response was categorized as having experienced domestic violence and coded

as “1” (otherwise coded as “0”). As shown in Table 1, 17% of women in our sample reported

having experienced domestic violence at least once since they were married.

Measures of education

Our goal was to evaluate the association between spread of mass education and domestic

violence against wives. We operationalized education in three different ways: community

educational context during childhood, parents’ and in-laws educational experience, and the

wife’s own and husband’s educational experiences. Because the CVFS has collected information

separately from both the wife (the victim of the violence) and the husband (perpetrator of the

violence), we have separate measures of childhood community educational context, parents’

education, and individual schooling for the wife and the husband.

13

Childhood community educational context. Information about access to school during

childhood was collected through individual interviews. During these interviews, respondents

were asked, “Was there a school within a one-hour walk from your home at any time before you

were 12 years old?” If the response to this question is positive, it is coded as “1” and “0” if

otherwise. We then constructed dummy variables for whether there was a school within a one-

hour walk from the place of the respondent’s residence at any time before she or he was 12 years

old. As shown in Table 1, 82% of wives and 81% of husbands had a school within a one-hour

walk from their childhood residence. To create measures of couple's access to school during

childhood we summed up the wives’ and husbands’ responses and divided that by two, resulting

in a scale of 0 to 1.

(Table 1 About Here)

Parents’ education. We measured parents’ education in terms of whether or not each of

the parents ever went to school. The measure of parents’ education is derived from individual

interviews conducted separately with wives and husbands. In the individual interview, wives and

husbands were asked, “Did your mother ever go to school?” If the response to this question was

yes, the mother’s schooling was coded as “1” and “0” if otherwise. The same question was

repeated for father’s education. We then summed wife’s responses to those questions to create a

measure of wife’s parents’ education and husband’s responses to create measures of husband’s

parents’ education. This resulted in a scale of 0 to 2, where “0” means that none of the parents

(neither mother nor father) ever went to school, “1” means that either one of the parents went to

school, and “2” means that both parents went to school. A mean of .31 for wife’s parents’

education and .19 for husband’s parents’ education (Table 1) suggest that in the parental

generation less than one third were ever exposed to formal public schooling. Likewise, to create

14

a measure of couples’ parents’ education we summed up the wives’ parents’ and husbands’

parents’ education and divided by two, resulting in a scale of 0 to 2.

Schooling experiences. The CVFS collected a complete history of respondents’

educational experiences, including adult education (literacy programs), via the LHC. Schooling

was measured as the total number of years spent in school or adult education up to one year

before the respondents got married. Using this information we created a series of categorical

variables, 0=no education, 1-5 years=primary, 6-10 years=high school, and 12 and more years=

college and treated “no education” as the reference group. As shown in Table 1, men and women

in Nepal have significantly different educational experiences. For example, more than half (57%)

of wives have no education, whereas only one third (31%) of husbands have no education.

Other Factors associated with Domestic Violence against Wives

Recent evidence indicates that a number of wives’ and husbands’ background

characteristics and experiences other than education may have important independent influences

on domestic violence against wives (Koenig, Ahmed, Hossain & Mozumder, 2003; Yount, 2005;

Yount & Carrera, 2006). Our models of education and domestic violence against wives also

include measures of wives’ and husbands’ backgrounds (age and birth cohort, ethnicity, and

marital experiences) to help insure the associations we observe with education are not a product

of these other factors.

Age and birth cohort. Research suggests significant differences between birth cohorts

both in terms of exposure to education and spousal relationship quality (Hoelter et al., 2004).

Compared to older cohorts, more recent cohorts have a significantly higher level of exposure to

and experience with education and more egalitarian spousal relationships. We also use birth

cohort as an indication of social change in this population. We do so by examining both the

15

overall effect of birth cohort on trends in domestic violence against wives and the extent to

which the effect of this historical change can be accounted for by trends in the childhood

community educational context, parents’, husbands’ and wives’ own education. Respondent’s

birth cohort was coded in four categories: cohorts born between 1972-81, 1962-71, 1952-61, and

1936-51. We treated the youngest cohort born between 1972-81 as the reference group. Our

expectation is that the introduction of measures of spread of mass education into the analysis

explains much of the historical change in domestic violence against wives, thereby suggesting

that changes in the spread of mass education (childhood community context, parents’, husbands’

and wives’ own education) has played a substantial role in the historical change in domestic

violence against wives.

Ethnicity. Nepali society consists of many ethnic groups (Bista, 1972; Macfarlane, 1976;

Thapa, 1997) that are likely to have significantly different educational experiences and marital

relationships. Scholars have often categorized these ethnicities into five major groups for

analytical purposes: Brahmin/Chhetri (high caste Hindus), Dalit (low caste Hindus), Newar, Hill

Janajati (Hill indigenous), and TeraiJanjati (Terai indigenous) (Axinn & Yabiku, 2001). We

coded individuals as “1” if they are members of a specific category and “0” if not, and treated

Brahmin/Chhetrias a reference group. Given the historical background of these ethnic groups, we

expect Brahmin/Chhetri to have more education, and Janajati to have more egalitarian marital

relationships.

Marital experience. Many dimensions of marital experiences may be related to

educational attainment and affect the spousal relationship and lead to violence. Perhaps the

strongest and most obvious of these is marriage timing (age at marriage). In a setting like Nepal

where the vast majority of people marry while they are still young, older age at first marriage is

16

associated with higher women’s autonomy and better spousal relationships (Allendorf &

Ghimire, Forthcoming), likely reducing occurrences of domestic violence against wives. In an

arranged marriage society like Nepal, another marital experience likely to affect the likelihood of

violence against wives is participation in spouse selection. In general, higher participation in

spouse selection is found to be associated with a better spousal relationship and lower domestic

violence (Allendorf & Ghimire, Forthcoming; Hoelter et al., 2004; Link, 2011).

The CVFS collected a complete history of respondents’ life experiences, including adult

marital experiences, via the LHC. Using this information we created a series of categorical

variables including married at age 15 and younger, married between ages 16 and 20, and married

after age 20; we treated married at age 15 and younger as the reference group. As shown in Table

1, men and women in Nepal have significantly different marital experiences. Although 41% of

women got married at age 15 and younger, only 10% of men married at those ages. Likewise, the

mean age at first marriage is 16.25 years old for wives, but it is 20.65 years old for husbands

(4.40 years difference).

The CVFS measured spouse choice using responses to a question that asks, “People

marry in different ways. Sometimes our parents or relatives decide whom we should marry, and

sometimes we decide ourselves. In your case, who selected your (first) spouse? Your parents or

relatives, yourself, or both?” We coded our measure of participation in spouse choice as “1” if a

respondent answered “parents or relatives”, and “5” if the respondent answered “myself.” If the

respondent answered with “both,” he or she was asked the follow-up question, “Although both of

you may have decided, one of you may have had a little more influence than the other. Who had

more influence in choosing your spouse? You, or your parents and relatives?” If the respondent

answered with “parents or relatives,” the response was coded as “2,” if he or she responded with

17

“myself,” the response was coded as “4,” and if the respondent answered with “both equally,”

the response was coded as “3.” This established an ordinal scale of 1 to 5 in which “1” means the

respondent did not participate in the choice of his or her spouse (arranged marriage), and “5”

means the respondent solely chose his or her spouse (individual choice marriage). We then

recoded the measure into a dummy variable: “1” if the individual had any say in their spouse

selection and “0” if not.

Analytical Strategy

Our analytical strategy estimated the independent and interrelated relationships between

the spread of mass education and domestic violence against wives. Our models of mass

education were guided by the life course perspective, starting with models of childhood

community effects, followed by parental education, and finally the couple’s own educational

experiences. We estimated multivariate models using standard logistic regression procedures.

Logistic regression is an appropriate statistical technique for analyzing multivariate models of

dichotomous dependent variables (Kmenta, 1986).

Results

Childhood community educational context

Table 2 presents our estimates of the association between wives’ and husbands’

childhood community educational context and incidence of domestic violence against wives.

Coefficients in the tables are the odds ratio—exponentiated log-odds of raw coefficients, which

can be interpreted as the multiplicative effect of a one-unit change in the independent variable on

the odds of domestic violence against wives.

We found that wives’ childhood community educational context has a strong negative

and statistically significant relationship with the odds of domestic violence against wives. The

18

odds multiplier of 0.75 in Model 2indicates that having a school within a one-hour walk from

wives’ place of residence during childhood reduces the odds of domestic violence against wives

by 25%. Husbands’ childhood community educational context is also negatively associated with

the odds of domestic violence against wives, but this association is not statistically significant. In

Model 3, we combined husbands’ and wives’ childhood community educational context into a

single measure of the couple’s childhood community educational context. As expected, the

combined negative association became even stronger than the individual association, and is

statistically significant. The odds multiplier of 0.65 in Model 4 indicates that having a school

within a one hour-walk during the couple's childhood (both wife and husband) is associated with

a 35% reduction in the odds of domestic violence against wives.

(Table 2 About Here)

In terms of controls, both wives’ ethnicity and birth cohort are strongly associated with

the odds of domestic violence against wives. In general, compared to high caste Brahmin/Chhetri

women, women from other ethnic backgrounds have higher odds of reporting domestic violence

against wives. This difference, however, is not significant for women of Hill Janjati ethnicity.

Compared to women from the youngest cohort (born between 1972-81), women from older

cohorts have higher odds of experiencing domestic violence.

Parents’ education

Childhood community educational context is closely associated with the residential

choices that parents make. Because there is great cross-generational stability in place of

residence in a setting like rural Nepal, parental educational experience may both shape the

presence of schools within a one-hour walk and be shaped by the presence of schools within a

one-hour walk during childhood. We examine the independence of these two dimensions of mass

19

education directly by controlling for the childhood community educational context and

estimating the association of parents’ educations with the odds of domestic violence against

wives. First, we estimated the models of wife’s and husband’s parents separately and then we

estimated couple models.

(Table 3 About Here)

We found both wives’ and husbands’ parents’ education are each negatively associated

with the odds of domestic violence against wives. The odds multiplier of 0.69 in Model 1 of

Table 3 indicates that a wife having a parent ever attend school is associated with a 31%

reduction in the odds of experiencing domestic violence. This means that if both of the wife’s

parents ever went to school, she is more than 60% less likely to experience domestic violence—

an enormous association. Although husband’s parents’ education is also negatively associated

with the odds of domestic violence against wives, this association is not statistically significant.

When we estimated models of a couple's parents' education, the magnitude and statistical

significance of the association became even stronger. The odds multiplier of 0.61 in Model 3

indicates that a one-point increase in a couple’s parents’ education reduces the odds of domestic

violence against wives by 39%.

Although the effect of the couple’s childhood community educational context remained

negative and similar in magnitude to that of the final model in Table 2, it is no longer statistically

significant once parental education is included in the model. This finding is consistent with the

interpretation that part of the effect of the couple’s childhood community educational context

works through their parents’ education, particularly the wife’s parents’ education.

Wives’ and husbands’ educational experiences

20

Childhood access to schools and parental education are both key determinants of

children’s own educational experiences (Beutel & Axinn, 2002; Blau & Duncan, 1967; Marini,

1978). In a setting like Nepal, as is true in much of South Asia, parental education may also

shape the selection of a spouse, as the majority of marriages are arranged by parents (Ghimire et

al., 2006). Therefore, we have strong reasons to anticipate that the effects of childhood access to

schools and parental education may affect domestic violence against wives via women’s and

their husbands’ schooling. To investigate this, we use the same models discussed above, now

controlling for couple’s childhood educational context, parents’ educations, and couple’s marital

experiences, to estimate effects of wives’ and husbands’ educational experiences. In addition,

because both husband's and wife's age at marriage and education are intricately linked with each

other, we also control for difference in age at first marriage between the husband and wife.

Model 1 through Model 3 of Table 4 present estimates of wives’ and husbands’

educations. We found that a wife’s educational attainment is negatively associated with the odds

of domestic violence against wives. The odds multiplier of 0.33 for educational attainment in

Model 1 of Table 4 indicates that compared to women with no education before marriage,

women with a college education before marriage are more than 67% less likely to experience

domestic violence by husbands during their marriage.

(Table 4 About Here)

Similarly, we found that husband’s education is also strongly, negatively associated with

domestic violence against wives. The odds multiplier of 0.29 for those who had a college

education (Model 2,Table 4) indicates that compared to those women who have husbands with

no education before marriage, women who have husbands with a college education before

marriage are more than 71% less likely to experience domestic violence by their husbands during

21

marriage. In Model 3, Table 4, we include both the wife’s and husband’s education. As shown in

Model 3, the odds multiplier for wife with a college education increased from 0.33 in Model 1 to

0.62 and is no longer statistically significant. The odds multiplier for husband with a college

education also slightly increased from 0.29 in Model 2, to 0.34 in Model 3, however this

association remains statistically significant. Given educational assortative marriage in general

(Mare, 1991) and arranged marriage in this setting that may exacerbate that sorting (Ghimire et

al., 2006), it is not surprising to find that the consequences of husbands’ and wives’ educations

are not independent. Within this lack of independence, it is the potential perpetrator’s

educational attainment that directly affects the likelihood of domestic violence, not the potential

victim’s educational attainment. Childhood community educational context, parental

background, and women’s educational attainment all increase the likelihood that a woman will

marry a highly educated man (Ghimire et al., 2006; Thornton et al., 2007), but with all the other

dimensions of education controlled, it is the husband’s own education that most significantly

reduces the chances that he will perpetrate domestic violence against his wife.

These findings are also net of couples’ marital experiences. As hypothesized, the odds

multiplier of 0.97 for difference in husband’s and wife’s age at first marriage suggests that

husband age at first marriage is negatively associated with the odds of domestic violence against

his wife, with those who marry later being less likely to perpetrate domestic violence against

their wives. Though the odds multipliers for couples’ childhood community educational context

and wife’s parents’ education remained negative, none of these remain statistically significant.

These results reinforce the interpretation that part of the effects of the couple’s childhood

community access to schools and parents’ educations works through their own education,

particularly husbands’ education. Though wives’ parents’ educations had a substantial and

22

significant effect reducing the likelihood of experiencing domestic violence by her husband, the

mechanism for this intergenerational influence may be the choice of a husband with high

educational attainment, rather than a direct effect of parental education itself.

Understanding Historical Trends

There have been historical changes in the incidence of domestic violence against wives in

this setting. This can be seen in the results by cohort in Table 2. More recent cohorts of married

women are substantially less likely to experience domestic violence than the earliest cohorts.

As shown in Model 1 of Table 2, in an equation containing only birth cohort and

ethnicity, we found that women born between 1936-51 were 86% more likely to experience

domestic violence from their husbands than those born between 1972-81. With the introduction

of wife's childhood community educational context, the odds multiplier for the 1936-51 birth

cohort was reduced to 1.64. These cohort difference continue to decline as we add more

dimensions of the dramatic changes in mass education to our models. By the final model

presented in Table 4, including all the dimensions of mass education we measure, the difference

by cohort are virtually entirely gone. The difference is stunning—rarely does empirical evidence

provide such a clear explanation for cohort change over time. Virtually the total trend in

domestic violence against wives can be explained by the spread of mass education, as

conceptualized as access to community school during childhood, parental education, wife’s and

husband’s education. Thus our expectation that the spread of mass education played a significant

role in changing domestic violence against wives in Nepal is strongly supported by these data.

Discussion

Social theory predicts that the spread of mass education will significantly alter families,

family events, and family relationships (Caldwell, 1982; Goode, 1970; Thornton & Lin, 1994;

23

Thornton, 2005). Theory identifies mechanisms through which these macro-level changes work

to delay marriage, delay childbearing within marriage, and limit the total number of children

parents have (Caldwell, 1982; Thornton & Lin, 1994). Empirical investigation of these changes

in rural Nepal is entirely consistent with these overall expectations (Axinn & Yabiku, 2001;

Ghimire & Axinn, 2010). Moreover, research has repeatedly demonstrated that education in

schools dominated by Western European-style curricula is among the most powerful forces

affecting family formation events and relationships (Caldwell et al., 1988; Hoelter et al., 2004;

Thornton & Lin, 1994).

Theories of change and variation in societal levels of domestic violence do not have the

same decades of empirical testing as theories of marriage timing and fertility. Nevertheless, there

are strong reasons to expect that multiple dimensions of mass education would influence the

incidence of domestic violence. Studies of family change in Nepal have clearly demonstrated

that the spread of mass education produces delays in marriage (Yabiku, 2005), a transition away

from arranged marriage toward individual choice of spouse (Ghimire et al., 2006), and an

increase in positive relations between husbands and wives (Hoelter et al., 2004). These changes

in the nature of marital relationships have the potential to profoundly change the likelihood that

husbands strike their wives. The spread of school buildings through communities can affect the

chances individuals attend school and mere exposure to them can alter attitudes and expectations

about appropriate behavior. Parental education has the potential to increase children’s education,

change parents’ expectations for their children’s behavior, and in an arranged marriage society

increase parental commitment to finding educated spouses for their children. Both women’s and

men’s education may alter their expectations of the marital relationship and change the way

24

husbands and wives treat each other in marriage. Each of these mechanisms may connect the

spread of mass education to a reduced likelihood that husbands hit their wives.

Our results are consistent with this possibility that multiple dimensions of mass education

reduce the likelihood of domestic violence against wives. Having schools close by during

women’s childhoods is strongly associated with a lower likelihood of experiencing domestic

violence. This association is greatly reduced when parental education is added to the model –

much of the association between access to school in childhood and likelihood of domestic

violence against wives may be due to parental education. Parental education also reduces

women's likelihood of experiencing domestic violence. The association between women’s

parents’ educations and women's likelihood of experiencing domestic violence is strong, but this

association is greatly reduced by adding women’s own educational attainment to the model, so

that much of the effect of parental education may be due to the education of their children.

Finally, both women’s and their husbands’ educations are each strongly associated with

likelihood husbands hit their wives, but these different dimensions of education are not entirely

independent. When both women’s and their husbands’ educations are included in the same

model, only the association between husbands’ education and wives likelihood of experiencing

domestic violence continues to be strong and statistically significant. Thus, though women’s

education is important, it may be important for the educational assortative marriages that connect

highly educated women to more highly educated husbands. These findings support our

hypothesis that in a predominantly patriarchal society such as Nepal, the spread of mass

education is likely to be associated with less domestic violence against wives through multiple

mechanisms. Equally important, these findings provide a substantial advance in our insight into

the interrelationships among these multiple complex mechanisms. Finally, the evidence we

25

present here also shows that the reduction in domestic violence across cohorts is largely

explained by the spread of mass education.

Domestic violence is associated with poor mental and physical health, lower quality

marital relationships, higher marital dissolution, and poor economic performance (Allendorf,

2007; Kishor & Johnson, 2004; Rijal, 2003; UN, 1995; Weiss, 1996). Although our investigation

is limited to cross-sectional measures from one point in time and a single setting, our findings

constitute an important advance in family theory and research on domestic violence. Just as in

other domains of family change, our findings indicate that multiple dimensions of spread of mass

education simultaneously shape domestic violence against wives. Our findings for this setting

also demonstrate the strong effects of mass education explain significant change across birth

cohorts in the incidence of domestic violence against wives. We argue future research on the

relationship of education to family change should consider multiple dimensions of mass

education. Though we study a narrow element of domestic violence against wives – physical

violence – our results are consistent with our argument that studies of other dimensions of

domestic violence would also benefit from this multidimensional conceptualization of education.

Of course our data come from one region in Nepal and cannot be used for inference to

other Nepalese populations or populations of other countries. Diversity across populations may

limit the extent to which we should expect similar associations elsewhere. However, evidence

from multiple settings shows a powerful influence of spread of Western-oriented mass education

on other aspects of family and marital relationships (Allendorf and Ghimire Forthcoming;

Caldwell & Caldwell 1982; Holter 2004). Thus we have substantial reason to expect similar

consequences of mass education in other settings. Studies of these associations in a broader

range of populations remains a high scientific priority.

26

References

Acharya, M., & Bennett, L. (1981). Rural women of Nepal: An aggregate analysis and summary

of 8 village studies. Kathmandu: Centre for Economic Development and Administration.

Adhikari, D. P. (1998). The history of Nepalese nationalism. Nayabazar, Kathmandu: Jeewan

Printing Support Press.

Ahmad, F., Riaz, S., Barata, P., & Stewart, D. E. (2004). Patriarchal beliefs and perception of

abuse among South Asia immigrant women. Violence Against Women, 10, 262–282.

DOI:10.1177/1077801203256000

Alexander, J. C. (1988). Action and its environments: Toward a new synthesis. New

York: Columbia University Press.

Allendorf, K. (2007). Couples’ report of women’s autonomy and health-care use in

Nepal. Studies in Family Planning, 38, 35–46. DOI:10.1111/j.1728-4465.2007.00114.x

Allendorf, K., & Ghimire D. J. Forthcoming. Dimensions and Determinants of Marital

Quality in Nepal. Social Science Research.

Axinn, W. G., & Barber, J. S. (2001). Mass education and fertility transition. American

Sociological Review, 66, 481–505.

Axinn, W. G., Pearce, L. D., & Ghimire, D. J. (1999). Innovations in life history calendar

applications. Social Science Research, 28, 243–264. DOI:10.1006/ssre.1998.0641

Axinn, W. G., & Thornton, A. (1993). Mothers, children, and cohabitation: The intergenerational

effects of attitudes and behavior. American Sociological Review, 58, 233–246.

Axinn, W. G., & Yabiku, S. T. (2001). Social change, the social organization of families, and

fertility limitation. American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1219–1261.

DOI:10.1086/320818

27

Bagheri, M., Nabavi, A., & Hosseinzadeh, A. H. (2009). Prevalence of Marital Violence in the

Family. The Indian Journal of Social Work, 70, 117–132.

Barber, J. S., & Axinn, W. G. (2004). New ideas and fertility limitation: The role of mass media.

Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 1180–1200. DOI:10.1111/j.0022-

2445.2004.00086.x

Barber, J. S., Shivakoti, G. P., Axinn, W. G., & Gajurel, K. (1997). Sampling strategies for rural

settings: A detailed example from the Chitwan Valley Family Study Nepal. Nepal

Population Journal, 6, 193–203.

Bengston, V. L. (1975). Generation and family effects in value socialization. American

Sociological Review, 40, 358–371.

Berreman, G. D. (1972). Hindus of the Himalayas. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Beutel, A. M., & Axinn, W. G. (2002). Gender, social change, and educational attainment.

Economic Development and Cultural Change, 51, 109–135.

Bista, D. B. (1972). People of Nepal. Kathmandu: Ratna Pustak Bhandar.

Blau, P. M., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. New York:Wiley.

Brauner-Otto, S. R. Forthcoming. Schools, their spatial distributions and characteristics, and

fertility limitations. Rural Sociology.

Cain, M., Khanam, S. R., & Nahar, S. (1979). Class, patriarchy, and women’s work in

Bangladesh. Population and Development Review, 5, 405–438.

Caldwell, J. C. (1982). Theory of fertility decline. London: Academic Press Inc.

Caldwell, J. C., Reddy, P. H., & Caldwell, P. (1988). The causes of demographic change:

Experimental research in South India. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Carvalho, N. (2007, March 5). Rising domestic violence against women. AsiaNet.It. Retrieved

28

from http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Rising-domestic-violence-against-women-

8651.html

Cleland, J., & Rodriguez, G. (1988). The effect of parental education on marital fertility in

developing countries. Population Studies, 42, 419–442.

Coleman, J. S. (1990). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of

Sociology, 94, 95–120.

Diop-Sidibe, N., Campbell, J. C., & Becker, S. (2006). Domestic violence against women in

Egypt—wife beating and health outcomes. Social Science and Medicine, 62, 1260–1277.

Devries, K., Watts C., Yoshihama, M., Kiss, L., Schraiber, L. B., Deyessa, N., Heise, L., Durand,

J., Mbwambo, J., Jansen, H., Berhane, Y., Ellsberg, M., Garcia-Moreno, C., & WHO

Multi-Country Study Team. (2011). Violence against women is strongly associated with

suicide attempts: Evidence from the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and

domestic violence against women. Social Science and Medicine, 73, 79–86.

Durkheim, E. (1984). The division of labor in society. New York: Free Press. (Original work

published in 1893)

Dyson, T., & Moore, M. (1983). On kinship structure, female autonomy, and demographic

behavior in India. Population and Development Review, 9, 25–60.

Elder, G. H. (1985). Life course dynamics: Trajectories and transitions, 1968-1980. Ithaca, NY:

Cornell University Press.

Ellsberg, M., Jansen, H. A., Heise, L., Watts C. H., & García-Moreno, C. 2008. Intimate partner

violence and women’s physical and mental health in the WHO multi-country study on

women’s health and domestic violence: an observational study. Lancet, 371, 1165–1172.

English, R. (1985). Himalayan state formation and the impact of British rule in the

29

Nineteenth century. Mountain Research and Development, 5, 61–78.

Gecas, V., & Seff, M. A. (1990). Families and adolescents: A review of the 1980s. Journal of

Marriage and the Family, 52, 941–958.

Ghimire, D. J., & Axinn, W. G. (2010). Community context, land use and first birth. Rural

Sociology, 75, 478–513. DOI:10.1111/j.1549-0831.2010.00019.x

Ghimire, D. J., Axinn, W. G., Yabiku, S. T., & Thornton, A. (2006). Social change, premarital

non-family experiences and spouse choice in an arranged marriage society. American

Journal of Sociology, 111, 1181–1218. DOI:10.1086/498468

Goode, W. J. (1970). World revolution and family patterns. New York: The Free Press.

Heise, L. L., Ellsberg, M. C., & Gottemoeller, M. (1999). Ending violence against women.

(Population Reports Series L, No 11). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University School of

Public Health, Population Information Program.

Hoelter, L. F., Axinn, W. G., & Ghimire, D. G. (2004). Social change, premarital non-family

experiences, and marital dynamics. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 1131–1151.

DOI:10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00083.x

Jamison, D. T., & Lockheed, M. E. (1987). Participation in schooling: Determinants and learning

outcomes in Nepal. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 35, 279–306.

Johnson, M. P. (1995). Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of

violence against women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 283–294.

Khaniya, T. R., & Kiernan, M. A. (1994). Nepal: System of education. In T. Husen and T.N.

Postlethwaite (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Education (2nd ed.)

(pp.40604067). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

Kishor, S., & Johnson, K. (2004). Domestic violence in nine developing countries:

30

A comparative study. Calverton: ORC Macro International.

Kmenta, J. (1986). Elements of Econometrics (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan Publishing

Company.

Koenig, M. A., Ahmed, S., Hossain, M. B., & Mozumder, A. B. M. K. A. (2003). Women's

status and domestic violence in rural Bangladesh: Individual and community-level

effects. Demography, 40, 269–288.

Koenig, M. A., Stephenson, R., Ahmed, S., Jejeebhoy, S. J., & Campbell, J. (2006). Individual

and contextual determinants of domestic violence in North India. American Journal of

Public Health, 40, 269–288. DOI:10.2105/AJPH.2004.050872

Link, C. F. (2011). Spousal communication and contraceptive use in rural Nepal: An event

history analysis. Studies in Family Planning, 42, 83–92. DOI:10.1111/j.1728-

4465.2011.00268.x

Macfarlane, A. (1976). Resources and population: A study of the Gurungs of Nepal.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Macfarlane, A. (1986). Marriage and love in England: Methods of reproduction 1300-1840.

Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Majumdar, S. (2003, November 6). In India domestic violence rises with education. Women’s

eNews. Retrieved fromhttp://www.womensenews.org/story/domestic-

violence/031106/india-domestic-violence-rises-education

Mare, R. D. (1991). Five decades of educational assortive mating. American Sociological

Review, 56,15–32.

Marini, M. M. (1978). The transition to adulthood: Sex differences in educational attainment and

age at marriage. American Sociological Review, 43, 483–507.

31

Mason, K. O. (1987). The impact of women’s social position on fertility in developing countries.

Sociological Forum, 1, 718–745. DOI:10.1007/BF01124382

Mathur, K. (2004). Countering gender violence: Initiatives towards collective action in

Rajasthan. New Delhi: Sage Publications India Pvt Ltd.

Naved, R. T., & Akhtar, N. (2008). Spousal violence against women and suicidal ideation in

Bangladesh. Women's Health Issues, 18, 442-452.

Naved, R. T., Azim, S.,Bhuiya, A., & Persson, L. A. (2006). Physical violence by husbands:

Magnitude, disclosure, and help seeking behavior of women in Bangladesh. Social

Science and Medicine, 62, 2917-2929. DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.12.001

Panday, D. R. (1999). Nepal's failed development: Reflections on the mission and the maladies.

Kathmandu: Nepal South Asia Centre.

Panday, G.K., Dutt, D., & Banerjee, B. (2008). Partner and relationship factors in

domestic violence: Perspective of women from a slum in Calcutta, India. Journal of

Interpersonal Violence, 30, 1–17. DOI:10.1177/0886260508322186

Pradhananga, R. B., & Shrestha, P. (2009). Domestic violence against women in Nepal: Concept,

history and existing laws. Working paper.

Rauschning, D., Wiesbrock, K., & Lailach, M. (Eds.) (1997). Key Resolutions of the United

Nations General Assembly, 1946–1996. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Regmi, R.R. (1999). Dimensions of Nepali society and culture. SAAN Research Institute,

Gairidhara, Kathmandu.

Rijal, Sanjita. (2003, April 1). Domestic violence: A major cause of increasing divorce cases.

The Kathmandu Post.

Rindfuss, R. R., & Morgan, S. P. (1983). Marriage, sex and first birth interval: The quiet

32

revolution in Asia. Population and Development Review, 9, 259–278.

Sharma, G. (1994). Development of educational administration in Nepal. Kathmandu: Indu

Chhapakhana Pvt. Ltd.

Smith, D. S. (1973). Parental power and marriage patterns: an analysis of historical trends in

Hingham, Massachusetts. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 25, 419–428.

Smith, T. E. (1988). Parental Control Techniques: Relative Frequencies and Relationships with

Situational Factors. Journal of Family Issues, 9, 155–176.

Srinivas, M. N. (1952). Religion and society among the Coors of South India. Oxford, UK:

Clarendon Press.

Stash, S., & Hannum, E. (2001). Who goes to school? Educational stratification by gender,

caste, and ethnicity in Nepal. Comparative Education Review, 45, 354–378.

DOI:10.1086/447676

Stephenson, R., Koenig, M. A., & Ahmed, S. (2006). Domestic violence and symptoms of

gynecologic morbidity among women in North India. International Family Planning

Perspectives, 32, 201–208.

Thapa, S. (1997). Timing of family formation in the ethnic mosaic Nepal: A district-level

analysis. Asia-Pacific Population Journal, 12, 75–87.

Thornton, A. (2005). Reading history sideways: The fallacy and enduring impact of the

developmental paradigm on family life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Thornton, A., Axinn, W. G., & Xie, Y. (2007). Marriage and cohabitation. Chicago: University

of Chicago Press.

Thornton, A., & Lin, H.-S. (1994). Social change and the family in Taiwan. Chicago: University

of Chicago Press.

33

United Nations. (1993). Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women. General

Assembly Resolution 48/104, 20 December 1993. United Nations, NY.

United Nations. (1995). Report of the Fourth World Conference on Women. Beijing, September

4-15, 1995. United Nations, NY.

Weiss, L. J. (1996). Women alone: The causes and consequences of non-marriage and marital

disruption among high caste Hindus in Nepal. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation)

Columbia University, New York.

World Health Organization. (2001). Putting women first: Ethical and safety

recommendations for research on domestic violence against women. Geneva

Switzerland: Department of Gender and Women’s Health.

Yabiku, S. T. (2005). The effect of non-family experiences on age of marriage in a setting of

rapid social change. Population Studies, 59, 339–354. DOI:10.1080/00324720500223393

Yount, K. M. (2005). Resources, family organization, and domestic violence against married

women in Minya, Egypt. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 579–596.

DOI:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00155.x

Yount, K. M., & Carrera, J. S. (2006). Domestic violence against married women in Cambodia.

Social Forces, 85, 355–387. DOI:10.1353/sof.2006.0151

Yount, K. M., Halim, N., Hynes, M., & Hillman, E. R. (2011). Response effects to attitudinal

questions about domestic violence against women: A comparative perspective. Social

Science Research, 40, 873–884. DOI:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2010.12.009

34

Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of Measures used in the Analyses (N=1,778 Currently Married in 1996)

1Note: For husband this cohort include all age 45 and above.

Wives Husbands

Coding Mean S. Dev. Min. Max. Mean S. Dev. Min. Max.

Childhood community educational context

Had a school within one-hour walk 0=no, 1=yes 0.82 0.38 0 1 0.81 0.39 0 1

Parents’ education

Parents ever went to school 0=none, 1=either, 0.31 0.53 0 2 0.19 0.43 0 2

2=both

Premarital education

Schooling Years 3.11 4.50 0 20 5.94 5.41 0 22

No education 0=no, 1=yes 0.57 0.49 0 1 0.31 0.46 0 1

1-5 years (Primary)

0=no, 1=yes 0.15 0.36 0 1 0.18 0.38 0 1

6-11 year (High school) 0=no, 1=yes 0.21 0.40 0 1 0.34 0.47 0 1

12 and more year (College) 0=no, 1=yes 0.07 0.26 0 1 0.17 0.37 0 1

Marital experiences

Age at first marriage Years 16.25 3.23 5 36 20.65 4.33 7 45

Married at age 15 and younger 0=no, 1=yes 0.41 0.49 0 1 0.10 0.30 0 1

Married between 16 and 20 0=no, 1=yes 0.50 0.50 0 1 0.41 0.49 0 1

Married after 20

0=no, 1=yes 0.08 0.27 0 1 0.49 0.50 0 1

Participation in spouse choice

0=no, 1=yes 0.24 0.43 0 1 0.51 0.50 0 1

Controls

Age in years Years 33.60 10. 88 15 59 39.23 12.45 17 80

Birth Cohort

Born bet. 1972–81 (age 15–24, Cohort0) 0=no, 1=yes 0.25 0.43 0 1

Born bet. 1962–71 (age 25–34, Cohort1) 0=no, 1=yes 0.30 0.46 0 1

Born bet. 1952–61 (age 35–44, Cohort2) 0=no, 1=yes 0.25 0.43 0 1

Born bet. 1936–51 (age 45–59, Cohort3) 0=no, 1=yes 0.20 0.39 0 1

Ethnicity

Brahmin/Chhetri 0=no, 1=yes 0.47 0.50 0 1

Dalit 0=no, 1=yes 0.12 0.32 0 1

Hill Janjati 0=no, 1=yes 0.17 0.38 0 1

Newar 0=no, 1=yes 0.07 0.24 0 1

Terai Janajati 0=no, 1=yes 0.17 0.39 0 1

Outcome

Ever beaten by husband 0=no, 1=yes 0.17 0.37 0 1

35

Table 2: Logistic Regression Estimates of Association Between Childhood Community Educational Context and Domestic Violence Against Wives (N=1,778)

Note: * P<.05, ** P<.01; all probabilities are one-tailed. Odds ratios are reported on the first line, with Z statistics in the parentheses on second line. All models were estimated using multivariate logistic regression. † Born 1972-81 (age 15-24 Cohort 0) as reference group. †† Brahmin/Chhetri as reference group.

Model

1 2 3 4 Childhood community educational context Wife had a school within one-hour walk 0.75*

(-1.67) Husband had a school within one-hour walk 0.81 (-1.17) Couple had school within one-hour walk 0.65* (-1.86) Controls Birth cohort† Born between 1962 – 71 (Cohort1) 1.19 1.17 1.17 1.16

(0.92) (0.82) (0.85) (0.79) Born between 1952 – 61 (Cohort2) 1.54* 1.47* 1.48* 1.42*

(2.27) (2.00) (2.03) (1.81) Born between 1936 – 51 (Cohort3 ) 1.86** 1.64** 1.66** 1.51* (3.22) (2.38) (2.34) (1.83) Ethnicity†† Dalit 2.58** 2.51** 2.60** 2.55** (4.87) (4.72) (4.91) (4.81) Hill Janjati 1.29 1.25 1.27 1.24 (1.34) (1.16) (1.25) (1.12) Newar 1.74* 1.74* 1.77* 1.74* (2.15) (2.14) (2.20) (2.16) Terai Janjati 1.95** 1.89** 1.95** 1.90** (3.88) (3.66) (3.87) (3.70) Intercept 0.10 0.14 0.13 0.16 (-13.58) (-8.28) (-8.58) (-6.53) - 2 Log L

1559 1556 1558 1556 Df 7 8 8 8 N 1778 1778 1778 1778

36

Table 3: Logistic Regression Estimates of Association Between Parents’ Education on Domestic Violence Against Wives (N=1,778)

Note: * P<.05, ** P<.01; all probabilities are one-tailed. Odds ratios are reported on the first line, with Z statistics in the parentheses on second line. All models were estimated using multivariate logistic regression. † Born 1972-81 (age 15-24 Cohort 0) as reference group. †† Brahmin/Chhetri as reference group.

Model

1 2 3 Parents’ education Wife’s parents ever went to school 0.69** (-2.45) Husband’s parents ever went to school 0.87 (-0.82) Couple parents' ever went to school 0.61* (-2.24) Childhood community educational context Couple had School within one-hour walk 0.78 0.82 0.69 (-1.49) (-1.12) (-1.62) Controls Birth cohort† Born between 1962 – 71 (Cohort1) 1.09 1.15 1.07

(0.45) (0.74) (0.36) Born between 1952 – 61 (Cohort2) 1.31 1.43* 1.25

(1.36) (1.84) (1.10) Born between 1936 – 51 (Cohort3 ) 1.46* 1.60** 1.33 (1.80) (2.13) (1.22) Ethnicity†† Dalit 2.35** 2.55** 2.36** (4.32) (4.77) (4.34) Hill Janjati 1.19 1.26 1.19 (0.92) (1.22) (0.90) Newar 1.73* 1.82* 1.78* (2.11) (2.30) (2.22) Terai Janjati 1.75** 1.91** 1.75** (3.17) (3.74) (3.18) Intercept 0.17 0.13 0.19 (-7.22) (-8.19) (-5.69) - 2 Log L 1549 1556 1550 df 9 9 9 N 1778 1778 1778

37

Table 4: Logistic Regression Estimates of Association Between Wife and Husband’s Education and Domestic Violence Against Wives (N=1,778)

Model 1 2 3 Premarital education

Wife’s education ††† With 1- 5 years of education 1.04 1.15 (0.21) (0.65) With 6- 11 years of education 0.68* 0.94 (-1.72) (-0.26) With 12 and more years of education 0.33** 0.62 (-2.40) (-0.99) Husband’s education††† With 1- 5 years of education 1.03 1.07 (0.16) (0.35) With 6- 11 years of education 0.66* 0.70* (-2.20) (-1.83) With 12 and more years of education 0.29** 0.34** (-4.04) (-3.24) Parents’ education Wife’s parents ever went to school 0.76* (-1.76) Husband’s parents ever went to school 1.04 (0.20) Couple's parents ever went to school 0.81 (-0.88) Childhood community educational context Wife had a school within one-hour walk 0.80 (-1.33) Husband had a school within one-hour walk

0.90 (0.54) Couple had a school within one-hour walk 0.76 (-1.14) Individual experience Marital experience Wife’s age at first marriage †††† Married between age 16 and 20

1.15 (1.01) Married after age 20 0.90 (-0.37) Husband’s age at first marriage †††† Married between age 16 and 20

0.72 (-1.61) Married after age 20 0.54**

(-2.99) Wife’s age at first marriage (in years) 0.98 (-0.65) Difference in age at first marriage (husband-Wife) 0.97* (-1.86) Wife participation in husband selection

1.15 1.04

(0.89) (0.20) Husband participation in wife selection

0.94

(-0.44) Difference in participation in spouse choice (Husband-Wife)

0.92

38

Note: *P<.05, ** P<.01; all probabilities are one-tailed. Odds ratios are reported on the first line, with Z statistics in the parentheses on second line. All models were estimated using multivariate logistic regression. † Born 1972-81 (age 15-24 Cohort 0) as reference group. †† Brahmin/Chhetri as reference group. ††† No education as reference group. †††† Married at age 15 and before as reference group.

(0.58) Controls Birth cohort† Born between 1962 – 71 (Cohort1) 1.01 1.01 0.97 (0.02) (0.03) (0.17) Born between 1952 – 61 (Cohort2) 1.14 1.06 1.01 (0.62)

(0.26) (0.02) Born between 1936 – 51 (Cohort3 ) 1.29 1.06 1.01 (1.07)

(0.22) (0.02)

Ethnicity†† Dalit 2.04** 1.95** 1.80** (3.50) (3.28) (2.84) Hill Janjati 1.07 1.20 1.07 (0.34) (0.92) (0.31) Newar 1.70* 2.01** 1.83* (1.99) (2.63) (2.27) Terai Janajati 1.48* 1.41* 1.32 (2.04) (1.84) (1.41) Intercept 0.19 0.34 0.41 (-5.94) (-3.24) (-1.71) - 2 Log L 1538 1519 1521 Df 15 15 19 N 1777 1775 1776