DOI: 10.3886/icpsr36140.v1
title: Violence Against American Indian and Alaska Native Women and Men: 2010 Findings from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS)
title: Version 1

description: This study examines the prevalence of violence against American Indian
and Alaska Native women and men, using a large nationally representative
sample from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey
(NISVS). More specifically, it provides estimates of sexual violence,
physical violence by intimate partners, stalking, and psychological
aggression by intimate partners. It also provides estimates of interracial
and intraracial victimizations and briefly examines the impact of violence.
This study is based on two of the NISVS samples that were included in the
2010 data collection effort --the general population sample and the
American Indian and Alaska Native oversample. This American Indian and
Alaska Native oversample was collected from geographical areas
(telephone exchanges) where at least 50% of the population identifies
themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native.
To increase the generalizability of the American Indian and Alaska Native
sample (and to add interviews conducted by cell phone), a new "combined"
sample was created by including (a) all respondents in the American Indian
and Alaska Native oversample and (b) 677 respondents in the general
population sample who identified themselves as American Indian or Alaska
Native. By combining these samples, a new sample was obtained that is
large enough to produce reliable and valid estimates for all women and men
in the United States who identify themselves as American Indian or Alaska
Native. For a more exact discussion of the sample, see the NIJ Technical
Report.
The combined sample includes 2,473 women and 1,505 men who identified
themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native. Results from the combined
American Indian and Alaska Native sample were compared to results from
the sample of respondents in the general population sample who identified
themselves as non-Hispanic White alone. The comparison sample includes
7,646 women and 6,050 men who identified themselves as non-Hispanic
White alone.
 There are 5 data files included with this study. Dataset 1 (General Population Raw Data) contains 18,957 cases and 26,114 variables. Dataset 2 (American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Oversample Raw Data) contains 3,612 cases and 22,932 variables. Dataset 3 (Respondent-level Data) contains 21,378 cases and 493 variables. Dataset 4 (Perpetrator-level Data) contains 51,535 cases and 446 variables. Dataset 5 (Weights File) contains 3,978 cases and 9 variables.
description: The primary objectives of the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey were to describe (1) the prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence; (2) who is most likely to experience these forms of violence; (3) the patterns and impact of the violence experienced by specific perpetrators; and (4) the health consequences of these forms of violence.
description: <strong>Dataset 1 (General Population Raw Data)</strong> The survey was conducted in 50 states and the District of Columbia and was administered using a computer-assisted telephone interview from January 22, 2010 through December 31, 2010. In 2010, a total of 18,049 interviews were conducted (9,970 women and 8,079 men) in the United States general population. This included 16,507 completed and 1,542 partially completed interviews. A total of 9,086 females and 7,421 males completed the survey. Approximately 45.2 percent of interviews were conducted by landline telephone and 54.8 percent of interviews were conducted using a respondent's cell phone. <strong>Advance Letters</strong> Reverse address matching was used to link available addresses to the landline sample. Approximately 50 percent of telephone numbers in the landline sample were matched. Prior to contacting participants, informational letters addressed to "Resident" were sent to available addresses to make residents aware that they would be receiving a request for an interview in the coming days. Following the World Health Organization's guidelines for research on domestic violence, introductory letters were carefully written, providing only general information about the survey to maximize safety and confidentiality. <strong>Incentives</strong> Respondents in the landline and cell phone samples were offered an incentive of 10 dollars to participate in the survey. Respondents could choose to have the incentive mailed to them or donated to the United Way on their behalf; 58.4 percent of respondents chose to donate their incentive. For respondents who chose to receive the incentive, mailing information was obtained so the incentive check could be sent to them. Mailing information was kept in a separate database from data collected during the administration of the survey and destroyed at the end of data collection. <strong>Graduated Informed Consent Process</strong> A graduated informed consent protocol was used to ensure respondent safety and confidentiality in accordance with recommended guidelines for surveys on sensitive topics such as violence victimization (Sullivan and Cain, 2004; WHO, 2001). With a graduated informed consent protocol, the initial person who answers the telephone is provided general non-specific information about the survey topic. The specific topics of the survey are only revealed to the individual respondent who has been randomly selected to participate in the survey. A graduated consent process is considered to be one of the safest approaches for gathering data on victimization experiences. <strong>Respondent Safety and Confidentiality</strong> Interviewers also reminded respondents that they could skip any question and could stop the interview at any time. Interviewers also established a safety plan with the respondents so that respondents would know what to do if they needed to stop an interview for safety reasons. Specifically, interviewers suggested that respondents answer questions in a private setting and instructed them to just say "Goodbye" if at any time they felt physically or emotionally unsafe. Interviewers also checked in with the respondents several times during the interview to make sure they wanted to proceed. At the end of the interview, respondents were provided telephone numbers for the National Domestic Violence Hotline and the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network. <strong>Interviewer Training and Monitoring</strong> Interviewers received 16 hours of training and an additional 2 hours of post-training practice. The training sessions, which included lectures, demonstration, round-robin practice, paired-practice, and group and paired mock interviews, were specifically designed to help interviewers administer questions about sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner victimization and the potential challenges they may encounter in conducting interviews on these sensitive topics. Interviewers were also provided resources to assist respondents in coping with traumatic and violent events. Throughout the data collection period, interviewers were provided the opportunity to discuss and process difficult or upsetting interviews. <strong>Cognitive Testing</strong> A key component of the questionnaire design process was conducting cognitive tests on the introductions and key questions used throughout the instrument. The purpose of the cognitive testing was to provide information on how well the questions worked and whether participants understood the text provided. <strong>Dataset 2 (American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Oversample Raw Data)</strong> To increase the likelihood of reaching American Indian and Alaska Native respondents, the sampling frame included landline telephone exchanges where at least 50 percent of the population was estimated to be American Indian or Alaska Native. Cell phones were not included in the random digit dialing survey. It is important to emphasize that the sample does not include American Indian and Alaska Native people throughout the Unites States. Those interviewed were located in 16 states (i.e., Alaska, Arizona, California, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming). Interviewers called selected phone numbers and asked to speak to an adult. If no adult was available, the interviewer terminated the call. Once an adult was on the phone, their phone number was verified (to make sure that it had not been misdialed). The interviewer also confirmed that the phone number was for a landline. The adult was then asked if this was a private residence (adults who were not in a private residence were not eligible to participate). The interviewer then informed the adult that someone (age 18 or older) in the household needed to be randomly selected. The interviewer asked: "including yourself, how many adults age 18 or older who identify themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native currently live in your household?". When the answers were zero, the adults were asked to verify that they had included themselves in their answers. If it was confirmed that no adults in the household identified themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native, the calls were terminated. In households with only one American Indian or Alaska Native adult, that adult was selected as the potential respondent. In households with two American Indian or Alaska Native adults of the same gender, one of them was randomly selected as the potential respondent. In households with two American Indian or Alaska Native adults of different genders (i.e., one male and one female), one of them was again randomly selected as the potential respondent, but females were selected at four times the rate of males. In households with more than two American Indian or Alaska Native adults, the one with the most recent birthday was selected as the potential respondent. Potential respondents were then read a consent form. If the potential respondents provided their consent, they then started the survey. A second phase of data collection was used to reduce nonresponse. Non-respondents were randomly selected to participate in this second phase. These non-respondents were offered a higher incentive to complete the survey ($40 rather than $10). During portions of this second phase, respondents in households with only male adults were selected to participate at a rate of 30 percent (rather than 100 percent). Approximately 8 percent of initial refusals were converted into completed interviews. <strong>Dataset 3 (Respondent-level Data)</strong> was constructed from the psychological aggression (PA), coercive control and entrapment (CCE), physical violence (PV), elder abuse psychological aggression (EPA), elder abuse coercive control and entrapment (ECCE), and elder abuse physical violence (EPV), stalking (ST), and sexual violence (SV) sections. It includes respondent-level variables only (all perpetrator-level variables are excluded). Data cleaning was performed by examining the response patterns for each question. Response patterns were built by examining the number of lifetime perpetrators, whether the respondent experienced victimizations in the past three years, the number of past three year perpetrators, whether the respondent experienced victimizations in the past year, and the number of past year perpetrators. <strong>Dataset 4 (Perpetrator-level Data)</strong> was constructed from the psychological aggression (PA), coercive control and entrapment (CCE), physical violence (PV), elder abuse psychological aggression (EPA), elder abuse coercive control and entrapment (ECCE), and elder abuse physical violence (EPV), stalking (ST), and sexual violence (SV) sections. It includes the number of victimizations by each perpetrator over the lifetime, over the past three years, and over the past year for all identified perpetrators. The perpetrator-level file also includes the respondent's gender, year of birth, and whether the respondent ever had any children under the age of 18 living with them. <strong>Dataset 5 (Weights File)</strong> includes weights that were created for the combined American Indian and Alaska Native sample. The combined sample includes the respondents in the American Indian and Alaska Native oversample with the respondents in the general population sample who identified themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native.
description: <strong>Dataset 1 (General Population Raw Data)</strong> The questionnaire was divided into several sections and included information on demographic characteristics of the respondent, health conditions, victimization experiences (including psychological aggression, coercive control and entrapment, physical violence by an intimate partner, stalking victimization, and sexual violence). The questionnaire also included information about perpetrators and follow-up questions. <strong>Demographics</strong> - Respondents were asked their year of birth, education level, race and ethnicity, place of birth (if not U.S. born, number of years lived in the U.S.), whether they were affiliated or enrolled in a tribe or village, whether they have ever and in the past 12 months lived on a reservation or in a tribal village, their total household income, and zip code. <strong>Health</strong> - Respondents were asked about the following health conditions: asthma, chronic pain, diabetes, difficulty sleeping, frequent headaches, high blood pressure, irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), general physical health, and mental health. They were also asked about activity limitations as a result of physical, mental, or emotional problems, and about health problems that require use of special equipment. They were also asked how often they worried or were stressed about having enough money to pay their rent or mortgage, buy nutritious meals, and times when they needed to see a doctor but couldn't afford it. <strong>Victimization</strong> - Respondents were asked to report the number of people who had perpetrated a series of violence behaviors (described below) against them. For each perpetrator they reported, they were asked for the initials of the perpetrator and the number of times the perpetrator did the behavior ever, in the past three years, and in the past 12 months. <strong> Psychological aggression (PA),</strong> which included behaviors such as acting dangerous, name calling, insults, and humiliation. <strong> Coercive control and entrapment (CCE),</strong> which included behaviors that are intended to monitor and control an intimate partner such as threats, interference with family and friends, and limiting access to money. It also included behaviors intended to control reproductive or sexual health. <strong> Physical violence (PV),</strong> which included behaviors such as slapping, pushing or shoving, being hurt by pulling hair, being hit with something hard, being kicked, being slammed against something, attempts to hurt by choking or suffocating, being beaten, being burned on purpose, and having a partner use a knife or gun against the victim. <strong> Stalking (S),</strong> which included a pattern of unwanted harassing or threatening tactics used by a perpetrator that caused fear or concern for the safety of oneself or others, such as unwanted phone calls or emails, watching or following from a distance, technology assisted tactics (GPS), and leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find. <strong> Sexual violence (SV),</strong> which included rape (completed forced penetration; attempted forced penetration; alcohol or drug facilitated completed penetration); being made to penetrate another person (completed; attempted - males only; alcohol or drug facilitated); sexual coercion (unwanted sexual penetration after being pressured in a non-physical way), unwanted sexual contact (e.g., being kissed in a sexual way, fondled or grabbed), and non-contact unwanted sexual experiences (i.e., unwanted experiences that do not involve any touching or penetration such as someone exposing their sexual body parts, flashing, or masturbating in front of the victim; making a victim show his or her body parts; making a victim look at or participate in sexual photos or movies; or someone harassing the victim in a public place in a way that made the victim feel unsafe). Respondents aged 70 and older were also asked about perpetrators other than romantic and sexual partners for recent psychological aggression, coercive control and entrapment, and physical violence victimization (i.e., past 12 months only). These questions were included as a part of a pilot to assess the utility of using NISVS to capture some information on victimization among older adults. <strong>Note:</strong> Users are cautioned against using the raw data to determine the prevalence of elder abuse in the United States or to understand patterns of elder abuse. The NISVS survey does not include the range of victimization (e.g., neglect, financial and other forms of exploitation) that is understood in the field as constituting elder abuse and should not be construed as such. The data are also only for the past 12 months and for those aged 70 and older. The field of elder abuse and other aging related legislation (e.g., Older American's Act) uses ages 60 and older as the cut-off. In this regard, the sample does not cover the population of interest and the limited types of victimization assessed in NISVS preclude making generalizable statements about elder abuse in the United States. <strong>Perpetrator Information</strong> - All behaviors in the NISVS survey were linked to a specific perpetrator and all questions were asked within the context of that perpetrator. Respondents who reported experiencing violence were asked to provide the interviewer with the initials or a nickname for the individual perpetrator or identify the person in some other general way so that each violent behavior reported could be tied to a specific perpetrator. Respondents were then asked a series of questions about each perpetrator including the perpetrator's age, sex, and race/ethnicity. In addition, for each perpetrator reported, respondents were asked their age and their relationship to the perpetrator, both at the time violence first began and at the last time violence was experienced. <strong>Follow-up Questions</strong> - Respondents who reported experiencing stalking victimization were asked a series of follow-up questions, including the respondent's age when they first experienced stalking by each perpetrator and the age at which they last experienced stalking. They were also asked whether they were fearful, whether the perpetrator ever damaged personal property or belongings, ever threatened to physically harm them, and whether they believed that they or someone close to them would be seriously harmed or killed. Respondents who reported being threatened with physical harm or physically forced to have sex were also asked a series of follow-up questions, including the respondent's age when they first experienced these behaviors by each perpetrator and the age at which they last experienced these behaviors. They were also asked whether they were physically injured, contracted an STD, or became pregnant as a result of the victimization. A series of general follow-up questions were asked of respondents who reported victimization in the preceding sections of the survey (i.e., psychological aggression, coercive control and entrapment, and physical violence by an intimate partner; stalking, and sexual violence victimization). Respondents were asked about the impact of the violence they experienced by a specific perpetrator. These questions included whether they were ever concerned for their safety; if they were ever fearful (and if so, how fearful); if they had nightmares, were constantly on guard, watchful, or easily startled; if they felt numb or detached from others, their activities, or surroundings; if they were ever injured (and if so, what those injuries included); who they talked with about the behavior(s) (and if so, how helpful these discussions were); their need for and ability to get services (medical care, housing services, community services, victim's advocate or legal services); and whether they ever had to miss work or school. The variables in <strong>Dataset 2 (American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Oversample Raw Data)</strong> data file are the same as those in Dataset 1. However, there are several variables not in Dataset 2 data file which are present in Dataset 1. These include approximately 12 administrative variables, 658 coercive control and entrapment variables, 13 demographic variables, 1 follow-up variable, 564 physical violence variables, 235 psychological aggression variables, 1,364 sexual violence variables, 329 stalking variables, and 3 weight variables. <strong>Dataset 3 (Respondent-level Data)</strong> was created to include all respondent-level variables from the NISVS victimization core. From the psychological aggression (PA), coercive control and entrapment (CCE), physical violence (PV), stalking (ST), and sexual violence (SV) sections, this includes the respondents' answers to the number of lifetime perpetrators, victimization in the past three years, the number of perpetrators in the past three years, victimization in the past year, and the number of perpetrators in the past year. From the elder abuse - psychological aggression (EPA), elder abuse - coercive control (ECCE) and entrapment, and elder abuse - physical violence (EPV) sections, this includes the respondents' answers to the number of past year perpetrators. <strong>Dataset 4 (Perpetrator-level Data)</strong> contains all perpetrator-level variables from the NISVS victimization core. From the psychological aggression (PA), coercive control and entrapment (CCE), physical violence (PV), stalking (ST), and sexual violence (SV) sections, this includes the number of victimizations by each perpetrator over the lifetime, over the past three years, and over the past year. From the elder abuse - psychological aggression (EPA) , elder abuse - coercive control and entrapment (ECCE), elder abuse - physical violence (EPV) sections, this includes the number of victimizations by each perpetrator over the past year. The variables in <strong>Dataset 5 (Weights File)</strong> include corrected weights for the combined General Population/AIAN samples. Weights for the AIAN oversample were originally included in the data file, but they were incorrect and should not be used. Users should consult the Technical Report for more information.
description: <strong>Dataset 1 (General Population Raw Data)</strong> Sample weights were essential for computing national estimates using these data. These weights reflected sampling features, non-response, coverage, and sampling variability. There were several main weight components that contributed to final sampling weights: selection, multiplicity, non-response, and post-stratification. The selection weight accounted for different sampling rates across states, the varying selection probabilities in the landline and in the cell phone frames, the within household probability of selection, and the subsampling of non-respondents in Phase Two of data collection. The multiplicity weight component took into consideration that some sample members had both landline and cell phone services, thereby having multiple chances of entering the survey. The non-response weight accounted for the variation in response rates within the selected sample. The post-stratification weight adjusted the product of the selection, multiplicity, and non-response weights to match the population distribution on main demographic characteristics. This was accomplished using benchmark counts from census projections to correct for both coverage and non-response, which allowed the landline and cell phone samples to be merged together. Two main sets of weights were computed for analyzing NISVS data. Applying the same principles in constructing the various weight components, one set of weights was computed for all partial and complete interviews, while another set of weights was computed for the complete interviews only. An interview was defined as "complete" if the respondent completed the screening, demographic, general health questions, and all questions on all five sets of violence victimization, as applicable. An interview was defined as "partial" if the respondent completed the screening, demographic, and general health questions and at least all questions on the first set of violence victimization (psychological aggression). Users of NISVS data will need to provide the "design" and "stratum" specifications to whichever software (such as SUDAAN or a SAS complex survey procedure) is being used for analysis and apply the correct weights when producing estimates. This is necessary because the NISVS data were collected through a complex sampling design. Information about the Design and Weight Variables can be found in the Orientation to Analyzing the NISVS Raw Data data documentation. Additional information can be found in the Technical Report. <strong>Dataset 2 (American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Oversample Raw Data)</strong> The sample weights for the combined AIAN sample include selection weights, nonresponse weights, and post-stratification weights. Weights were computed for the sample of respondents who completed the Psychological Aggression section and for the sample of respondents who completed the Sexual Violence section. There are four weight variables in <strong>Dataset 3 (Respondent-level Data)</strong>. Two weights are taken from the General Population data, and two weights are taken from the AIAN oversample. There are no weight variables in <strong>Dataset 4 (Perpetrator-level Data)</strong>. <strong>Dataset 5 (Weights File)</strong> Weights for the AIAN oversample were included in the original data file, but these were incorrect. New weights were created for a sample that combined the respondents from the AIAN oversample with the respondents from the general population sample who identified themselves as AIAN. The correct weights for the combined sample are included in Dataset 5.
description: Response Rates: <strong>Dataset 1 (General Population Raw Data)</strong>: The overall weighted response rate for the 2010 data collection for NISVS ranged from 27.5 percent to 33.6 percent. The computation of the weighted response rate reflected the stratified, two-phase, dual-frame survey design used in NISVS, and accounted for the disproportionate sampling across states, combined response rates from Phases One and Two, and combined response rates resulting from the two sampling frames. The range in the overall response rates reflects differences in how the proportion of the unknowns that are eligible is estimated. The 27.5 percent was an estimate of the proportion of the unknowns that are eligible based on the information identified by interviewers when calling numbers. The upper estimate (33.6 percent) also included information from the prescreening process. <strong>Dataset 2 (American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Oversample Raw Data)</strong>: The overall response rate was 27.9 percent. <strong>Dataset 3 (Respondent-level Data)</strong>: Not applicable <strong>Dataset 4 (Perpetrator-level Data)</strong>: Not applicable <strong>Dataset 5 (Weights File)</strong>: Not applicable
description: <strong>Dataset 1 (General Population Raw Data)</strong> employed a dual-frame, stratified random digit dial (RDD) sampling design, with continuous data collection. To meet the challenges of rising non-coverage rates in United States landline-based telephone surveys, NISVS implemented a dual-frame design where both landline and cell phone frames were sampled simultaneously. <strong>List-Assisted Landline Frame</strong> The landline sampling frame was comprised of hundred-banks of telephone numbers where each bank had at least one known listed residential number. A hundred-bank is the 100 telephone numbers that are generated by fixing the first eight digits of a telephone number and changing the last two digits (e.g., (800) 555-55XX). Known business numbers were excluded from the frame. In addition, non-working numbers were removed after sample selection through screening. <strong>Cell-Phone Frame</strong> The cell phone frame consisted of phone numbers in telephone banks identified as active and currently in use for cell phones. At the time the sample was drawn, directory listings of cell phone numbers were not available. Thus, list-assisted screening was not possible. <strong>Stratification for State-Level Estimates</strong> NISVS had the dual objectives of providing national and state-level estimates. A sample design optimized for national estimates would use proportionate allocation across states (resulting in a sample size in each state that is proportionate to the adult population in that state), whereas a design optimized for providing stable state-level estimates might allocate the sample approximately equally across states. Considering these competing objectives, NISVS survey samples were stratified by state, balancing between stable state-level estimates and weight variation for the national estimates from oversampling of smaller states. <strong>Within-Household Selection</strong> Each state sample included both landline and cell phone samples. When reaching a household in the landline sample, the interviewer asked about the number of males and females living in the household. In a one-adult household, the adult was automatically selected to participate. In households with only two adults, the person on the phone or the other adult in the household was randomly selected. When there were more than two adults in the household, the adult with the most recent birthday was selected. Because cell phones are personal use devices, the person answering the cell phone was selected as the respondent, if eligible. <strong>Nonresponse Phase</strong> To increase participation, NISVS was administered as a two-phase survey. Phase One was the main data collection phase. Respondents in the first phase were offered an incentive of 10 dollars to participate in the survey. A random subsample of non-respondents from the first phase was selected during Phase Two, with the goal of reducing non-response and non-response bias. The second phase included a substantially higher incentive (40 dollars) to further encourage participation. For more information about the sampling and sample distribution, consult the Technical Report. Data for <strong>Dataset 2 (American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Oversample Raw Data)</strong> were collected through a random digit dialing survey of the non-institutionalized adult population of the United States. To increase the likelihood of reaching AIAN respondents, the sampling frame included landline telephone exchanges where at least 50 percent of the population was estimated to be AIAN. Cell phones were not included in the random digit dialing survey for the AIAN oversample. The sample does not include AIAN people throughout the United States. Instead, it includes AIAN people who live in telephone exchanges where at least 50 percent of the population was estimated to be AIAN. Some of these telephone exchanges are in reservations, tribal lands, and Alaska Native villages. Others are not. A total of 234 telephone exchanges were found where at least 50 percent of the population was American Indian or Alaska Native. These 234 telephone exchanges were located in the following 16 states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. The survey also used a list-assisted design. Each telephone exchange was split up into banks of 100 numbers. Banks were then selected only if they included at least one listed telephone number. Known business numbers and known nonworking numbers were also removed. Interviewers then called the selected phone numbers and asked to speak to an adult. If no adult was available, the interviewer terminated the call. Once an adult was on the phone, their phone number was verified (to make sure that it had not been misdialed). The interviewer also confirmed that the phone number was for a landline (adults contacted on their cell phones were not eligible to participate). The adult was then asked if this was a private residence (adults who were not in a private residence were not eligible to participate). The interviewer then informed the adult that someone (age 18 or older) in the household needed to be randomly selected. The interviewer asked: "including yourself, how many adults age 18 or older who identify themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native currently live in your household?" When the answers were zero, the adults were asked to verify that they had included themselves in their answers. If it was confirmed that no adults in the household identified themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native, the calls were terminated. <strong>Dataset 3 (Respondent-level Data)</strong>, <strong>Dataset 4 (Perpetrator-level Data)</strong>, and <strong>Dataset 5 (Weights File)</strong> are derivatives of the General Population and American Indian and Alaska Native oversample data. Users should consult the Technical Report to gain a full understanding of how these files were created.
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: General Population Raw Data
DS2: American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Oversample Raw Data
DS3: Respondent-level Data
DS4: Perpetrator-level Data
DS5: Weights File
description: <strong>Dataset 1 (General Population Raw Data)</strong>: Non-institutionalized English and/or Spanish-speaking adults aged 18 or older in the 50 states and District of Columbia. <strong>Dataset 2 (American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Oversample Raw Data)</strong>: Non-institutionalized adult population of the United States with landline telephones whose numbers were in telephone exchanges where at least 50 percent of the population was estimated to be American Indian and Alaska Native. <strong>Dataset 3 (Respondent-level Data)</strong>: Non-institutionalized adult population of the United States with landline telephones whose numbers were in telephone exchanges where at least 50 percent of the population was estimated to be American Indian and Alaska Native and non-institutionalized English and/or Spanish-speaking adults aged 18 or older in the 50 states and District of Columbia. <strong>Dataset 4 (Perpetrator-level Data)</strong>: Non-institutionalized adult population of the United States with landline telephones whose numbers were in telephone exchanges where at least 50 percent of the population was estimated to be American Indian and Alaska Native and non-institutionalized English and/or Spanish-speaking adults aged 18 or older in the 50 states and District of Columbia. <strong>Dataset 5 (Weights File)</strong>: Non-institutionalized adult population of the United States with landline telephones whose numbers were in telephone exchanges where at least 50 percent of the population was estimated to be American Indian and Alaska Native and non-institutionalized English and/or Spanish-speaking adults aged 18 or older in the 50 states and District of Columbia. . Smallest Geographic Unit: state
description: computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI)The NISVS project and data collection was overseen by the Centers for Disease and Prevention (CDC). The overall cost of the NISVS project was a collaboration of CDC, the Department of Defense (DoD) and the National Institute of Justice (NIJ).The CDC 2010 Summary Report presents data from the first
year of data collection in the general population sample. In 2010, NISVS was
also conducted with a separate sample of self-identified American Indian and
Alaska Native (AIAN) people, and a separate random sample of female active duty
military and female spouses of active duty military. While the AIAN data are
available as part of this study, the military sample is not currently
available.For more information about NISVS, a variety of materials are
available on the CDC's
NISVS website. These include the NISVS 2010 Summary Report (Full Report,
Executive Summary, a Fact Sheet, and Expanded State Tables); the NISVS 2010
Report on Intimate Partner Violence (Full Report, Fact Sheet on IPV); and the
NISVS 2010 Findings on Victimization by Sexual Orientation (Full Report, Fact
Sheet). Within these documents you will find Key Findings, Background and
Methods, more detailed findings for specific types of victimization
experiences, Discussion, Implications for Prevention, and helpful
References.Users are strongly encouraged to consult the following
two documents:

(1) Technical Report which provides detailed documentation for Analysis of the
National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey performed by the National
Institute of Justice.


(2) Orientation to Analyzing the NISVS General Population Raw Data data
documentation created by the CDC for use with the General Population Raw Data.
The NISVS General Population raw dataset contains over 26,000 variables, in
part, to accommodate the range of victimization experiences captured in NISVS
(e.g., 60 behaviors across three time frames - lifetime, past 3 years, past 12
months) and by collecting this information by perpetrator. Among the greatest
challenges of analyzing NISVS data is to link all these variables together by
perpetrator such that data elements can be combined in a meaningful way.


Exploration of the raw dataset is recommended to understand the full extent of
these challenges and the complexity of data.
To protect respondent privacy, all perpetrator names and/or initials
have been anonymized as [PERP 01], [PERP 02], etc. For more information,
consult the codebook notes.The NIJ Research Report examines the prevalence
of intimate partner and sexual violence against American Indian and Alaska
Native women and men. For more information and to obtain a copy of the report,
visit the NIJ Director's Corner Web site.