COUNS-EDU The International Journal of Counseling and Education Vol.4, No.2, 2019, pp. 69-77 p-ISSN: 2548-348X- e-ISSN: 2548-3498 http://journal.konselor.or.id/index.php/counsedu DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190421620 Received on 07/07/2019; Revised on 08/12/2019; Accepted on 09/11/2019; Published on: 10/08/2019 69 Psychological Well-Being of Youth Inventory on Domestic Violence Victims: Rasch Model Analysis * ) Corresponding author, e-mail: rima@konselor.org Abstract Domestic violence is a long-standing phenomenon in society with physical and psychological impacts on the victims, witnesses and observers. This research, therefore designed an instrument to examine the psychological well-being of adolescents living with parents experiencing domestic violence. The instrument designed, was tested with 30 students of the vocational high school in Padang City, and analyzed using rasch models. The test results describe that the instrument is feasibility utilized to measure the psychological well-being of adolescents living with domestic violence victims with a reliability value of 0.89 and 0.91 for individuals. Keywords: Psychological well-being, domestic violence, rasch model, youth How to Cite: Fadli, R. P., Alizamar, A., Afdal, A., & Ifdil, I. (2019). Psychological Well Being Youth Inventory for Domestic Violance Victims: Rasch Model Analysis. COUNS-EDU: The International Journal of Counseling and Education, 4(2), 69-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190421620 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. ©2019 by author. Introduction Family is the smallest social miniature in a community which comprises of adults, adolescents and children with each responsible of the well-being of the other (Kurniawan, 2015; Tutwiler, 2017). Its problems are quite worrisome to the community (Afdal, 2015; Berg, Kiviruusu, Karvonen, Rahkonen, & Huurre, 2017; Tseng & Hsu, 2018). The most rife phenomenon is the discovery of cases of violence (Herzberger, 2019; Roberson & Wallace, 2016), carried out against wives (women) and their children (Anjani, 2016; Borneo, 2016; Merung, 2016; Rasool, 2016; Utama Hs, 2017). This does not only affect the perpetrators (Cantos, Goldstein, Brenner, O’Leary, & Verborg, 2015; Mcmurran & Gilchrist, 2008; Ulloa & Hammett, 2016) but also victims, witnesses and observers (Kimball, 2016; Mardiyati, 2015; Montgomery, Just-Østergaard, & Jervelund, 2019; Novianti, 2008; Ulloa & Hammett, 2016; Van der Kolk, 2017). Domestic violence on victims, especially family members, has a profound physical and psychological impact (Afdal, 2015). According to the 2017 Women’s Commission data in Indonesian, domestic violence/ personal relations, and violence against wives was ranked first with over 5,784 cases, which was followed by 2,171 courtship violence cases, 1,799 cases of violence against girls and the remaining were attributed to ex- husband, ex-boyfriend, and against domestic workers (Azriana, Chuzaifah, Y., Nurherwati, S., Indraswari, & Amiruddin, 2017). Similarly, a report from the electronic media Antara Sumbar in 2018 reported that violence against women in the city of Padang was predominately domestic (Nasution, 2018) with 73 cases in 2017 (Utama Hs, 2017). Reports from the West Sumatra News electronic media which were also reported by the Rima Pratiwi Fadli 1*) , Alizamar Alizamar 2 , Afdal Afdal 3 , Ifdil Ifdil 4 1234 Universitas Negeri Padang, Indonesia http://dx.doi.org/10.23916/0020190421620 COUNS-EDU  Vol.4, No.2, 2019 Available online: http://journal.konselor.or.id/index.php/counsedu Fadli, R. P. et al Psychological Well-Being of Youth Inventory on Domestic Violence Victims: Rasch Model Analysis| 70 Indonesian Counselor Association (IKI) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190421620 Chairperson of the Padang Pariaman Family Welfare Consultation Institution (Lembaga Konsultasi Kesejahteraan Keluarga/LK3), stated that family issues were related to domestic violence (Redaksi, 2018). Domestic violence affects both victims and perpetrators (Espinoza & Warner, 2016). Its impact comprises of direct victims, and witnesses such as parents (Callaghan, Alexander, Sixsmith, & Fellin, 2018). Its various forms on children in the household include physical, psychological, sexual and social violence, which means that its greatly affects them in the family (Cook et al., 2017; Katz, 2016; Kimball, 2016). Kondisi psikologis anak yang tinggal dengan orang tua KDRT Seringkali mendapatkan stresor dari kondisi keluarga (Perkins, Wood, Varjas, & Vanegas, 2016). Such conditions are also influenced by other factors which triggers the emergence and symptoms of stress in individuals (Alizamar et al., 2018). Stress tends to arise due to pressure or tension which comes from dissonance between a person and the surrounding environment (Zola, Fadli, & Ifdil, 2018). The impact of domestic violence on children both physically and psychologically includes wounds, bruises, lumps, ashamed of meeting other people, alienating themselves from the environment, and the loss of relations such as its perpetrators and victims (Anggraeni, 2013). In addition, children living with violent parents have psychological problems (Anderson & Saunders, 2003; Callahan, Tolman, & Saunders, 2003; Ham-Rowbottom, Gordon, Jarvis, & Novaco, 2005; Tolman & Rosen, 2001; Victor, Grogan-Kaylor, Ryan, Perron, & Gilbert, 2018) and tent to be always unhappy. The research findings also explain that they experience psychological trauma (Mardiyati, 2015). According to Hupper, psychological well-being is showed to have a well-functioning state of life which is a combination of feelings and proper self-functioning (Megawati & Megawati, 2015). However, the psychological well-being of adolescents living with domestic violent parents, are yet to be identified. The existing instruments are related to the measurement of Psychological Well-Being of students (children and adolescents) with reading difficulty(Lindeblad, Svensson, & Gustafson, 2016) using an instrument known as the Back Youth Inventory. Furthermore, other existing instruments related to victims of domestic violence measures the comparison of socio-economic status, social support, mental status of women victims using domestic violance inventory (Vameghi, Akbari, Majd, Sajedi, & Sajjadi, 2018). Studies related to this topic uses its inventory (Avdibegovic, Brkic, & Sinanovic, 2017; Cunha & Goncalves, 2016; White & Satyen, 2015) with no instruments measuring the psychological well condition of adolescents living with domestic violence parents. Based on this, it is necessary to have a measurement instrument to identify the condition of the psychological well-being of respondents, such as children. Therefore, this article discusses the instruments for measuring the psychological well-being of adolescents experiencing domestic violence. Method This instrument measures the condition and psychological well-being of adolescents with a specific population experiencing domestic violence. This instrument was developed using the theory of psychological well-being based on the following self-acceptance, positive relations with others, environmental mastery, purpose in life, personal growth and autonomy (López-Torres Hidalgo et al., 2010; Ryff, 1984; Ryff & Singer, 2008). This instrument contains measurements of the psychological well- being and condition of adolescents living domestic violent parents. This instrument consists of a total of 50 items which were all positive statements, analyzed using the Rasch model. However 8 items were not utilized, therefore, only 42 items with a reliability value of 0.89 and 0.91 for a person. The sampling were 30 students (17 girls and 13 boys) chosen based on the criterium questionare of domestic violance victims. The data is accessible at osf.io/mv6e8. Results and Discussion Validity The validity of an instrument means the extent to which it is measured . Hence, the validity of this instrument examines the extent to which it measures the psychological well-being of adolescents. its analysis uses a PCA (Principal Component Analysis) of residuals which analyzes the extent to which the diversity of instruments should be measured. PCA analysis has two parameters, the first is the total raw variance in observation value (<20%) with both consisting of total raw unexplained variance values (<15%) (Linacre, 2011). This is detailed in table 1. COUNS-EDU  The International Journal of Counseling and Education Vol.4, No.2, 2019 Psychological Well-Being of Youth Inventory on Domestic Violence Victims: Rasch Model Analysis| 71 Indonesian Counselor Association (IKI) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190421620 Table 1. Standardized Residual variance in Eigenvalue units = Item information units Eigenvalue Observed Expected Total raw variance in observations = 76.9101 100.0% 100.0% Raw variance explained by measures = 26.9101 35.0% 35.7% Raw variance explained by persons = 7.2747 9.5% 9.6% Raw Variance explained by items = 19.6353 25.5% 26.0% Raw unexplained variance (total) = 50.0000 65.0% 100.0% 64.3% Unexplned variance in 1st contrast = 6.7363 8.8% 13.5% Unexplned variance in 2nd contrast = 5.1573 6.7% 10.3% Unexplned variance in 3rd contrast = 4.4602 5.8% 8.9% Unexplned variance in 4th contrast = 4.1814 5.4% 8.4% Unexplned variance in 5th contrast = 3.4074 4.4% 6.8% Based on Table 1, it is seen that the total raw variance result is 35.0% which is not much different from the expected value of 35.7%. This shows that the minimum unidimensional requirement of 20% has been fulfilled based on criteria (Linacre, 2011). The results of the unexplained variance of all (1st to 5th) are below 15% which shows that the level of independence of items in the instrument is good. Therefore, this result states that the unidimensional requirements which illustrates what this instrument measured, such as the Psychological Well-Being of adolescents living with violent parents are measured. Item Validity The measure item reveals a statistical fit, with the parameters used to show the match between infit and outfit from the mean square using a middle squared value of 1.0 or the ideal range 0.5> MNSQ<1.5, Z-standardized values with a square value of 0.0 or with an ideal range of -2.0> ZSTD<+2.0 (Bond, Fox, & Lacey, 2007; Boone, Staver, & Yale, 2013; Sumintono & Widhiarso, 2015) and Point Measure Correlation (Pt Mean Corr) with a value range of 0.4 | 3 + | | | T| P P | 2 P + 18 L P S| P P P | L P P P |T 7 L L P P P | 47 M| 1 L P P P + 32 L P | 17 P P P S|S 3 9 | 15 23 30 4 48 49 P | 12 2 20 39 43 46 6 P | 16 19 22 38 0 P T+M 10 13 14 21 31 41 P | 25 34 35 45 5 | 42 | 33 40 |S 36 | 24 27 28 37 44 50 -1 + 1 11 8 | 29 | |T 26 | | -2 + | Figure 1. Person Map Based on Figure 1, the first left wright map shows that there are three students (women) with higher level of ability (more than +2 logit). While the lowest level of respondent's ability is below 0 logit which shows that their respondent's ability to answer questions is high. Secondly, on the right wright map explains the distribution of item logit values, with item 18 having the highest difficulty level (+2.04 logit), conducted by 3 students with the above ability (+2 logit) which means that students have the probability to work on this problem correctly. Meanwhile, item number 26 is a problem that almost all students tend to carry out correctly, a low logit value (-1.49 logit) or means that the question is too easy compared to the respondent's ability. It quotes that students have goals in life. Thirdly, comparing the distance between M- S-T (mean, 1SD and 2SD) in the variable maps above shows that on the left side of the map the distribution of students' ability is smaller than the level of item effectiveness on the right. In this context a person’s ability shows little diversity compared to items. This means that the level of ability of respondents in working on instruments is high, which means that the instrument tends to measure the ability high, medium and low respondents. In conclusion, based on the results of misfit items and a person’s ability, 8 items were aborted, namely 7, 11, 13, 15, 17.26, 29 and 46. Reliability Reliability means the consistency or stability of a measurement instrument. The information on the reliability of people and items is seen in the summary statistics in table 3. COUNS-EDU  Vol.4, No.2, 2019 Available online: http://journal.konselor.or.id/index.php/counsedu Fadli, R. P. et al Psychological Well-Being of Youth Inventory on Domestic Violence Victims: Rasch Model Analysis| 74 Indonesian Counselor Association (IKI) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190421620 Table 3. Summary of 30 Measured Person ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | TOTAL MODEL INFIT OUTFIT | | SCORE COUNT MEASURE S.E. MNSQ ZSTD MNSQ ZSTD | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | MEAN 191.1 50.0 1.20 .19 1.04 -.1 1.00 -.3 | | P.SD 18.6 .0 .61 .01 .49 2.3 .45 2.2 | | S.SD 18.9 .0 .62 .01 .50 2.4 .46 2.3 | | MAX. 219.0 50.0 2.23 .22 2.33 5.1 2.14 4.6 | | MIN. 145.0 50.0 -.21 .17 .35 -4.6 .34 -4.7 | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | REAL RMSE .21 TRUE SD .57 SEPARATION 2.78 Person RELIABILITY .89 | |MODEL RMSE .19 TRUE SD .58 SEPARATION 3.10 Person RELIABILITY .91 | | S.E. OF Person MEAN = .11 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Person RAW SCORE-TO-MEASURE CORRELATION = 1.00 CRONBACH ALPHA (KR-20) Person RAW SCORE "TEST" RELIABILITY = .91 SEM = 5.47 Table 4. Summary of 50 Measured Item ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | TOTAL MODEL INFIT OUTFIT | | SCORE COUNT MEASURE S.E. MNSQ ZSTD MNSQ ZSTD | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | MEAN 114.7 30.0 .00 .24 .98 -.2 1.00 -.1 | | P.SD 12.9 .0 .72 .02 .39 1.5 .39 1.5 | | S.SD 13.0 .0 .72 .02 .40 1.5 .40 1.5 | | MAX. 137.0 30.0 2.04 .32 2.00 3.3 2.07 3.5 | | MIN. 73.0 30.0 -1.49 .21 .41 -2.8 .45 -2.5 | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | REAL RMSE .26 TRUE SD .67 SEPARATION 2.58 Item RELIABILITY .87 | |MODEL RMSE .24 TRUE SD .67 SEPARATION 2.78 Item RELIABILITY .89 | | S.E. OF Item MEAN = .10 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Item RAW SCORE-TO-MEASURE CORRELATION = -.99 The table 3 can be simplified as shown in table 5. Table 5. Summary Statistics Measured Person and Item Summary Statistics Measured Measure MNSQ Reliabilit y Cronbach Alpha (KR-20) INFIT OUTFIT Measured Person 1.20 1.04 1.00 .91 .91 Measured Item .00 .98 1.00 .89 Table 4 shows that the mean values of 30 and 50 people are 1.20 and .00 respectively, which is above the mean item. Furthermore, their reliability scores are .91 and.9, which shows that the quality of the answers provided by the respondent is excellent and the quality of the items used in the measurement is also good. The cronbach alpha value (KR-20) is .91 which indicates that the interaction between people and item is good. Besides that, the sensitivity value of people + 1.04 logit (INFIT MNSQ) answer pattern and the sensitivity value is +1.00 logit (MNSQ OUTFIT). While the item has a +.98 logit (INFIT MNSQ) sensitivity value with an overall value of +1.00 logit (MNSQ OUTFIT) which indicate that it is still in the COUNS-EDU  The International Journal of Counseling and Education Vol.4, No.2, 2019 Psychological Well-Being of Youth Inventory on Domestic Violence Victims: Rasch Model Analysis| 75 Indonesian Counselor Association (IKI) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190421620 ideal range (+0.5> MNSQ<+1.5) (Sumintono & Widhiarso, 2015). This shows that the items have a very good quality for the conditions of measurement performed (Bond & Christine M. Fox, 2015; Boone et al., 2013; Sumintono & Wahyu Widhiarso, 2015) which indicates that 30 people are serious in working on the instrument. Conclusions This instrument meets the validity and reliability requirements of, both item and individuals. A total of 8 items were considered misfit while 7, 11, 13, 15, 17.26, 29 and 46 were utilized. Acknowledgments I wish to express my gratitude to the school counselor and the headmaster for their assistance in carrying out and testing the research instrument. Special thanks to the vocational high school students in Padang City for their time and support. References Afdal, A. (2015). Pemanfaatan Konseling Keluarga Eksperensial untuk Penyelesaian Kasus Kekerasan dalam Rumah Tangga. Jurnal EDUCATIO: Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia, 1(1). Alizamar, A., Ifdil, I., Fadli, R. P., Erwinda, L., Zola, N., Churnia, E., … Rangka, I. B. (2018). The Effectiveness of Hypnotherapy in Reducing Stress Levels. Addictive Disorders & Their Treatment, 17(4), 191–195. Anderson, D. K., & Saunders, D. G. (2003). Leaving an abusive partner: An empirical review of predictors, the process of leaving, and psychological well-being. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 4(2), 163– 191. Anggraeni, R. D. (2013). Dampak Kekerasan Anak Dalam Rumah Tangga. Artikel Ilmiah Hasil Penelitian Mahasiswa, 1(1). Anjani, S. D. (2016). Penegakan hukum tindak pidana kekerasan dalam rumah tangga dengan menggunakan konsep hukum progresif (studi kasus pada Polsek Natar). Universitas Lampung. Avdibegovic, E., Brkic, M., & Sinanovic, O. (2017). Emotional profile of women victims of domestic violence. Materia Socio-Medica, 29(2), 109. Azriana, Chuzaifah, Y., Nurherwati, S., Indraswari, & Amiruddin, M. (2017). Lembar fakta catatan tahunan (catahu) 2016: Kekerasan terhadap perempuan meluas: Mendesak negara hadir hentikan kekerasan terhadap perempuan di ranah domestik, komunitas dan negara. Jakarta. Berg, N., Kiviruusu, O., Karvonen, S., Rahkonen, O., & Huurre, T. (2017). Pathways from problems in adolescent family relationships to midlife mental health via early adulthood disadvantages–a 26-year longitudinal study. PloS One, 12(5), e0178136. Bond, T. G., & Christine M. Fox. (2015). Applying the Rasch Model Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences Third Edition. New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. Bond, T. G., Fox, C. M., & Lacey, H. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement. In the Social Sciences (2nd. Citeseer. Boone, W. J., Staver, J. R., & Yale, M. S. (2013). Rasch analysis in the human sciences. Springer. Borneo, J. (2016). Analisis kriminologi terhadap kekerasan dalam rumah tangga di kecamatan Pontianak Utara. Jurnal Hukum Prodi Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Untan (Jurnal Mahasiswa S1 Fakultas Hukum) Universitas Tanjungpura, 4(3). Callaghan, J. E. M., Alexander, J. H., Sixsmith, J., & Fellin, L. C. (2018). Beyond “witnessing”: Children’s experiences of coercive control in domestic violence and abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 33(10), 1551–1581. Callahan, M. R., Tolman, R. M., & Saunders, D. G. (2003). Adolescent dating violence victimization and psychological well-being. Journal of Adolescent Research, 18(6), 664–681. Cantos, A. L., Goldstein, D. A., Brenner, L., O’Leary, K. D., & Verborg, R. (2015). Correlates and program completion of family only and generally violent perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Behavioral Psychology/Psicologia Conductual, 23(3). Cook, A., Spinazzola, J., Ford, J., Lanktree, C., Blaustein, M., Cloitre, M., … Liautaud, J. (2017). COUNS-EDU  Vol.4, No.2, 2019 Available online: http://journal.konselor.or.id/index.php/counsedu Fadli, R. P. et al Psychological Well-Being of Youth Inventory on Domestic Violence Victims: Rasch Model Analysis| 76 Indonesian Counselor Association (IKI) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190421620 Complex trauma in children and adolescents. Psychiatric Annals, 35(5), 390–398. Cunha, O. S., & Goncalves, R. A. (2016). Severe and less severe intimate partner violence: From characterization to prediction. Violence and Victims, 31(2), 235–250. Espinoza, R. C., & Warner, D. (2016). Where do we go from here?: Examining intimate partner violence by bringing male victims, female perpetrators, and psychological sciences into the fold. Journal of Family Violence, 31(8), 959–966. Ham-Rowbottom, K. A., Gordon, E. E., Jarvis, K. L., & Novaco, R. W. (2005). Life constraints and psychological well-being of domestic violence shelter graduates. Journal of Family Violence, 20(2), 109– 121. Herzberger, S. D. (2019). Violence within the family: Social psychological perspectives. Routledge. Katz, E. (2016). Beyond the physical incident model: How children living with domestic violence are harmed by and resist regimes of coercive control. Child Abuse Review, 25(1), 46–59. Kimball, E. (2016). Edleson revisited: Reviewing children’s witnessing of domestic violence 15 years later. Journal of Family Violence, 31(5), 625–637. Kurniawan, M. I. (2015). Tri Pusat Pendidikan Sebagai Sarana Pendidikan Karakter Anak Sekolah Dasar. PEDAGOGIA: Jurnal Pendidikan, 4(1), 41–49. Linacre, J. M. (2011). A user’s guide to Winsteps-Ministep: rasch-model computer programs. Chicago, IL: Winsteps.com. Lindeblad, E., Svensson, I., & Gustafson, S. (2016). Self-concepts and psychological well-being assessed by Beck Youth Inventory among pupils with reading difficulties. Reading Psychology, 37(3), 449–469. López-Torres Hidalgo, J., Bravo, B. N., Martínez, I. P., Pretel, F. A., Postigo, J. M. L., & Rabadán, F. E. (2010). Psychological Well-Being, Assessment Tools and Related Factors. Psychological Well-Being (Edited by Ingrid E. Wells). Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers, 77–113. Mardiyati, I. (2015). Dampak Trauma Kekerasan Dalam Rumah Tangga Terhadap Perkembangan Psikis Anak. Raheema, 2(1). Mcmurran, M., & Gilchrist, E. (2008). Anger control and alcohol use: Appropriate interventions for perpetrators of domestic violence? Psychology, Crime & Law, 14(2), 107–116. Megawati, E., & Megawati, E. (2015). Hubungan antara perilaku prososial dengan psychological well-being pada remaja. Universitas Udayana. Merung, P. V. (2016). Kajian Kriminologi Terhadap Upaya Penanganan Kasus Kekerasan Dalam Rumah Tangga (KDRT) Di Indonesia. Veritas et Justitia, 2(2), 397–423. Montgomery, E., Just-Østergaard, E., & Jervelund, S. S. (2019). Transmitting trauma: a systematic review of the risk of child abuse perpetrated by parents exposed to traumatic events. International Journal of Public Health, 64(2), 241–251. Nasution, M. S. (2018, March 8). Kekerasan terhadap perempuan di Padang didominasi KDRT. Antara Sumbar. Novianti, I. (2008). Fenomena kekerasan di lingkungan pendidikan. Insania, 13(2), 324–338. Perkins, C., Wood, L., Varjas, K., & Vanegas, G. (2016). Psychological well-being of children and youth in Mexico. In International Handbook of Psychological Well-Being in Children and Adolescents (pp. 115– 135). Springer. Rasool, S. (2016). Help-seeking after domestic violence: the critical role of children. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31(9), 1661–1686. Redaksi. (2018). Banyaknya Permasalahan Keluarga Membuat LK3 Padang Pariaman Prihatin. Berita Sumbar. Retrieved from http://beritasumbar.com/banyaknya-permasalahan-keluarga-membuat-lk3- padang-pariaman-prihatin/ Roberson, C., & Wallace, P. H. (2016). Family violence: Legal, medical, and social perspectives. Routledge. Ryff, C. D. (1984). Personality development from the inside: The subjective experience of change in adulthood and aging. Life-Span Development and Behavior, 6, 243–279. Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. H. (2008). Know thyself and become what you are: A eudaimonic approach to psychological well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 9(1), 13–39. Sumintono, B., & Wahyu Widhiarso. (2015). Aplikasi Pemodelan Rasch pada Assesment Pendidikan. Cimahi: Trim Komunikata Publishing House. Sumintono, B., & Widhiarso, W. (2015). Aplikasi pemodelan rasch pada assessment pendidikan. Trim Komunikata. Tolman, R. M., & Rosen, D. (2001). Domestic violence in the lives of women receiving welfare: Mental COUNS-EDU  The International Journal of Counseling and Education Vol.4, No.2, 2019 Psychological Well-Being of Youth Inventory on Domestic Violence Victims: Rasch Model Analysis| 77 Indonesian Counselor Association (IKI) | DOI: https://doi.org/10.23916/0020190421620 health, substance dependence, and economic well-being. Violence against Women, 7(2), 141–158. Tseng, W.-S., & Hsu, J. (2018). Culture and family: Problems and therapy. Routledge. Tutwiler, S. J. W. (2017). Teachers as collaborative partners: Working with diverse families and communities. Routledge. Ulloa, E. C., & Hammett, J. F. (2016). The effect of gender and perpetrator–victim role on mental health outcomes and risk behaviors associated with intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31(7), 1184–1207. Utama Hs, A. (2017). Hak-hak istri siri yang mengalami kekerasan dalam rumah tangga (KDRT) perspektif Undang-Undang No 23 Tahun 2004 Tentang Penghapusan Kekerasan Dalam Rumah Tangga (UU PKDRT). UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya. Vameghi, R., Akbari, S. A. A., Majd, H. A., Sajedi, F., & Sajjadi, H. (2018). The comparison of socioeconomic status, perceived social support and mental status in women of reproductive age experiencing and not experiencing domestic violence in Iran. Journal of Injury and Violence Research, 10(1), 35. Van der Kolk, B. A. (2017). Developmental trauma disorder: toward a rational diagnosis for children with complex trauma histories. Psychiatric Annals, 35(5), 401–408. Victor, B. G., Grogan-Kaylor, A., Ryan, J. P., Perron, B. E., & Gilbert, T. T. (2018). Domestic violence, parental substance misuse and the decision to substantiate child maltreatment. Child Abuse & Neglect, 79, 31–41. White, M. E., & Satyen, L. (2015). Cross-cultural differences in intimate partner violence and depression: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 24, 120–130. Zola, N., Fadli, R. P., & Ifdil, I. (2018). Chromotherapy to reducing stress. OSF Preprints, 26.