Study1PlosOneIBIPV

Participants were Spanish volunteers recruited in 2018-2019 by announcements in different Spanish education centers (participating universities, vocational training centers and high schools) (opportunity sample). InstrumentsThe <b>Inventory of Beliefs about Intimate Partner Violence </b>(IBIPV, [64]) comprises 22 items rated on a seven-point scale from 1 (<i>totally disagree</i>) to 7 (<i>totally agree</i>) which reflect three dimensions: <i>Justifying Partner Violence </i>(F1-JPV, 6-items, α = .71); <i>Victims Responsible for Violence </i>(F2-VRV, 9-ítems, α = .93); and <i>Abuser Responsible for Violence </i>(F3-ARV, 7-items, α = .84). After reversing the scores of item 3, and the seven items of subscale ARV, so that all 22 items maintain the same sense in the construct, higher scores indicate higher tolerance towards IPVAW (i.e. lower rejection towards IPVAW). The <b>Inventory of Distorted Thoughts about Women and Violence</b> (IPDMV in the Spanish acronym, [57, 58]; adapted version of Ferrer et al. [61]) comprises 24 items related to four dimensions: <i>Inferiority of Women Compared to Men</i> (F1-IW, 7 items, α = .86); <i>Blaming Female Victims of Abuse</i> (F2-BW, 7 items, α = .62); <i>Violence as an Appropriate Problem-solving Strategy </i>(F3-VP, 5 items, : α = .69); and <i>Minimization and Exoneration of the Abuser</i> (F4-MA, 5 items, α = .53). Responses are given in a four-point scale from 1 (<i>totally disagree</i>) to 4 (<i>totally agree</i>), and the higher the scores, the higher the levels of distorted thoughts (i.e. the lower the rejection towards IPVAW). Finally, participants completed a brief questionnaire designed ad hoc, including some sociodemographic data, such as gender and age, and some questions about their previous training in IPVAW.