IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/koc/wpaper/2120.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does Education Really Cause Domestic Violence? Revisiting the Turkish Data

Author

Listed:
  • Pelin Akyol

    (Department of Economics, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey)

  • Murat Guray Kirdar

    (Department of Economics, Boğaziçi University, Bebek, Istanbul, Turkey)

Abstract

Using the 2008 Turkish National Survey of Domestic Violence against Women (NSDVW) and the 1997 compulsory schooling policy as an instrument for schooling, Erten and Keskin (2018, henceforth EK), published in AEJ–Applied Economics, find that women’s education increases the psychological violence and financial control behavior that they face from their partners. The authors also claim that the incidence of financial control behavior rises because women become more likely to be employed—supporting the instrumental violence hypothesis. They present this evidence only for women who live in what they call “rural areas during childhood”. We first show that the evidence EK provide—which exists only for childhood rural areas—is a result of their misclassification of the rural areas variable. We show that once this variable is defined properly, the evidence for their findings vanishes. Second, ignoring the misclassification of the rural status variable, we demonstrate a number of serious flaws in their empirical analysis: (i) selection bias resulting from the policy altering the composition of women in their sample, (ii) failure of the main identification assumption of RDD for some key outcomes, (iii) failure of the exclusion restriction assumption, (iv) inconsistency in the definition of employment variable across men and women (and a problematic definition of employment of women), (v) elementary mistakes in data cleaning, RDD estimation, and interpretation of the estimates. In addition, the evidence for urban areas contradicts the hypothesis they claim to hold for rural areas. Then, we examine the policy effect on domestic violence outcomes using both 2008 and 2014 TNSDVW datasets. We find null policy effects on psychological violence and almost null effects on women’s employment, and positive but statistically insignificant effects on partners’ financial control behavior. Hence, our findings do not support the instrumental violence hypothesis, and this holds true for the rural sample as well. The only robust evidence the data provide is that the policy reduces physical violence for women with rural childhood residence.

Suggested Citation

  • Pelin Akyol & Murat Guray Kirdar, 2021. "Does Education Really Cause Domestic Violence? Revisiting the Turkish Data," Koç University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum Working Papers 2120, Koc University-TUSIAD Economic Research Forum.
  • Handle: RePEc:koc:wpaper:2120
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://eaf.ku.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/erf_wp_2120.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Intimate partner violence; education; compulsory schooling; psychological violence; financial control behavior; women’s employment.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I28 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Government Policy
    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination
    • J24 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Human Capital; Skills; Occupational Choice; Labor Productivity
    • O15 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Economic Development: Human Resources; Human Development; Income Distribution; Migration
    • O18 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Urban, Rural, Regional, and Transportation Analysis; Housing; Infrastructure

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:koc:wpaper:2120. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dekoctr.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sumru Oz (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dekoctr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.