Introduction
This study is to focus on the attitudes of the community towards violence against women, this study introduce: * the origin of domestic violence, * the definition of domestic violence against women, * how it affects the society, * forms of domestic violence , * the cause of domestic violence *
A Review of Literature is to emphasize on the importance of the attitudes of the community towards the topic, the determinant, the suggested improvements and the limitations. This study will also conclude what is to be done to improve the attitudes of the community.

Personal experiences and perspective
The concern of this topic has sparked my interests as a Marketing student due to the recent reports of inhuman violent acts against women in India that has raised commotion all over the country, however this report is not pin-pointing at any countries, but as a general subject.

You need also to link your topic and your personal experience to the theoretical perspectives (epistemologies and paradigms) that were discussed in class.

Domestic Violence against Women
The status of women has been seen as unequal to the status of men in terms of authority, opportunity as well as independence. Although the society has reached a tremendous change from degradation (1990s) to a position of equality (2000s), Violence against women which is defined as “an act of gender-based violence that results in, physical, sexual or psychological harm, or suffering to women including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty; whether occurring in public or private life” by The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (UN General Assembly 1993) is still seen as a common public problem across the globe.

(Michael A. Koenig, Rob Stephenson, Saifuddin Ahmed, Shireen J. Jejeebhoy, Jacquelyn Campbell Am J Public Health. 2006 January) “women are vulnerable to many forms of violence, and domestic violence represents the most common form.” (Isabel Ruiz‐Pérez, Juncal Plazaola‐Castaño, Carmen Vives‐Cases ,J Epidemiol Community Health. 2007 December) supports this statement by implying “World Health Organization (WHO) and shows that the most common type of violence against women is that which carried out by their partner”
Through findings, it has shown the most common form of Violence against Women is Domestic Violence (physical or mental assault of women by their male partners),
Although there is a gradual improvements in women’s status within the last decade, due to Women’s activism in various parts of the world that has increased the community’s awareness of Domestic Violence as a social problem, however, Domestic violence against women is receiving little attention as a social or health issue in the world.

Domestic violence takes a number of forms. The most common forms of Domestic Violence are physical and sexual violence, threats and intimidation, psychological and social abuse and economic deprivation. It is a profound health problem for women, however it is not considered as a serious problem of public concern.

Research shows that domestic violence has attracted attention for the public as series of unpleasant episodes are occur, for example, loss of life and threat to life in several parts of India. “There were several cases of women who were ill treated, tortured and even murdered for not meeting the demands of so called – head of the family” (A Situational Analysis of Domestic Violence Against Women in Kerala, September, 2005) supported the statement.

Domestic Violence is also an important cause of morbidity from multiple mental,physical, sexual and health outcomes, and it is also linked with known risk factors for poor health, such as alcohol and drug use, smoking and unsafe sex. ( Garcia Moreno & Watts, 2011)
Children who witness domestic violence exhibit problems in their social and emotional adjustment (Lavendosky & Graham-Bermann,2001) agrees with Koenig (2006) that with the witnessing of violence between parents as a child emerging as a strong predictor of subsequent domestic violence.

Literature Review

Existing research on domestic violence against women has been reviewed, and reveals a notable lack of attention to state improvements of the attitudes of the community towards domestic violence.
Importance of the attitudes of community towards Domestic Violence against Women
To improve understanding of the determinant of the attitudes towards domestic violence in order to aid the development of violence prevention effort, Studies have been conducted to highlight the importance of attitudes from both a policy and research perspective. Meyering (2011) emphasized that “at a policy level, as they affect the prevalence and impact of domestic violence. Attitudes are linked to the perpetration of violence, with those holding violence-supportive attitudes more likely to become offenders themselves”. Meyering (2011) further added on that “Attitudes also influence the responses of victims and the community to violence. They affect the ability of women to disclose violence and seek help; the decisions of bystanders to intervene; and the willingness of the community to hold men accountable.”
Determinant of community attitudes towards Domestic Violence against Women
According to Flood and Pease (2009), “Two clusters of factors, associated with gender and culture, have an influence at multiple levels of the social order on attitudes regarding violence.” Supports that gender is a consistent predictor of attitudes that support use of violence against women. They also discuss the so-called ‘gender gap’ in attitudes towards domestic violence, citing both Australian and international studies in which men and women were found to differ significantly in their beliefs and values. These studies collectively show that men are more likely than women to adhere to common myths about violence against women, consider a smaller range of behaviors as violent, express victim-blaming attitudes , downplay the harm caused by violence and its seriousness.
For example, Koenig (2003) has conducted a analytical data on men’s and women’s views about circumstances in which beating of the female partner would be justified; “For almost all behaviors cited, a higher percentage of women than men believed beating to be justifiable; 16% of men and 28% of women believed beatings to be justifiable when a woman refused to have sex with her partner, and 22% of men and 27% of women when a woman adopted contraception without the permission of her partner. Attitudes towards infidelity by the female partner were at the other extreme: 60 % of men and a striking 87% of women believed that beating was justified if the woman was unfaithful.”
To support that gender plays a big part in the attitudes, Men in the study according to the National Community Attitudes to Violence against Women Survey 2009, identified a narrower spectrum of behaviors as domestic violence and were less likely to regard them as serious. They were more accepting of excuses for violence and less prepared to intervene in a domestic violence situation. (AIC,SRC&VicHealth 2009)
Hence, the sources shows a common link in that men in general have the higher tendency towards violence than women.
There are other factors such as culture, individual, organisational, community and societal factors that are determinants of attitudes.

Improvements of community attitudes towards domestic Violence against Women
There is many things that the community can do as a whole to improve the standards of this women, Hollander (2006) suggests that improvements in individuals’ education or socioeconomic status, the investigators conclude, may help to lower the risk of physical violence toward women; however he contradicts that the same assumption cannot be made with respect to sexual violence within marriage. Koenig (2006) agrees that at the individual level, through research, the results indicate that although improvements in education or household socioeconomic status may lead to significantly lower risks of physical violence among women, the same cannot be assumed with respect to sexual violence within marriage. This two sources has a common ground where they concluded that women tend to be helpless to protect themselves from sexual violence when they are married. To argue the above conclusions, Hollander’s(2006) regression analysis shows that the most highly educated men had an increased likelihood of having sexually coerced their wives in a particular year, and there was so association with wives’ level of education. Household asset index scores were not significant, but economic pressure was predictive of sexual coercion. To add on, he included that childlessness , a history of extramarital relationships and exposure to domestic violence as a child were positively associated with sexual coercion. In another words, his opinons were that improvements in community socioeconomic development levels alone will not sufficient to reduce the risk of domestic violence, rather according to other researchers, like Koenig (2006), suggested that to improve the attitudes for both men and women, findings pointed that interventions for both men and women that challenge and attenuate the normative underpinnings condonning wife beating or decrease broader levels of violent crime may represent important steps toward reducing levels of within-marriage physical and sexual violence in such settings.
Limitations
While assessing the problem, past researchers has common limitations when conducting the research using qualitative methods, for example, Ruiz-Perez, Plazaola-Castano and Vives-Cases (2007) complains that obtaining reliable data on this type of violence is a complex task, not just because of the problems of defining the term as described above, but also because of the methodological issues derived from the very nature of the phenomenon(domestic violence against women), such as the intimate context in which this violence takes place, which means the problem cannot be directly observed.Taboos, fear and feelings of guilt and shame also account for a high rate of non responses and of hiding the truth. Another limitation that they had pointed out is that the selection process of candidates of the questionnaires (to research about their attitudes towards acts of violence at home) might cause significant bias because these women may not, in terms of the violence they are undergoing, be representative of the group of women who decide not to seek help. Koenig (2006) agrees that his concern of the Rakai Survey that he has conducted, is the possible under-reporting of violence by participants or respondents, given the culturally sensitive nature of this behavior and the possible reluctance of many participants or respondents to acknowledge its occurrence.
Sunny (2005) compains that despite efforts to gather the data depicted that to depict the true scenario of the victims, it was difficult for the beneficiaries to respond to the queries, and it was a major constraint. For instance, the agencies that her research team had approached were very reluctant to provide the addresses of the victims due to the sensitivity and confidentiality of the issue. Moreover, the unwillingness of several respondents to disclose their experience for fear of their husbands had resulted in repeated visits to these families. Distance and the prolonged interviews played a part of the limitations as well.

Hypothesis
The aim of this report is to understand how to improve the community attitudes towards Domestic Violence against Women.

Although broad community education campaigns have started to have impact in raising people’s awareness of domestic violence issues and services. There is a need to further influence community attitudes on domestic violence, to assist more women to more easily identify domestic violence situations, to encourage them to take action at an earlier stage in the abusive relationship and to improve the response of the general community to the issue. Marketing campaigns create awareness around the world such as The Council of Europe Campaign, Singapore’s We Can! (AWARE – Association of Women for Action and Research, 2013) campaign, serves to raise awareness on domestic violence through volunteers, and through workshops or activities.
However through my findings and research of this topic, 8 out of 10 persons will not intervene if they know that a friend, relative or neighbour is being abused by a partner (AWARE Survey 2012).
The main reason for their inaction is they have no idea how to help, through experience, it is due to fears of breaking up victims family or afraid that they will get into trouble such as the fear of the abuser’ reaction which will affect the victim, the other reason is the selfish feeling that it is none of their business.
To improve the attitudes of the community, the effects of domestic violence should also be conveyed to them, such as trauma, medical burden due to physical injuries, social problems (example, unable to leave the house due to physical injuries), HIV (due to sexual coercion), worst case scenario is that It will also lead to murder. Further studies shows that it is possible that women might murder their husband due to the consecutive abuse inflicted on them.
Therefore, it is important to solve and to improve the community attitudes towards this social issue.

Methodology

To test my hypothesis, both quantitative and qualitative methods were within my considerations of this proposal, as quantitative methods are able to test out the public or community knowledge and if they are able to identify the definition of domestic violence against women. Quantitative methods can also be used to compare things, such as the results of community programs, or the attitudes about a community issue. It is fair in a way that all respondents are subjected to exactly the same tests or to the same questions. However, quantitative methods are unable to go in depth to understand this topic in order to improve the community’s attitudes and to create awareness. Therefore, it needs to work together with qualitative methods, which on the other hand are helpful for assessing community needs, designing prevention campaigns (effective for an activist), planning and evaluating interventions, and engaging community actors via participatory research.
Quantitative methods were used previously by United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women argued that population – based or household surveys that ask women about their experiences of violence are considered the most reliable method for obtaining information on violence against women in a general population. Population-based surveys use randomly selected samples and their results are therefore representative of the larger population. However, as domestic violence is a relatively sensitive topic to reveal to strangers (interviewers) mentioned in the literature review, it has come to my concern that qualitative methods are more suitable for such a situation.

Qualitative Research methods
Qualitative research methods generate data that are embedded in their context and are non-numerical. Qualitative researchers aim to gather an in-depth understanding of human behaviour and the reasons that govern such behaviour. The qualitative method investigates the “why”and “how”of decision making. Hence, smaller but focused samples are more often needed.
It consists of 3 methods: focus groups, depth interviews and field studies.

Focus groups examine a range of subjects or issues during a “focused” discussion for a given research study.

Depth Interviews allow a researcher to collect data from respondents when the phenomenon under study cannot be directly observed or measured.

Field studies collect qualitative research data and are carried out in their natural settings.

Method Chosen – Focus Group

Focus group discussions are a method of collecting information relatively quickly. They generally examine what the six to twelve subjects in each group like and dislike about an issue or topic under study, or compare the attributes of two or more issues or matters under examination. Their findings provide valuable insights as a pilot study or lead to further in-depth research using other methods.

Aim

The aim of the focus group is to collect information from the respondents in order to understand their views and their attitudes towards the issue proposed. They can also produce solutions to improve the issue (Domestic violence against women) from their personal perspective and experiences.

Advantages of Focus group

* The researcher can interact with the participants, pose follow-up questions or ask questions that are more in-depth * Results can be easier to understand than complicated statistical data * The researcher can get information from non-verbal responses, such as facial expressions or body language * Information is provided more quickly than if people were interviewed separately * They are useful to obtain detailed information about personal and group feelings, perceptions and opinions * They can save time and money compared to individual interviews * They offer the opportunity to seek clarification *

Disadvantages of Focus group

* The small sample size means the groups might not be a good representation of the larger population * Group discussions can be difficult to steer and control, so time can be lost to irrelevant topics * Respondents can feel peer pressure to give similar answers to moderator’s questions * The moderator’s skill in phrasing questions along with the setting can affect responses and skew results * They can be difficult to encourage a range of people to participate * Some participants may find a focus group situation intimidating or off-pulling; participants may feel under pressure to agree with the dominant view

Reasons for choosing Focus group

As a method of more in-depth qualitative research, focus groups provide a means to obtain greater insights into the settings and contexts in which violence occurs, the dynamics of abuse and how women are affected by this violence. Additionally, research on men can provide important insights into the causes of violence, as well as into the most effective strategies for preventing violence. Focus groups also assist in determining the survival mechanisms that women employ to deal with domestic violence, both on their own and with the help of their families and friends, especially those women for whom there is an absence of formal services. Understanding survivors’ pathways to recovery can improve clinical interventions and public education campaigns.

Sample size

In order to understand the views from both genders as mentioned above, 3 focus groups can be conducted, size of 6 from each group. The reason being, it is easier to control and as the topic is sensitive (mentioned in methodology), It will be best if the size is smaller. 6 males and 12 females will be selected in order to compare their opinions, as both genders are part of the community and public.

Sampling methodology

As qualitative research method is chosen for this study, it will be better to use non-probability sampling in order to choose my representatives. It is because non-probability sampling is cheaper than probability study, as this study is to find out specifically how to improve the community’s attitudes towards domestic violence against women, and therefore, there is a specific demographic and characteristics of the sample that will be looked at. As this study is preliminary in nature, and time is an issue here, it will be recommended if non-probability sampling is used. There is also a level of acceptable level error, for preliminary studies, controlling the sampling error is not very important.

There are 6 types of non-probability samples; convenience samples, volunteer samples, purposive samples, typical case sampling, quota sampling and snowball samples. For this study, purposive sampling is more suitable. As the subjects of the focus groups will possesses specific characteristics or qualities required for the study, they may be able to provide very specific and valuable insights into the hypothesis under study.
Purposive samples are commonly used in qualitative research such as depth interviews or focus groups (in this case, focus groups), where individuals are selected based on who can shed light on, or are experts on, the subject or issue under study.

Processes of the Focus group

1. Defining the research problem 2. Selecting a sample 3. Recruiting focus group interviewees 4. Choosing a suitable location for the interviews 5. Understanding the role of the moderator 6. Understanding the role of researcher 7. Preparing focus group materials 8. Collecting and analyzing the data 9. Preparing the summary of the findings

Defining the research problem

Discussed in proposal part 1 under hypothesis, this study is to find out how to improve the community attitudes towards domestic violence against women.

Selecting a sample

Table A (Represents the Demographics of the Participants) Focus Groups | Demographics | Group A(6 people) | Men | Aged 25 and above | Married at least once before | | Group B(6 people) | Women | Aged 18 and above | Married at least once before | Experienced at least 1 domestic violence act before (Victims) | Group C(6 people) | Women | Aged 18 and above | | Relatives or friends of the victims | The reasons for choosing such sample is because in order to understand how to improve the attitudes of the community towards the women who had experienced domestic violence, it is important to know the fundamentals of the issue and causes of such acts, Group B represents the victims who were married or are still married, aged 18 and above and had experience at least 1 domestic violent act before (such as, physically, verbally or sexually); it will be easier for them to open up as all 6 of them come from the same characteristics. Group C are women who are aged 18 and above, friends or relatives of the victims (not necessarily have to be related to Group B); we will able to find out from a 3rd party, who has seen or heard from the victims about the violent acts, and are able to give us solution or give us some insights of what should be done to improve these victims’ lives. Group A are men who are aged 25 above, who were married or are still married; this group can tell us to what extend would trigger them to perform violent acts (example: cheating spouse, refuses to do housework and etc.) and if violent acts can be tolerated.

Recruiting a group of interviewees

It is important to recruit more than the number required for each focus group to allow for “no shows”. For example, for every group, another 2 or 3 people will be invited in case the original members changes their mind. Group A and Group B (refer to the table A above) will most likely to be recruited from the Association of Women for Action and Research of Singapore (AWARE) and from the Singapore Committee for United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN WOMEN) through counselors or volunteers. Group A will be recruited from Social Media by using a screening questionnaire.

Location for the interviews

The location to conduct the focus groups will be the classrooms or discussion rooms in Kaplan Institute. It will be convenient for the participants, as it is in city area, and for privacy purposes.

Role of the moderator

The moderators, observers for each group discussion should be the same general demographic profile as the participants. Group B and C are all-female groups, therefore should have female moderators; Group A however should have male moderators. This is because it will be more comfortable for them to not feel judged in anyways (example: chauvinism or feminism)
It may be preferred to have 2 moderators per group, not only so that the discussion can be monitored more closely than is possible than with 1 moderator, but also so that 1 moderator will be available to leave the group and provide individual assistance in the event a participant becomes overwhelmed during the group discussion.

Moderator Characteristics
The moderators, observers, and translators for each group discussion should be the same general demographic profile as the participants. All-female groups should have female moderators; all-male groups should have male moderators. In all cases, it may be preferable to have two moderators per group, not only so that the discussion can be monitored more closely than is possible with one moderator, but also so that one moderator will be available to leave the group and provide individual assistance in the event a participant becomes overwhelmed during the group discussion. The characteristics of the moderators should be considered:

* Ability to feel at ease with people * Comfort level in listening to sensitive topics (domestic violence – sex abuse) * Good listening skills

Moderators should not be:

* Judgmental and disrespect the dignity of respondents and confidentiality * Avoid offering opinions, agree or disagree with commentary from participants * Should not put words into participants’ mouths (As there are not right or wrong answers n a focus group discussions

The moderator proposed that will be conducting the focus group will be a fellow schoolmate or a fellow classmate who is neutral and patient, this way, biasness can be reduced By getting someone closer, the costs will be again be reduced.
Once the group has gathered in the discussion room, the host/hostess should provide the participants with refreshments and assist them if they need to make a phone call or should they need the bathroom. The moderator should then introduce him or herself and the group members to each other to make them feel at ease to create friendly environment.
The group members will then wear nametags so it will be easier to remember names.
They will then be able to speak freely about their experiences, opinions, so then they will know when a topic is probe further,

Understanding the role of researcher

Irrespective of whether the researcher moderates the focus group discussions, the role of researcher involves many preparatory and other activities such as: * Obtaining ethics clearance for the project * Identifying and recruiting suitable focus group members (Research subjects) * Booking the facilities * Hiring and briefing the moderator * Preparing the focus group materials such as screener questions, stimulus materials and the moderator’s discussion guide * Making payments * Coordinating the conduct of focus groups and the collection of data via audio or audio-visual (need to ask participants’ beforehand if they are comfortable of being recorded) * Analyzing the data * Preparing a summary report of findings

Focus group materials

* Screener questions to select suitable participants * Stimulus materials for the group to get the subjects talking * Moderator’s discussion guide * Refreshments * Recording devices

Ethical Considerations

World Health Organization (WHO) recommended that when researching on Domestic violence against women, it is important that:

* The safety of respondents and the research team is paramount and should infuse all project decisions.

* Prevalence studies need to be methodologically sound and to build upon current research experience about how to minimize the underreporting of abuse.

* Protecting confidentiality is essential to ensure both women’s safety and data quality.

* All research team members should be carefully selected and receive specialized training and ongoing support.

* The study design must include a number of actions aimed at reducing any possible distress caused to the participants by the research.

Limitations
As the nature of the topic is very sensitive, victims may or may not turn up for the group discussion (therefore it is very important for participants to understand the purpose of the research), they may also choose not to answer questions that might remind them of unhappy or traumatized experiences. The safety of the victims or participants who are related to victims of domestic violence should also be considered. The victims of domestic violence against women may suffer physical harm if partner finds out that she has been talking to others about her relationship with him. Because many violent partners control the actions of their spouses closely, even the act of speaking to another person without his permission may trigger a beating. There were cases before done by researchers for example, from Chiapas, Mexico describe how, when they first began researching domestic violence, they were not fully aware of the risks involved. Without taking any special precautions regarding safety of respondents. They were shocked to learn later that 3 respondents were beaten up by their partners because they had participated in the survey. (Park, 1995) Therefore, the importance of the safety of the victims cannot be ignored.
Time & Budget
Timeline
1st month | * Preparation of moderator’s discussion script * Screener questionnaire * Select Participants * Recruit Focus group moderators * Train Focus group moderators * Book location (School’s discussion room) | 2nd month | * Prepare refreshments * Send participants reminders * Conduct 3 focus groups ( 1 per week) * Collect data | 3rd month | * Analyzing data * Report writing |

Budget Payment items | Costs | Stationeries (pen, paper, nametags, and etc) | $20 | Printing services | $10 | Refreshments | $90 ($5 per participant) | 4 Moderators | $40 ($5 per hour per moderator) | Extra* | $40 | Total | $200 |

*In case of emergency or excess participants

Summary

From the background of domestic violence against women to the literature review, it is clearly visible that there is an increasing amount of research beginning to offer a global overview of the extent of the violence against women. In this paper, we discuss the magnitude of some of the most common forms of domestic violence against women: physical abuse, verbally abuse, psychological and also sexual abuse. The causes of domestic violence against women and also how the issue affects the society were also compared and discussed. Most forms of violence are not unique incidents but are ongoing and can even continue for decades. In the second part of the proposal, we discuss about the suitable methods and sampling, and discussed about the processes that is able to fit into the time frame that was given. However, it was mentioned many times that there are many limitations in terms of methodologically or sampling. The limitations are that the respondents might not able to come clean about their experiences due to the sensitivity of the topic, and also because of the time constraint, the thoughts of including other methods to this study are eliminated.

References

1. Domestic violence in rural Uganda: evidence from a community–based study (Bull World Health Organ vol.81 n.1 Genebra Jan. 2003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0042-96862003000100011

2. Factors Influencing Attitudes to Violence Against Women (Journal article, 2009) by Michael Flood & Bob Pease

3. Domestic violence in Australia—an overview of the issues 22 November 2011 Liesl Mitchell

4. Involving Men in Efforts to End Violence Against Women by Michael Flood 5. Violence against women: an urgent public health priority Claudia Garcia-Moreno a & Charlotte Watts (Bulletin of the World Health Organization 2011;89:2-2. doi: 10.2471/BLT.10.085217)

6. Parenting in Battered Women: The Effects of Domestic Violence on Women and Their Children Alytia A. Levendosky,Sandra A. Graham-Bermann Journal of Family Violence (June 2001, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 171-192)

7. Health and Development Policy Project. Measuring Violence Against Women Cross-culturally: Notes from a Meeting.Takoma Park, Maryland: Health and Development Policy (Project:1995)

8. An Analysis of Domestic Violence in Asian American Communities: A Multicultural Approach to Counseling Christine K. Ho PhD, BSa (pages 129-150)

9. Violence against women: global scope and magnitude: The Lancet, Volume 359, Issue 9313, Pages 1232-1237 Charlotte Watts, Cathy Zimmerman

10. Asia Research Institute Working Paper Series No. 6 :A Feminist Critique of Domestic Violence Laws in Singapore and Malaysia, Kumaralingam Amirthalingam (July 2006)

11. Fontes LA. Ethics in family violence research: Cross-cultural issues. Family Relations.
1998;47:53-61