Increasing awareness of severity and extent of violence against women has led to its recognition as a societal problem rather than being considered a private matter. Violence against women perpetrated by their partners is a complex and multi-causal phenomenon (Redding, Ruiz-Cantero, Fernández-Sáez, & Guijarro-Garvi, 2017). Over the years, different terms have been used to define it depending on the type of relationship. One of the terms that have become most widely used is intimate partner violence (IPV), referring to all the types of violence that occur in the context of an intimate or romantic relationship (Saltzman, Fanslow, McMahon, & Shelley, 1999).

Intimate partner violence is one of the most widespread forms of violence. Data from the Word Health Organization indicate that one in three women have experienced IPV at some point in their lives (Butchart & Mikton, 2014). This refers to violence against women by their partner or ex-partner and to a regular behavioural pattern, not isolated events (Deza, 2012), increasing gradually as a romantic commitment grows (González & Santana, 2001), with the objective of dominating the relationship and their partner/ex-partner (Fisher, Tran, Kriitma, Rosenthal, & Tran, 2010). Typically, the abuse starts early on, is chronic (Amor, Echeburúa, Corral, Zubizarreta, & Sarasua, 2002), and can take various forms: physical, psychological, and/or sexual (Rodríguez, Romero, Durand-Smith, Colmenares, & Saldívar, 2006). Psychological aggression is the most common form (Fernández-Fuertes & Fuertes, 2010; Pazos, Oliva, & Hernando, 2014) and it often occurs before physical violence. Psychological aggression refers to verbal and emotional attacks, including humiliation, threats, criticism, insults (Rey-Anacona, 2008), prohibition (Aiquipa, 2015), control tactics (Muñoz-Rivas, Graña, O’Leary, & González, 2007), belittling (Amor, Echeburúa, Corral, Sarasua, & Zubizarreta, 2001), isolation, domination, and rejection (Almendros, Gámez-Guadix, Carrobles, Rodríguez-Carballeira, & Porrúa, 2009). Physical violence is understood as the use of hitting, kicking, beating, or other types of physical force with the potential to cause bodily injury or harm, and sexual violence is understood as forcing someone to have sex or perform sexual acts against his/her will by coercion, intimidation, or force (Alberdi & Matas, 2002).

In this context, the model of romantic love and acceptance of related myths have encouraged women to remain in violent relationships. That is, the ideas that love gives meaning to life and can solve everything, and that break up represents a failure, play a negative role in women, making them believe that they should be capable of changing their abusive partner, or even being used to justify the violent behaviours as evidence of love (Bosch, Ferrer, Navarro, & Ferreiro, 2012; Sanpedro, 2004). The traditional model of romantic love tends to encourage individuals to stay in relationships based on control and inequality, encouraging passivity, subordination, idealisation, dependence on the other (Ferrer, Bosch, & Navarro, 2010), personal sacrifice, unrequited love (Ruiz-Jarabo & Blanco, 2004), and caregiving (Esteban & Távora, 2008; Illouz, 2009), especially in women (Cantera & Blanch, 2010). It should be noted that there are many women who understand love as an absolute and unconditional surrender to their couple, providing them with excessive care and keeping their own desires and needs in the background. These beliefs are today deeply rooted in many women without hardly realizing it, because they consider it as something natural and socially accepted (Coria, 2011). Emotions, as well as this type of beliefs, are culturally mediated, respond to the social norms and, therefore, are predetermined by myths, stereotypes, and taboos. Considering these beliefs as normal or natural results in the perpetuation of traditional sentimental structures (Herrera, 2017; Hochschild, 2012), in which there is a marked difference between men and women in the roles and behavioural patterns they must carry out. Violence is also an important element in maintaining women’s subordination to men (Osborne, 2009). In line with this, love has been indicated as a possible factor that makes IPV more likely to occur and perpetuate (Bosch et al., 2007; Ferrer, Bosch, Navarro, Ramis, & García, 2008).

Lee (1977) proposed an interesting model to understand the nature of love, describing six styles of loving, a typological conception of love that serves as a framework for this study: a) Eros (passionate love), characterised by the expression of high levels of passion, physical attraction, and sexual activity; b) Ludus (game-playing love), involving a weaker emotional connection, with no future plans and no desire for attachment; c) Storge (friendship-based love), characterised by enduring commitment based on intimacy, friendship, and affection; d) Mania (obsessive love), that involves dependency on the partner, extreme jealousy, possessiveness, a lack of trust, and ambivalence; e) Pragma (pragmatic love), based on the rational search for the ideal partner, considering age, level of education, social status, religion, etc.; and f) Agape (altruistic love), characterised by unconditional commitment, selfless, and all-giving.

Love style preferences are linked to individuals’ belief systems and attitudes to romantic situations (Hendrick & Hendrick, 2006). As indicated, the phenomenon of women staying in violent relationships has been associated with cognitive and emotional factors such as feelings of love (Amor, Bohórquez, & Echeburúa, 2006; Melgar, 2010; Puente-Martínez, Ubillos-Landa, Echeburúa, & Páez-Rovira, 2016) and with emotional dependence (Momeñe, Jáuregui y Estévez, 2017; Sánchez, 2016). In relation to this, it is important to analyse the establishment of increasingly strong affective attachment to abusive partners (Montero, 2001) and more passionate feelings towards such partners than shown by people who have never experienced abuse (Kú & Sánchez, 2006).

In relation to this, it is important to underline that caregiving is a dominant feature of the role women play in relationships between couples (Oliver & Valls, 2004) and that caregiving is also associated with love (Leal, 2007). In this context, caregiving is used to refer to a willingness to help satisfy the needs of the other person, in an unconditional way and considering multiple factors (López, 2009). Some women experiencing IPV believe that they have to continue taking care of their partner, accepting and giving into his demands, despite the abusive relationship (Souto et al., 2016).

In light of all this, the objectives of this study were: 1) to investigate potential associations between violence, love styles, and perceived caregiver burden; 2) to assess differences in the type of violence received and perpetrated as a function of perceived caregiver burden; 3) to analyse the predictive role of violence received and perpetrated and love styles in perceived caregiver burden; and 4) to determine whether love styles mediate in the relation between violence (received and perpetrated) and perceived caregiver burden.

Firstly, we assessed associations between the scores for violence perpetrated and received, love attitudes, and caregiver burden (Table 1), and found significant correlations (see below). Our results indicate that Eros love style was positively correlated with overall psychological aggression (both perpetrated and received) and also that Ludus love style was negatively correlated with overall psychological aggression (both perpetrated and received), overall physical assault received, minor physical assault perpetrated and received, and overall sexual coercion perpetrated and received. It is important to point out that romantic love is based on a construction of an unreal conception of love through the use of romantic myths (Yela, 2003), such as relating jealousy with love (González & Santana, 2001). Such demonstrations of love could be risk factors for gender-based violence (Diaz-Aguado, Martínez, & Martín, 2013).

Table 1

*p < .05; **p < .01

Similarly, Storge love style was positively correlated with overall psychological aggression and minor psychological aggression received, while Mania love style was negatively correlated with minor psychological aggression perpetrated. Finally, Agape love style was positively correlated with the overall and minor psychological aggression perpetrated and with sexual coercion and severe injury received. With regards to burden, no burden was negatively associated with overall and minor psychological aggression perpetrated. Lastly, we found that low perceived burden was positively associated with overall psychological aggression perpetrated and with minor psychological aggression perpetrated and received.

Secondly, we analysed differences in the type of violence received and perpetrated and love attitudes as a function of perceived caregiver burden (Table 2). The sample was divided into three subgroups by caregiver burden, using the cut-off points for “no burden”, “low burden” and “high burden” for the Spanish version of the ZBI (Martín et al., 1996). We found significantly higher mean scores for severe psychological aggression received and perpetrated in individuals who reported mild burden, and significantly higher mean scores for psychological aggression and minor sexual coercion and emotional negotiation perpetrated in the severe burden group. Further, though the differences did not reach significance, we note that we found the highest mean scores for Pragma love style in all three burden groups.

Table 2

*p < .05.

Thirdly, we analysed the predictive role of violence perpetrated and received and love attitudes on the perceived caregiver burden (Table 3). Below we indicate the significant regressions.

Table 3

*p < .05.

Finally, we analysed the relationship between violence, both received and perpetrated, and perceived caregiver burden, this relationship being mediated by love styles (Table 4).

Table 4

*p < .05; **p < .01.

The unstandardized coefficient for minor psychological aggression perpetrated increased from .06 in the first stage of analysis to .07 in the third stage. This implies that 16.66% of the variance of the relationship between minor psychological aggression perpetrated and caregiver burden is explained by love style. Similarly, the unstandardized coefficient for minor injury perpetrated increased from 1.78 in the first stage of analysis to 2.27 in the third stage, implying that 21.58% of the variance of the relationship between minor injury perpetrated and caregiver burden is explained by love style.

Firstly, we have analysed the relationship between violence, love style, and caregiver burden. In this analysis, we found a significant positive association between Eros love style and psychological aggression, both perpetrated and received. This may be due to the fact that Eros or passionate love is characterized by irresistible passion and intense feelings (Brenlla, Brizzio, & Carreras, 2004; Ubillos et al., 2001), a previous study finding that abused women reported more passionate feelings than women who had not been abused (Kú & Sánchez, 2006). Further, Ludus love style was negatively associated with psychological aggression and sexual coercion perpetrated and received as well as with physical assault received and minor physical assault perpetrated and received, and Mania love style was negatively associated with minor psychological aggression perpetrated. Although these findings are not consistent with previous studies showing that both the Ludus and Mania predict partner violence (Galicia, Sánchez, & Robles, 2013), they may be understood in terms of greater relationship satisfaction being linked to Eros love style (Contreras, Hendrick, & Hendrick, 1996).

With regards to Storge, this love style was positively associated with psychological aggression received. This result is in line with previous studies indicating that Storge love style is commonly found in the context of partner violence (Lucariello, 2012). Further, our findings may be related to the fact that these individuals consider falling in love to be more romantic in nature and a long-term commitment (Galicia et al., 2013). In turn, the romantic love model and acceptance of associated myths play a crucial role in the onset and maintenance of violence (Ferrer et al., 2008). As noted above, the literature states that this myth of romantic love particularly affects women (Cantera & Blanch, 2010). This can be explained from the social and power structure that urges women to seek a partner under the pretext of seeking ideal love, condemning them to inequalities, subjugation, and sacrifice. In this way, a model of domesticity is constructed where family, and by extension home, is the naturalized habitat of a woman, who lives situations of conflict generated from unreal equality guidelines that new generations have assumed under the protection of traditional roles, despite the evident persistence of gender differences (Melero, 2008). A search for romantic love is imposed on girls in order to organize and build a future, while for boys it is seduction, implying profit. The need to love is stronger in women, but at the same time it is more dependent, as Leal (2007) points out. Likewise, for Bosch and Ferrer (2013) gender-differentiated love creates false expectations and may be at the root of gender-based violence. From a differentiated socialization, women could expect the appearance in their lives of a “prince charming” within a framework characterized by expectation, passivity, care, and renunciation. In this way, romantic love reproduces inequality (Esteban & Távora, 2008; Illouz, 2009). We also found that Agape love style was positively associated with psychological aggression perpetrated and sexual coercion and severe injury received. These results are in line with previous research indicating that Agape in women is a predictor of violence perpetrated and received (Galicia et al., 2013). With respect to caregiving burden, we found that a perception of no burden was associated to psychological aggression perpetrated. Notably, this finding concerns violence perpetrated, which may be due to a tendency to underestimate violence received (Berns, 2000). This may be due to the cultural naturalization of violence against women and the tendency of abused women to minimize aggression (Zubizarreta, 2004).

Secondly, we analysed differences in violence and love styles perpetrated and received as a function of perceived caregiving burden. Our results indicate that the mean severe psychological aggression received and perpetrated was highest in the mild burden group. Further, though the differences did not reach significance, the mean scores were highest for Pragma love style in all three burden groups. The cultural, gender, and age differences related to predominant love style may help us understand these results (Galicia et al., 2013). Further, they may be explained by the positive relationships found in previous studies (Vohs, Finkenauer, & Baumeister, 2010) between Pragma love style and self-control. A romantic view of love may lead women to justify the control their partner exerts over them, and encourage them to adhere in their relationships to gender stereotypes in which control is associated with masculinity (Galicia et al., 2013).

Thirdly, we analysed the predictive role of violence perpetrated and received and love styles in perceived caregiving burden. The results of this analysis show, on the one hand, that Agape, together with severe and minor psychological aggression perpetrated predict caregiving burden and, on the other hand, that Storge, together with severe psychological aggression perpetrated and received predicted the impact of caregiving on interpersonal relationships. Similarly, we found that both minor psychological aggression perpetrated and minor physical aggression received are predictors of a high burden. We are not aware of any studies that have found an association between love attitudes, violence (received and perpetrated), and caregiving burden. Nevertheless, there is research associating romantic love with gender-based violence (Amurrio, Larrinaga, Usategui, & del Valle, 2008) and indicating that women who seek romantic love wanting to find a relationship to give a sense of meaning to their lives are at high risk of experiencing IPV (Sanpedro, 2004).

Finally, we analysed love style as a mediator in the relationship between violence, both perpetrated and received, and caregiving burden. In this analysis, we found that the relationships of caregiving burden with minor psychological aggression perpetrated and with minor injury perpetrated were mediated by love style. We are not aware of any previous research on the mediating role of love style in violence perpetrated by caregiving women. On the other hand, our findings seem to be in line with previous studies that have found romantic love to be associated with women staying in violent relationships (Ferrer et al., 2010) and taking care of men (Esteban & Távora, 2008).

Certain limitations of this study should be recognised. First, it was based on a convenience sample from one region in our country, exclusively composed of women, with a mean age of 58 years old and who did not report high levels of violence. In relation to this, with such a high mean age, the attitudes reported may differ from the preferences at the beginning of their relationships, as love styles may change over time and, further, the sample may not be representative of the entire population of caregiving individuals, limiting the generalization of results. Moreover, age may have an impact on women’s perception of experiencing partner violence. In fact, some studies have found older women to be more vulnerable, since they may face more social barriers to leaving an abusive partner (Straka & Montminy, 2006). Another factor to bear in mind is that more than half of the participants had tertiary education. Education is positively associated with the empowerment of women and more balanced gender roles in relationships (Vega, 2007) and, hence, a higher level of education could be protective against partner violence (Golden, Perreira, & Durrance, 2013; Redding et al., 2017). Given all this, our findings should be interpreted with caution. On the other hand, interpretations and perceptions of what is abusive behaviour may have influenced the results of this study, as in reporting violence there is a tendency to place emphasis on acts by the other party (Cáceres, 2011). Additionally, the cross-sectional nature of the study means we are unable to establish causal relationships between the study variables.

Despite these limitations, this study provides novel data on the mediating role of love styles in violence and caregiver burden perceived by women. The results may be very useful for improving our understanding of partner relationships and the love styles that may be associated with caregiver burden in women who receive or perpetrate violence.

Finally, future lines of research should be directed towards deepening, from a qualitative perspective, the meaning that women give to the violence received by their partners and to the care they provide them, as well as it would be interesting to gather information about their experiences.