#2 Prevalence of Physical Violence in Intimate Relationships: Part 2. Rates of Male and Female Perpetration

Partner Abuse ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah L. Desmarais ◽  
Kim A. Reeves ◽  
Tonia L. Nicholls ◽  
Robin P. Telford ◽  
Martin S. Fiebert
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Female Perpetration

#1 Prevalence of Physical Violence in Intimate Relationships: Part 1. Rates of Male and Female Victimization

Partner Abuse ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah L. Desmarais ◽  
Kim A. Reeves ◽  
Tonia L. Nicholls ◽  
Robin P. Telford ◽  
Martin S. Fiebert
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Male And Female

scholarly journals Investigating the Relationship between Approval, and Experiences of Physical Violence and Controlling Behaviours in Heterosexual Intimate Relationships

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Ryan Jones
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Latent Profile Analysis ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Bivariate Analysis ◽  
Male Violence ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Female Violence ◽  
Couple Violence ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Male To Female

<p>Popular theory understands intimate partner violence (IPV) as gendered, and stresses the integral role of a patriarchal society and approval of male to female aggression in the aetiology of men’s IPV to women. This thesis set out to explore this hypothesis using a gender inclusive methodology, and examines the relationship between participants’ approval of men’s and women’s use of controlling behaviours and physical violence in heterosexual intimate relationships. Undergraduate university students (N = 515) completed an online questionnaire about their use and experience of aggression and controlling behaviours, and their beliefs about dating violence. Bivariate analyses found that conflict tactics and controlling behaviours were perpetrated and experienced at equal rates by the sexes. ANOVA found that male and female participants approved of female to male violence significantly more than male to female violence when the aggressor was provoked via infidelity or physical violence, indicating a collective chivalrous belief pattern. Violent students also approved of male and female violence significantly more than non-violent students. Applying Johnson's (1999) typological approach, latent profile analysis found that 77.7% of violent relationships could be classed as Situational Couple Violence (SCV), 10.4% as Coercive Controlling Violence (CCV), 2.1% as Violent Resistant (VR), and 9.8% as Mutual Violent Control (MVC). Bivariate analysis revealed a greater frequency of women than men in the SCV group (n = 92, 61%) with a small effect; no other significant differences were found between the groups. ANOVA also found that the typology groups approved of female to male violence significantly more than male to female violence with CCV men endorsing the highest approval of male and female violence. Further research is required to determine why this group hold high approval in general compared to other groups. The need for interventions to address the approval of a person’s own violence and approval of their partner’s violence is discussed in addition to implications for theory, practice, and policy.</p>

Prevalence of Physical Violence in Intimate Relationships, Part 1: Rates of Male and Female Victimization

Partner Abuse ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah L. Desmarais ◽  
Kim A. Reeves ◽  
Tonia L. Nicholls ◽  
Robin P. Telford ◽  
Martin S. Fiebert
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
The Body ◽  
Sample Type ◽  
Male Victims ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Pooled Prevalence

Physical violence in intimate relationships affects men, women, and families worldwide. Although the body of research examining the experiences of male victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) has grown, there have been few attempts to synthesize, compare, and contrast findings regarding the prevalence of male and female victimization. We examined research published in the last 10 years to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the prevalence of physical IPV victimization in heterosexual relationships. Our specific aims were to (a) describe the prevalence of physical IPV victimization in industrialized, English-speaking nations; and (b) explore study and sample characteristics that affect prevalence. Literature searches undertaken in three databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) identified 750 articles published between 2000 and 2010. We included 249 articles that reported 543 rates of physical IPV victimization in our review: 158 articles reported 318 rates for women, 6 articles reported 8 rates for men, and 85 articles reported 217 rates for both men and women. Most studies were conducted in the United States (k = 213, 85.5%) and almost half (k = 118, 47.4%) measured IPV using a Conflict Tactics Scale-based approach. Unweighted, pooled prevalence estimates were calculated for female and male victimization overall and by sample type, country, measurement time frame, and measurement approach. Across studies, approximately 1 in 4 women (23.1%) and 1 in 5 men (19.3%) experienced physical violence in an intimate relationship, with an overall pooled prevalence estimate of 22.4%. Analyses revealed considerable variability in rates as a function of methodological issues, indicating the need for standardized measurement of IPV.

scholarly journals Investigating the Relationship between Approval, and Experiences of Physical Violence and Controlling Behaviours in Heterosexual Intimate Relationships

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Ryan Jones
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Latent Profile Analysis ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Bivariate Analysis ◽  
Male Violence ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Female Violence ◽  
Couple Violence ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Male To Female

<p>Popular theory understands intimate partner violence (IPV) as gendered, and stresses the integral role of a patriarchal society and approval of male to female aggression in the aetiology of men’s IPV to women. This thesis set out to explore this hypothesis using a gender inclusive methodology, and examines the relationship between participants’ approval of men’s and women’s use of controlling behaviours and physical violence in heterosexual intimate relationships. Undergraduate university students (N = 515) completed an online questionnaire about their use and experience of aggression and controlling behaviours, and their beliefs about dating violence. Bivariate analyses found that conflict tactics and controlling behaviours were perpetrated and experienced at equal rates by the sexes. ANOVA found that male and female participants approved of female to male violence significantly more than male to female violence when the aggressor was provoked via infidelity or physical violence, indicating a collective chivalrous belief pattern. Violent students also approved of male and female violence significantly more than non-violent students. Applying Johnson's (1999) typological approach, latent profile analysis found that 77.7% of violent relationships could be classed as Situational Couple Violence (SCV), 10.4% as Coercive Controlling Violence (CCV), 2.1% as Violent Resistant (VR), and 9.8% as Mutual Violent Control (MVC). Bivariate analysis revealed a greater frequency of women than men in the SCV group (n = 92, 61%) with a small effect; no other significant differences were found between the groups. ANOVA also found that the typology groups approved of female to male violence significantly more than male to female violence with CCV men endorsing the highest approval of male and female violence. Further research is required to determine why this group hold high approval in general compared to other groups. The need for interventions to address the approval of a person’s own violence and approval of their partner’s violence is discussed in addition to implications for theory, practice, and policy.</p>

Violent Coercion in Intimate Relationships

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amie Langer Zarling ◽  
Rosaura Orengo-Aguayo ◽  
Erika Lawrence
Keyword(s):  
Romantic Relationships ◽  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Committed Relationships ◽  
Empirically Supported ◽  
Recent Treatment ◽  
Controlling Behaviors ◽  
Empirically Supported Interventions

This chapter defines violent coercion in romantic relationships as comprising threatening or controlling behaviors such as economic abuse and social isolation, dominance and intimidation, belligerence and humiliation, threats of physical violence, physical violence itself, and sexual violence. This type of coercion occurs in a broad range of intimate relationships—dating, cohabiting, engaged and newlywed couples, separated and divorced couples, and second and third marriages. Even mild and infrequent forms of violent coercion have negative consequences for victims, relationships, and children raised in these homes. There are few empirically supported interventions for violent coercion in committed relationships, and those that do exist are limited in their efficacy. This chapter reviews the wide variation in definitions of coercion in committed relationships, assesses the methods used to measure coercion in committed relationships, reviews traditional treatments and evaluates their efficacy, and delineates recent treatment advances and outline directions for future research.

“He Didn’t Necessarily Force Himself Upon Me, But . . . ”: Women’s Lived Experiences of Sexual Coercion in Intimate Relationships With Men

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (8) ◽  
pp. 911-933 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole K. Jeffrey ◽  
Paula C. Barata
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Lived Experiences ◽  
Sexual Coercion ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
Subjective Experiences ◽  
University Women ◽  
Self Blame ◽  
Women's Relationships ◽  
Depth Interviews

This study examined women’s subjective experiences with sexual coercion (SC), particularly less forceful forms, in intimate relationships. In-depth interviews with 12 university women highlighted that physical violence need not be present for SC to be harmful, as many experienced guilt, anger, sadness, and self-blame. The severity of SC and the context of women’s relationships affected their interpretations, which in turn affected the effects of SC. Many women not only held negative interpretations of their partners’ SC but also minimized and justified. Thus, the interviews were also critically analyzed for the possible influence of dominant discourses and gendered power relations.

Situational Contexts of Rural Violence: A Comparison of Male and Female Perpetration

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Callie Marie Rennison ◽  
Walter S. DeKeseredy
Keyword(s):  
Woman Abuse ◽  
Urban Violence ◽  
Crime Victimization ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Female Victims ◽  
Male Offenders ◽  
Female Perpetration ◽  
Situational Contexts ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
Main Effects

The amount of social scientific knowledge about rural violence pales in comparison with that of urban violence, and even less is known about the situational contexts of rural violence. Using National Crime Victimization Survey data, we explore situational contexts of rural violence in general, as well as compare male- and female-perpetrated violence contexts. Results indicate that the contexts of violence committed by females are characterized by main effects (i.e., no weapons, no injuries across a variety of contexts), while male-perpetrated violence is highly contextual. An important finding emerged from studying contexts associated with male offenders and female victims—in every dominant context with one exception, male perpetrators were engaged in woman abuse. These findings highlight the need for greater attention to rural violence and variation in how this violence is perpetrated.

Prevalence of Physical Violence in Intimate Relationships, Part 2: Rates of Male and Female Perpetration

Partner Abuse ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 170-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah L. Desmarais ◽  
Kim A. Reeves ◽  
Tonia L. Nicholls ◽  
Robin P. Telford ◽  
Martin S. Fiebert
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Relationships ◽  
Social Problem ◽  
Physical Violence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Sample Type ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Pooled Prevalence ◽  
Prevalence Estimates ◽  
Ipv Perpetration

Physical violence perpetrated by men against their female partners is widely recognized as a serious social problem. Whether women’s use of physical violence against their male partners represents a serious social problem remains a question under debate. We examined research published in the last 10 years to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the prevalence of physical IPV perpetrated by men and women in heterosexual relationships. Our specific aims were to (a) describe the prevalence of physical IPV perpetration in industrialized, English-speaking nations, and (b) explore study and sample characteristics that affect prevalence. Literature searches undertaken in 3 databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) identified 750 articles published between 2000 and 2010. We included 111 articles that reported 272 rates of physical IPV perpetration in our review: 25 articles reported 34 rates for men, 14 articles reported 24 rates for women, and 72 articles reported 214 rates for both men and women. The vast majority of studies were conducted in the United States (k = 95, 85.6%) and most (k = 81, 73.0%) measured IPV using a Conflict Tactics Scale-based approach. We calculated unweighted, pooled prevalence estimates for female and male perpetration overall and by sample type, country, measurement time frame, and measurement approach. Across studies, the overall pooled prevalence estimate was 24.8%. Consistent with prior reviews, pooled prevalence was slightly greater for female- compared to male-perpetrated physical IPV: more than 1 in 4 women (28.3%) and 1 in 5 men (21.6%) reported perpetrating physical violence in an intimate relationship. This pattern of results remained when we calculated pooled prevalence estimates by sample and study characteristics, with few exceptions. Findings underscore the need for interventions that acknowledge the use of violence by women in intimate relationships.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document