Types of Domestic Violence Research Evidence

Types of Domestic ViolenceResearch Evidence Michael P. Johnson, Ph.D. Sociology, Women's Studies, and African & African American Studies Penn State Photos from Donna Ferrato, Living with the Enemy. New York: Aperture, 1991 Catholic Family Services of Peel Dufferin June 3, 2010 McKeesport, PA

The Continuing Gender Debate • Anti-feminist politics and conflicting data • Explaining the ostensible contradictions • A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence • The three major types (plus one or two) • Gender differences and sampling biases • Dramatic Differences Among the Types • Violence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalation • Health consequences • Relationship consequences • Miscellaneous other major differences • Preview of Policy Implications Screening, Primary prevention/education, Intervention with perpetrators, Intervention for survivors, Law enforcement issues, Custody and access issues

The Anti-feminist Backlash • The Men’s Project. February 2009. Submission to Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General • …the Ontario Government may be in violation of their obligations… [because] the existing network of shelters for victims of family violence exclude men…. • Pittsburgh Post Gazette July 26, 2009 • Feminist ideologues ignore research that shows domestic violence is just as often started by women as by men • Globe and Mail July 27, 2002 (Web site) • Men as likely to suffer spousal abuse, Statscan says.

General Surveys Indicate That Women Are as Violent as Men

But Agency Studies Indicate ThatMen Are the Batterers

A Small TheorythatReconciles the Contradiction • There is more than one type of partner violence • The different types are differently gendered • Both major sampling plans are biased • General survey studies are biased toward situationally-provoked violence, which women are as likely to perpetrate as are men • Agency studies are biased toward coercive controlling violence, perpetrated almost entirely by men

The Continuing Gender Debate Anti-feminist politics and conflicting data Explaining the ostensible contradictions A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence The three major types (plus one or two) Gender differences and sampling biases Dramatic Differences Among the Types Violence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalation Health consequences Relationship consequences Miscellaneous other major differences Preview of Policy Implications Screening, Primary prevention/education, Intervention with perpetrators, Intervention for survivors, Law enforcement issues, Custody and access issues

Intimate Terrorism Coercive Control Violent Resistance Resisting the Intimate Terrorist Situational Couple Violence Situationally-provoked Violence Separation-instigated Violence No History of Violence or Control Mutual Violent Control Two Intimate Terrorists

Domestic Violence/Intimate Terrorism Two major subtypes: (a) Emotionally dependent; (b) Antisocial

Coercive Control Scale Thinking about your husband [yourself], would you say he [you]… • is jealous or possessive? • tries to provoke arguments? • tries to limit your contact with family and friends? • insists on knowing who you are with at all times? • calls you names or puts you down in front of others? • makes you feel inadequate? • shouts or swears at you? • frightens you? • prevents you from knowing about or having access to the family income even when you ask? *These are items from the 1995 National Violence Against Women Survey (Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998). They were adapted from the Canadian Violence Against Women Survey (Holly Johnson, 1996).

Gender Symmetry/Asymmetryby Type of Violence(1970s Pittsburgh: Violent husbands and wives)

The Biases of Major Sampling Plans(Violent men: Pittsburgh*)

Pittsburgh data Mixed sample Intimate Terrorism 76% severe 75% escalated 1/25 couples 29% mutual General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Couple Violence 28% severe 28% escalated 1/8 couples 69% mutual Situational Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc .

British data Mixed sample Intimate Terrorism 43% severe 78% escalated 15% mutual General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Couple Violence 13% severe 20% escalated 87% mutual Situational Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc

Canadian GSS 1999 Previous partner Intimate Terrorism 41% frequent violence 56% feared for life General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Couple Violence 8% frequent violence 17% feared for life Situational Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc

Canadian GSS 2004 Previous/current partner Intimate Terrorism 57% frequent violence 60% feared for life General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Couple Violence 8% frequent violence 9% feared for life Situational Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc

Women’s Health Outcomes by Type of Male Violence

Relationship Outcomes by Type of Male Violence

Need to Re-assess EverythingVarious studies by Various Social Scientists • Intergenerational “transmission” • SCV d = .11; IT d = .35 • SCV odds ratio = 2.40; IT odds ratio = 7.51 • Marriage • SCV b = -.62; IT b = .58 • Gender traditionalism or hostility toward women • Traditionalism: SCV d = -.14; IT d = .80 • Hostility: non-viol., SCV, IT, IT = 154, 153, 135, 131 • Gender, frequency, severity, escalation, mutuality, impact on victim, impact on children, etc.

Preview of Policy Implications • Screening • Primary prevention/education • Intervention with perpetrators • Intervention for survivors • Law enforcement • Custody and access issues

We make big mistakes if we don’t make big distinctions. Different types of partner violence have… • Different causes • Different developmental trajectories • Different effects • Different successful intervention strategies

Support Your Local Women’s Shelter Safety Support Information Advocacy Photos from Donna Ferrato, Living with the Enemy. New York: Aperture, 1991 Philadelphia, PA shelter

Screening/Triage • Different models for different clients • To screen we need information on control and violence for both members • Safety first! • Initially assume the worst (intimate terrorism) • If SCV seems likely, try individual application of other approaches • If SCV and safety become clear, move to couple approaches with protections in place

Primary Prevention/EducationYou’re the experts • Intimate terrorism • Equality and respect • Violent resistance • Dangers of violent resistance • Safety planning • Entrapment/escape issues • Situational couple violence • Sources of conflict • Anger management tactics • Communication • Substance abuse

Intervention with PerpetratorsHold them all accountable in the criminal justice systemto provide an essential motivation for change • Intimate terrorism • Control-focused education • Perhaps different tactics for sub-types • Violent resistance • Alternatives to violence/Safety planning • Neutralize entrapment • Situational couple violence • Sources of conflict • Anger management • Communication counseling • Substance abuse rehab

Intervention with Perpetrators Outcomes of Duluth-type Batterer Intervention Program (Thirteen Months Post-adjudication) Eckhardt et al., 2008

Differential Success of Intervention Strategies by IT Sub-type(Percent non-violent two years after completing treatment)

Intervention for Survivors • Intimate terrorism • Long-term support • Alternatives to violent resistance • Empowerment to leave • Transitional support • Situational couple violence • Source of conflict • Anger management • Communication counseling • Substance abuse rehab

Custody and Access Issues • Separation-instigated violence • Manipulative accusations • Resources for thorough evaluation • Custody/access options • Joint custody/Co-parenting • Parallel parenting, minimal couple contact • Supervised exchanges • Supervised access • No contact

Pittsburgh, 1978 (Frieze) Married women from shelters and courts, matched with married women living on the same block (n=272) 86% White; 14% Black Data on self and husband, reported by wives Incident data on most violent incident • United States, 1995-96 (NVAW, Tjaden & Thoennes) National random sample; subsample=4967 married women 83% White; 10% Black; 8% Hispanic (all races) Data on current husbands, reported by wife Incident data on most recent incident • Chicago, 1995 (Lloyd) Random sample of women in a poor neighborhood (n=596) 5% White; 54% Black; 41% Hispanic Data on male partners, reported by female partner No incident data

Pittsburgh Control Scale (High>2.74; 40%m; 10%w) • When you and your husband go places together, who decides where you will go? • If you disagree [about people you like], which people do the two of you spend more time with? • Does your husband know where you are when you are not together? • Are there places you might like to go but don’t because you feel your husband wouldn’t want you to? How often does this happen? • Do you generally do what your husband asks you to do? • Who decides how the family money will be spent in terms of major expenses? • [How often} does he try to get what he wants by doing any of the following?…emotionally withdraws? • …restricts your freedom? • …stops having sex with you? • …threatens to leave you? • Has your husband ever pressured you to have sexual relations?

Pittsburgh: Other Items • “Has your husband ever gotten angry and threatened to use physical force with you?” followed by the item that is actually used: Has he ever actually slapped or pushed you or used other physical force with you? • Can you estimate how many times, in total, he was violent with you? • Did he become more violent over time? • How badly were you hurt [the time your husband was most violent with you]? Frieze codes: severe, severe superficial, severe trauma, and extreme permanent. • Were you afraid he would be violent again? Already “very frightened” at the first violent incident. • How would you rate the happiness of your marriage on a scale from 1-Not at all to 10-Very happy? Low=1-4, 32% • Is sex ever unpleasant for you? • Do you and your husband have a good time when you go out together?

Chicago Items • Control Items: In the past 12 months, when you’ve had an argument, how often did your husband/boyfriend… • …say something to spite you? • ...insult you, swear at you, or call you out of your name? • ...accuse you of being with another man? • ...try to control your every move? • ...withhold money, make you ask for money or take yours? • …threaten you with a knife or gun? • ...threaten to kill you? • ...threaten to hurt your family or friends?

Pittsburgh-cutoff Intimate Terrorism 67% severe 72% escalated 1/25 couples 37% mutual General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Couple Violence 29% severe 29% escalated 1/8 couples 74% mutual Specific Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc.

NVAWS Control Scale(High = 3 or more) • “Thinking about your current husband, would you say he is jealous or possessive?” • “…tries to limit your contact with family and friends?” • “…insists on knowing who you are with at all times?” • “…calls you names or puts you down in front of others?” • “…makes you feel inadequate?” • “…shouts or swears at you?” • “…prevents you from knowing about or having access to the family income even when you ask?” ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- • “…insists on changing residences even when you don’t want or need to?” • “…prevents you from working outside the home?”

Control Scale “Thinking about your current husband, would you say he is jealous or possessive?” • “…tries to limit your contact with family and friends?” • “…insists on knowing who you are with at all times?” • “…calls you names or puts you down in front of others?” • “…makes you feel inadequate?” • “…shouts or swears at you?” • “…prevents you from knowing about or having access to the family income even when you ask?” NVAWS

The Great Gender Debate • Distinguishing among types of partner violence resolves it • A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence • The three major types • Gender differences and sampling biases • Other differences • Implications for Research and Theory • Everything we “know” has to be re-assessed • Need a standard operationalization • Tricky sampling problems • Need for differentiated theory • Implications for Intervention • Screening/triage • Intervention with perpetrators • Intervention for survivors • Custody and access issues

Need a Standard Operationalization • Problems with cluster analysis • Extremely sensitive to sample • Not comparable across studies • Need a standard operationalization • NVAWS items • Tolman: Psychological Maltreatment of Women Inventory • Graham-Kevan & Archer: Controlling Behaviors Scale • Dutton & Goodman: Coercive control

Need for Differentiated Theory • Intimate terrorism • Coercive control theory • Gender theory • Theories of paternalism • Violent Resistance • Coping • Entrapment • Situational couple violence • Family conflict theory • Communication • Anger management • Substance abuse

The Great Gender Debate • Distinguishing among types of partner violence resolves it • A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence • The three major types • Gender differences and sampling biases • Other differences • Implications for Research and Theory • Everything we “know” has to be re-assessed • Need a standard operationalization • Tricky sampling problems • Need for differentiated theory • Implications for Intervention • Screening/triage • Intervention with perpetrators • Intervention for survivors • Custody and access issues

A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence • The three major types (plus one or two) • Gender differences and sampling biases • Some other basic differences • We need to re-assess everything we thought we knew • Implications for Intervention • Screening/triage • Primary prevention/education • Intervention with perpetrators • Intervention for survivors • Custody and access issues

Sampling Problem: General SurveysCurrent Spouses-NVAWS Felson & Outlaw, 2007

Sampling Solution: General SurveysFormer Spouses-NVAWS Felson & Outlaw, 2007

Data from NVAWS, Johnson, Leone, & Xu, 2008

Types of Domestic ViolenceResearch Evidence The Continuing Gender Debate A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence Dramatic Differences Among the Types Preview of Policy Implications

Types of Domestic Violence Research Evidence