Types of Domestic Violence Research Evidence and Implications

1. Types of Domestic ViolenceResearch Evidence and Implications Michael P. Johnson, Ph.D. Sociology, Women's Studies, and African & African American Studies Penn State www.personal.psu.edu/mpj Photos from Donna Ferrato, Living with the Enemy. New York: Aperture, 1991 Women’s Refuge Conference 2012 Blenheim, New Zealand October 27, 2012 McKeesport, PA

2. Are Women Really as Violent as Men? • Anti-feminist politics and conflicting data • Explaining the ostensible contradictions • A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence • The three major types • Gender differences and sampling biases • Dramatic Differences Among the Types • Violence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalation • A few health and relationship consequences • Different risk factors for perpetration • Policy Implications

3. The Anti-feminist BacklashAttack Feminist ResearchDeny the Role of GenderAttack Programs that Address Violence against Women • “The gender paradigm. . . biased social science.” Dutton et al., 2010 • “Men as likely to suffer spousal abuse, Statscan says.” Globe and Mail July 27, 2002 (Web site) • “…the Ontario Government may be in violation of their obligations… [because] the existing network of shelters for victims of family violence exclude[s] men….” The Men’s Project, February 2009: Submission to the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General

4. General Surveys Indicate That Women Are as Violent as Men

5. But Agency Studies Indicate ThatMen Are the Primary Batterers

6. Differentiating Among Types of Intimate Partner ViolenceExplains the Contradictions • There is more than one type of partner violence • One type is perpetrated mostly by men, another by both men and women • Agency studies are dominated by the male-perpetrated type, general surveys by the gender-symmetric type

7. Are Women Really as Violent as Men? • Anti-feminist politics and conflicting data • Explaining the ostensible contradictions • A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence • The three major types • Gender differences and sampling biases • Dramatic Differences Among the Types • Violence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalation • A few health and relationship consequences • Different risk factors for perpetration • Policy Implications

8. Intimate Terrorism Violent Coercive Control Violent Resistance Resisting the Intimate Terrorist Situational Couple Violence Situationally-provoked Violence

9. Intimate Terrorism Violent Coercive Control • Pattern of violent coercive control • The basic pattern is the use of multiple control tactics (violent and non-violent) to attempt to take general control over one’s partner • Specific control tactics vary from case to case, involving different combinations of economic control, isolation, emotional abuse, intimidation, use of children, and other control tactics • In heterosexual relationships, perpetrated primarily but not exclusively by men • Generally rare, but common in agency settings

10. Intimate Terrorism/Domestic Violence Adapted from Pence & Paymar, 1993.

11. Violent Resistance Resisting the Intimate Terrorist • Many victims respond with violence • Not necessarily self-defense • In heterosexual relationships, most violent resistors desist and turn to other tactics, either to mitigate the violence or to escape • Generally rare, but common in agency settings

12. Situational Couple Violence Situationally-provoked Violence • Conflicts turn to arguments that escalate • Both men and women do this • Men’s violence more likely to injure and frighten • Huge variability • 40% only one incident, but can involve chronic and severe violence • Variable causes of chronic SCV include chronic conflict, substance abuse, anger issues, communication issues, and others • By far the most common type

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

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

15. Are Women Really as Violent as Men? • Anti-feminist politics and conflicting data • Explaining the ostensible contradictions • A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence • The three major types • Gender differences and sampling biases • Dramatic Differences Among the Types • Violence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalation • A few health and relationship consequences • Different risk factors for perpetration • Policy Implications

16. Johnson, 2006 Mixed sample, married Pittsburgh, 1970s Intimate Terrorism 76% severe 75% escalated Shelter 80-90% General 2-4% 29% mutual General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Couple Violence 28% severe 28% escalated General 12-18% Shelter 10-20% 69% mutual Situational Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc .

17. Ansara & Hindin, 2010 Previous/current partners Canadian GSS 2004 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

18. Health & Relationship Outcomes by Type of Male Violence(various studies)

19. Different Risk FactorsStudies by Various Social ScientistsDifferent Locations and Sample TypesDifferent Measures • Intergenerational “transmission” • SCV d = +.11 IT d = +.35 • Marriage • SCV b = -.62 IT b = +.58 • Gender traditionalism • SCV d = -.14 IT d = +.80

20. Are Women Really as Violent as Men? • Anti-feminist politics and conflicting data • Explaining the ostensible contradictions • A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence • The three major types • Gender differences and sampling biases • Dramatic Differences Among the Types • Violence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalation • A few health and relationship consequences • Different risk factors for perpetration • Policy Implications

21. Primary Prevention/Education • Intimate terrorism • Equality and respect • Violent resistance • Intimate terrorism danger signs • Safety planning • Entrapment/escape issues • Situational couple violence • Sources of conflict, e.g., poverty • Anger management, communication, substance abuse

22. Screening/Triage • Different models for different clients • To screen we need to assess coercive control and violence for both partners • Safety first! • Initially assume the worst (intimate terrorism) • If SCV seems likely, try individual application of other approaches • If you are confidant that you are dealing with SCV, and safety has been demonstrated over time, you can move to couple approaches with protections in place

23. Intervention with PerpetratorsHold them all accountable in the criminal justice systemto provide an essential motivation for change • Intimate terrorism • Control-focused education • Violent resistance • Alternatives to violence/Safety planning • Neutralize entrapment • Situational couple violence • Sources of conflict, e.g., poverty • Anger management, communication, substance abuse rehab

24. Intervention for Survivors • Intimate terrorism • Long-term support • Alternatives to violent resistance • Empowerment to leave • Transitional support • Situational couple violence • Sources of conflict, e.g., poverty • Anger management, communication, substance abuse rehab

25. We make big mistakes if we don’t make big distinctions.www.personal.psu.edu/mpj Different types of partner violence have… • Different causes • Different developmental trajectories • Different effects • Different implications for policy and practice

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

27. Fals-Stewart, W., & Clinton-Sherrod, M. (2009). Treating intimate partner violence among substance-abusing dyads: The effect of couples therapy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(3), 257-263. Fals-Stewart, W., Klostermann, K., & Clinton-Sherrod, M. (2009). Substance abuse and intimate partner violence. In K. D. O'Leary (Ed.), Psychological and physical aggression in couples: Causes and interventions. (pp. 251-269 ). Washington, DC American Psychological Association. Gondolf, E. W. (2002). Batterer Intervention Systems: Issues, Outcomes, and Recommendations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gondolf, E. W. (2007). Theoretical and research support for the Duluth Model: A reply to Dutton and Corvo. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12(6), 644-657. Gondolf, E. W. (2008). Implementation of case management for batterer program participants. [Peer Reviewed]. Violence Against Women, 14(2), 208-225. doi: 10.1177/1077801207312589 Mills, L. G. (2008). Violent Partners: A Breakthrough Plan for Ending the Cycle of Abuse. New York, NY: Basic Books. Stith, S. M., & McCollum, E. E. (2009). Couples treatment for psychological and physical aggression. In K. D. O'Leary (Ed.), Psychological and Physical Aggression in Couples: Causes and Interventions (pp. 233-250). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Stith, S. M., McCollum, e. E., Rosen, K. H., & Locke, L. D. (2002). Multicouple group therapy for domestic violence. In F. W. Kaslow (Ed.), Comprehensive Handbook of Psychotherapy: Integrative/eclectic (Vol. 4, pp. 499-520). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Stith, S. M., Rosen, K. H., McCollum, E. E., & Thomsen, C. J. (2004). Treating intimate partner violence within intact couple relationships: Outcomes of multi-couple versus individual couple therapy. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy. Special Issue: Implications of Reseach with Diverse Families, 30(3), 305-318. A Few Useful References—research Fals-Stewart, W., & Clinton-Sherrod, M. (2009). Treating intimate partner violence among substance-abusing dyads: The effect of couples therapy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(3), 257-263. Graham-Kevan, N., & Archer, J. (2003). Intimate terrorism and common couple violence: A test of Johnson's predictions in four British samples. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(11), 1247-1270. Johnson, M. P. (2008). Types of Domestic Violence: Intimate Terrorism, Violent Resistance, and Situational Couple Violence. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Jouriles, E. N., McDonald, R., Slep, A. M. S., Heyman, R. E., & Garrido, E. (2008). Child abuse in the context of domestic violence: Prevalence, explanations, and practice implications. Violence and Victims, 23(2), 221-235. Leone, J. M. (2011). Suicidal behavior among low-income, African American female victims of intimate terrorism and situational couple violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(13), 2568-2591.

28. Fals-Stewart, W., & Clinton-Sherrod, M. (2009). Treating intimate partner violence among substance-abusing dyads: The effect of couples therapy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(3), 257-263. Fals-Stewart, W., Klostermann, K., & Clinton-Sherrod, M. (2009). Substance abuse and intimate partner violence. In K. D. O'Leary (Ed.), Psychological and physical aggression in couples: Causes and interventions. (pp. 251-269 ). Washington, DC American Psychological Association. Gondolf, E. W. (2002). Batterer Intervention Systems: Issues, Outcomes, and Recommendations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gondolf, E. W. (2007). Theoretical and research support for the Duluth Model: A reply to Dutton and Corvo. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12(6), 644-657. Gondolf, E. W. (2008). Implementation of case management for batterer program participants. [Peer Reviewed]. Violence Against Women, 14(2), 208-225. doi: 10.1177/1077801207312589 Mills, L. G. (2008). Violent Partners: A Breakthrough Plan for Ending the Cycle of Abuse. New York, NY: Basic Books. Stith, S. M., & McCollum, E. E. (2009). Couples treatment for psychological and physical aggression. In K. D. O'Leary (Ed.), Psychological and Physical Aggression in Couples: Causes and Interventions (pp. 233-250). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Stith, S. M., McCollum, e. E., Rosen, K. H., & Locke, L. D. (2002). Multicouple group therapy for domestic violence. In F. W. Kaslow (Ed.), Comprehensive Handbook of Psychotherapy: Integrative/eclectic (Vol. 4, pp. 499-520). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Stith, S. M., Rosen, K. H., McCollum, E. E., & Thomsen, C. J. (2004). Treating intimate partner violence within intact couple relationships: Outcomes of multi-couple versus individual couple therapy. Journal of Marital & Family Therapy. Special Issue: Implications of Reseach with Diverse Families, 30(3), 305-318. A Few Useful References—interventions Gondolf, E. W. (2008). Implementation of case management for batterer program participants. Violence Against Women, 14(2), 208-225. Gondolf, E. W. (2012). The Future of Batterer Programs: Reassessing Evidence-Based Practice. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Jaffe, P. G., Johnston, J. R., Crooks, C. V., & Bala, N. (2008). Custody disputes involving allegations of domestic violence: Toward a differentiated approach to parenting plans. Family Court Review, 46(3), 500-522. Mills, L. G. (2008). Violent Partners: A Breakthrough Plan for Ending the Cycle of Abuse. New York, NY: Basic Books. O’Farrell, T.J. & Fals-Stewart, W. (2006). Behavioral Couples Therapy for Alcoholism and Drug Abuse. New York: Guilford Press. Materials also available free at www.addictionandfamily.org. Pence, E. & Paymar ,M. (1993). Education Groups for Men Who Batter: The Duluth Model. New York: Springer. Stith, S. M., McCollum, E. E., & Rosen, K. H. (2011). Couples Therapy for Domestic Violence: Finding Safe Solutions. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.