Search results

The purpose of the study was to provide a comparative analysis on the psychological and socio-cultural impacts of COVID-19 on victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) in South Africa (SA) and the USA.

The authors collected media and scholarly articles that dealt with IPV victims during the early phase of the pandemic. This study focused solely on SA and the USA because of their unique contexts and the fact that the authors are residents of these countries. The authors observed how both presidents dealt with IPV amidst the COVID 19 pandemic, especially when stay-at-home orders were in place. Aspects relating to the psychological and socio-cultural impacts amidst the pandemic were considered.

The authors found that in both countries, many black women from low socio-economic backgrounds experience IPV. Being in isolated spaces with their perpetrators prohibits victims from reporting the abuse. As the world attempts to curb the spread of COVID-19 infections, effective strategies have been suggested for victims and perpetrators. The authors found the approaches of the two governments (until the Biden Administration in 2021) to be starkly different in terms of effective strategies and the neglect and downplaying of the extent of one or both pandemics (i.e. COVID-19 and IPV). Pro-safety, equality, gender and race-conscious embracing approaches to overcome IPV are urgently needed.

The paper focused on IPV during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. It provides relevant information about IPV in both countries, especially when stay-at-home orders are in place.

This research explores the experiences of self-identified queer victims of intimate partner violence, their personal encounters with violence-response organizations, and the extent to which their gender/sexual identity impacted their willingness to disclose their abuse.

Eleven respondents were recruited from online queer social networking sites and were interviewed via e-mail or Skype.

All respondents identified as gender variant or had an abusive partner who identified as gender variant. All study participants reported having experienced physical abuse. Several reported sexual and emotional abuse. Respondents reported a reluctance to seek institutional support and intervention. Several respondents were unable to recognize abuse as abuse until much later. When asked about whether or not they sought intervention, most respondents in this study described a sort of isolation, where they perceived that they were facing prejudice and stigmatization, and risked being dismissed and delegitimized. Several respondents sensed that there simply were no organizations that were sensitized and available to queer-identified victims. Even if they had pursued help from existing institutions, several respondents communicated a doubt that they could truly be of service, since these institutions likely operated with heteronormative narratives and practices. Collectively, the respondents in this study describe experiences as victims of IPV that are clearly mediated by homophobia and cissism.

We emphasize the need for an “intersectional awareness” in scholarship and organizing surrounding IPV. We critique the state’s gender-based practices of violence intervention and propose alternative possibilities for more inclusive intervention and organizing on behalf of queer victims of violence.

The body of literature that exists on IPV among LGBTQ persons is small, and much of this literature is focused on how patterns of IPV differ from heterosexual violence. In exploring IPV among self-identified queer victims, we depart from most research on IPV in that our analysis is not so much concerned with the gender or sex assignment of the victim, but rather the gendered context in which the violence is playing out.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of gender in intimate partner violence (IPV) and, based upon the author’s experience as an expert witness, 25 years of clinical experience working with IPV perpetrators and victims, and a review of the relevant scholarly literature, provide judges, attorneys, mental health professionals and expert court witness suggestions for the adjudication of cases involving IPV in homicide and other cases.

The author reviewed the extant general domestic violence research literature, depending largely on results from findings from the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project, a series of 17 literature review published in five issues of the peer-reviewed journal, Partner Ause. Other relevant research articles were found via a search of the PschInfo database, using the keywords “intimate partner homicides,” “domestic violence homicides,” “intimate partner homicides and gender” and “domestic violence homicides and gender.”

The judicial response to IPV perpetration has been limited by common misconceptions, among them the confusion between most forms of IPV, which are primarily bi-directional and less consequential and battering, which involves more serious assaults and is typically motivated out of a desire to dominate and control one’s partner. Another misconception is that women are much more likely than men to perpetrate IPV in self-defense or to express emotion. On the other hand, there is no question that female victims are much more likely to experience severe physical injuries, and that women account for approximately three-quarters of homicide victims.

These include the following: this concise review of IPV research provides a clearer understanding of IPV, useful for anyone working in the field. Mental health professionals working with IPV perpetrators, as well as victims, can draw from this research best practice suggestions in working with more problematic cases. The paper should be especially useful to anyone involved in the adjudication of IPV cases, including lethal cases. In particular, prosecutors and attorneys working for the defense are given suggestions on how to obtain more reliable research data, choose more fruitful questions for their clients, and better conceptualize a case overall.

This paper presents a more nuanced and evidence-based conceptualization of serious and lethal IPV, drawing on a broad research base not generally available to members of the legal profession.

The purpose of this paper is to understand the relationship among police legitimacy/trust and experiences of intimate partner violence (IPV), including victims’ decisions to report IPV to police and police responses to IPV.

Data were drawn from the 2017 Survey of Police–Public Encounters II – a cross-sectional, general population survey of adults from New York City and Baltimore (n=1,000). Regression analyses were used to examine associations among police legitimacy/trust, IPV exposure, police reporting of IPV, and perceived police responses to IPV and interaction effects.

Higher levels of IPV exposure were significantly associated with lower levels of police legitimacy/trust; however, this relationship was stronger among African–American participants than non-African–American participants. Higher levels of police legitimacy/trust were significantly associated with more positive police responses to IPV and this relationship was stronger among heterosexual participants than sexual minority participants.

Future research should examine prospective relationships to understand causal mechanisms linking individual perceptions of police legitimacy/trust, experiences with IPV and victims’ interactions with police.

Low levels of legitimacy/trust between police and citizens may result, in part, if police are engaged in negative or inadequate responses to reports of IPV. Police–social work partnerships can enhance effective police responses to IPV, particularly to racial/ethnic and sexual minority individuals.

This study provides empirical evidence linking police legitimacy/trust to the experiences of IPV and perceived police responses to reports of IPV, including important group differences among victims based on race/ethnicity and sexual orientation.

Social psychology has focused on an individual’s reaction to emergencies and witnessing a crime, which has developed theories of bystander intervention and bystander apathy. The purpose of this study is to explore why people choose to intervene when they are a bystander to intimate partner violence (IPV) and the psychological processes that underpin this. Decision-making was explored drawing on literature from the whistleblowing field.

Through a mixed methods epistemology, this study explored factors that explained intervening behaviour concerning IPV. In total, 212 participants who had known someone who was a victim of IPV were recruited from the general population.

A logistic regression model indicated that conscientiousness and fairness were found to predict intervening behaviour. Being a child witness was found to predict non-intervening behaviour. Qualitative analysis revealed three types of bystander apathy: those who lacked capability as they were children; those who were indifferent and did not see it as their place to intervene; and those who wanted to intervene but did not as they were frightened of exacerbating the situation.

IPV has significant physical and psychological effects on victims. However, the choice to intervene is complex, and bystander intervention in this study was also associated in some cases with not only a continuation of the IPV behaviour towards the victim but also aggression and physical violence towards the bystander (whistleblower retaliation). Based on the findings of this study, recommendations are made for how to support bystanders and victims of IPV.

This study involved participants with real-life experience of being a bystander to IPV. The mixed methodology provided an insight into the psychological processes, which underpin bystander experiences of IPV and maps onto the literature in relation to whistleblowing.

Coercive control (which is a form of intimate partner violence [IPV]) is a significant public health concern affecting millions of people throughout the world. Whilst exposure to IPV in childhood and adolescence has been shown to contribute to the intergenerational transmission of IPV, this alone does not explain IPV. A range of bio-psycho-social factors contribute to IPV which includes exposure to peer influence on social media platforms, whereby research has shown this online expression of views and opinions can change off-line behaviour. This has extended to not only purchasing products but also influencing attitudes in relation to illegal behaviour such as sexual harassment and sexual assault. The purpose of this study was to explore what young people are being exposed to online, through social media, surrounding coercive controlling behaviour.

According to Fazel et al. (2021), real-time social media data can provide important information about trends in public attitudes and attitudes towards events in the news. This study used data from Twitter to explore what adolescents are being exposed to online surrounding coercive and controlling behaviour. The data was subsequently analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

Three overarching themes were found in relation to coercive control: the Educator; Gaslighter; and the Comedian. Two of these were forms of secondary victimisation.

Social media provides a powerful platform through which people’s attitudes and behaviours may be influenced both positively and negatively in relation to socio-political issues (Lozano-Blasco et al., 2022). The implications of the findings in this study are discussed with recommendations for how social media platforms could be supported to act prevent them from being used as a tool to facilitate the distribution of hate speech in relation to IPV and instead be used as a platform for psycho-education.

Previous research in this field has tended to focus on the impact of IPV and the prevalence rates of IPV in young people, but not on the different types of information young people may be exposed to surrounding relationships on social media platforms.

Research showing that women commit high rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) against men has been controversial because IPV is typically framed as caused by the patriarchal construction of society and men's domination over women. Johnson's (1995) typology of common couple violence (CCV) and intimate terrorism (IT) attempted to resolve this controversy, but he maintained that IT was caused by patriarchy and committed almost exclusively by men. This study investigates Johnson's theory as it applies to a sample of 302 men who sustained IPV from their female partners and sought help, and a comparison sample of community men. Results showed that the male helpseekers sample was comprised of victims of IT and that violence by the male victims was part of a pattern of what Johnson labels violent resistance. Men in the community sample who were involved in IPV conformed to Johnson's description of CCV. Results are discussed in terms of research, policy, and practice implications of acknowledging women's use of severe IPV and controlling behaviour against their male partners.

The purpose of this study is to understand mediation in divorce cases where intimate partner violence (IPV) is a concern. These cases may involve managing power imbalances, coercive control or risk for continued violence.

In this paper, the authors use feminist and sociological theoretical approaches and grounded theory to analyze triangulated ethnographic data to explore how mediators construct and manage the issue of IPV in mediation.

The results indicate that mediators often share a common discourse about IPV that asserts that mediators are professionals with the skills to both identify IPV and to appropriately conduct mediations where IPV is present. However, to achieve successful mediations mediators sometimes choose to discount the seriousness of IPV in assessments. They also use a set of fluid strategies to handle potential power imbalances that allow them to represent themselves as unbiased, even while those strategies risk the equity of the mediation.

The authors share several strategies that could enhance the social justice of the process for all parties, including uniformity in assessing whether IPV is a concern and oversight of mediators’ practices and training.

The results indicate mediators often share a common discourse about IPV that asserts mediators are professionals with the skills to identify IPV and to appropriately conduct mediations where IPV is present. To reach settlement mediators use a set of fluid mediation and accommodation strategies to handle potential power imbalances due to IPV that allow them to represent themselves as impartial, even while those strategies may risk equity in the mediation.

The unique data provide a behind-the-scenes look at mediation generated from participant observation of mediation training and actual mediations, along with interviews with 30 practicing mediators.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the influence of contextual factors on the attribution of responsibility to female victims of an intimate partner violence (IPV) episode. The victim’s infidelity and the perpetrator’s alcohol abuse constituted the contextual factors in the investigation. The bystander’s age, gender, and attitude towards gender roles were predicted to influence the attribution of responsibility to an IPV victim, and their willingness to help.

An experimental study was conducted with 464 Italian participants with two independent conditions incorporated into a fictional scenario, measuring the different levels of the dependent variables under investigation. The participants were randomly assigned to different conditions provided their answers via an anonymous questionnaire.

The participants attributed more responsibility to the victim when they admitted infidelity, controlling for gender role norms and sexism. Attribution of responsibility, male gender, and attitudes towards the male gender role were significantly associated with less willingness to help the victim.

The results point to the importance of increasing the bystander’s role in preventing IPV by addressing gender role norms and their impact on the justification of violence.

The study complements the existing literature by providing new evidence of the barriers that prevent the bystander’s intervention in IPV episodes. A clearer understanding of these barriers will help to develop strategies that aim to prevent violence in the future.

Technology-facilitated abuse, so-called “tech abuse,” through phones, trackers, and other emerging innovations, has a substantial impact on the nature of intimate partner violence (IPV). The current chapter examines the risks and harms posed to IPV victims/survivors from the burgeoning Internet of Things (IoT) environment. IoT systems are understood as “smart” devices such as conventional household appliances that are connected to the internet. Interdependencies between different products together with the devices' enhanced functionalities offer opportunities for coercion and control. Across the chapter, we use the example of IoT to showcase how and why tech abuse is a socio-technological issue and requires not only human-centered (i.e., societal) but also cybersecurity (i.e., technical) responses. We apply the method of “threat modeling,” which is a process used to investigate potential cybersecurity attacks, to shift the conventional technical focus from the risks to systems toward risks to people. Through the analysis of a smart lock, we highlight insufficiently designed IoT privacy and security features and uncover how seemingly neutral design decisions can constrain, shape, and facilitate coercive and controlling behaviors.