Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Explaining Intimate Partner Violence: The Sociological Limitations of Victimization Studies

  • Published:
Sociological Forum

Abstract

This paper examines whether differentiating among types of intimate partner violence enhances the explanatory capacity of extant empirical models.The analysis uses national-level Canadian data to evaluate an alternative approach to operationalizing intimate partner violence, drawing upon Black's (1990) and Johnson's (1995) theoretical work. The main argument suggests that current efforts to explain intimate partner violence with victimization studies are inadequate because they typically do not measure key sociological variables. The failure to assess the contexts within which different types of violence occur further hinders explanatory efforts.The paper concludes with recommendations for innovative theoretical and methodological strategies to address these limitations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldarondo Etiony, Glenda Kaufman Kantor, and Jana L. Jasinski, 2002 “A risk marker analysis of wife assault in Latino families.” Violence Against Women 8:429–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson Kristin L., 1997 “Gender, status, and domestic violence: An integration of feminist and family violence approaches.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 57:655–669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson Kristin L., 2002 “Perpetrator or victim? Relationships between intimate partner violence and well-being.” Journal of Marriage and Family 64:851–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer John, 1999 “Assessment of the reliability of the Conflict Tactics Scale: A meta-analytic review.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 14:1263–1289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer John, 2000 “Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review.” Psychological Bulletin 126:651–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachman Ronet, 2000 “A comparison of annual incidence rates and contextual characteristics of intimate-partner violence against women from the National Crime Victimization Survey.” Violence Against Women 6:839–867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner M. P., 1988 The Moral Order of a Suburb. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner M. P., 1993 “Violent networks: The origins and management of domestic conflict.” In Richard B. Felson and James T. TeDeschi (eds.), Aggression and Violence: Social Interactionist Perspectives: 209–231. Washington: American Psychological Association.

  • Black Donald, 1979 “A strategy of pure sociology.” In Scott G. McNall (ed.), Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology: 149–68. New York: St. Martin's Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner M. P., 1988 The Moral Order of a Suburb. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner M. P., 1993 “Violent networks: The origins and management of domestic conflict.” In Richard B. Felson and James T. TeDeschi (eds.), Aggression and Violence: Social Interactionist Perspectives: 209–231. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black Donald, 1983 “Crime as social control.” American Sociological Review 48:34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black Donald, 1990 “The elementary forms of conflict management.” In School of Justice Studies, Arizona State University (ed.), New Directions in the Study of Justice, Law, and Social Control: 43–69. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black Donald, 1995 “The epistemology of pure sociology.” Law and Social Inquiry 20:829–870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black Donald, 2002 “Violent structures.” Paper presented at Workshop on Theories of Violence, sponsored by National Institute of Justice, Violence and Victimization Division, Washington, DC.

  • Brownridge Douglas A., 2002 “Cultural variation in male partner violence against women.” Violence Against Women 8:87–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black Donald, 1983 “Crime as social control.” American Sociological Review 48:34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black Donald, 1995 “The epistemology of pure sociology.” Law and Social Inquiry 20:829–870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black Donald, 2002 “Violent structures.” Paper presented at Workshop on Theories of Violence, sponsored by National Institute of Justice, Violence and Victimization Division, Washington, DC.

  • Brownridge Douglas A., 1990 “The elementary forms of conflict management.” In School of Justice Studies, Arizona State University (ed.), New Directions in the Study of Justice, Law, and Social Control: 43–69. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownridge Douglas A., 1995 “The epistemology of pure sociology.” Law and Social Inquiry 20:829–870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownridge Douglas A., 2002 “Violent structures.” Paper presented at Workshop on Theories of Violence, sponsored by National Institute of Justice, Violence and Victimization Division, Washington, DC.

  • Brownridge Douglas A., 1990 “The elementary forms of conflict management.” In School of Justice Studies, Arizona State University (ed.), New Directions in the Study of Justice, Law, and Social Control: 43–69. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownridge Douglas A., 1995 “The epistemology of pure sociology.” Law and Social Inquiry 20:829–870.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownridge Douglas A., 2002 “Violent structures.” Paper presented at Workshop on Theories of Violence, sponsored by National Institute of Justice, Violence and Victimization Division, Washington, DC.

  • Brownridge Douglas A., 2004 “Understanding women's heightened risk of violence in common-law unions.” Violence Against Women 10:626–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brush Lisa D., 1990 “Violent acts and injurious outcomes in married couples: Methodological issues in the National Survey of Families and Households.” Gender and Society 4:56–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge Valerie Pottie, 2000 “Spousal violence.” In Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics (eds.), Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile: 11–26. Ottawa: Minister of Industry.

  • Chappell Allison Taylor, Mary DeWees, and Marion J. Borg, 2003 “Applying Black's theory of law to domestic disputes.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern Sociological Society, Boston, Massachusetts.

  • Chappell Allison Taylor, Mary DeWees, and Marion J. Borg, Cook Sarah L., 2002 “Self-reports of sexual, physical, and nonphysical abuse perpetration.” Violence Against Women 8:541–565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooney Mark, 1998a Warriors and Peacemakers: How Third Parties Shape Violence. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooney Mark, 1998b “The dark side of community: Moralistic homicide and strong social ties.” Sociological Focus 31:135–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooney Mark, and Scott Phillips, 2002 “Typologizing violence: A Blackian perspective.” International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 22:75–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeKeseredy Walter S., 2000 “Current controversies on defining nonlethal violence against women in intimate heterosexual relationships.” Violence Against Women 6:728–746.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeKeseredy Walter S. and Linda MacLeod, 1997 Woman Abuse: A Sociological Story. Toronto: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeKeseredy Walter S., and Martin D. Schwartz, eds., 1998 Rethinking Violence Against Women. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobash R. Emerson and Russell Dobash, 1979 Violence Against Wives. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobash R. Emerson and Russell Dobash, 1998 Violent men and violent contexts:141–168. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobash Russell P., R. Emerson Dobash, Kate Cavanagh, and Ruth Lewis, 1998 “Separate and intersecting realities: A comparison of men's and women's accounts of violence against women.” Violence Against Women 4:382–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobash Russell P., R. Emerson Dobash, Kate Cavanagh, and Ruth Lewis, 2004 “Not an ordinary killer—Just an ordinary guy: When men murder an intimate woman partner.” Violence Against Women 10:577–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton Donald G., 1999 “Limitations of social learning models in explaining intimate aggression.” In Ximena B. Arriaga and Stuart Oskamp (eds.), Violence in Intimate Relationships: 73–87. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellsberg Mary, Lori Heise, Rodolfo Pena, Sonia Agurto, and Anna Winkvist, 2001 “Researching violence against women: Methodological considerations from three Nicaraguan studies.” Studies in Family Planning 32:1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ember Carol R., and Melvin Ember, 1994 “War, socialization, and interpersonal violence: A cross-cultural study.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 38:620–646.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erchak Gerald M., and Richard Rosenfeld, 1994 “Societal isolation, violent norms, and gender relations: A reexamination and extension of Levinson's model of wife beating.” Cross-Cultural Research 28:111–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felson Richard B., and James T. Tedeschi, 1995 “A social interactionist approach to violence: Cross-cultural applications.” In R. Barry Ruback and Neil A Weiner (eds.), Interpersonal Violent Behaviors: Social and Cultural Aspects: 153–70. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiebert Martin S., 1997 “Annotated bibliography: References examining assaults by women on their spouses/partners.” Sexuality and Culture 1:273–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox Greer Litton, Michael L. Benson, Alfred A. DeMaris, and Judy Van Wyk, 2002 “Economic distress and intimate violence: Testing family stress and resource theories.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 64:793–807.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelles Richard J., 1993 “Through a sociological lens: Social structure and family violence.” In R. Gelles and D. Loseke (eds.), Current Controversies on Family Violence: 31–46. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelles Richard J., 1997 Intimate Violence in Families, 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelles Richard J., and Donileen R. Loseke (eds.), 1993 Current Controversies on Family Violence. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelles Richard J., and Murray A. Straus, 1988 Intimate Violence: The Causes and Consequences of Abuse in the American Family. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon Malcolm, 2000 “Definitional issues in violence against women: Surveillance and research from a violence research perspective.” Violence Against Women 6:747–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham-Kevan, Nicola, and John Archer, 2003 “Intimate terrorism and common couple violence: A test of Johnson's predictions in four British samples.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 18:1247–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagemann-White, Carol, 2001 “European research on the prevalence of violence against women.” Violence Against Women 7:732–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haj-Yahia, Muhammad M., 2000 “The incidence of wife abuse and battering and some sociodemographic correlates as revealed by two national surveys in Palestinian society.” Journal of Family Violence 15:347–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison Deborah, 2002 The First Casualty: Violence Against Women in Canadian Military Communities. Toronto: James Lorimer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heise Lori, 1998 “Violence against women: An integrated, ecological framework.” Violence Against Women 4:262–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman Kristi L., David H. Demo, and John N. Edwards, 1994 “Physical wife abuse in a non-Western society: An integrated theoretical approach.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 56:131–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang Chien Ju, and Tiffany Gunn, 2001 “An examination of domestic violence in an African-American community in North Carolina: Causes and consequences.” Journal of Black Studies 31:790–811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson Neil, and John Gottman, 1998 When Men Batter Women: New Insights into Ending Abusive Relationships. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewkes Rachel, 2002 “Intimate partner violence: Causes and prevention.” Lancet 359:1423–1429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiwani Yasmin, 2000 “The 1999 General Social Survey on spousal violence: An analysis.” Canadian Woman Studies/Les cahiers de la femme 20:34–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson Holly, and Valerie Pottie Bunge, 2001 “Prevalence and consequences of spousal assault in Canada.” Canadian Journal of Criminology 43:27–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson Holly, and Tina Hotton, 2001 “Spousal violence.” In Statistics Canada (eds.), Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile 2001: 26–41. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

  • Johnson Michael P., 1995 “Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 57:283– 294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson Michael P., 1999 “Two types of violence against women in the American family: Identifying patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence.” Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of National Council on Family Relations, Irvine, California.

  • Johnson Michael P., 2001 “Conflict and control: Symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence.” In A. Booth, A. C. Crouter, and M. Clements (eds.), Couples in Conflict: 95–104. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson Michael P., In press “Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence.” Violence Against Women.

  • Johnson Michael P., and Kathleen J. Ferraro, 2000 “Research on domestic violence in the 1990s: Making distinctions.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 62:948–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson Michael P., and Janel M. Leone In press “The differential effects of intimate terrorism and situational couple violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women survey.” Journal of Family Issues.

  • Kim Jae Yop, and Kyu-taik Sung, 2000 “Conjugal violence in Korean American families: A residue of the cultural tradition.” Journal of Family Violence 15:331–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim Kwang-iel, and Youn-gyu Cho, 1992 “Epidemiological survey of spousal abuse in Korea.” In Emilio C. Viano (ed.), Intimate Violence: Interdisciplinary Perspectives: 277–282. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimmel Michael S., 2002 “Gender symmetry in domestic violence: A substantive and methodological research review.” Violence Against Women 8:1332–1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight Rosemary, and Suzanne E. Hatty, 1992 “Violence against women in Australia's capital city.” In Emilio C. Viano (ed.), Intimate Violence: Interdisciplinary Perspectives: 255–264. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurz Demie, 1993 “Physical assaults by husbands: A major social problem.” In R. Gelles and D. Loseke (eds.), Current Controversies on Family Violence: 88–103. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leone Janel M., Michael P. Johnson, Catherine L. Cohan, and Susan E. Lloyd, 2004 “Consequences of male partner violence for low-income minority women.” Journal of Marriage and Family 66:471–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd Sally A., and Beth C. Emery, 2000 The Dark Side of Courtship: Physical and Sexual Aggression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loue Sana, 2000 “Intimate partner violence: Bridging the gap between law and science.” Journal of Legal Medicine 21:1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson Michael P., 1999 “Two types of violence against women in the American family: Identifying patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence.” Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of National Council on Family Relations, Irvine, California.

  • Johnson Michael P., 2001 “Conflict and control: Symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence.” In A. Booth, A. C. Crouter, and M. Clements (eds.), Couples in Conflict: 95–104. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson Michael P., In press “Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence.” Violence Against Women.

  • Johnson Michael P., and Kathleen J. Ferraro, 2001 Intimate Partner Violence: Societal, Medical, Legal, and Individual Responses. New York: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan Ross, and Rosemary Gartner, 1999 “When she brings home the bacon: Labor-force participation and the risk of spousal violence against women.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 61:947–958.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maundeni Tapologo, 2002 “Wife abuse among a sample of divorced women in Botswana: A research note.” Violence Against Women 8:257–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melzer Scott A., 2002 “Gender, work, and intimate violence: Men's occupational violence spillover and compensatory violence.” Journal of Marriage and Family 64:820–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalski Joseph H., 2002 “Managing conflict within the family: A theoretical and empirical examination of Black's theory of social control.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern Sociological Society, Baltimore, MD.

  • Michalski Joseph H., 2004 “Making sociological sense out of trends in intimate partner violence: The social structure of violence against women.” Violence Against Women 10:652–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mihalic Sharon W., and Delbert Elliott, 1997 “A social learning theory model of marital violence.” Journal of Family Violence 12:21–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirrlees-Black, C., 1999 Domestic Violence: Findings from a New British Crime Survey Self-Completion Questionnaire. Home Office Research Study 191. London, UK: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morash Merry, Hoan N. Bui, and Anna M. Santiago, 2000 “Cultural-specific gender ideology and wife abuse in Mexican-descent families.” International Review of Victimology 7:67–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno Claudia L., Nabila El-Bassel, Louisa Gilbert, and Takeshi Wada, 2002 “Correlates of poverty and partner abuse among women on methadone.” Violence Against Women 8:455–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse Barbara J., 1995 “Beyond the Conflict Tactics Scale: Assessing gender differences in partner violence.” Violence and Victims 10:251–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Leary, K. Daniel, 1993 “Through a psychological lens: Personality traits, personality disorders, and levels of violence.” In R. Gelles and D. Loseke (eds.), Current Controversies on Family Violence: 7–30. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raj Anita, and Jay Silverman, 2002 “Violence against immigrant women: The roles of culture, context, and legal immigrant status on intimate partner violence.” Violence Against Women 8:367–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Randall Melanie, and Lori Haskell, 1995 “Sexual violence in women's lives: Findings from the women's safety project, a community-based survey.” Violence Against Women 1:6– 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rankin Larry B., Daniel G. Saunders, and Reg A. Williams, 2000 “Mediators of attachment style, social support, and sense of belonging in predicting woman abuse by African-American men.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 15:1060–1080.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanday Peggy Reeves, 1981 “The socio-cultural context of rape: A cross-cultural study.” Journal of Social Issues 37:5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz Martin D., 2000 “Methodological issues in the use of survey data for measuring and characterizing violence against women.” Violence Against Women 6:815–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sev'er, Aysan, 2002 Fleeing the House of Horrors: Women Who Have Left Abusive Partners. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sev'er, Aysan, Myrna Dawson, and Holly Johhnson, 2004 “Guest editors' introduction to lethal and nonlethal violence against women by intimate partners: Trends and prospects in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada.” Violence Against Women 10:563–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith Michael D., 1990 “Sociodemographic risk factors in wife abuse: Results from a survey of Toronto women.” Canadian Journal of Sociology 15:39–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorenson Susan B., Dawn M. Upchurch, and Haikang Shen, 1996 “Violence and injury in marital arguments: Risk patterns and gender differences.” American Journal of Public Health 865:35–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Statistics Canada, 2001 General Social Survey—Cycle 13 Overview: Personal Safety and Perceptions of Policing. Ottawa: Minister of Industry.

  • Stith Sandra M., Karen H. Rosen, Kimberly A. Middleton, Amy L. Busch, Kirsten Lundeberg, and Russell P. Carlton, 2000 “The intergenerational transmission of spouse abuse: A meta-analysis.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 62:640–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straus Murray A., 1993 “Physical assaults by wives: A major social problem.” In R. Gelles and D. Loseke, (eds.), Current Controversies on Family Violence: 67–87. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straus Murray A., 1999 “The controversy over domestic violence by women: A methodological, theoretical, and sociology of science analysis.” In Ximena B. Arriaga and Stuart Oskamp (eds.), Violence in Intimate Relationships: 17–44. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straus Murray A., and Richard J. Gelles, eds., 1990 Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptations to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straus Murray A., and Stephen Sweet, 1992 “Verbal/symbolic aggression in couples: Incidence rates and relationships to personal characteristics.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 54:346–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan Suzanne C., and David L. Snow, 2002 “A typology of women's use of violence in intimate relationships.” Violence Against Women 8:286–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szinovacz Maximiliane E., and Lance C. Egley, 1995 “Comparing one-partner and couple data on sensitive marital behaviors: The case of marital violence.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 57:995–1010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tjaden Patricia, and Nancy Thoennes, 2000 “Prevalence and consequences of male-to-female and female-to-male intimate partner violence as measured by the National Violence Against Women Survey.” Violence Against Women 6:142–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tonizzo Santina, Kevin Howells, Andrew Day, Daniel Reidpath, and Irene Froyland, 2000 “Attribution of negative partner behavior by men who physically abuse their partners.” Journal of Family Violence 15:155–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trainor Catherine, Mylène Lamber, and Mia Dauvergne, 2002 “Spousal violence.” In Statistics Canada (eds.), Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile 2002: 6–25. Ottawa: Statistics Canada.

  • Tucker James, 1999 The Therapeutic Corporation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker James, and Susan Ross In press “Corporal punishment and Black's theory of social control.” In M. Donnelly and M. Straus (eds.), Corporal Punishment of Children in Theoretical Perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

  • United Nations Development Fund for Women, 2004 Facts and Figures on Violence Against Women. Retrieved July 23, 2004, from http://www.unifem.org/campaigns/november25/facts_figures.php.

  • Yllö, Kersti A., 1993 “Through a feminist lens: Gender, power, and violence.” In Gelles and Loseke (eds.): 47–62.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph H. Michalski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Michalski, J.H. Explaining Intimate Partner Violence: The Sociological Limitations of Victimization Studies. Sociol Forum 20, 613–640 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11206-005-9060-5

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11206-005-9060-5

Key Words

Navigation