Abstract
Controversies persist regarding the pervasiveness of gender symmetrical patterns of intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration even as IPV research has proliferated. Johnson’s typology accounts for gender symmetrical and asymmetrical patterns of partner violence; unfortunately this framework has been poorly integrated into our research methods resulting in a fragmented knowledgebase. The original typology can be expanded to account for patterns of control absent of physical violence at the dyadic level. Measures based upon an expanded typology will allow us to better explore the theoretical underpinnings of gender symmetry in partner violence categories, and facilitate category-specific intervention development.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651–680.
Basile, K. C., Arias, I., Desai, S., & Thompson, M. P. (2004). The differential association of intimate partner physical, sexual, psychological, and stalking violence and posttraumatic stress symptoms in a nationally representative sample of women. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 17(5), 413–421.
Coker, A. L., Davis, K. E., Arias, I., Desai, S., Sanderson, M., Brandt, H. M., & Smith, P. H. (2002). Physical and mental health effects of intimate partner violence for men and women. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 23(4), 260–268.
Dobash, R., & Dobash, R. (1979). Violence against wives: A case against patriarchy. New York. NY: Free Press.
Dobash, R. P., Dobash, R. E., Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1992). The myth of sexual symmetry in marital violence. Social Problems, 39(1), 71–91.
Dutton, M. A. (1992). Understanding women's responses to domestic violence: A redefinition of battered woman syndrome. Hofstra Law Review, 21, 1193–1208.
Dutton, M. A., Goodman, L., & Schmidt, R. J. (2006). Development and validation of a coercive control measure for intimate partner violence: Final technical report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
Evans, M., Gergory, A., Feder, G., Howarth, E., & Hegarty, K. (2016). “Even ‘daily’ is not enough”: how well do we measure domestic violence and abuse? – A think-aloud study of a commonly used self-report scale. Violence and Victims, 31, 3–26.
Fiebert, M. S. (2010). References examining assaults by women on their spouses or male partners: An annotated bibliography. Sexuality and Culture, 14(1), 49–91.
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, 1247–1270.
Johnson, M. P. (2006). Conflict and control: gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 12, 1003–1018.
Johnson, M. P. (2008). A typology of domestic violence: intimate terrorism, violent resistance and situational couple violence. Lebanon, NH: Northeastern University Press.
Kulkarni, S. J., Woods, S. J., & Mennicke, A. M. (2016). Intimate partner violence (IPV) in the workplace: Exploring gender differences in current health outcomes. Health and Social Work.
Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J. (2010). Controversies involving gender and intimate partner violence in the United States. Sex Roles, 62, 221–225.
Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Mirsa, T. A., Selwyn, C., & Rohling, M. (2012). Rate of bidirectional versus unidirectional intimate partner violence across samples, sexual orientations, and race/ethnicities: a comprehensive review. Partner Abuse, 3(2), 199–230.
Loseke, D. R., & Kurz, D. (2005). Men’s violence toward women is the serious social problem. In D. R. Loseke, R. J. Gelles, & M. M. Cavanaugh (Eds.), Current Controversies on Family Violence (pp. 79–95). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth model. Springer Publishing Company.
Ross, J. M., & Babcock, J. C. (2009). Gender differences in partner violence in context: deconstructing Johnson’s (2001) control-based typology of violent couples. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 18, 604–622.
Smith, P. H., Earp, J. A., & DeVellis, R. (1995). Measuring battering, Development of the Women’s Experience with Battering (WEB) Scale. Women's Health, 1(4), 273–288.
Smith, P. H., Smith, J. B., & Earp, J. L. (1999). Beyond the measurement trap: a reconstructed conceptualization and measurement of woman battering. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 179–195.
Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. New York. NY: Oxford University Press.
Straus, M. A. (2010). Thirty years of denying the evidence on gender symmetry in partner violence: implications for prevention and treatment. Partner Abuse, 1, 332–362.
Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 13, 283–316.
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Full report of the prevalence, incidence, and consequences of violence against women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mennicke, A., Kulkarni, S. Understanding Gender Symmetry within an Expanded Partner Violence Typology. J Fam Viol 31, 1013–1018 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-016-9867-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-016-9867-2