Elsevier

Aggression and Violent Behavior

Volume 10, Issue 1, November–December 2004, Pages 65-98
Aggression and Violent Behavior

Intimate partner physical abuse perpetration and victimization risk factors: A meta-analytic review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2003.09.001Get rights and content

Abstract

Evidence from 85 studies was examined to identify risk factors most strongly related to intimate partner physical abuse perpetration and victimization. The studies produced 308 distinct effect sizes. These effect sizes were then used to calculate composite effect sizes for 16 perpetration and 9 victimization risk factors. Large effect sizes were found between perpetration of physical abuse and five risk factors (emotional abuse, forced sex, illicit drug use, attitudes condoning marital violence, and marital satisfaction). Moderate effect sizes were calculated between perpetration of physical abuse and six risk factors (traditional sex-role ideology, anger/hostility, history of partner abuse, alcohol use, depression, and career/life stress). A large effect size was calculated between physical violence victimization and the victim using violence toward her partner. Moderate effect sizes were calculated between female physical violence victimization and depression and fear of future abuse.

Introduction

Intimate partner violence is a pervasive social problem that has devastating effects on all family members as well as on the larger community. A large body of research has focused on gaining a greater understanding of risk factors associated with physical abuse perpetration and victimization. Risk factors are characteristics associated with an increased likelihood that a problem behavior will occur. Although presence of one or more risk markers does not necessarily indicate that a causal relationship is present, the odds of an associated event are greater when one or more risk markers are present. Numerous risk factors have been found to be associated with partner violence. However, findings across studies are often contradictory, making it difficult to condense the information into a general scope of knowledge on the topic.

Meta-analysis is a statistical method for reviewing multiple studies across the relevant research literature and provides a method for comparison of separate studies made possible using effect sizes. The effect size is a statistical representation of the magnitude of the relationship between two variables. Statistical procedures standardize the data from each individual study and the standardized data are then reported as an effect size. Because results have been transformed to a common metric, the magnitude of effect sizes from different studies may be compared. In this article, we present results from a meta-analytic review designed to summarize data on intimate partner violence risk factors gained between the years of 1980 and 2000. In addition, this meta-analysis identifies areas that need additional empirical work.

Section snippets

Literature review

Previous meta-analyses have been conducted on individual risk factors and partner violence. For example, in their meta-analysis, Sugarman and Hotaling (1995) report an effect size of r=−.18 for the relationship between social desirability and intimate violence. Stith et al. (2000) examined the relationship between family of origin violence and intimate partner violence. The authors report effect sizes ranging from r=.08 to r=.35 between domestic violence and various aspects of witnessing or

Theoretical perspective

Theoretical perspectives on intimate partner violence have shifted from single factor to multifactor frameworks. These multifactor frameworks suggest that partner violence is not simply caused by an individual's patriarchal belief system or psychological dysfunction but rather result from the interaction between various characteristics of the individual and their environment. Dutton's (1995a) nested ecological theory on partner violence has guided our choice of risk factors examined in this

Literature search

Computer database searches were the primary method of identifying articles for inclusion in this study. The following computer databases were searched for studies conducted between 1980 and 2000: ERIC, Sociological Abstracts, Medline, PsychLit, Social Sciences Abstracts, and the Social Sciences Citation Index. Key words used in the search were intimate partner and abuse, intimate partner and violence; spousal/spouse and violence, spousal/spouse abuse, spousal/spouse and aggression, family and

Results

At least four studies using different samples, which contain appropriate statistical data, are needed to calculate a composite effect size for any risk factor; therefore, we were unable to calculate any composite effect sizes for male victims. We were unable to find at least four studies with appropriate data to calculate composite effect sizes for nine offender-related risk factors (i.e., physically abused a child, violent toward nonfamily members, pet abuse, controlling behaviors, stalking,

Offender risk factors

This section presents results only for male offenders except in the case of marital satisfaction. We were able to calculate separate effect sizes for male and female offenders and marital satisfaction.

Victim risk factors

As we predicted, variables at the exosystem level had a smaller impact on victimization than microsystem or ontogentic variables. However, as in the case of offender risk factors, variables at the ontogentic level did not clearly result in stronger effect sizes than those at the microsystem level. In other words, both relationship and individual variables appear to be important in understanding victimization.

Discussion

This study used Dutton's (1995a) nested ecological theory of partner violence to examine risk factors examined in this study. Partial support was given to our predictions. For both perpetration and victimization, risk factors at the exosystem level (assumed to be most distal from the violence) resulted in the smallest effect sizes. However, factors at the microsystem and ontogentic system levels were not clearly different in their relationship to intimate partner violence. Five offender risk

Acknowledgements

We thank Dr. Joel Milner, Ms. Mary Behrend, Col. Rene' Robichaux, and Col. Virgil Patterson for their assistance in this project. In addition, we want to thank Dr. David Sugarman for his comments on earlier versions of this manuscript.

References (144)

  • K.A. *Barbour et al.

    The experience and expression of anger in maritally violent and maritally discordant–nonviolent men

    Behavior Therapy

    (1998)
  • S.H. *Dinwiddie

    Psychiatric disorders among wife batterers

    Comprehensive Psychiatry

    (1992)
  • E. *Aldarondo et al.

    Social predictors of wife assault cessation

  • E. *Aldarondo et al.

    Risk marker analysis of the cessation and persistence of wife assault

    Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

    (1996)
  • P.R. Amato et al.

    Parental divorce and adult well-being: A meta-analysis

    Journal of Marriage and the Family

    (1991)
  • M.C. *Astin et al.

    Posttraumatic stress disorder and childhood abuse in battered women: Comparisons with maritally distressed women

    Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

    (1995)
  • J.C. *Babcock et al.

    Power and violence: The relation between communication patterns, power discrepancies, and domestic violence

    Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

    (1993)
  • J. *Barling et al.

    Work stressors and wife abuse

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (1986)
  • O.W. *Barnett et al.

    Alcohol use in male spouse abusers and their female partners

    Journal of Family Violence

    (1993)
  • O.W. *Barnett et al.

    The relationship between violence, social support, and self-blame in battered women

    Journal of Interpersonal Violence

    (1996)
  • S.A. *Bauserman et al.

    Relationships among marital investment, marital satisfaction, and marital commitment in domestically victimized and nonvictimized wives

    Violence and Victims

    (1992)
  • R. *Beasley et al.

    Personality characteristics of male spouse abusers

    Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

    (1992)
  • A. Beck et al.

    An inventory for measuring depression

    Archives of General Psychiatry

    (1961)
  • D. Beere et al.

    The sex-role egalitarianism scale: A measure of attitudes toward equality between the sexes

    Sex Roles

    (1994)
  • D.J. *Boyle et al.

    Generalized versus spouse-specific anger/hostility and men's violence against intimates

    Violence and Victims

    (1996)
  • M.B. *Brinkerhoff et al.

    Religious involvement and spousal violence: The Canadian case

    Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion

    (1992)
  • A. *Browne et al.

    The impact of recent partner violence on poor women's capacity to maintain work

    Violence Against Women

    (1999)
  • L. *Bullock et al.

    The prevalence and characteristics of battered women in a primary care setting

    Nurse Practitioner

    (1989)
  • M. Burt

    Cultural myths and supports for rape

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1980)
  • A.H. Buss et al.

    An inventory for assessing different kinds of hostility

    Journal of Consulting Psychology

    (1957)
  • C.A. *Byrne et al.

    Marital satisfaction and marital violence: Moderating effects of attributional processes

    Journal of Family Psychology

    (1997)
  • P.L. *Caesar

    Exposure to violence in the families-of-origin among wife-abusers and maritally nonviolent men

    Violence and Victims

    (1988)
  • D. Cahalan et al.

    American drinking practices: A national study of drinking behavior and attitudes

    (1969)
  • J.C. *Campbell

    A test of two explanatory models of women's responses to battering

    Nursing Research

    (1989)
  • J.C. *Campbell

    Women's responses to sexual abuse in intimate relationships

    Health Care for Women International

    (1989)
  • J.C. Campbell et al.

    Forced sex and intimate partner violence: Effects on women's risk and women's health

    Violence Against Women

    (1999)
  • M. *Cascardi et al.

    Characteristics of women physically abused by their spouses and who seek treatment regarding marital conflict

    Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

    (1995)
  • A.H. *Clark et al.

    Trauma exposure and alcohol use in battered women

    Violence Against Women

    (2000)
  • S. Cohen et al.

    A global measure of perceived stress

    Journal of Health and Social Behavior

    (1983)
  • K.H. *Coleman et al.

    Factors affecting conjugal violence

    Journal of Psychology

    (1980)
  • J.V. *Cordova et al.

    Negative reciprocity and communication in couples with a violent husband

    Journal of Abnormal Psychology

    (1993)
  • W. Coryell et al.

    Clinical assessment: Use of nonphysician interviewers

    Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease

    (1978)
  • C.B. *Cunradi et al.

    Alcohol-related problems and intimate partner violence among White, Black, and Hispanic couples in the U.S

    Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research

    (1999)
  • A. *DeMaris et al.

    Female victims of spouse violence: Factors influencing their level of fearfulness

    Family Relations

    (1996)
  • L.R. Derogatis

    The brief symptom inventory

    (1975)
  • L.R. Derogatis et al.

    The SCL-90: An outpatient psychiatric rating scale: Preliminary report

    Psychopharmacology Bulletin

    (1973)
  • A.M. Dewhurst

    Aggression against women by men: Sexual and spousal assault

    Journal of Offender Rehabilitation

    (1992)
  • J. *Dienemann et al.

    Intimate partner abuse among women diagnosed with depression

    Issues in Mental Health Nursing

    (2000)
  • B.P. Dohrenwend et al.

    Nonspecific psychological distress and other dimensions of psychopathology

    Archives of General Psychiatry

    (1980)
  • J.A. Durlack

    Understanding meta-analysis

  • D.G. Dutton

    The domestic assault of women: Psychological and criminal justice perspectives

    (1995)
  • D.G. *Dutton

    Trauma symptoms and PTSD-like profiles in perpetrators of intimate abuse

    Journal of Traumatic Stress

    (1995)
  • D.G. *Dutton et al.

    Intimacy-anger and insecure attachment as precursors of abuse in intimate relationships

    Journal of Applied Social Psychology

    (1994)
  • D.G. *Dutton et al.

    Borderline personality in perpetrators of psychological and physical abuse

    Violence and Victims

    (1993)
  • L. *Else et al.

    Personality characteristics of men who physically abuse women

    Hospital and Community Psychiatry

    (1993)
  • J.A. Ewing

    Detecting alcoholism: The CAGE questionnaire

    JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association

    (1984)
  • R.W. *Fagan et al.

    Reasons for alcohol use in maritally violent men

    American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse

    (1988)
  • S.L. Feld et al.

    Escalation and desistance of wife assault in marriage

    Criminology

    (1989)
  • S. *Feldbau-Kohn et al.

    Major depressive disorder and depressive symptomatology as predictors of husband to wife physical aggression

    Violence and Victims

    (1998)
  • K.J. Ferraro et al.

    How women experience battering: The process of victimization

    Social Problems

    (1983)
  • Cited by (0)

    This material is based upon work supported by the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Air Force, under Agreement No. 98-EXCA-3-0654. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Agriculture or the U.S. Air Force.

    View full text