Informing Intimate Partner Violence Prevention Efforts: Dyadic, Developmental, and Contextual Considerations

Abstract

The use of physically aggressive tactics during disagreements between romantic partners, a critical dimension of intimate partner violence (IPV), has been named a significant public health problem (White, 2009) and is the focus of the current Special Section. The consequences of IPV are far reaching and include health and mental health impacts (Breiding, Black, & Ryan, 2008; Coker et al., 2002), difficulties associated with an increased probability of being involved in the legal system (Jordan, 2004), loss of income and work productivity (Rothman & Corso, 2008), and financial costs associated with medical and psychological treatment and recovery (Bonomi, Anderson, Rivara, & Thompson, 2009; Brown, Finkelsteing, & Mercy, 2008). Unfortunately, even once IPV has come to clinical attention, evidence indicates that existing perpetrator treatment programs are relatively ineffective (Babcock, Green, & Robie, 2004; Jackson et al., 2003). In addition, a recent review concludes that many existing teen dating violence prevention programs also have had a disappointing level of impact on recipients (Whitaker et al., 2006). Consequently, in the current Special Section, we argue that existing IPV prevention and intervention programs have had reduced effectiveness because they were designed prior to a full understanding of the etiology and complex dynamics associated with IPV. Moreover, a number of recent empirical findings have challenged some of the widely held beliefs about IPV (Ehrensaft, 2008). As a result, many researchers and clinicians are calling for new approaches to understanding (Zurbriggen, 2009) and preventing (e.g., Dutton & Corvo, 2006) IPV. These approaches are being constructed with the assumption that theory-driven and evidence-based interventions will provide stronger protection for both women and men who are involved in IPV. Preventing IPV is also likely to reduce the occurrence of mental health disorders and adjustment problems among children residing in families struggling with IPV (e.g., El-Sheikh, Cummings, Kouros, Elmore-Staton, & Buckhalt, 2008). Ehrensaft (2008) further suggests that research in the IPV field has rarely employed a developmental focus. She posits that existing IPV prevention programs have had limited impact, perhaps because of their overreliance on universal programs with a gender-based format. Some other recent and controversial empirical findings that need to be considered when designing more effective IPV prevention and intervention programs are briefly summarized below. Substantial evidence has emerged in recent years that IPV encompasses more than men’s violence against women. It is increasingly apparent that women’s violence toward men is also an important phenomenon that has implications for prevention and intervention programs (Capaldi, Kim, & Shortt, 2007; Langhinrichsen-Rohling, 2010). Generally, men and women’s IPV in relationships has been shown to be remarkably common among young people. For example, Moffitt and Caspi (1999) compared the findings of three studies with large samples in order to determine rates of IPV in late adolescence and young adulthood (under age 25 years). Across these studies, physical violence perpetration rates ranged from about 36% to 51% for girls/women and from 22% to 43% for boys/men. These rates may be even higher in high-risk samples such as in couples with a partner with a substance abuse problem (Feingold, Kerr, & Capaldi, 2008). Across this Special Section, we assert that a dyadic, developmental, and contextual consideration of both men and women’s IPV perpetration and victimization will be essential to enhance the effectiveness of IPV prevention and intervention programs. This approach has been articulated as a Dynamic Developmental Systems perspective (Capaldi et al., 2009). The degree to which sex of the participant is the main contextual factor on which to focus, however, (as recently argued by White [2009] and Zurbriggen, [2009]) remains controversial among the papers included in this Special Section. Certainly, some of the relatively recent findings regarding women’s violence have been among the most divisive in the field. For example, adolescent girls and women generally have been found to perpetrate a similar or even higher frequency of physically aggressive behavior toward their male partners than have adolescent boys and men toward their female partners (Archer, 2000; Fergusson, Horwood, & Ridder, 2005; Williams & Frieze, 2005). Likewise, survey data of both dating and marital couples indicate highly similar or even slightly higher rates of physical aggression by women against men than vice versa for both married (e.g., Straus & Gelles, 1986) and dating (Laner & Thompson, 1982; Sugarman & Hotaling, 1989) couples. Same-sex couples, both gay and lesbian, show a similar prevalence of violence toward their partners as do heterosexual couples (Blosnich & Bossarte, 2009; Burke & Follingstad, 1999; Murray & Mobley, 2009). Also, both men and women report injuries as a result of their IPV victimization (Archer, 2000), even though women are more likely than men to suffer severe injuries (Cascardi, Langhinrichsen-Rohling, & Vivian, 1992; Stets & Straus, 1990). Moreover, physical aggression that does not result in physical injuries can have other impacts that are destructive to the relationship and to the well-being of both partners (Bradbury & Lawrence, 1999; Gelles & Harrop, 1989). These impacts include declines in relationship satisfaction (Shortt, Capaldi, Kim, & Laurent, 2010) and a higher probability of relationship breakups, dissolutions, and divorce, with accompanying negative effects such as loss of income and housing (Menard, 2001). Individuals experiencing physical violence in their romantic relationships also report more personal distress including fear, depressive symptoms, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) than nonvictims (Afifi et al., 2009; Bennice, Resick, Mechanic, & Astin, 2003). The experience of physical violence in romantic relationships is also associated with unwanted pursuit behavior and stalking (Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Palarea, Cohen, & Rohling, 2000), and the perpetration of unwanted pursuit behaviors after a relationship breakup has been shown to be similarly common for women and men (Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al., 2000). As a whole, these findings call into question the utility of treatment approaches that mandate a unilateral view of IPV perpetration (i.e., in unilateral interventions, only the motivation and behavior of one partner, namely the primary perpetrator who is often assumed to be the man, is considered). Age is clearly another important contextual factor to consider. It is now well understood that young dating couples show higher levels of physical aggression toward their partners than do older married couples (Gelles & Straus, 1988; Kim, Laurent, Capaldi, & Feingold, 2008; McLaughlin, Leonard, & Senchak, 1992). In fact, both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies indicate that physical aggression toward one’s partner peaks at relatively young ages, even perhaps as early as late adolescence, and declines with age (Kim et al., 2008; Nocentini, Menesini, & Pastorelli, 2010; O’Leary, Heyman, & Neidig, 1999). Arrests for IPV also tend to occur at younger ages (Capaldi et al., 2009). Taken as a whole, these evidence-based findings make a strong case for the importance of targeting prevention programs toward youth and adolescents, even as they are embarking on their first dating experiences.