A systematic review of the effectiveness of intervention programs for perpetrators and victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) was conducted. Inclusion criteria for studies included publication in a peer-reviewed journal, a representative, community, or clinical sample, written in English, and conducted in the United States. A total of 40 articles were included. Comparisons to a prior review highlight developments in research in the past 10 years. Studies into batterer intervention programs, the predominant form of abuser intervention in the United States, found mixed support for their effectiveness at reducing IPV. Issues with program completion remain a problem. Research into victim–survivor programs proved more promising in both reducing IPV and ameliorating adverse mental health outcomes (i.e., depression and posttraumatic stress disorder). Recommendations for intervention and policy with future directions for IPV research are discussed.

As a part of the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge project, this systematic review provides an update on intimate partner violence (IPV) legal decision-making research from the last 10 years. We specifically reviewed how sex/gender, sexual orientation, and race/ethnicity influence police, prosecutor, and adjudicator perceptions and decision-making in IPV cases. We systematically reviewed a total of 91 study-eligible articles and ascertained themes within the literature. Most notably, the research is mixed and findings were inconsistent and depended on the research focus and methodology. The most robust trend indicates White, heterosexual female victims are constructed as those most worthy of legal pursuit. This pattern was apparent in decisions to arrest, prosecute, sentence, and grant protective orders. Furthermore, some studies indicate individuals from historically marginalized groups (i.e., people of color and folx in the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community) or female-to-male-perpetrated IPV are disparately ignored by the legal system; others observe more aggressive legal action in these populations. We discuss these seemingly contradictory responses and pose ideas for future research.

The increasing body of studies on intimate partner violence (IPV) and its’ high prevalence worldwide signify heightened scholarly and societal interest. This is especially pertinent as IPV has recently penetrated broader contexts, including the digital world, and manifested in more diverse and complex forms. Building on Capaldi et al. (2012), this review aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of emerging IPV risk factors by reviewing studies published from 2012 to 2023. We systematically reviewed 156 peer-reviewed articles published in English-speaking Western countries, utilizing a dynamic developmental systems perspective. The risk factors of IPV were organized into three domains: (a) contextual and demographic factors, such as age, gender, SES, and community contexts; (b) developmental characteristics, including family risk factors, history of IPV, peer-related factors, school- and work-related factors, psychological and behavioral factors, and cognition; and (c) relational characteristics, including relationship discord, conflict, and interactional patterns. This review expands on Capaldi et al.’s (2012) previous work by adopting more inclusive approaches, examining both perpetration and victimization, including sexual minority participants, incorporating technological forms of IPV, and utilizing comprehensive measures to provide a more thorough understanding of IPV. Furthermore, this review provides recommendations and future directions for practitioners, policymakers, and researchers working to address IPV.

Beginning in the 1960s and 1970s, many states enacted legislation criminalizing most forms of intimate partner violence (IPV) and necessitating law enforcement to shift to treat IPV as a potentially criminal, and thus arrestable, offense. These legislative changes include mandatory arrest laws (i.e., laws that require police to make an arrest if they believe there is a probable cause that a crime occurred) and dual-arrest policies (e.g., laws that require both individuals involved in the IPV incident to be arrested if law enforcement cannot determine who is primarily at fault). In 2012,Partner Abusepublished a comprehensive review, the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge project, which included consideration of how state law and law enforcement policies impact IPV. The current systematic review serves to update the literature published from 2012 to 2023 regarding law enforcement response to IPV cases. A review of 27 papers identified the following themes: characteristics of the offense, IPV dyad demographic characteristics, officer-specific characteristics, and diversion programs/alternatives to arrest. Consistent with prior research, this review suggests the IPV victim’s sex may serve as a salient factor with law enforcement responding more punitively in cases involving female victims. However, research regarding other extralegal factors (e.g., IPV dyad race) generally produced mixed results. Finally, this review highlights alternatives to arrest, like citations and diversion programs that offer promising avenues for future exploration.

A systematic review of primary prevention programs for intimate partner violence (IPV) was conducted. Inclusion criteria for studies included publication in a peer-reviewed journal, a representative, community, or clinical sample, written in English, and conducted in the United States. A total of 24 articles were included. All studies included some kind of intervention, such as knowledge and/or behavioral, to change outcomes in IPV perpetration and/or victimization. Of the 24 studies, 16 used experimental designs, with the majority focused on adolescent samples (n= 14). The majority of studies used a group modality. Several prevention programs were adapted for specific subgroups (i.e., refugees) with promising outcomes for preventing IPV. While the majority of research reviewed suggests some reduction in IPV, the field still yields mixed results. Research does point toward the importance of adapting or creating prevention programs specifically for marginalized or vulnerable subgroups. Comparisons to a prior review highlight developments in this body of research over the past 10 years. Recommendations for intervention and policy with future directions for IPV research are discussed.

A systematic review of risk assessment instruments for intimate partner violence (IPV) was conducted. Inclusion criteria for studies included publication in a peer-reviewed journal, a representative, community, or clinical sample, written in English, and conducted in the United States. A total of 57 articles were included. Our review demonstrates there has been (a) an increase in research into the validity and predictive capabilities of risk assessments for IPV, (b) a proliferation of risk assessment instruments, and (c) novel populations are being assessed with adapted risk instruments (e.g., immigrants and nonbinary). Comparisons to a prior review highlight developments in research in the past 10 years. Recommendations for intervention and policy with future directions for IPV research are discussed.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in increased rates and severity of intimate partner violence (IPV) and associated posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, underlying causes of this relationship continue to be understood. The current online survey study examined the relative and compounding impact of COVID-related stressors and emotion regulation difficulties on PTSD symptom severity in a sample of female and male IPV survivors. We replicated findings illustrating a connection between PTSD severity and difficulties with emotion regulation among female IPV survivors and extended these findings to male IPV survivors. However, there was a weaker relationship between emotion dysregulation and PTSD severity among male compared to female IPV survivors. Further, findings revealed a significant association between socioeconomic fears due to COVID (e.g., losing access to food and medication) and PTSD severity. These results provide support for the impact of individuals’ intrapersonal and environmental context on the experience of IPV and PTSD.

The Inner Strength (IS) program (Graham-Kevan & Wilks-Riley, 2011) is a group-based, 26-session trauma-based therapeutic intervention, delivered in community settings or in prison, for people who have perpetrated partner abuse and often other forms of general violence. The intervention combines elements of dialectical behavioural therapy and mentalisation-based therapy with practical support and advocacy. This article synthesizes qualitative findings from the evaluation of the pilot version of IS in a highly deprived area of North East England. The intervention was delivered by a small team of social workers and police trained and supervised by an external clinician and coauthor of the intervention. As of June 2019, 34 individuals (31 men and 3 women) had completed the program in seven cohorts before the evaluation. Quantitative trends are reported in a separate article (redacted, forthcoming). The 34 names were randomized, and participants were contacted in order of randomization. Of the first 12 to be contacted, 10 agreed to take part in a face-to-face, semistructured interview. Next, participants’ motivation to enroll, engage in, and complete the intervention were explored. Eight of 10 interviewees were men whose primary motivation was their role as fathers and recognition of the need to change if they were to have access to and a relationship with their children. The primary motivation to engage in the intervention was a sense of trust in the practitioner developed in one-to-one sessions before the group intervention started, feeling accepted and safe within the group, acquiring skills in emotional regulation and mentalization, and the availability of practitioners after and between sessions. Participants who often felt shame in other settings experienced IS as a place of respite and valued a range of experiential learning techniques and the bonds formed with the group. Practitioners were available out of hours and postintervention to help participants apply new skills at times of crisis until the skills became habitual. These findings are congruent with two common factors across successful psychological treatment identified by Laska et al. (2014): the centrality of the therapeutic relationship and an intervention that matches the client’s needs.