Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) has profound and widespread health and economic implications at an individual, familial, and societal level. Violence risk assessment measures offer an evidence-informed approach to ascertain the degree of threat an abuser poses, transparent and defensible indicators for intervention and treatment decisions, and can be used to inform professionals, perpetrators, and victims alike regarding the nature and intensity of services required to help prevent IPV. This article summarizes the state of knowledge regarding risk assessment for IPV through a systematic examination of all English publications from westernized nations from 1990 to 2011. Three search engines—PsychINFO, ScienceDirect, and Social Sciences Citation Index—identified 3,361 potentially relevant articles. After dropping duplicates and removing articles that did not explicitly examine risk assessment for IPV, 39 articles remained. Several themes emerged: (a) There is a relatively small body of empirical evidence evaluating risk assessment measures in the context of IPV; (b) continued advancements are needed in the methodological rigor of the research; (c) investigations should expand cross-validation research to diverse samples (e.g., gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender [GLBT]; male victims/female perpetrators); and (d) an exciting development in IPV risk assessment research is evidence that risk assessments can serve to reduce risk levels (Belfrage et al., 2011). In terms of clinical implications, the review demonstrated considerable promise of several measures but generally reveals modest postdictive/predictive validity. Limited evidence for the superiority of IPV specific risk assessment measures over general violence risk assessment measures was revealed; however, this may largely be a reflection of study limitations. Given the challenges in comparing across studies and the heterogeneity of partner abusers, it seems premature to recommend one preferred assessment measure/approach to clinicians.

Physical violence perpetrated by men against their female partners is widely recognized as a serious social problem. Whether women’s use of physical violence against their male partners represents a serious social problem remains a question under debate. We examined research published in the last 10 years to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the prevalence of physical IPV perpetrated by men and women in heterosexual relationships. Our specific aims were to (a) describe the prevalence of physical IPV perpetration in industrialized, English-speaking nations, and (b) explore study and sample characteristics that affect prevalence. Literature searches undertaken in 3 databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) identified 750 articles published between 2000 and 2010. We included 111 articles that reported 272 rates of physical IPV perpetration in our review: 25 articles reported 34 rates for men, 14 articles reported 24 rates for women, and 72 articles reported 214 rates for both men and women. The vast majority of studies were conducted in the United States (k = 95, 85.6%) and most (k = 81, 73.0%) measured IPV using a Conflict Tactics Scale-based approach. We calculated unweighted, pooled prevalence estimates for female and male perpetration overall and by sample type, country, measurement time frame, and measurement approach. Across studies, the overall pooled prevalence estimate was 24.8%. Consistent with prior reviews, pooled prevalence was slightly greater for female- compared to male-perpetrated physical IPV: more than 1 in 4 women (28.3%) and 1 in 5 men (21.6%) reported perpetrating physical violence in an intimate relationship. This pattern of results remained when we calculated pooled prevalence estimates by sample and study characteristics, with few exceptions. Findings underscore the need for interventions that acknowledge the use of violence by women in intimate relationships.

Although a subjective component of trauma is commonly recognized in diagnosing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), there are few studies that specifically address Criterion A2, and none addressing this issue among undocumented immigrants. We assessed 212 arriving undocumented immigrants with diverse trauma histories to investigate concordance between objective and subjective factors of trauma (Criteria A1 and A2) and across different types of trauma and PTSD. Concordance between Criteria A1 and A2 varied, with highest rates found for political violence. Interpersonal violence in general was associated with higher rates of PTSD. We identified a dose-response effect for PTSD, but this was not dependent on other events (i.e., other doses) meeting Criterion A2. Discussion focuses on Criterion A within the phenomenology of PTSD and the need to gauge subjective interpretations of trauma events among this population.

Torture survivors often report chronic debilitating physical and psychological distress. Prior research on the relationship between physical and psychological trauma suggests that the 2 are not independent. Injury sustained during torture may increase the likelihood of subsequent distress as either a moderator or mediator. For long-term psychopathology in a sample of Punjabi Sikh survivors of human rights violations (N = 116), chronic injuries mediated the path between torture and posttraumatic stress disorder, specifically the severity of numbing symptoms. Although injuries were associated with major depression, torture was not, and injuries did not moderate the relationship between major depression and torture. Chronic injuries may represent trauma severity or persistent traumatic cues. These findings emphasize connections between physical and psychological trauma and the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to torture treatment.