Female Tactics and Strategies of Intimate Partner Violence: A Study of Incident Reports

Abstract

Researchers have debated the extent to which females pursue violence against their male partners for purposes of enforcing or resisting control. In an effort to shed light on this important topic, we examined 43 incident reports of women who were court-referred to a batterer intervention program to explore how and why they engaged in intimate partner violence. Our analysis of the reports revealed that the most common tactic of physical violence was pushing and the most common tactic of psychological violence was intimidation. The motive to enforce was observed in the majority of the incident reports, while attempts to resist, retaliate, and punish occurred in about one third of the reports. We also found that female violence typically occurred in the contexts of anger and fear. The implications of our research for violence intervention programs are discussed.Intimate partner violence has been described as either mutual couple violence or coercive control of a spouse, fiancé, or girlfriend= boyfriend (Dobash and Dobash 1979; Dutton and Goodman 2005; Johnson in press; Pence and Paymar 1986; Stark 1995). As described by Johnson (in press), mutual couple violence occurs between noncontrolling partners, while coercive control refers to either intimate terrorism (i.e., the use of force to gain control over one's partner) or violent resistance (i.e., the use of violence in response to a partner's This research was presented at the Mid-South Sociological Association 2005 meetings in Atlanta, GA.

Why Do Women Use Intimate Partner Violence? A Systematic Review of Women’s Motivations

“…Twelve (52%) studies (Archer & Graham-Kevan, 2003; Barnett, Lee, & Thelen, 1997; Carrado, George, Loxam et al, 1996; Cascardi & Vivian, 1995; Dobash & Dobash, 2004; Hamberger & Guse, 2005; Hamberger, Lohr, & Bonge, 1994; Henning, Jones, & Holdford, 2005; Kernsmith, 2005; O'Leary & Slep, 2006; Rosen, Stith, Few et al, 2005; Sarantakos, 2004) included both men and women, with five enrolling couples (Cascardi & Vivian, 1995; Dobash & Dobash, 2004; O'Leary & Slep, 2006; Rosen, Stith, Few et al, 2005; Sarantakos, 2004). Sixteen (70%) studies recruited women from IPV shelters, prisons, or batterers’ treatment programs (Archer & Graham-Kevan, 2003; Barnett, Lee, & Thelen, 1997; Dobash & Dobash, 2004; Downs, Rindels, & Atkinson, 2007; Flemke & Allen, 2008; Hamberger, Lohr, & Bonge, 1994; Hamberger, 1997; Hamberger & Guse, 2005; Henning, Jones, & Holdford, 2005; Kernsmith, 2005; Miller & Meloy, 2006; Saunders, 1986; Seamans, Rubin, & Stabb, 2007; Stuart, Moore, Hellmuth et al, 2006; Swan & Snow, 2003; Ward & Muldoon, 2007). Nine (39%) studies recruited from a health care-based or community-based sample (Archer & Graham-Kevan, 2003; Carrado, George, Loxam et al, 1996; Cascardi & Vivian, 1995; O'Leary & Slep, 2006; Olson & Lloyd, 2005; Rosen, Stith, Few et al, 2005; Sarantakos, 2004; Swan & Snow, 2003; Weston, Marshall, & Coker, 2007).…”

“…One additional study grouped anger with other motivations, making its unique contribution difficult to disentangle (Archer & Graham-Kevan, 2003). Of 14 studies that ranked or compared motivations based on frequency of endorsement (Barnett, Lee, & Thelen, 1997; Carrado, George, Loxam et al, 1996; Cascardi & Vivian, 1995; Hamberger, 1997; Hamberger & Guse, 2005; Henning, Jones, & Holdford, 2005; Kernsmith, 2005; O'Leary & Slep, 2006; Olson & Lloyd, 2005; Saunders, 1986; Seamans, Rubin, & Stabb, 2007; Stuart, Moore, Hellmuth et al, 2006; Swan & Snow, 2003; Ward & Muldoon, 2007), two found that anger/emotion release was the most common reason (39%) that women reported using IPV (Barnett, Lee, & Thelen, 1997; Stuart, Moore, Hellmuth et al, 2006), and one found that anger/coercion (50–52%) was the top-ranking motivation (Cascardi & Vivian, 1995). Olson & Lloyd (2005) documented that “psychological factors,” which grouped anger with other emotions, were the most common motivation for IPV.…”

Top 10 Reasons Why Women’s Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence Is an Important Area of Inquiry

“…If women defend themselves from men's violence, the violence may escalate further (Fojtik, 1977(Fojtik, -1978Ward & Muldoon, 2007). Bachman and Carmody (1994) found that fighting back against intimate partners is more likely to lead to injuries for women than fighting back against strangers.…”

The Role and Impact of Primary Aggressor Laws and Policies

“…In his examination of the reasons given by 52 women arrested for acts of intimate partner violence, Hamberger (1997) found that the most commonly given reason was self-defense (N = 24), followed by "expressing feelings/tension (N = 10). Finally, Ward and Muldoon (2007) examined incident reports for 43 women referred to batterer treatment programs in South Carolina and found that in 33% of the incidents self-defense was a reason for employing violence.…”