Intimate partner aggression and work: An interdisciplinary review and agenda for future research

Abstract

Intimate partner aggression (IPA) is a social issue that affects the workplace. While IPA has been relatively ignored by management scholars due to notions that it is a private domestic matter, recent research offers mounting evidence of its spillover effects at work, including consequences for victims, perpetrators, coworkers, and organizations. To date, scholarly research on IPA and work has been impeded because existing research is scattered across disciplines with differing conceptualizations and emphasis. This integrative review aims to clarify the constructs of IPA and work-related IPA (WIPA), summarize existing IPA and work research, integrate prior studies to offer a nomological network of antecedents and consequences of IPA victimization and perpetration, and propose specific recommendations that can further stimulate scholarly attention on this important research area.

Retreating or repairing? Examining the alternate linkages between daily partner-instigated incivility at home and helping at work.

“…Research on the role of organizations in mitigating domestic violence—which is more egregious than partner-instigated incivility—has noted that organizations can implement policies to help curtail domestic violence, including offering flexible work arrangements to limit exposure to hostile exchanges (Wilcox et al, 2021). Other work has suggested that supervisor and coworker social support are important in alleviating the spillover of mistreatment at home (in the form of intimate partner aggression) into the workplace (Deen et al, 2022; O’Leary-Kelly et al, 2008; Tolentino et al, 2017). Thus, although our focus was on how perspective taking can help alleviate the extent to which partner-instigated incivility affects employees, prior scholarship still suggests that organizational support is likely to be impactful in this context.…”

“…Likewise, our article focused on how employees coped with one specific type of negative family interaction-partner-instigated incivility. However, other forms of mistreatment at home exist, including intimate partner violence (Deen et al, 2022) and family undermining (Hoobler & Brass, 2006). Much like the diversity of mistreatment events employees may experience at work (Hershcovis, 2011), the characteristics distinguishing how employees respond to types of family mistreatment and their downstream effects may vary between types of partner mistreatment.…”

“…1 For brevity and to be inclusive of all relationships, we use the term "partner" from this point forward. 2 This distinguishes partner-instigated incivility from research on abusive incidences such as intimate partner violence (Deen et al, 2022), as many healthy relationships also involve much milder instances of rude or discourteous exchanges. Unlike intimate partner violence, partner-instigated incivility is characterized by a much lower degree of aggression and greater ambiguity related to whether the perpetrator intended to harm the target (Andersson & Pearson, 1999).…”

Coping strategies adopted by frontline nurses in dealing with COVID‐19 patients in a developing country during the pandemic: A qualitative study

“…Additionally, the positive influence of an intimate partner might be beneficial in maintaining one's determination, managing work–family conflict and engaging efficiently at work (Bermele et al, 2018 ). In contrast, the negative impact of an intimate partner creates poor attention at work (Anderson et al, 2018 ), job burnout and dissatisfaction, which lessens job interest and makes it more challenging to continue the job (Deen et al, 2022 ).…”

The adoption of human resource practices to support employees affected by intimate partner violence: Women representation in leadership matters

“…Consistent research evidence suggests that IPV negatively impacts organizations and their employees in a variety of ways (e.g., Deen et al, 2021;Duffy et al, 2004;LeBlanc et al, 2014;Tolentino et al, 2016; for a comprehensive review, see Deen et al, 2022). At the organizational level, IPV has been found to incur direct (e.g., illness, death, absenteeism, and turnover), indirect (e.g., reduced commitment, morale, and performance), and intangible costs (e.g., negative impact on company image and work climate; O' Leary-Kelly et al, 2008) for organizations.…”