Intimate Partner Violence

Abstract

Scholars have identified many dozens of risk factors for intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration, but they have been less successful at establishing the processes through which these risk factors promote IPV perpetration and at elucidating the interplay among the corpus of established risk factors. The present chapter reviews this sprawling, unruly literature from the perspective of I 3 theory (pronounced "I-cubed theory"), a novel framework designed to impose theoretical coherence on IPV risk factors and to stimulate new research. I 3 theory identifies three processes through which risk factors promote IPV perpetration: instigation , which encompasses discrete situational events that normatively trigger an urge to aggress; impellance , which encompasses factors that alter individuals' "urge-readiness" at the moment they encounter instigation; and inhibition , which encompasses the counteraction to the urge to aggress. IPV perpetration is most likely, and most severe, when instigating and impelling forces are strong and inhibiting forces are weak.

Adverse childhood experiences and intimate partner aggression in the US: Sex differences and similarities in psychosocial mediation

“…Intrapersonal models highlight factors that may be internal to the aggressor that may increase the tendency to inflict violence (Finkel et al, 2013). Four theories that contribute to the intrapersonal model approach include: social learning/family of origin, cognitive-behavioral, personality, and clinical theories (Finkel et al, 2013).…”

“…Intrapersonal models highlight factors that may be internal to the aggressor that may increase the tendency to inflict violence (Finkel et al, 2013). Four theories that contribute to the intrapersonal model approach include: social learning/family of origin, cognitive-behavioral, personality, and clinical theories (Finkel et al, 2013). The clinical approach explains intimate partner aggression via associated psychological disorders where aggressors are more likely to have greater levels of psychopathology compared to nonaggressors (Finkel et al, 2013).…”

Attitudes Towards the Use of Violence and Partner-Directed Aggression

“…More specifically, for those exposed to the relationship provocation scenario, a greater desire to engage in physically aggressive behavior was expressed by those with relatively more positive self-reported explicit violence attitudes compared to those with less positive violence attitudes in the same provoking relationship context. This interaction may be conceptualized according to the process components of the I 3 (pronounced I-cubed) metatheoretical model for IPV (Finkel & Eckhardt, 2013). In this model, relationship provocation is a form of instigation, as exposure to a provoking relationship situation normatively evokes an urge to behave aggressively within an individual.…”

“…Interpersonal models of IPV conceptualize partnerviolence in terms of relationship systems involving both partners. Negative, abusive behaviors are often reciprocated in violent relationships and characterized by reactive and competitive interactions (Finkel & Eckhardt, 2013;Jacobson et al, 1994;Murphy & Eckhardt, 2005). Repeated participation in escalating negative interactions develops cognitive scripts for IPV.…”

Theories of femicide and their significance for social research

“…Socio-cultural models, which highlight the influence of social norms, values and cultural beliefs that are widespread in a given society; and 5. Inclusive proposals, which embrace a large explanatory model aiming to organize the empirical data available (Bell and Naugle, 2008;Dutton, 1985;Finkel and Eckhardt, 2013;O'Leary et al, 2007;Stith et al, 2004).…”