Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse Against Men: Voices of Victimization Among Ex-Servicemen of the British Armed Forces

Taylor, Paul J.; Keeling, June; Mottershead, Richard

doi:10.1177/1054137317717964

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another important point here is that the lowest correlations between narrator and recipient ratings were for offender narratives. This is consistent with the claim that this perceptual difference is due to the offender's self-interest in describing the violent event more vaguely in order to diminish the risk of being blamed for the violence (Banwell, 2010;Flinck & Paavilainen, 2010;Londt, 2014;Mullaney, 2007;Nilan et al, 2014;Taylor et al, 2019;Whiting et al, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Furthermore, we hypothesize that bystanders will evaluate the event as more severe than victims or offenders (H3b). This is based on the results regarding offender denial and victim blaming and the assumption that both male and female offenders tend to diminish the severity of their perpetrated violence (Banwell, 2010;Flinck & Paavilainen, 2010;Londt, 2014;Mullaney, 2007;Nilan et al, 2014;Taylor et al, 2019;Whiting et al, 2012).…”

Section: Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How bad is bad? Perceptual differences in the communication of severity in intimate partner violence

Sikström

Dahl²

2023

Humanit Soc Sci Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate communication of the severity of violence in intimate relations is essential for the appropriate evaluation of offenders and victims in contexts such as court trials, custody cases, and the continuation of relationships. Using a new paradigm, this study quantifies discrepancies in how the severity of violence is communicated in texts written by offenders, victims, and bystanders who witness violence. The study was conducted in two phases, where participants were randomly sampled from the same population to participate in either Phase 1 or Phase 2. In the first Phase, witnesses (narrators) provided nine narratives about self-experienced intimate partner violence and rated the violence’s severity; then in the second Phase non-witnesses (recipients) read all the narratives and rated the severity of the violence. Four types of perceptual differences (calibration, accuracy, gender, and role perceptual differences) were identified when rating the severity of three types of violence (psychological, physical, and sexual) as communicated by three types of witnesses (victims, offenders, and bystanders) of violence in heterosexual, romantic relationships. Several novel findings were made related to a strong perceptual difference in calibration, i.e., a tendency for the recipient to rate the violence more severely than the narrator, where this effect was mainly found for victims and bystanders, but not for offenders. Also, the calibration effect was largely seen in the sexual and physical, but not psychological, narratives. The recipients’ accuracy was considerably lower for psychological rather than sexual violence. Finally, the validity of the method was confirmed by replicating earlier findings on perceptual differences in roles where witnesses rated violence more severely than victims or offenders and women were rated more severely than men, which was especially true for male raters. These results suggest systematic perceptual differences in severity ratings and may have substantial implications for victims and offenders in real-life settings. These findings may potentially be used to ameliorate the negative effects of perceptual differences.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

How bad is bad? Perceptual differences in the communication of severity in intimate partner violence

Sikström

Dahl²

2023

Humanit Soc Sci Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Considering that DVA victimisation has been found to be prevalent among male military personnel internationally [ 24 , 25 , 47 , 60 – 62 ], increased awareness of male victimisation in the military is needed. Furthermore, participants perceived that healthcare and welfare staff are often ill-equipped to manage cases of psychological abuse or coercive control and that those forms of abuse are likely to be taken less seriously than physical abuse.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The experience of health and welfare workers in identifying and responding to domestic abuse among military personnel in the UK

Sparrow

Alves-Costa

Alves

et al. 2020

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Awareness of domestic violence and abuse (DVA) as a problem among military personnel (serving and veterans) has grown in recent years, and there is a need for research to inform improvements in the identification of and response to DVA in this population. This study aimed to explore the experience of health and welfare professionals in identifying and responding to DVA among the UK military population (serving personnel and veterans). Methods Thirty-five semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with health and welfare staff who work with serving UK military personnel and veterans. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Results Three superordinate themes were identified: i) patterns of DVA observed by health and welfare workers (perceived gender differences in DVA experiences and role of mental health and alcohol); (ii) barriers to identification of and response to DVA (attitudinal/knowledge-based barriers and practical barriers), and iii) resource issues (training needs and access to services). Participants discussed how factors such as a culture of hypermasculinity, under-reporting of DVA, the perception of DVA as a “private matter” among military personnel, and lack of knowledge and awareness of emotional abuse and coercive controlling behaviour as abuse constitute barriers to identification and management of DVA. Healthcare providers highlighted the need for more integrated working between civilian and military services, to increase access to support and provide effective care to both victims and perpetrators. Furthermore, healthcare and welfare staff reflected on their training needs in the screening and management of DVA to improve practice. Conclusions There is a need for increased awareness of DVA, particularly of non-physical forms of abuse, and of male victimisation in the military. Standardised protocols for DVA management and systematic training are required to promote a consistent and appropriate response to DVA. There is a particular training need among healthcare and first-line welfare staff, who are largely relied upon to identify cases of DVA in the military. Employing DVA advocates within military and civilian healthcare settings may be useful in improving DVA awareness, management and access to specialist support.

show abstract

“…Research into IPV in the military has tended to focus on military personnel as perpetrators of IPV and civilian partners/spouses as victims (Jones, 2012; Rentz et al, 2006). This relative neglect of victimization research in the military may reflect the underrecognition of male victimization within the male-dominated military environment (Taylor, Keeling, & Mottershead, 2017). However, high levels of IPV victimization have been found in some studies of military personnel, both male and female, serving and ex-serving (Cerulli, Bossarte, & Dichter, 2014; Dichter, Cerulli, & Bossarte, 2011; Foran, Heyman, Slep, & Res, 2014; Skomorovsky, Hujaleh, & Wolejszo, 2015; Zamorski & Wiens-Kinkaid, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of Self-Reported Intimate Partner Violence Victimization Among Military Personnel: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Sparrow

Dickson

Kwan³

et al. 2018

Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse Against Men: Voices of Victimization Among Ex-Servicemen of the British Armed Forces

Cited by 7 publications

References 63 publications

How bad is bad? Perceptual differences in the communication of severity in intimate partner violence

How bad is bad? Perceptual differences in the communication of severity in intimate partner violence

The experience of health and welfare workers in identifying and responding to domestic abuse among military personnel in the UK

Prevalence of Self-Reported Intimate Partner Violence Victimization Among Military Personnel: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About