Violence Between Spouses and Intimates: Physical Aggression Between Women and Men in Intimate Relationships

Jeffrey Fagan and Angela Browne

INTRODUCTION

In the 1960s, Americans began to ask important questions about violence. The National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, known as the Kerner Commission, concluded in 1969 that the United States was the world's leader in rates of homicide, assault, rape, and robbery. To most people, crime in general and violent crime in particular became major sources of discontent (Gurr, 1989; Weiner and Wolfgang, 1985). However, this early concern with criminal victimization focused primarily on violent incidents outside the home. Like the commission, most Americans believed that the risk of personal attack or injury lay in individuals beyond one's circle of intimates. Violence in the family-if recognized at all-was rarely considered criminal unless a death occurred. The average family, it was assumed, afforded at least some measure of nurturance and protection to its members. Twenty years later, we are now aware of the extent of violence between family members in our society and the seriousness of that violence in terms of physical and non-physical injury.

Jeffrey Fagan is at the School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University. Angela Browne is at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Violence Between Spouses and Intimates: Physical Aggression Between Women and Men in Intimate Relationships Jeffrey Fagan and Angela Browne INTRODUCTION In the 1960s, Americans began to ask important questions about violence. The National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, known as the Kerner Commission, concluded in 1969 that the United States was the world's leader in rates of homicide, assault, rape, and robbery. To most people, crime in general and violent crime in particular became major sources of discontent (Gurr, 1989; Weiner and Wolfgang, 1985). However, this early concern with criminal victimization focused primarily on violent incidents outside the home. Like the commission, most Americans believed that the risk of personal attack or injury lay in individuals beyond one's circle of intimates. Violence in the family-if recognized at all-was rarely considered criminal unless a death occurred. The average family, it was assumed, afforded at least some measure of nurturance and protection to its members. Twenty years later, we are now aware of the extent of violence between family members in our society and the seriousness of that violence in terms of physical and non-physical injury. Jeffrey Fagan is at the School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University. Angela Browne is at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences In the past two decades, there has been an upsurge of inquiry into violence between intimates. The growth of social services in the 1960s, designed primarily to wrestle with extramarital social problems such as stranger crime or substance abuse, not only focused public policy on the economic behavior of families (Gilbert, 1983), but also opened up the family as a social institution amenable to public scrutiny. Accordingly, family social interactions became increasingly subject to social interventions and legal sanctions (Wexler, 1982). Until public policy focused attention on the private realm of family life, few people considered the home to be other than ''a compassionate, egalitarian, peaceful affair in which violence played no part" (Wardell et al., 1983). Three major trends in this era raised doubts about this tranquil view of American family life. First, the "discovery" of child abuse through medical and sociological research in the mid-1960s focused public attention on family violence (e.g., Caffey, 1946; Silverman, 1953; Kempe et al., 1962; see also Gil, 1970). Child abuse victims had a visceral and emotional public appeal. Several national organizations came into being to promote services and financial support for child victims, and to work for statutory changes and improved protections. A nationwide reporting system was implemented during the 1970s, and laws mandated formal reports to designated agencies by parents, teachers, and police officers who became aware of child abuse or neglect. Second, political activism by feminist organizations at that time helped make visible the use of physical force as a means of intimidation or coercion within the family and elevated it to prominence as a social concern (U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 1978; Schechter, 1982). Much of this awareness was engendered by the modern women's movement which, in the 1960s, began to examine violence against women around the issue of rape. Such discussion revealed the prevalence of women experiencing sexual assaults by intimate male partners, rather than strangers, and provided a forum for the identification of the physical assault of wives as a problem of previously unrecognized national proportions. Concern over the harm to women (specifically, serious injuries and fatalities), and also to the children for whom they cared, intensified as the public became aware of the confluence of family violence and other violent behaviors outside the family. Violence in the home, previously informally condoned because it was "private," was now defined in a social context as deviant and placed in the public domain, marking a "moral passage" in American

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences social history (Gusfield, 1967). As incidence and prevalence estimates became established, family violence became an issue of focus for researchers, medical and mental health treatment providers, and policy makers. Third, the emphasis on victimization in criminal justice research and practice in the 1970s identified family violence as an important and complex phenomenon confronting the police and courts (Parnas, 1967; Bard and Zacker, 1971; Wilson, 1977). During the 1970s, sweeping legal and police policy changes were instituted in response to public concern and social science investigations. Victim support was an important component of political activism that sought to reorient legal institutions toward fulfilling the entitlement of the rights of victims. Feminist groups decried the secondary victimization of "special victims," including victims of rape and wife abuse. Research on marital violence in the United States has now spanned nearly three decades. National surveys estimate that an act of physical violence is committed by a family member in nearly half of all homes during an average 12-month period in the United States (see, e.g., Straus et al., 1980; Gelles and Straus, 1988). Minimum estimates from these surveys indicate that acts of physical aggression between spouses occur in one of six homes each year. Injuries and lethal injuries from partner violence fall disproportionately on women. A minimum of two million women are severely assaulted annually by their male partners (Straus and Gelles, 1986), and more than half the women murdered in the United States are killed by male partners or ex-partners (Browne and Williams, 1989; Zahn, 1989). Rosenberg et al. (1984) estimated that more than 20,000 hospitalizations occur each year due to acts of violence in the home. These estimates have remained remarkably consistent over time, even in the face of increased awareness and intervention. Yet, despite the growing evidence that criminal violence frequently occurs between family members as well as between acquaintances and strangers, criminologists today continue to study these patterns separately. There have been few efforts to integrate the empirical literature on aggression within families with other perspectives on violence. Knowledge utilization in the policy development process also has selectively incorporated the independent bodies of empirical research and theoretical traditions. Family violence continues to be defined and studied by criminologists as a separate crime type, rather than as a specific variety of violence or aggression (cf. Williams and Flewelling, 1988), and is

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences more often treated as a "specialization" similar to white-collar crime or substance use. In turn, criminal justice policy toward wife assault has reflected research paradigms and theories of criminal or violent behavior toward strangers, rather than either an integrated perspective or a perspective incorporating the unique contributions of family violence research. MARITAL VIOLENCE DEFINED In this paper, the discussion of research and policy on violence between intimate adult partners includes physical assault, sexual assault, and homicide, committed, threatened, or attempted by spouses, ex-spouses, common-law spouses, or cohabitants toward their partners. We also note other harmful behaviors that occur as part of the natural history of marital violence: psychological abuse, economic deprivation, threats to others in the family, and threats as a method of coercion. These behaviors co-occur with physical assault, and although we do not focus on them specifically, they are part of the "ecology of aggression" that characterizes marital violence. They may also constitute antecedents of physical aggression, part of the maintenance of a pattern of marital violence, or displacements of aggression when assaults desist. Definitions in the study of violence between intimates have varied extensively. Bandura (1973) defined aggression as behavior that results in personal injury or property destruction. Bandura's definition is consistent with the definition of family violence offered by Gelles and Straus (1979) as "an act carried out with the intention of, or perceived intention of, physically hurting another person." Gelles and Straus distinguished violence from aggression, which includes any malevolent action, regardless of whether physical harm is involved. However, they excluded verbal aggression, marital rape, and sexual assaults from their definition of family violence. Collins (1988), focusing exclusively on violent behaviors, defines violence as an actual or attempted physical attack and terms this "expressive interpersonal violence." Such broad conceptual definitions require careful attention to the operational definitions and attendant measures in the studies reviewed. For example, although Straus and Gelles define violence as actions undertaken with the intent or perceived intent to harm, their measure assesses neither intent nor perceptions. In this paper, we are concerned with aggression between adults

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences in families or intimate cohabitating relationships that reflects the intent to harm or to create a painful condition. These behaviors include attempted or completed physical assaults, homicides, and sexual assaults. We are also concerned with property destruction that is intended to harm the partner and with the threat of force. The extensive literature on victimization of spouses or partners-along with its broader implications for the understanding and control of violent behavior-warrants focusing this essay specifically on aggression between intimately related adults. Also, the differences in jurisprudential issues regarding children and elderly dependents, and the variations in administrative response systems, require a broader and more complex analysis. Accordingly, the terms wife assault, marital violence, and spouse abuse are sometimes used interchangeably to describe the phenomenon of assaults and abuse by partners or spouses in current or former intimate relationships in which they are or were cohabiting. ORGANIZATION OF THIS PAPER In this paper, we examine empirical and theoretical knowledge on violence between adult partners. The first section traces the evolution of theory, research, and policy on partner violence. The historical, cultural, social, and legal foundations of current efforts are reviewed. In the following section, a social epidemiology of assaults between partners is established, including estimates of participation and frequency rates, characteristics of victims and assailants, and an assessment of "risk markers" for marital violence. Patterns of spousal homicide and their relationship to other forms of partner and stranger violence are also discussed. This section includes a critical review that assesses the limitations and strengths of empirical research and theory. Specifically, we examine the validity and reliability of current indices and the overall strength and limitations of current knowledge. We discuss the unique context of families that complicates sampling and measurement decisions, as well as the critical interdependence of definition, measurement, and interpretation. Then the broader implications of empirical knowledge for explanation and theory are assessed. We examine several explanatory frameworks suggested by the epidemiology and risk factors evident in marital violence and integrate them within a broader conceptual framework. The examination concludes with discussions linking research on marital violence to the larger study of violent behavior.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences After that, current policies and interventions are examined, including empirical evidence of their effectiveness and their validity in terms of current knowledge. Both social and legal interventions are discussed, as is the interaction among policy, theory, definition, and knowledge of family violence. This includes an analysis of the social processes of problem definition and the sociology of knowledge about violence between adult intimates. The influence of these processes on what we know and do about marital violence is analyzed. Finally a research agenda is set forth for the advancement of theory, methods, and empirical knowledge of partner violence, and research to integrate the perspectives is specifically (but not exclusively) recommended. We conclude with a discussion that integrates knowledge of assaults between intimate partners with other forms of violence within families and violence outside the context of families. EVOLUTION OF KNOWLEDGE AND POLICY ON MARITAL VIOLENCE The new social knowledge of violence between adult partners developed during an era in which social intervention in family life had gained widespread support and created a context for defining marital violence as an urgent social problem. The ensuing social and political processes shaped both the knowledge of marital violence and policy responses. The nature of the problem and its etiological roots were subjected to varying interpretations and definitions. As would be expected, definitions, research traditions, and policy development all varied according to the interests and perspectives of the definers. Thus, the perspectives that were influential in the development of knowledge and policy responses to marital violence reflect differing assumptions regarding its definition and etiology, as well as concerns with the "ownership" of marital violence as a social problem. CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVES Marital violence is intrinsic to many cultures. Levinson (1988) using cross-cultural data on family violence from the Human Relations Area Files (HRAF) data base (Lagace, 1979) identified eight varieties of marital violence in 330 societies.1 Levinson (1988, 1989) estimated the prevalence of wife beating2 in a representative sample of 90 societies from the 330 cultural groups in the

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences HRAF data base. Wife beating occurred in 84.5 percent of the 90 cultures. It occurred "at least occasionally" in all or nearly all households in 18.8 percent of the societies, and in a majority (but not all) in 29.9 percent. Husband beating was reported in 6.7 percent of all societies; it was rare or unheard of in 73.1 percent and occurred in a minority of households in 20.2 percent. Other studies (cited in Levinson, 1989) report comparable data: Wife beating occurs in 71 to 92 percent of the societies studied. Motivations for wife beating in these societies included sexual jealousy or infidelity (45.5%), insubordination or disobedience by the wife (25.5%), and the wife's failure to meet "household responsibilities" (23.3%). Societal responses to wife beating varied extensively. In 91.2 percent of the societies, intervention by outsiders occurred. These interventions included help or intercession by kin or neighbors (17.6%), shelter for the wife (14.7%), legal intervention (17.6%), marital violence as grounds for divorce (11.8%), and supernatural sanctions (e.g., casting a spell)-in an unspecified proportion. In 29.4 percent of the societies, interventions are limited to beatings that exceed societal norms for the "physical discipline" of wives. Interventions were reportedly unavailable in 8.8 percent of the societies. The study gave no indication of the legal status of wife or husband assaults in the societies studied. Such comparative studies are complicated by several methodological and design issues. Family configurations and kinship networks vary extensively across societies, and the meaning of family and the nature of marital bonds are obviously culture specific. Consensus on a universal definition of family violence is no more evident in cross-cultural research than in contemporary research in the United States (Korbin, 1977). Variations in injury, motivation, and context are consistent with variations in the social organization of these societies, the meanings attached to marital violence, and the unique family configurations (e.g., Gartner, 1990). Other sources of design variability include measurement inconsistencies, sampling problems in defining the boundaries of cultures and stratifying them, and uneven attention to the variables that are thought to cause cross-cultural variation. Anthropological studies also tend to avoid explicit comparisons of two or more cultures, limiting tests of the factors that actually influence cultural variations (Levinson, 1988). However, coding and validation procedures in the HRAF data base may have offset some of these limitations.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences HISTORICAL LEGACIES OF PUBLIC POLICY ON MARITAL VIOLENCE Cultural and legal supports for marital violence toward wives have existed in Western civilization for more than 3,000 years. In ancient Rome, physical domination of wives by husbands was acknowledged in the "law of marriage," formalized by Romulus in 753 B.C. (Pagelow, 1984). Davidson (1978) quotes Friar Cherubino of Siena in the late 1400s as recommending in his Rules of Marriage that husbands respond to an offense by a wife by first scolding, bullying, and terrifying. If that did not produce the desired results, they were then instructed to "take up a stick and beat her soundly ...". Blackstone's (1765) commentary on English common law accorded legal rather than moral authority to men's domination in family matters. In a system in which wives occupied the same status as children, Blackstone noted that the civil law ''gave the husband the same, or a larger, authority over his wife: allowing him for some misdemeanors, to beat his wife severely with scourges and cudgels ... for others only moderate chastisement." After the colonization of North America, the social and legal history of reform efforts for marital violence shows cyclical patterns dating to the Puritan era in Massachusetts in the 1640s (Pleck, 1987). Throughout American history, interest in criminal sanctions against marital violence has coincided with both heightened concern about state responsibility to enforce public morality and increased fear of crime (Pleck, 1989). According to Stark and Flitcraft (1983:330), "Virtually every 20 years ... the popular press has joined women's groups and charitable organizations to denounce wife beating, child abuse, and related forms of family violence in the strongest terms." Reform Movements Toward Women and Children From the Puritans Through the Nineteenth Century The first American law prohibiting beating female spouses was enacted in the Puritan era in 1641 in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. This law was modified two years later to include violence against husbands. Pleck (1989:24) notes that laws against wife and child beating were intended primarily to serve as a "symbolic affirmation" of biblical principles, and that the Puritans upheld and justified the use of "legitimate" physical force by parents, masters, or husbands. Men were allowed to punish their children and wives physically, whereas wives or children were never allowed

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences to punish their husbands or parents. Respect for family privacy and the husband's authority sharply limited the number of arrests under these sanctions. By 1663, enforcement under these laws had virtually ceased. The next law against wife beating (and evidently the last one for 200 years) was passed in 1672 in the Plymouth Colony. However, only 12 cases of spouse assault against wives were prosecuted in the Plymouth Colony court from 1633 to 1802 (Pleck, 1987).3 No further laws against wife assault or other forms of family violence were enacted until a Tennessee law was passed in 1850, followed by a Georgia law seven years later and by an Alabama Supreme Court ruling in 1871. Rather, during this time court rulings continued to define the limitations of legal intervention for spouse assault. A Mississippi court ruling in 1824 said that a husband, in cases of "great emergency," had the right to discipline his wife physically so long as it was done in a moderate manner, "without being subjected to vexatious prosecution (Bradley v. State, 1 Miss. 157). The "rule of thumb" (1866) permitted a man to beat his wife "with a stick as large as his finger but not larger than his thumb," a reform that was deemed "compassionate" by limiting the weapons a man could use against his spouse (State v. Rhodes, 61 Phil. L. [N.C.] 453; cited by Browne, 1987).4 However, in a subsequent ruling in the same case, the court declined to ''interfere with family government in trifling cases" (State v. Rhodes, 61 N.C. 453, 353, 1868; cited in Pleck, 1989). The era beginning in the 1870s and continuing through the turn of the century was again a period of activism to stop wife beating and other forms of family violence. It was fueled by growing sympathy with victims of domestic abuse and was coupled with the child protection movement, itself a function of middle-class outrage over the conditions of the urban poor, primarily immigrants who labored in increasingly industrialized cities (Platt, 1969). Dobash and Dobash (1979) describe two short-lived periods of public concern and social action against wife beating. Mill's (1869) famous essay, "The Subjection of Women" decried the battering of wives and resulted in a report to the British parliament in 1874. In the same decade, both British and American legislatures took some limited actions to protect women. Americans revoked a few laws of chastisement, while the British offered "meager protection against cruelty and allowed divorce on this ground" (Mill, 1869:5). In 1871, Alabama became the first state to rescind a husband's legal right to beat his wife, noting that the "wife is entitled to the

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences same protection of the law that the husband can invoke for himself ..." (Fulgham v. State, 46 Ala. 146-147). A North Carolina court followed suit in 1874 but qualified its ruling by advising that if no permanent injury was inflicted or "dangerous" violence shown, it was best to "draw the curtain, shut out the public gaze, and leave the parties to forget and forgive" (State v. Oliver, 70 N.C. 60, 61-62). Although Pleck (1987) contends that these were atypical legal opinions, the lack of prosecution of cases of wife assault, and the public priorities on family privacy and patriarchal authority, suggest that such legal opinions accurately reflected the attitudes of the times, even if not cited in subsequent cases. Fear of crime and perceived threat to the moral order were prime motivators of fueling public concern during this period. The crime rate escalated rapidly after the Civil War, both within and outside the home. Laws against wife beating at this time often called for stiff punishment: statutes authorized flogging at the whipping post in three states, an expression of the regard for domestic violence as a serious crime with strong accountability for violators (Pleck, 1989). However, only a few perpetrators were ever flogged for wife abuse, and those who were flogged were disproportionately African American. During this period, family stability and Victorian morality were guiding ethics, and Pleck (1989) reports that more attention was given to the protection of victims and to stabilizing the family unit that to the punishment of offenders. Reconciliation was the goal of intervention, and divorce from an abusive mate was not encouraged. By the 1890s, Pleck (1989) reports that concern with wife and child abuse began to fade. Society turned to social casework, rather than law enforcement, as the preferred intervention, and cases that were identified were attributed increasingly to economic hardship, family problems, or psychiatric disturbance (Gordon, 1988). General interest in family violence declined until the 1960s. EMERGENCE OF MARITAL VIOLENCE AS A POLICY ISSUE The rediscovery of wife abuse in this century was due in large part to the work of feminist activists and clinical researchers who documented and publicized the issue (Martin, 1976; Roy, 1977; Hilberman and Munson, 1978; Walker, 1979). Victims of spouse assault, overwhelmingly women, presented themselves to feminist grassroots organizations via rape hot lines started by these groups, as well as victim assistance agencies or rape crisis centers (Schechter, 1982). These grassroots organizations quickly defined

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences a wide range of services needed by marital violence victims: shelter, transportation, counseling, legal assistance, and child care (Schwendinger and Schwendinger, 1983). They also defined the limitations of existing legal remedies to sanction offenders or offer protection to victims. Recognition by feminists of the problems and limitations of justice system responses spurred the development of other services for women victims of marital violence as well. Building on the models developed for rape victims, feminist organizations opened crisis intervention and victim assistance programs for women victims of marital violence, started shelters for victims and their children, and formed specialized legal assistance programs for both civil and criminal actions (Schechter, 1982). Through state and national political organizations, they mobilized to reform legislation regarding laws of protection, to eliminate requirements for divorce filing to obtain an order of protection, and to simplify the prosecution of marital rape. Their early influence was critical in defining wife battering as a multifaceted public policy issue whose solutions spanned the organizational boundaries of specific social or legal institutions. As marital violence became a public issue, the criminal justice system was obliged to respond in new ways. Traditionally, marital violence was perceived as an ever-present and perhaps intractable problem, creating dangerous situations for the police and difficult-to-resolve cases for the courts (Parnas, 1967; Fields, 1978). Early writings on police responses to family violence were critical, citing their refusal to get involved in family disputes (Fields, 1978), their avoidance of arrest and other criminal sanctions (Field and Field, 1973; Martin, 1976; Roy, 1977; Dobash and Dobash, 1979), and their inappropriate use of nonlegal remedies such as mediation (Eisenberg and Micklow, 1977). Police viewed family disturbance calls as dangerous to responding officers (Parnas, 1967; Bard, 1970; cf. Garner and Clemmer, 1986), and otherwise viewed family disturbances as problematic and intractable interpersonal conflicts that were inappropriate for police attention (Wilson, 1977). Prior to the early 1970s, many police departments actually had "hands-off" policies (Elliott, 1989). Police training manuals clearly specified that, in responding to domestic disputes, arrest was to be avoided whenever possible (International Association of Chiefs of Police, IACP, 1967).5 When arrests were made, they often were classified as misdemeanors, which typed them as less serious from the outset (Goolkasian, 1986). A wife usually could

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Mosher, D.L., and S.S. Tomkins 1988 Scripting the macho man: Hypermasculine socialization and enculturation. Journal of Sex Research 25: 60-84. Neidig, P., D. Friedman, and B. Collins 1986 Attitudinal characteristics of males who have engaged in spouse abuse. Journal of Family Violence 1:223-233. Nisonoff, L., and I. Bitman 1979 Spouse abuse: Incidence and relationship to selected demographic variables. Victimology 4:131-139. Novaco, R. 1976 The functions and regulation of the arousal of anger. American Journal of Psychiatry 133(1):1124-1128. O'Brien, J.E. 1971 Violence in divorce-prone families. Journal of Marriage and the Family 33:962-698. Okun, L. 1986 Women Abuse: Facts Replacing Myths. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press. O'Leary, K.D., and I. Arias 1988 Assessing agreement of reports of spouse abuse. In G.T. Hotaling, D. Finkelhor, J.T. Kirkpatrick, and M.A. Straus, eds., Family Abuse and its Consequences: New Directors for Research. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. Pagelow, M.D. 1984 Family Violence. New York: Praeger Parker, R.N., and M.D. Smith 1979 Deterrence, poverty and type of homicide. American Journal of Sociology 85:614-624. Parnas, R.J. 1967 Police response to domestic violence. Wisconsin Law Review 31:914-60. Pate, A., and E.E. Hamilton 1992 Formal and informal deterrents to domestic violence: The Dade County spouse assault experiment. American Sociological Review 57:691-697. Patterson, G.R., and T.J. Dishion 1985 Contributions of families and peers to delinquency. Criminology 23:63-80. Pelton, L.G. 1979 Interpreting family violence data. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 49:194-210. Petersilia, J. 1980 Career criminal research: A review of recent evidence. In N. Morris and M. Tonry, eds., Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Vol. 2. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pierce, G.L., S. Spaar, and L.R. Briggs 1988 The Character of Police Work: Strategic and Tactical Implications.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Center for Applied Social Research, Northeastern University, Boston. Pirog-Good, M.A., and J.E. Stets, eds., 1989 Violence in Dating Relationships: Emerging Social Issues. New York: Praeger. Pitman, D.J., and W. Handy 1964 Patterns in criminal aggravated assault. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 55: 462-67. Platt, A.M. 1969 The Child Savers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pleck, E. 1987 Domestic Tyranny: The Making of American Social Policy Against Family Violence From Colonial Times to the Present. New York: Oxford University Press. 1989 Criminal approaches to family violence, 1640-1980. In L. Ohlin and M. Tonry, eds., Family Violence, Vol. 11: Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Prescott, S., and C. Lesko 1977 Battered women: A social psychological perspective. In Battered Women: A Psychosociological Study of Domestic Violence. New York: Van Nostrand Rheinhold. Reidel, M., M.A. Zahn, and L. Mock 1985 The Nature and Patterns of American Homicides. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Resick, P.A., and D. Reese 1986 Perception of family social climate and physical aggression in the home. Journal of Family Violence 1:71-83. Rivera, B., and C.S. Widom 1990 Childhood victimization and violent offending. Violence and Victims 5(1):19-36. Roscoe, B., and N. Benaske 1985 Courtship violence experienced by abused wives: Similarities in patterns of abuse. Family Relations 34:419-424. Rosenbaum, A., and R.D. O'Leary 1981 Marital violence: Characteristics of abusive couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 49(1):63-76. Rosenberg, M.L., R.J. Gelles, P.C. Holinger, E. Stark, M.A. Zahn, J.M. Conn, N.N. Fajman, and T.A. Karlson 1984 Violence, Homicide, Assault, and Suicide. Unpublished manuscript, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta. Rounsaville, B.J. 1978 Theories in marital violence: Evidence from a study of battered women. Victimology 3(1-2):11-31. Rouse, L.P. 1984 Conflict Tactics Used by Men in Marital Disputes. Paper presented

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences at the second national conference for Family Violence Researchers, University of New Hampshire, Durham, July. Roy, M. 1977 Battered Women: A Psychosocial Study of Domestic Violence. New York: Van Nostrand. Russell, D.E.H. 1982 Rape in Marriage. New York: Macmillan Saltzman, L.E., J.A. Mercy, M.L. Rosenberg, W.R. Elsea, G. Napper, R.K. Sikes, R. Waxweiler, and the Collaborative Working Group for the Study of Family and Institute Assaults in Atlanta 1990 Magnitude and patterns of family and intimate assaults in Atlanta, Georgia, 1984. Violence and Victims 5(1):3-18. Saunders, D.G. 1987 A Typology of Men Who Batter: Three Types Derived from Cluster Analysis. Paper presented at the third national conference on Family Violence Research, University of New Hampshire, Durham, July. 1988 Other "truths" about domestic violence: A reply to McNeely and Robinson-Simpson. Social Work 179-184. Saunders, D.G., and S.T. Azar 1989 Treatment programs for family violence. In L. Ohlin and M. Tonry, eds., Family Violence, Vol. 11: Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Saunders, D.G., and D.R. Hanusa 1984 Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment of Abusive Husbands: The Short-Term Effects of Group Therapy. Paper presented at the second national conference on Family Violence Research, University of New Hampshire, Durham, August. Saunders, D.G., A.B. Lynch, M. Grayson, and D. Linz 1987 The inventory of beliefs about wife beating: The construction and initial validation of a measure of beliefs and attitudes. Violence and Victims 2(1):39-58. Schecter, S. 1982 Women and Male Violence. Boston: South End Press. Schmidt, J., and E.H. Steury 1989 Prosecutorial discretion in filing charges in domestic violence cases. Criminology 27(3):487-510. Schneider, E.M. 1980 Equal rights to trail for women: Sex bias in the law on self-defense. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 15:623-647. Schneider, E.M., and S.B. Jordan 1981 Representation of women who defend themselves in response to physical or sexual assault. In E. Bochnak, ed., Women's Self Defense Cases: Theory and Practice. Charlottesville, Va.: The Michie Company Law Publishers.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Schulman, M. 1979 A Survey of Spousal Violence Against Women in Kentucky. Unpublished manuscript, Law Enforcement Administration, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. Schwendinger, J.R., and H. Schwendinger 1983 Rape and Inequality. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Scott, M.B., and S.M. Lyman 1968 Accounts. American Sociological Review 33(1):46-62. Sellin, T., and M.E. Wolfgang 1964 The Measurement of Delinquency. New York: Wiley & Sons. Sherif, M., and C. Hovland 1961 Social Judgment. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press. Sherman, L.W. 1992 Policing Domestic Violence: Experiments and Directions. New York: Free Press. Sherman, L.W., and R.A. Berk 1984 The specific deterrent effects of arrest for domestic assault. American Sociological Review 49:261-272. Sherman, L.W., and E.G. Cohn 1989 The impact of research on legal policy: The Minneapolis violence experiment. Law & Society Review 23(1):117-144. Sherman, L.W., P.R. Gartin, and M.E. Buerger 1989 Hot spots of predatory crime: Routine activities and the criminology of place. Criminology 27(1):27-55. Sherman, L.W., J.D. Schmidt, D. Rogan, and C. De Riso 1990 Predicting domestic homicide: Prior police contact and gun threats. In M. Steinman, ed., Redefining Crime: Responses to Women Battering . Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson Publishing. Sherman, L.W., J.D. Schmidt, D.P. Rogan, P. Gartin, E.G. Cohen, D.J. Collins, and A.R. Bacich 1991 From initial deterrence to long-term escalation: Short custody arrest for poverty ghetto domestic violence. Criminology 29:821-850. Sherman, L.W., D.A. Smith, J.D. Schmidt, and D.P. Rogan 1992 Crime, punishment, and stake in conformity: Legal and informal control of domestic violence. American Sociological Review 57:680-690. Shields, N., and C.R. Hanneke 1983 Battered wives' reactions to marital rape. Pp. 132-147 in D. Finkelhor, R.J. Gelles, G.T. Hotaling, and M.A. Straus, eds., The Dark Side of Families: Current Family Violence Research. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Shields, N., G.J. McCall, and C.R. Hanneke 1988 Patterns of family and non-family violence: Violent husbands and violent men. Violence and Victims 3:83-98.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Silverman, F.N. 1953 The roentgen manifestations of unrecognized skeletal trauma in infants. American Journal of Roentgenology 69:413-426. Silverman, R.A., and S.K. Mukherjee 1987 Intimate homicide: An analysis of violent social relationships. Behavioral Sciences and the Law 5:37-47. Simon, R.J., and S. Baxter 1989 Gender and violent crime. In N.A. Weiner and M.E. Wolfgang, eds., Violent Crime, Violent Criminals. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. Skogan, W.G. 1981 Issues in the Measurement of Victimization. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. 1989 Social change and the future of violent crime. Pp. 235-250 in T.R. Gurr, ed., Violence in America, Vol. I: The History of Crime. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. Smith, D.A. 1986 The neighborhood context of police behavior. In A.J. Reiss, Jr. and M. Tonry, eds., Communities and Crime. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Smith, M.D. 1986 Effects of question format on the reporting of woman abuse. Victimology 11:430-438. 1987 The incidence and prevalence of women abuse in Toronto. Violence and Victims 2(3):173-187. 1990 Patriarchical ideology and wife beating: A test of a feminist hypothesis. Violence and Victims 5(4):257-274. Smith, M.D., and R.N. Parker 1980 Types of homicide and variation in regional rates. Social Forces 59:136-147. Sonkin, D.J. 1987 Domestic Violence on Trial: Psychological and Legal Dimensions of Family Violence. New York: Springer. Sonkin, D.J., and M. Durphy 1985 Learning to Live Without Violence: A Handbook for Men, 2nd re. ed. San Francisco: Volcano Press. Sonkin, D.J., D. Martin, and L.E. Walker 1985 The Male Batterer: A Treatment Approach. New York: Springer Sorenson, S.B., and C.A. Telles 1991 Self-reports of spouse violence in a Mexican-American and non-Hispanic white population. Violence and Victims 6:3-16. Speckart, G., and M.D. Anglin 1986 Narcotics and crime: A causal modeling approach. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 2(1):3-28. Speiker, G. 1983 What is the linkage between alcohol abuse and violence. Pp.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences 125-137 in E. Gottheil, K.A. Druley, T.E. Skoloda, and H.M. Waxman, eds., Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Aggression. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas. Sprey, J. 1971 On the management of conflict in families. Journal of Marriage and the Family 33:722-732. Stanko, E.A. 1982 Would you believe this woman? In N. Rafter and E.A. Stanko, eds., Judge, Lawyer, Victim and Thief. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Star, B. 1980 Patterns in family violence. Social Casework Reprint Series 5-12. Stark, E., and A. Flitcraft 1983 Social knowledge, social policy, and the abuse of women: The case against patriarchal benevolence. Pp. 330-348 in D. Finkelhor, R.J. Gelles, G.T. Hotaling, and M.A. Straus, eds., The Dark Side of Families: Current Family Violence Research. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Stark, E., A. Flitcraft, and W. Frazier 1979 Medicine and patriarchical violence: The social construction of a private event. International Journal of Health Services 9(3):461-493. Stark, E., A. Flitcraft, D. Zuckerman, A. Grey, J. Robinson, and W. Frazier 1981 Wife Abuse in the Medical Setting: An Introduction to Health Personnel. Monograph Series #7. Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse on Domestic Violence. Stark, R., and J. McEvoy 1970 Middle class violence. Psychology Today 4(6):107-112. Starr, R.H., Jr. 1988 Physical abuse of children. In V.B. van Hasselt, R.L. Morrison, A.S. Bellack, and M. Hersen, eds., Handbook of Family Violence. New York: Plenum Press. Steadman, H.J. 1982 A situational approach to violence. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 5:171-186. Steinmetz, S.A. 1977 The Cycle of Violence: Assertive, Aggressive and Abusive Family Interactions. New York: Praeger. Stets, J.E., and M.A. Straus 1990 Gender differences in reporting marital violence and its medical and psychological consequences. In M.A. Straus and R.J. Gelles, eds., Psychical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptation to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Press.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Straus, M.A. 1973 A general systems theory of violence between family members. Social Science Information 12:105-125. 1976 Sexual inequality, cultural norms, and wife beating. Victimology 1:54-76. 1978 Wife beating: How common and why? Victimology 2:443-458. 1979 Measuring family conflict and violence. The Conflict Tactics Scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family 41:75-88. 1983 Ordinary violence, child abuse, and wife-beating: What do they have in common and why? In D. Finkelhor, R.J. Gelles, G.T. Hotaling, and M.A. Straus, eds., The Dark Side of Families: Current Family Violence Research. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. 1986 Domestic violence and homicide antecedents. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 62:446-465. 1989 Assaults by Wives on Husbands: Implications for Primary Prevention of Marital Violence. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Reno, Nev., November. 1990a The conflict tactics scales and its critics: An evaluation and new data on validity and reliability. In M.A. Straus and R.J. Gelles, eds., Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptation to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Press. 1990b Injury and frequency of assault and the ''representative sample fallacy" in measuring wife beating and child abuse. In M.A. Straus and R.J. Gelles, eds., Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptation to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Press. Straus, M.A., and R.J. Gelles 1986 Societal change in family violence from 1975 to 1985 as revealed by two national surveys. Journal of Marriage and the Family 48:465-479. Straus, M.A., and R.J. Gelles, eds. 1990 Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptations to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Press. Straus, M.A., and C. Smith 1990 Violence in Hispanic families in the United States: Incidence rates and structural interpretations. In M.A. Straus and R.J. Gelles, eds., Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptation to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Press. Straus, M.A., R.J. Gelles, and S.K. Steinmetz 1980 Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Press, Doubleday.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Sugarman, D.B., and G.T. Hotaling 1989 Courtship violence: In M.A. Pirog-Good and J.E. Stets, eds., Violence in Dating Relationships. New York: Praeger. Sullivan, J.P., and D.L. Mosher 1990 Acceptance of guided imagery of marital rape as a function of macho personality. Violence and Victims 5(4):275-286. Sykes, G.M., and D. Matza 1957 Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review 22:667-670. Szinovacz, M.E. 1983 Using couple data as a methodological tool: The case of marital violence. Journal of Marriage and the Family 45:633-644. Tauchen, G., H. Tauchen, and A.D. Witte 1986 The Dynamics of Domestic Violence: A Reanalysis of the Minneapolis Experiment. Unpublished manuscript, Police Foundation, Washington, D.C. Taylor, S.P. 1983 Alcohol and human physical aggression. Pp. 280-291 in E. Gottheil, K.A. Druley, T.E. Skoloda, and H.M. Waxman, eds., Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Aggression. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas. Telch, C.F., and C.U. Lindquist 1984 Violent vs. non-violent couples: A comparison of patterns. Psychotherapy 21:242-248. Thyfault, R. 1984 Self-defense: Battered women syndrome on trial. California Western Law Review 20:485-510. Thyfault, R., A. Browne, and L.E. Walker 1987 When battered women kill: Evaluation and expert testimony techniques. In D.J. Sonkin, ed., Domestic Violence on Trial: Psychological and Legal Dimensions of Family Violence. New York: Springer. Tolman, R.M. 1989 The development of a measure of the psychological maltreatment of women by their male partners . Violence and Victims 4(3):159-178. Totman, J. 1978 The Murderess: A Psychosocial Study of Criminal Homicide. San Francisco: R. & E. Research Associates. U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 1978 Battered Women: Issues of Public Policy. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. 1982 Under the Rule of Thumb: Battered Women and the Administration of Justice. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. Waldorf, D. 1973 Careers in Dope. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Walker, L.E. 1979 The Battered Women. New York: Harper and Row. 1984 The Battered Woman Syndrome. New York: Springer. Wardell, L., D.L. Gillespie, and A. Leffler 1983 Science and violence against wives. In D. Finkelhor, R.J. Gelles, G.T. Hotaling, and M.A. Straus, eds., The Dark Side of Families: Current Family Violence Research. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Washburn, C., and I.H. Frieze 1980 Methodological Issues in Studying Battered Women. Paper presented at the first national conference for Family Violence Researchers, University of New Hampshire, Durham, July . Weiner, N.A., and M.E. Wolfgang 1985 The extent and character of violent crime in America, 1969 to 1982. In L.A. Curtis, ed., American Violence and Public Policy. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press. Weis, J.G. 1989 Family violence research methodology and design. In L. Ohlin and M. Tonry, eds., Family Violence, Vol. 11: Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Weisburd, D.L., L. Maher, and L.W. Sherman 1989 Contrasting Crime-Specific and Crime-General Theories: The Case of Hot Spots of Crime. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, San Francisco, August. Wexler, S. 1982 Battered women and public policy. In E. Boneparth, ed., Women, Power and Policy. New York: Pergamon. White, S.O., and M.A. Straus 1981 The implications of family violence for rehabilitation strategies. In S.E. Martin, L. Sechrest, and R. Redner, eds., New Directions in the Rehabilitation of Criminal Offenders. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. Widom, C.S. 1988 Intergeneration transmission of violence. In N.A. Weiner and M.E. Wolfgang, eds., Violent Crime, Violent Criminals. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. 1989 Child abuse, neglect and violent criminal behavior. Criminology 27(2):251-271. 1990 Implications of biases in sampling techniques for child abuse research and policy. In D. Besharov, ed., Family Violence Research and Policy. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America. Wiersema, B., and C. Loftin 1994 Estimates of Assault by Inmates from the National Crime Victimization

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences Survey, 1987. Institute of Criminal Justice & Criminology. College Park, Md.: University of Maryland. Wilbanks, W. 1983 The female homicide offender in Dade County, Florida. Criminal Justice Review 8(2):9-14. Williams, K.R., and R.L. Flewelling 1988 The social production of criminal homicide: A comparative study of disaggregated rates in American cities. American Sociological Review 53(3):421-431. Williams, K.R., and R. Hawkins 1986 Perceptual research on general deterrence: A critical review. Law & Society Review 20:544-572. 1989a The meaning of arrest for wife assault. Criminology 27(2):163-181. 1989b Controlling male aggression in intimate relationships. Law & Society Review 24(4):591-612. 1992 Wife assault, costs of arrest, and the deterrence process. Journal of Research and Crime Delinquency 29:292-310. Wilson, J.Q. 1977 Foreword. In Domestic Violence and the Police: Studies in Detroit and Kansas City. Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation. Winick, C. 1983 Drinking and disinhibition in popular culture. Pp. 347-373 in R. Room and G. Collins, eds., Alcohol and Disinhibition: The Nature and Meaning of the Link. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Research Monograph No. 12. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Winkler, I., and I.J. Doherty 1983 Communication styles and marital satisfaction in Israeli and American couples. Family Process 22:221-228. Wolfgang, M.E. 1958 Patterns in Criminal Homicide. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1967 A sociological analysis of criminal homicide. In M.E. Wolfgang, ed., Studies in Homicide. New York: Harper and Row. Wolfgang, M.E., and F. Ferracuti 1967 The Subculture of Violence: Toward an Integrated Theory of Criminology . London: Tavistock. Yllo, K.A. 1983 Sexual equality and violence against wives in American states. Journal of Comparative Family Studies 14:67-86. 1988 Political and methodological debates in wife abuse research. In K. Yllo and M. Bograd, eds., Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse . Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications. Yllo, K.A., and M.A. Straus 1984 Patriarchy and violence against wives: The impact of structural

OCR for page 115
Understanding and Preventing Violence - Volume 3: Social Influences and normative factors. Journal of International and Comparative Social Welfare 1(1):16-29. Zahn, M.A. 1989 Homicide in the twentieth century: Trends, types and causes. In T.R. Gurr, ed., Violence in America, Vol. I: The History of Violence . Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications. Zimring, F.E. 1989 Toward a jurisprudence of family violence. In L. Ohlin and M. Tonry, eds., Family Violence, Vol. 11: Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Zimring, F.E., S.K. Mukherjee, and B.J. Van Winkle 1983 Intimate violence: A study of intersexual homicide in Chicago. The University of Chicago Law Review 50(2):910-930. Zinberg, N.E. 1984 Drug, Set, and Setting: The Social Bases of Controlled Drug Use. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.