Cited by 73Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceElder Abuse and NeglectStalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment

Gender Inequality and Patterns of Abuse Post Leaving

Davies, Lorraine, Ford-Gilboe, Marilyn, Hammerton, Joanne·2009·Journal of Family Violence

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10896-008-9204-5

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In Broughton and Ford-Gilboe's quantitative secondary analysis of 157 Canadian mothers, although women had been separated from their abusive partners for an average of 2.5 years, the majority continued to experience coercive control.

    “Broughton and Ford-Gilboe (2017) noted that in their quantitative secondary analysis of 157 Canadian mothers, “Although women had been separated from their abusive partners for an average of 2.5 years, the majority continued to experience coercive control” (p. 2468), a trend also noted by Davies et al. (2009).”
  • The consistency between the various qualitative studies confirms the importance of further study on post-separation abuse, supported by the results of several quantitative studies.

    “Nevertheless, the consistency between the various qualitative studies confirms the importance of further study on post-separation abuse, supported by the results of several quantitative studies (Broughton & Ford-Gilboe, 2017; Davies et al., 2009).”
  • After separation from an abusive partner, up to 90% of women report continued harassment, stalking or abuse.

    “After separation from an abusive partner, up to 90% of women report continued harassment, stalking or abuse (Davies et al., 2009; Hardesty et al., 2012; Mitchell et al., 2021).”

    From Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Davies et al., 2009

  • Patriarchal norms create the context for post-separation abuse by men towards women through gendered notions of caregiving of children, male entitlement, and gender bias in courts.

    “Patriarchal norms create the context for post-separation abuse by men towards women through gendered notions of caregiving of children, male entitlement and gender bias in courts (Davies et al., 2009; Meier, 2020).”

    From Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Davies et al., 2009

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davies, L., Ford-Gilboe, M., & Hammerton, J.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Davies, Lorraine
Venue
Journal of Family Violence
Published
2008-09-18
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
27-39
ISSN
  • 0885-7482 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2851
OpenAlex
W2000213247
Cited by
73
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
4.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Family Violence (publishedVersion)
  • Scholarship@Western (Western University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Elder Abuse and Neglect
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
Keywords
intimate partner violence, gender inequality, leaving abusive relationships, post-separation abuse, coercive control, relations of production, cathexis, power and control, men's violence against women, women's safety, socio-structural factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review