The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Under the radar: policing non-violent domestic abuse in the US and UK
Open accessAbstract
Physical violence is but one of many tools that may be used to gain greater power within intimate relationships, yet the legal response has been critiqued for failing to recognise and respond to the full spectrum of abusive behaviours, such as coercive control. Using a sample of police officers from the United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK), the current study utilises hypothetical vignettes to assess police officers’ perceptions of domestic abuse, including those incidents that are not necessarily physically violent, but involve stalking and other coercive, controlling behaviours that are harmful and require intervention. Within- and between-country similarities and differences were analysed. Findings revealed that the majority of officers in both countries possessed a good level of understanding of domestic abuse and how they should respond to it – amidst and beyond the physical violence. However, our analysis of both quantitative and qualitative data also showed that the use of physical violence is at the forefront of many officers’ expectations about domestic abuse, and that when physical violence is absent, the police response is less proactive. Our study finds some support for the idea that non-physical abuse does go “under the radar” to some extent for some officers, and that this is more the case for American officers than their British counterparts. Findings are discussed in terms of context of the research sites and implications for policy, practice and future research.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Robinson et al. found that the DASH was used inconsistently, if at all, and that there were inconsistencies in how responses were recorded.
“The DASH was used inconsistently, if at all, and there were also inconsistencies in how responses were recorded.”
Robinson et al. have shown that the DASH is often not used in the correct manner, including cutting and pasting from previous reports and completing it only when felt worthwhile.
“Robinson et al. [7,8] have shown that the DASH is often not used in the correct manner, with instances of cutting and pasting from previous reports, only completing the DASH if it was felt worthwhile, etc.”
Any scheme designed to predict domestic abuse (or other forms of violence) is dependent on the correct usage of the instrument.
“Any scheme designed to predict domestic abuse (or other forms of violence) is dependent on the correct usage of the instrument.”
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 42 · Cited by 44
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- 10.1177/1524838014520725 · DOI
- 10.1177/1524838005275088 · DOI
- Bourlet, A. (1990). Police Intervention in Marital Violence. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
- Burke, A. S. (2007). Domestic violence as a crime of pattern and intent: An alternative reconceptualization. The George Washington Law Review, 75(3), 552–612.
- Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- 10.1111/psci.2008.19.issue-8 · DOI
- Collings, G. B. (2014). Coercive Control: Perceptions of the new definition of domestic abuse. Cardiff: School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University.
- Fagan, J. (1996). The criminalization of domestic violence: Promises and limits. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
- 10.1177/0038038587021001008 · DOI
- Guthrie, J. A., & Kunkel, A. (2015). Problematizing the uniform application of the formula story: Advocacy for survivors in a domestic violence support group. Women & Language, 38, 43–62.
- 10.1080/01924036.2008.9678784 · DOI
- 10.1037/10674-001 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0002764293036005007 · DOI
- Johnson, M. P. (2008). A typology of domestic violence: Intimate terrorism, violent resistance, and situational couple violence. Lebanon: Northeastern University Press.
- Loseke, D. R. (2001). Lived realities and formula stories of “battered women.”. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Institutional selves: Troubled identities in a postmodern world (pp. 107–126). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- Messing, J. T., Campbell, J., Wilson, J. S., Brown, S., Patchell, B., & Shall, C. (2014). Police Departments’ Use of the Lethality Assessment Program: A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice (document # 247456).
- Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Muir, W. K. (1977). Police: Streetcorner politicians. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- 10.1177/1077801214568032 · DOI
- Pleck, E. (2004). Domestic Tyranny: The Making of American Social Policy Against Family Violence from Colonial Times to the Present. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
- Robinson, A. L. (2010a). Domestic violence. In F. Brookman, M. Maguire, H. Pierpoint, & T. Bennett (Eds.), Handbook of Crime (pp. 245–269). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
- Robinson, A. L. (2010b). Risk and intimate partner violence. In H. Kemshall & B. Wilkinson (Eds.), Good practice in risk assessment and risk management (3rd ed., pp. 119–138). London: Jessica Kingsley.
- 10.1177/0886260511425792 · DOI
- 10.1196/annals.1385.004 · DOI
- Sherman, L. W., Schmidt, J. D., & Rogan, D. P. (1992). Policing domestic violence: Experiments and dilemmas. New York, NY: Free Press.
- 10.2307/797286 · DOI
- Stark, E. (2013). Coercive control. In N. Lombard & L. McMillan (Eds.), Violence against women: Current theory and practice in domestic abuse, sexual violence and exploitation (pp. 17–33). London: Jessica Kingsley.
- 10.2307/3491414 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10900-005-5518-x · DOI
- 10.1023/A:1022893231951 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Robinson, A. L., Pinchevsky, G. M., & Guthrie, J. A.
- Affiliations
- Cardiff University (GB)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US)
- Corresponding author
- Robinson, Amanda L.
- Venue
- International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2015-11-20
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 195-208
- ISSN
- 0192-4036 (ISSN-L)
- 2157-6475
- OpenAlex
- W2187596346
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4
- FWCI
- 4.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
- Digital Scholarship - UNLV (University of Nevada Reno) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
- Keywords
- coercive control, stalking, police perceptions, physical violence, intimate partner violence, police officers, United States, United Kingdom, cross-national comparison
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