Cited by 26Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsAttachment and Relationship Dynamics

An Integrative Theoretical Model of Intimate Partner Violence, Coparenting After Separation, and Maternal and Child Well‐Being

Hardesty, Jennifer L., Raffaelli, Marcela, Khaw, Lyndal, Thomann Mitchell, Elissa, Haselschwerdt, Megan L., Crossman, Kimberly A.·2012·Journal of Family Theory & Review

Abstract

The quality of coparenting relationships after separation is known to affect mothers' and children's physical and mental health. It is well established that conflict is a common phenomenon among separating parents; however, studies rarely distinguish between relationships characterized by violence as opposed to conflict. Because violence creates a distinct separation and coparenting experience, we propose a theoretical model that integrates these disparate literatures. The integrated model provides a heuristic tool to guide future theory building, research, and practice.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1756-2589.2012.00139.x

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Post-separation abuse contrasts with situational couple violence, in which violence erupts out of specific arguments or conflicts but without an ongoing motive to dominate one's partner.

    “This contrasts with what is called situational couple violence, in which violence erupts out of specific arguments or conflicts but without an ongoing motive to dominate one's partner (Hardesty et al., 2012; Johnson, 2005).”

    From Post‐separation abuse: A concept analysis (2023) · cites this paper as Hardesty et al., 2012

  • 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 Hardesty et al., 2012

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hardesty, J. L., Raffaelli, M., Khaw, L., Thomann Mitchell, E., Haselschwerdt, M. L., & Crossman, K. A.
Affiliations
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Corresponding author
Hardesty, Jennifer L.
Venue
Journal of Family Theory & Review
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-12
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
318-331
ISSN
  • 1756-2570 (ISSN-L)
  • 1756-2589
OpenAlex
W2048995011
Cited by
26
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2
FWCI
1.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Family Theory & Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
Keywords
intimate partner violence, co-parenting, parental separation, maternal well-being, child well-being, domestic violence, theoretical model, mother and child

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