Cited by 128Intimate Partner and Family ViolenceStalking, Cyberstalking, and HarassmentFamily Dynamics and Relationships

“He Could Scare Me Without Laying a Hand on Me”: Mothers’ Experiences of Nonviolent Coercive Control During Marriage and After Separation

Crossman, Kimberly A., Hardesty, Jennifer L., Raffaelli, Marcela·2016·Violence Against Women

Abstract

Studies demonstrate the negative effects of violent coercive control but few examine coercive control without violence. This study describes the characteristics of nonviolent coercive control among 8 divorcing mothers and compares them with 47 mothers who experienced violent coercive control or no violence/no control. Mothers with nonviolent coercive control reported more coping strategies, risk, harassment, and perceived threat than mothers with no violence/no control; similar levels of fear and control during marriage as mothers with violent coercive control; and more postseparation fear than both groups. Findings highlight the need to include nonviolent coercive control in screening methods and research measures.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1077801215604744

Cites

10 of 10 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?

  • Coercive control likely has more severe mental health implications than situational psychological IPV or physical IPV not embedded in coercive control.

    “Importantly, coercive control is both highly prevalent, occurring in up to 58% of IPV relationships, and a particularly insidious form of IPV that likely has more severe mental health implications than situational psychological IPV, or even physical IPV that is not embedded in the context of coercive control (Crossman et al., 2016; Kennedy et al., 2018; Stark, 2007).”
  • Coercive control is highly prevalent, occurring in up to 58% of IPV relationships.

    “Importantly, coercive control is both highly prevalent, occurring in up to 58% of IPV relationships, and a particularly insidious form of IPV that likely has more severe mental health implications than situational psychological IPV, or even physical IPV that is not embedded in the context of coercive control (Crossman et al., 2016; Kennedy et al., 2018; Stark, 2007).”
  • In Crossman et al.'s qualitative study, the majority of the eight separated women experienced coercive control tactics that included personal threats during child visitation, often the only contact between the ex-partners.

    “Similarly, Crossman et al. (2016) reported that the majority of the eight separated women in their qualitative study experienced coercive control tactics that included personal threats during child visitation, often the only contact between the ex-partners.”
  • Although abuse with respect to custody issues after separation from an abusive partner has been widely studied, relatively little research has examined post-separation abuse beyond child custody, and these have mostly consisted of qualitative studies with relatively small sample sizes.

    “In summary, although abuse with respect to custody issues after separation from an abusive partner has been widely studied, relatively little research has examined post-separation abuse beyond child custody, and these have mostly consisted of qualitative studies with relatively small sample sizes (i.e. Crossman et al., 2016; Krigel & Benjamin, 2021; Miller & Smolter, 2011; Rivera et al., 2018; Toe”
  • The coercive control tactics used against women by their ex-partners in both the quantitative and qualitative analyses in the current study are consistent with the previously published, largely qualitative research on this topic.

    “The coercive control tactics used against women by their ex-partners in both the quantitative and qualitative analyses in the current study are consistent with the previously published, largely qualitative research on this topic (Broughton & Ford-Gilboe, 2017; Crossman et al., 2016; Douglas, 2018; Hardesty & Ganong, 2006; Hayes, 2012; Krigel & Benjamin, 2021; Sharp-Jeffs et al., 2018; Toews & Berm”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Crossman, K. A., Hardesty, J. L., & Raffaelli, M.
Affiliations
  • Southern Illinois University Carbondale (US)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Corresponding author
Crossman, Kimberly A.
Venue
Violence Against Women
Published
2015-09-23
Volume
22
Issue
4
Pages
454-473
ISSN
  • 1077-8012 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8448
OpenAlex
W2263598162
Cited by
128
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
7.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Violence Against Women (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  • National Institute of Food and Agriculture
  • College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
Keywords
divorce, mothers, coping strategies, threat perception, harassment, screening measures
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Coercion, Divorce, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Marriage, Risk Factors, Spouse Abuse, Spouses, Battered Women, Young Adult

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