Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Research: Scientific Progress, Scientific Challenges, and Gender
Abstract
The purpose of this review is to evaluate the current status of scientific knowledge on intimate partner violence (IPV) and sexual violence, with a particular focus on the measurement of gender patterns. A multimethod analysis of estimates for the incidence and prevalence of intimate and sexual aggression reveals consistencies across some methodologies and inconsistencies across others. In particular, self-report using behavioral checklists such as the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales yields results that are very discrepant from other research findings. Contrary to some assertions, self-report studies using simple checklists do not represent “most data” on intimate violence; there are large criminological and public health databases that warrant attention. When these sources are considered and placed in the context of other data on violence and aggression, a clear pattern of gender asymmetry emerges, with males perpetrating more physical and sexual violence than females for virtually every form of violence ever studied. Violence research has been hampered by the conservative forces that affect most social science research, including peer review, grant review, and tenure review processes that discourage methodological innovation and reward incremental research studies. We need to focus resources on scientific and technological innovation to better understand violent phenomena and better serve all those involved in violence. Two examples of self-report methods that do not produce gender symmetry are described.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Individuals who seek support such as emergency medical care, police intervention, legal protection, or housing may have less access to informal supports that will meet their needs.
“Additionally, individuals who seek support such as emergency medical care, police intervention, legal protection, or housing may be experiencing more severe violence and may have less access to informal supports that will meet their needs (Hamby, 2014).”
From The association between social support and posttraumatic stress symptoms among survivors of betrayal trauma: a meta-analysis (2021) · cites this paper as Hamby, 2014
Individuals who seek support such as emergency medical care, police intervention, legal protection, or housing may be experiencing more severe violence.
“Additionally, individuals who seek support such as emergency medical care, police intervention, legal protection, or housing may be experiencing more severe violence and may have less access to informal supports that will meet their needs (Hamby, 2014).”
From The association between social support and posttraumatic stress symptoms among survivors of betrayal trauma: a meta-analysis (2021) · cites this paper as Hamby, 2014
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 46 · Cited by 201
- Authors
- Hamby, S.
- Affiliations
- Sewanee: The University of the South (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hamby, Sherry
- ORCID
- Hamby, Sherry
- Venue
- Trauma, Violence, & Abuse
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-01-24
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 149-158
- ISSN
- 1524-8380 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8324
- OpenAlex
- W2124079545
- Cited by
- 201
- References
- 46
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 6
- FWCI
- 19.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Trauma Violence & Abuse (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
- Keywords
- intimate partner violence, sexual violence, violence measurement, Revised Conflict Tactics Scales
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