The DOI matches its Crossref record; 219 of the 220 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prevalence of Partner Abuse: Rates of Emotional Abuse and Control
Abstract
Partner abuse research over the past two decades has divided violent, threatening, or abusive phenomena into discrete areas of interest to researchers that, although distinct, are still broadly defined under the common category of “domestic abuse” or, more recently, intimate partner violence (IPV). Thus, any concerted attempt to typify the various substrata of IPV research must recognize the distinct features of each area regarding their component parts (i.e., behavioral or psychological sequelae, incidence and prevalence, and social or interpersonal context) while maintaining the overarching categorical commonality as variants of IPV. This article constitutes a contemporaneous and systematic review of the research on three aspects of controlling coercive violence (CCV): emotional abuse, sexual coercion, and stalking or obsessive behavior, along with a separate examination of when these IPV substrata are combined with physical assaults on intimate partners. Each CCV substrata is operationally defined in research terms common to the social science research, and tabular and narrative data is provided on the incidence and prevalence of each substrata and the combined category. Notable findings derived from this review are reported for each of the three aspects of CCV. For emotional abuse, prevalence rates might average around 80%, with 40% of women and 32% of men reporting expressive aggression (i.e., verbal abuse or emotional violence in response to some agitating or aggravating circumstance) and 41% of women and 43% of men reporting some form of coercive control. For sexual coercion, national samples demonstrated the widest disparity by gender of victim, with 0.2% of men and 4.5% of women endorsing forced sexual intercourse by a partner. By far, the largest selection of highly variable studies, stalking and obsessive behaviors showed a range from 4.1% to 8.0% of women and 0.5% to 2.0% of men in the United States have been stalked at some time in their life. Women were reported as having a significantly higher prevalence (7%) of stalking victimization than men (2%). For all types of violence, except being followed in a way that frightened them, strangers were the most common perpetrators; as reported in approximately 80% of cases, women were most often victimized by men they knew, most frequently, their current or former intimate partners. Among women who reported repeated unwanted contact, current (15.9%) and former (32.9%) intimate partners were the perpetrators in nearly half of the most recent incidents and the largest subdivision of reports came from college or university student samples. A separate examination reports of these types of IPV combined with physical assaults on intimate partners reported the strongest link was between stalking and other forms of violence in intimate relationships: 81% of women who were stalked by a current or former husband or cohabiting partner were also physically assaulted by that partner and 31% reported being sexually assaulted by that partner. Of the types of IPV reported on, most forms of violence that show the highest rates of reportage come from large national samples, with smaller samples showing increased variability. This article concludes with a brief section delineating conclusions that can be drawn from the review and the potential implications for research, practice, and IPV scholarship.
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?
In the citing paper
“Emotional IPV is the most prevalent form of IPV experienced, with nearly 50% of both men and women reporting emotional abuse victimization (Black et al., 2011;Carney & Barner, 2012).”
From The relationship between emotional intimate partner violence and other forms of violence: A metaanalytic review. (2024) · cites this paper as Carney & Barner, 2012
In the citing paper
“Evidence exists of the co-emergence of forms of physical IPV and emotional IPV in cross-sectional studies, which have highlighted that physical IPV rarely occurs in the absence of emotional IPV (Burman et al., 1992;Carney & Barner, 2012;Cordova et al., 1993;Lloyd, 1996;Margolin et al., 1988;Sabourin et al., 1993).”
From The relationship between emotional intimate partner violence and other forms of violence: A metaanalytic review. (2024) · cites this paper as Carney & Barner, 2012
In the citing paper
“Despite evidence that emotional abuse is the most prevalent form of IPV (Basile et al., 2011;Carney & Barner, 2012), methods of assessment remain an urgent need for this issue.”
From The relationship between emotional intimate partner violence and other forms of violence: A metaanalytic review. (2024) · cites this paper as Carney & Barner, 2012
Citations
Cites
Items 201–219 of 219
Saudino, K. J., & Hines, D. A. (2007) · Journal of Family Violence · doi:10.1007/s10896-006-9059-6 · Cited by 25
Health Behavior in Adolescent Women Reporting and not Reporting Intimate Partner Violence
Hanson, M. J. (2010) · Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1552-6909.2010.01138.x · Cited by 22
Violence involving intimate partners: prevalence in Canadian family practice.
Ahmad, F., Hogg‐Johnson, S., Stewart, D. E., & Levinson, W. S. (2007) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 22
Differentiating between Physically Violent and Nonviolent Stalkers: An Examination of Canadian Cases
Morrison, K. A. (2008) · Journal of Forensic Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2008.00722.x · Cited by 20
Zavala, E., & Spohn, R. E. (2010) · Sociological Spectrum · doi:10.1080/02732173.2010.496103 · Cited by 20
Johnson, J. K., John, R., Humera, A., Kukreja, S., Found, M., & Lindow, S. W. (2006) · European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology · doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2006.04.035 · Cited by 19
The Course and Nature of Stalking
Sheridan, L. P. (2001) · Journal of Threat Assessment · doi:10.1300/j177v01n03_03 · Cited by 16
Asking pregnant women about domestic abuse
Keeling, J. J., & Birch, L. (2004) · British Journal of Midwifery · doi:10.12968/bjom.2004.12.12.17172 · Cited by 16
Influence of Gender and Experience on College Students' Stalking Schemas
Yanowitz, K. L. (2006) · Violence and Victims · doi:10.1891/vivi.21.1.91 · Cited by 15
Self-Reported Elder Domestic Partner Violence in One Rural Iowa County
Daly, J. M., Hartz, A. J., Stromquist, A. M., Peek-Asa, C., & Jogerst, G. J. (2008) · Journal of Emotional Abuse · doi:10.1300/j135v07n04_06 · Cited by 13
LeBlanc, J., Levesque, G., Richardson, J., & Berka, L. H. (2001) · Journal of Forensic Sciences · doi:10.1520/jfs14974j · Cited by 12
Targeted Neighborhood Sampling: A New Approach for Recruiting Abusive Couples
Christopher, F. S., Pflieger, J. C., Canary, D. J., Guerrero, L. K., & Holtzworth‐Munroe, A. (2007) · Journal of Family Violence · doi:10.1007/s10896-007-9130-y · Cited by 10
STALKING AND RESTRAINING ORDERS: A LEGAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
Wallace, H., & Kelty, K. (1995) · Journal of Crime and Justice · doi:10.1080/0735648x.1995.9721051 · Cited by 8
Stalking and harassment in Scotland
Morris, S., Anderson, S., Murray, L., & Kingdom), S. S. E. S. R. (. (2002) · OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · Cited by 8
Swanwick, R. A. (1996) · The University of Queensland Law Journal · Cited by 7
Physical and psychological abuse among a predominantly African American sample.
Barnes, S. Y. (2001) · PubMed · Cited by 5
Distorting Intimate Violence Findings: Playing with Numbers
Graham‐Kevan, N. (2007) · European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research · doi:10.1007/s10610-007-9058-z · Cited by 2
Associations between Stalking Tactics, Intimate Partner Violence, and Underlying Motivations.
Yazykova, K. M., Raghavan, C., O’Connor, M., & Dernison, A. M. (2006) · Cited by 1
Categories of Stalking Tactics and Their Associations with Intimate Partner Violence
Yazykova, K. M., Raghavan, C., & O’Connor, M. (2006) · Cited by 1
Flagged first, then by citations
1 of the 220 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- 2000, Criminal harassment, Juristat, 20, 1
- 10.1037/1076-8971.4.1-2.236 · DOI
- Klein R. C. A. , & Johnson M. P. (2000). Strategies of couple conflict. In R. M. Milardo & S. Duck (Eds.), Families as relationships (pp. 79–97). Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley.
- 1997, Criminal harassment, Juristat, 16, 1
- 10.1016/S1049-3867(03)00115-4 · DOI
- 2000, Stalking as a variant of intimate violence: Implications from a young adult sample, Violence & Victims, 15, 91, 10.1891/0886-6708.15.1.91 · DOI
- 10.1037/0893-3200.16.3.286 · DOI
- Marshall J. , & Castle C. (1998, February). Restraining orders and stalking offences in 1995 and 1996. Information Bulletin, 1–16.
- Mechanic M. B. , Weaver T. L. , & Resick P. A. (2002). Intimate partner violence and stalking behavior: Exploration of patterns and correlates in a sample of acutely battered women. In K. E. Davis , I. H. Frieze , & R. D. Maiuro (Eds.), Stalking: Perspectives on victims and perpetrators (pp. 62–88). New York: Springer Publishing.
- 2004, Stalking in the context of domestic violence: Findings on the criminal justice system, Women and Criminal Justice, 15, 33
- 1999, Study of stalkers, The American Journal of Psychiatry, 156, 1244
- O’Leary K. D. , & Jouriles E. N. (1994). Psychological abuse between adult partners: Prevalence and impact on partners and children. In L. L’Abate (Ed.), Handbook of developmental family psychology and psychopathology (330–349). Oxford, United Kingdom: Wiley.
- 2000, Same-gender stalking, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 28, 191
- Perilla J. L. , Lippy C. A. , Rosales A. , & Serrata J. V. (2011). Domestic violence prevalence. In J. W. White , M. P. Koss , & A. E. Kazdin (Eds.), Violence against women and children: Mapping the terrain. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
- 10.1891/vivi.2003.18.6.595 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Douglas, E. M., & Hines, D. A. (2011) · Journal of Family Violence · doi:10.1007/s10896-011-9382-4 · Cited by 289
Emotional Abuse in Intimate Relationships: The Role of Gender and Age
Karakurt, G., & Silver, K. E. (2013) · Violence and Victims · doi:10.1891/0886-6708.vv-d-12-00041 · Cited by 211
Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programs: A Proposal for Evidence-Based Standards in the United States
Babcock, J. C., Armenti, N. A., Cannon, C. E. B., Lauve-Moon, K. R., Buttell, F., Ferreira, R. J., Cantos, A. L., Hamel, J., Kelly, D. R., Jordan, C., et al. (2016) · Partner Abuse · doi:10.1891/1946-6560.7.4.355 · Cited by 180
Watkins, L. E., Maldonado, R. C., & DiLillo, D. (2016) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/1073191116665696 · Cited by 138
Cannon, C. E. B., Hamel, J., Buttell, F., & Ferreira, R. J. (2016) · Partner Abuse · doi:10.1891/1946-6560.7.3.226 · Cited by 128
Metadata
- Authors
- Carney, M. M., & Barner, J. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Georgia (US)
- Venue
- Partner Abuse
- Publisher
- Springer Publishing Company
- Published
- 2012
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 286-335
- ISSN
- 1946-6560 (ISSN-L)
- 1946-6579
- OpenAlex
- W2001976555
- Cited by
- 184
- References
- 220
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 9.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Partner Abuse (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Health › Intimate Partner and Family Violence
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Stalking, Cyberstalking, and Harassment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Elder Abuse and Neglect
- Keywords
- intimate partner violence, emotional abuse, coercive control, sexual coercion, stalking, obsessive behavior, stalking victimization, prevalence, gender differences, physical assault, university students, perpetrators
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