Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 411

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 86 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Effectiveness of Intervention Programs for Perpetrators and Victims of Intimate Partner Violence

Eckhardt, Christopher I., Murphy, Christopher M., Whitaker, Daniel J., Sprunger, Joel, Dykstra, Rita, Woodard, Kim·2013·Partner Abuse

Abstract

In this review, we provide a descriptive and detailed review of intervention programs for intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators and survivor-victims. Given the extensive personal, interpersonal, and societal costs associated with IPV, it is essential that services being offered by the criminal justice, mental health, and medical communities have requisite empirical support to justify their implementation. The review involved a detailed summary of all studies published since 1990 using randomized or quasi-experimental designs that compared an active intervention program to a relevant comparison condition. These studies included 20 studies investigating the effectiveness of “traditional” forms of batterer intervention programs (BIPs) aimed at perpetrators of IPV, 10 studies that investigated the effectiveness of alternative formats of BIPs, 16 studies of brief intervention programs for IPV victim-survivors, and 15 studies of more extended intervention programs for IPV victim-survivors. Interventions for perpetrators showed equivocal results regarding their ability to lower the risk of IPV, and available studies had many methodological flaws. More recent investigations of novel programs with alternative content have shown promising results. Among interventions for victim-survivors of IPV, a range of therapeutic approaches have been shown to produce enhancements in emotional functioning, with the strongest support for cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) approaches in reducing negative symptomatic effects of IPV. Supportive advocacy in community settings has been shown to reduce the frequency of revictimization relative to no-treatment controls, although rates of revictimization remain alarmingly high in these studies. Brief interventions for victim-survivors have had more complex and less consistently positive effects. Several studies have found significant increases in safety behaviors, but enhanced use of community resources is often not found. It remains unclear whether brief safety interventions produce longer term reduction in IPV revictimization. Discussion summarizes the general state of knowledge on interventions for IPV perpetrators and victim-survivors and important areas for future research.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1891/1946-6560.4.2.196

Cites

86 of 86 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 86 references

Cited by

See all 411

Metadata

Authors
Eckhardt, C. I., Murphy, C. M., Whitaker, D. J., Sprunger, J., Dykstra, R., & Woodard, K.
Venue
Partner Abuse
Published
2013
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
196-231
ISSN
  • 1946-6560 (ISSN-L)
  • 1946-6579
OpenAlex
W2332590031
Cited by
411
References
86
FWCI
26.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Effectiveness of Intervention Programs for Perpetrators and Victims of Intimate Partner Violence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1891/1946-6560.4.2.196
The paper
Eckhardt, C. I., Murphy, C. M., Whitaker, D. J., Sprunger, J., Dykstra, R., & Woodard, K. (2013). The Effectiveness of Intervention Programs for Perpetrators and Victims of Intimate Partner Violence. Partner Abuse. https://doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.4.2.196

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.