Prevalence and Incidence Estimates for Intimate Partner Violence

Vera E. Mouradian, Ph.D.
National Violence Against Women Prevention Research Center
Wellesley Centers for Women
Wellesley College

Violence between intimates is a problem that affects some members of every group in society. It affects all ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic classes (Hotaling & Sugarman, 1986). The question of whether its representation across all such groups is equal has not proven easy to answer, partly due to confounds and sample variation. Violence between partners also is an international problem. One cross-cultural comparison of physical aggression and battering behavior in 14 countries revealed that physical aggression between romantic partners occurs in most of the cultures sampled and is perpetrated by both men and women, while battering (the more severe acts of violence that are not condoned by society) occurs in several cultures and is perpetrated primarily by men (Campbell, 1992).

The following statistics are offered as examples of what the research literature in the area of violence against women has produced with regard to prevalence and incidence rates. The information is topically organized based on commonly asked questions and questions likely to be of interest to practitioner, advocacy, and public policy audiences, as well as to the general public. This list of statistics is not intended to be exhaustive, and, as a casual perusal of the figures indicates, there is significant variation across studies in the estimates that are obtained.

What does the research literature have to say about the overall prevalence and incidence of partner violence?

Although estimates vary based on the nature of the sample and method of data collection, statistics indicate that somewhere between 23 percent (Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 1980) and 66 percent (Roy, 1982) of American women are physically assaulted by a spouse or cohabitant lover during their lifetimes, and, according to one estimate, as many as 50 to 60 percent of couples may experience physical violence during the course of their relationships (Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 1980). Twenty to 50 percent of students in college samples also report experiencing partner aggression (Arias, Samios, & O'Leary, 1987; Bernard & Bernard, 1983; Breslin, Riggs, O’Leary, & Arias, 1990; Makepeace, 1981; Riggs & O’Leary, 1996; Rouse, Breen, & Howell, 1988; White & Koss, 1991).

The violence occurs repeatedly during the course of a relationship for between one in five (Steinmetz, 1980) and one in three female victims (Langan & Innes, Bureau of Justice Statistics Report, 1986). The average number of assaults experienced by female victims at the hands of an intimate partner during the year covered by the 1985 National Family Violence Survey was six (Straus, 1990a). Straus has noted that this is a much lower average than found in studies of women staying in shelters for battered women, among whom frequency of victimization in a given year has been found to be as much as 11 times higher.

Listed below are some key examples of statistics generated by individual studies:

The 1985 National Family Violence Survey in the U.S. (Straus & Gelles, 1986) and the 1987 representative sample of residents of the province of Alberta, Canada (Kennedy & Dutton, 1989) produced similar overall 12-month rates of violence against wives: 11.3% and 11.2%, respectively.

The National Survey of Wives in Great Britain (Painter & Farrington, 1998) found that 32.7% of women who responded to the survey had been hit and/or threatened with violence by their current or former husband (27.9% reported having been hit; 20.7% reported having been threatened). It is important to note that the overall rate is based on answers to only two items; most measures of physical aggression in intimate dyads consist of more items. Thus, this percentage may be an underestimate because of the number of tactics measured (and possibly for other methodological reasons as well).

In a study of 93 couples seeking marital therapy at a state university marital therapy clinic, 61% of husbands were reported by the wife, the husband, or both to have been physically aggressive against their wives. Similarly, 62% of wives were reported to have been physically aggressive against their husbands. Fifty two percent of these relationships were classified by the researchers as exhibiting severe aggression based on the reported behavior of one or both partners. (Cascardi, Langhinrichsen, & Vivian, 1992).

A study of premarital aggression among 625 couples applying for a marriage license in Buffalo, NY found that 36% of couples indicated that at least one incident of husband-to-wife physical aggression had occurred during the course of their relationship (McLaughlin, Leonard, & Senchak, 1992). It is important to note that this statistic is based on answers to only two items ("pushed, grabbed, or shoved", and "slapped" the partner); most measures of physical aggression in intimate dyads consist of more items. Thus, this percentage may be an underestimate because of the number of tactics measured (there might be other methodological limitations contributing to this effect as well).

In White and Koss’s (1991) national survey of college students, reports of inflicting and sustaining aggression were similar for men and women and ranged from 32-39% depending on direction of aggression and sex of respondent.

In Riggs and O’Leary’s (1996) sample of 345 university undergraduates, 30% admitted to engaging in at least one act of physical aggression against their dating partner and 5% reported using at least one act of severe physical aggression (choking, forced sex, beating up, or threatening with a weapon) against that partner.

What does the research have to say about gender differences in perpetration and victimization?

Approximately equivalent incidence rates for perpetration and victimization have been found for married women and men in national surveys using Straus’s (1979) Conflict Tactics Scale (e.g., Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 1980; Straus & Gelles, 1986) and in research addressing dating or courtship violence (e.g., Arias, Samios, & O'Leary, 1987; Makepeace, 1981; Burke, Stets, & Pirog-Good, 1987; White & Koss, 1991). The equivalence of contextual and/or motivational factors precipitating the violence and of outcomes for the target of violence generally have not been addressed by such studies and this fact causes the finding of equivalent rates of violence in these studies to remain a controversial topic of debate among social scientists and social activists concerned with this problem. The equivalent rates findings also remain controversial because there are a sizable number of other sources, including other national surveys, that indicate incidence and prevalence of intimate partner violence is not equal between the sexes.

According to these other sources:

• Women are up to six times more likely to suffer violence at the hands of a partner or ex-partner (Bachman & Saltzman, 1995; Koss et al., 1994)
  
• The results of a National Crime Victimization Survey conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (Bachman, BJS Report, 1994) found that women were 10 times more likely to be victims of male intimates than vice versa.
  
• Police and court records in the U.S., Canada, and Europe indicate that women are the overwhelming majority of victims in intimate partner violence cases, constituting 90-95% of all reported cases (e.g., Berk, Berk, Loseke, & Rauma, 1983; Dobash & Dobash, 1977-1978; McLeod, 1984). Hospital statistics also support the contention that most victims of intimate partner violence are women (e.g., Ochs, Neuenschwander, & Dodson 1996).
  
• The National Violence Against Women Survey (NVAWS) (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000), was a nationally representative telephone survey of 8,000 women and 8,000 men that asked about their experiences with rape, physical assault, and stalking. It included questions on victim-perpetrator relationship, and, for victims of a current or former spouse or opposite-sex cohabiting partner, information on frequency, duration, and consequences of victimization was gathered. Findings from this study are summarized below in terms of overall trends, lifetime prevalence, and year prevalence estimates: Women experienced significantly more violence by intimate partners than men whether the time period was lifetime or the preceding 12 months and whether the victimization involved rape, physical assault, or stalking.

Lifetime rates:

• 4.5% of women and 0.2% of men who participated in the survey reported having been raped by an intimate partner;
  
• 20.4% of women and 7% of men who participated in the survey reported having been physically assaulted by an intimate partner;
  
• 4.1% of women and 0.5% of men who participated in the survey reported having been stalked by an intimate partner.
  
  (NOTE: In several cases, these numbers are lower than those found in other national telephone surveys, but the NVAWS may share a type of shortcoming for which the NCVS has been criticized. Specifically, the context provided for the survey may limit the kinds of experiences that respondents deem relevant for answering the questions. The NVAWS was couched as a survey on safety (the NCVS is introduced as a survey on crime) and experiences that a respondent deems not to have involved sufficiently high threats to safety may not be reported).

According to the study’s authors (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000) these data indicate that women were

• 22.5 times more likely than men to report ever having been raped by an intimate partner in their lifetimes;
• 2.9 times more likely than men to report ever having been physically assaulted by an intimate partner in their lifetimes;
• 8.2 times more likely than men to report ever having been stalked by an intimate partner in their lifetimes.

For the year preceding the survey the following statistics were obtained:

• 0.2% of women and too few men to calculate prevalence estimates reported having been raped in the 12 months preceding the survey
• 1.1% of women and 0.6% of men reported having been physically assaulted by an intimate partner in the previous 12 months
• 0.3% of women and 0.1% of men reported having been stalked by an intimate partner in the 12 months preceding the survey.
• Across the three types of victimization experiences 1.4% of women and, 0.8% of men experienced some form of violence at the hands of an intimate romantic partner during the 12-month period preceding the survey.
• The average frequency of victimization was greater for women than for men. Women experienced an average of 7.1 incidents of violence from an intimate partner, while men experienced an average of 4.7 incidents. Women had been experiencing the violence for longer than the men as well (an average of 3.8 versus 3.3 years).
• 33% of women, but only 26% of the men reported their partner threatened to harm or kill them during the most recent physical assault.
• 45% of women, but only 20% of men feared for the safety of someone close to them during the most recent physical assault.

Despite similarity in the proportions of respondents who indicated they had used some form of physical aggression against a partner at least once, data from the 1985 National Family Violence Survey (Straus, 1990a) indicate that frequency of physical aggression use is not equal. The average frequency with which men assaulted an intimate partner was 21% higher than the average frequency with which women assaulted an intimate partner and the average frequency with which men used severe aggression against intimate partners was 42% higher than the average frequency with which women used severe acts of physical aggression against intimate partners.

What percentage of women are victims of sexual assault or rape by intimate romantic partners?

Some studies estimate that between 10% and 14% of women who have ever been married or cohabited with a male intimate have experienced sexual assault or rape at their intimate partner’s hands (Finkelhor & Yllo, 1985; Russell, 1990).

The National Survey of Wives in Great Britain (Painter & Farrington, 1998) found that 13.9% of women who responded to the survey had been raped by their current or former husbands; and for nearly half of these women (6.1%) these experiences included their husbands’ use of threatened or actual violence to accomplish the rapes. Of those women who reported experiencing marital rape, 39.7% had been raped between two and five times and 45.8% had been raped six or more times by their current or former husband.

Estimates of the proportion of all rapes of women that are committed by male intimates ranges from 19% to approximately 41%:

In their National Women's Survey, Kilpatrick, Edmunds, and Seymour (1992) found that the vast majority of rapes committed against women were perpetrated by someone the victim knew and the majority of non-stranger assailants were either current or former romantic partners or family members. Husbands and boyfriends were responsible for 19% of all rapes reported in the Survey. (See the Rape and Sexual Assault Overview article by Dean Kilpatrick or the High, Low, Changing: What’s New In Rape Prevention article by Mary Koss for more information on rape and sexual assault and Patricia Mahoney's article on Wife Rape] or the International Perspectives section of this website for articles authored by Kim Slote and Carrie Cuthbert on sexual assault in intimate relationships across cultures).

The results of several studies of rape statistics indicate that over a quarter of all rapes are committed by intimate partners (George, Winfeld, & Blazer, 1992; Randall & Haskall, 1995; Ullman & Siegel, 1993).

In a subsample of a National Institute of Mental Health-funded telephone survey of a representative sample of female residents of Charleston County, South Carolina, Kilpatrick, Best, Saunders, and Veronen (1988) found that 40.6% of rape victims had been raped by a male intimate partner (23.8% by a husband and 16.8% by a current or former boyfriend).

What percentage of women are both physically and sexually assaulted by intimate partners (i.e., by the same partner)?

Thirty-three to 50% of women who are physically assaulted by their partners also are sexually assaulted by them (Frieze & Browne, 1989). Pence & Paymar's (1993) study puts the estimate even higher, at between 50 and 70%.

Lenore Walker's (1984) study of battered and non-battered wives yielded the following comparisons:

-59% of battered women in the sample compared to 7% of non-battered women reported having been forced to have sex with their partners.

-41% of battered women compared to only 5% of non-battered women reported being asked to perform unusual sex acts by their partners (acts that included inserting objects into their vaginas, engaging in group sex, engaging in sex with animals, bondage, and sadomasochism).

The National Survey of Wives in Great Britain (Painter & Farrington, 1998) found that 35.0% of assaulted wives also had been raped by their current or former husbands compared with only 5.7% of non-assaulted wives.

Several studies of marital rape have documented the co-occurrence of rape and battering within the same abusive incident. One such study does not provide a numerical estimate but the author notes that physical abuse is "often" a part of marital rape (Bergen, 1996). Other studies have found that between 35 and 44% of victims of marital rape report that a beating by their husband has preceded or occurred during his rape of her (Campbell & Alford, 1989; Finkelhor & Yllo, 1985; Russell, 1990)

What percentage of women are stalked by current or former intimate romantic partners? (See the article on Stalking by Mindy Mechanic for more information)

In Meloy & Gothard's (1995) study of stalking behavior, 55% of the sample had stalked a person with whom a prior relationship had existed (15% stalked former spouses; 40% stalked former sexual partners). These figures are not gender-specific, however.

Zona, Palarea, & Lane's (1998) compilation of cases from the Los Angeles Police Department's Threat Management Unit indicated that more than a third (39.3%) of stalking cases involved intimate romantic partners. This figure is not gender-specific either, however.

Tjaden and Thoennes (1998), gathered data on stalking as part of the National Violence Against Women Survey. They found:

• 8.2% of women and 2.2% of men who participated in the survey had been stalked by someone at some point in their lives
• 1% of women and 0.4% of men reported having been stalked by an intimate partner in the 12 months preceding the survey.
• 78% of stalking victims were women.
• The majority of perpetrators, regardless of the gender of the victim, were male (94% of stalkers of females, 60% of stalkers of males).
• The majority of female victims (62%) were stalked by current or former romantic partners whereas the majority of male victims (70%) were stalked by acquaintances or strangers. 43% percent of female victims of intimate romantic partners were stalked after the relationship had ended, but 21% were stalked by a partner while the relationship was intact, and another 36% were stalked both before and after the relationship ended.
• Among the women who were stalked by current or former husbands or cohabiting partners, 81% had been physically assaulted by the same partner and 31% had been sexually assaulted by him. They also found that ex-husbands who stalked their ex-wives were statistically significantly more likely than ex-husbands who did not stalk their ex-wives to have engaged in emotionally abusive and controlling behavior toward their former wives.
• Tjaden and Thoennes estimate that husbands or partners who stalk their wives or girlfriends are four times more likely than husbands or partners in the general population to physically assault their wives or girlfriends and six times more likely to sexually assault them.

A study of stalking victimization experiences in a sample of 861 women from nine college or university campuses found that 90 (10.45%) had been victims of behavior they considered to be stalking (Mustaine & Tewksbury, 1999). However, the study did not address the question of what percentage or proportion of these women were stalked by current or former intimate romantic partners.

In a study of the relationship experiences of 141 female undergraduate psychology students, 13 (9.22%) reported they had experienced harassment consistent with legal definitions of stalking at the hands of a former boyfriend or husband (Coleman, 1997). Although Coleman's comparison of stalked and non-stalked students' experiences in a former relationship did reveal that the stalked group experienced more verbal and physical aggression by their ex-partners than the non-stalked group, no information was provided on what percentage or proportion of the stalked group was also physically abused by their stalker.

What percentage of women are injured as a result of intimate partner violence?

Women are more likely than men to suffer injury when their assailant is an intimate romantic partner (Bachman & Salztman, 1995). Straus and his colleagues have found that women are injured by acts of intimate partner violence at a rate of seven times the rate of injury to men (Stets & Straus, 1990; Straus, 1990a).

In a study of 180 couples referred to treatment programs for domestic violence at three military bases (Cantos, Neidig, & O’Leary), at least one member of the couple reported being injured by an incident of intimate partner violence in 65% of the couples interviewed. This study revealed that women were disproportionately more likely to be injured by intimate partner violence than men (38% of wives were the sole recipients of injuries versus 5% of husbands), and wives were more likely to be the victims of severe injury as well. While more severe acts of violence were more likely to lead to injury regardless of the gender of the perpetrator, the authors noted that men were able to inflict injuries without the use of a weapon, whereas use of a weapon was necessary for women to inflict injury on their spouses.

Cascardi, Langhinrichsen, and Vivian’s (1992) study of 93 couples seeking marital therapy at a state university marital therapy clinic found that 50% of wives (as opposed to about a third of husbands) reported sustaining some form of injury due to intimate partner violence. Wives also were more likely than husbands to suffer severe injuries. Wives who experienced marital aggression reported clinical levels of depressive symptomatology as well.

The following statistics regarding physical and mental health outcomes were obtained from the National Violence Against Women Survey (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000):

• 41.6% of the women and 18.8% of the men who reported they had been victimized by an intimate romantic partner reported they were injured during the most recent victimization by their partner.
• 11.3% of women and 3.8% of men who reported they were victimized by a romantic partner, received medical care as a result of the most recent such victimization.
• 8.8% of women and 2.9% of the men who reported they were victimized by a romantic partner, reported they were hospitalized as a result of their most recent victimization.
• 27.4% of women and 21.7% of men received counseling as a result of their most recent victimization by a romantic partner.

Twenty-two to 35% of emergency room visits by women are in response to partner violence (Abbott, Johnson, Koziol-McLain, & Lowenstein, 1995; McLeer & Anwar, 1989; Randall, 1990).

More than half of identified victims of intimate partner violence obtain medical care for trauma-related injuries repeatedly. For example, Stark, Flitcraft & Frazier (1979) found that approximately 53% of domestic violence victims present to physicians repeatedly (i.e., 6 or more times) with trauma-related injuries. One study of victims of domestic violence treated in an emergency department based domestic violence clinic (Hotch, Grunfield, Mackay, & Cowan, 1996) found that 81% of the women who were currently married (formally or in common-law relationships) and for whom data were available, were seeking emergency medical care for injuries from an incident that was not the first incident of abuse. Similarly, for 86% of victims in Berrios and Grady's (1991) study of 218 female victims of domestic violence referred to a domestic violence center by a medical center, the incident that brought them in for medical care was not the first. Moreover, 40% of these victims had required medical attention for abuse sustained in the past and 13% had required hospitalization. These data underscore how important medical screening and coordination of follow-up services by medical, mental health, social service, and advocacy personnel can be to improving women’s lives and long-term health.

Is there a distinctive pattern of injuries from domestic/dating violence?

Maybe. Several studies indicate that injuries to the face, head, and neck are more likely among female victims of domestic violence than among other groups of injured patients.

However, the American Medical Association has suggested that female victims of domestic violence are up to 13 times more likely to suffer injury to their breasts, chests, or abdomens than accident victims (AMA Diagnostic and Treatment Guidelines on Domestic Violence, 1992; Stark, Flitcraft, & Frazier, 1979).

One study suggests that injuries to both constellations of sites are more common among female domestic violence victims. Berrios and Grady (1991) found the most frequent location of injuries to be the face, skull, eyes, upper trunk, and extremities.

Hotch, Grunfield, Mackay, and Cowan (1996) found the face and extremities to be the most common sites of injury and that more than half of women presenting with injuries due to intimate partner violence (55%) had more than one injury.

A comparison of the frequency of head, neck, and facial injuries among self-identified victims of intimate partner violence and patients with injuries due to other causes who presented at an emergency care department during a one year period (Ochs, Neuenschwander, & Dodson, 1996) indicated that victims of intimate partner violence were much more likely to sustain injuries to these locations than the comparison group (94.4% versus 53.2%).

The common theme in these studies seems to be that injuries to domestic and/or dating violence victims are most likely to occur in sites above the waist, and especially to the upper trunk and face, head, and neck. It should be noted that none of these studies addressed injuries that might be expected to occur from sexual violence (which can occur both within and outside of committed romantic relationships) and sexual violence within a relationship appears not to have been addressed.

What percentage of battered women are abused while pregnant?

The Berrios and Grady (1991) study found that 10% of victims presenting to a hospital emergency room with injuries due to intimate partner violence were pregnant at the time of the abusive incident; 30% of intimate partner violence victims reported that they had been abused during a previous pregnancy; and 5% reported having had a miscarriage as a result of abuse by an intimate romantic partner.

In Walker's (1984) sample of battered women, 59% reported that battering occurred during their first pregnancy, 63% reported battering during their second pregnancy, and 55% reported battering during their third pregnancy.

Walker (1984) also found that if battering occurred during pregnancy, it was likely to occur across all three trimesters.

What do intimate partner homicide rates look like?

An examination of 20 years (1976-1995) of homicide data from the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting System’s Supplemental Homicide Report (Puzone, Saltzman, Kresnow, Thompson, & Mercy, 2000) indicated that:

• The majority of victims of intimate partner homicide over this 20 year period were female (60%).
• 34% of all adult women homicide victims killed between 1976 and 1995 were killed by an intimate partner, whereas only 6% of all men killed over the same period were killed by an intimate partner.
• The majority of victims of both sexes were murdered by current spouses (65%), followed by heterosexual romantic partners (29%).
• Only 4% of murders involved ex-spouses.
• Intimate partner homicide rates decreased over this 20-year period for all groups studied (male and female European Americans and African Americans) except white, unmarried females for whom risk of being murdered by a boyfriend increased. Browne & Williams (1993) found a similar pattern of change in an earlier study of intimate partner homicide from the period 1976-1987.
• The rate of victimization from intimate partner homicide has decreased much more for men of both racial groups than for women.
• African Americans remain at greater risk for intimate partner homicide than European Americans, but the decrease in intimate partner homicides among African American couples was greater than the decrease in the rate among European American couples.

Browne and Williams (1989) have provided evidence that the decline in female-perpetrated homicides of male intimates may be related to the increase in legal and extralegal services and resources for battered women that has occurred since the 1980s.

Browne and Williams’s (1993) study of intimate homicides from 1976-1987 revealed the following profile of intimate partner homicides:

• The majority of victims (61%) were women and this pattern was nearly identical across relationship status.
• The majority of homicides (73%) were committed against current or former spouses, while 27% involved unmarried couples.
• Within the formal or common-law current or ex-spouse homicide category, 80% of victims were formally married to their murderers, 15% were common-law spouses, and 5% were ex-spouses

A study of familicides (multiple-victim homicides in which the killer’s spouse or ex-spouse and one or more children are murdered) in Canada between 1974 and 1990 and in England and Wales between 1977 and 1990 indicated that 93% and 96% of cases, respectively, were committed by men (Wilson, Daly, & Daniele, 1995).

How do separation and divorce affect risk of intimate partner violence?

Several sources of information indicate that a woman’s risk of victimization from a boyfriend or husband does not necessarily end or even decline when the relationship is ended. There is ample anecdotal evidence and some research evidence that indicates that, for some women, the violence may escalate even to the point of attempted or completed homicide. That separation or divorce is associated with continued or greater risk for intimate partner violence from ex-husbands or ex-boyfriends has been documented by Bachman and Saltzman (1995), Browne (1987), Walker? (1984), Moore (1979; as cited in Browne, 1987) and Wilson and Daly (1993). One study has found that women are more likely to be killed by ex-partners than by husbands (Ellis & DeKeseredy, 1997). Tjaden and Thoennes (1998) analysis of data on stalking in the National Violence Against Women Survey indicated that as many as 79% of female victims of stalking are stalked after a relationships ends (43% only after the relationship ended; 36% both while the relationship lasted and after it ended).

One estimate of risk associated with separation or divorce is that as many as 50% of women who leave their abusive partners are stalked and/or assaulted by them after they end the relationship (Moore, 1979; as cited in Browne, 1987).

A study of women treated in an emergency department based clinic for victims of domestic violence found that 9% of the first 279 patients treated in the program were victims of ex-partners (Hotch et al., 1996).

References

Abbott, J., Johnson, R., Koziol-McLain, J., Lowenstein, S. (1995). Domestic

violence against women: Incidence and prevalence in an emergency department

population. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 1763-1767.

American Medical Association. (1992). Diagnostic and treatment guidelines on

domestic violence. Archives of Family Medicine, 1, 39-47.

American Medical Association, Council on Scientific Affairs. (1992). Violence

against women: Relevance for medical practitioners. Journal of the American

Medical Association, 267, 3, 184-3,189.

Arias, I., Samios, M., & O’Leary, K. D. (1987). Prevalence and correlates of physical aggression during courtship. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2, 82-90.

Bachman, R. (1994). National Crime Victimization Report: Violence Against Women. (U. S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics).

Bachman, R. & Saltzman, L. (1995). Violence against women: Estimates from the redesigned survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics special report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics (Publication NCJ-154348).

Bergen, R. K. (1996). Wife rape: Understanding the response of survivors and service providers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Berk, R. A., Berk, S. F., Loseke, D. R., & Rauma, D. (1983). Mutual combat and other family violence myths. In D. Finklehor, R. J. Gelles, G. T. Hotaling, & M. A. Straus (Eds.) The Dark Side of Families (pp. 197-212). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Bernard, M. L., & Bernard, J. L. (1983). Violent intimacy: The family as a modelfor love relationships. Family Relations, 32, 283-286.

Berrios, D. C. & Grady, D. (1991). Domestic violence: Risk factors and otucomes. Western Journal of Medicine, 155, 133-135.

Breslin, F. C., Riggs, D. S., O’Leary, K. D., & Arias, I. (1990). Family

Precursors: Expected and actual consequences of dating aggression. Journal of

Interpersonal Violence, 5, 247-258.

Browne, A. (1987). When Battered Women Kill. New York: The Free Press.

Browne, A. & Williams, K. R. (1989). Exploring the effect of resource availability and the likelihood of female-perpetrated homicides. Law and Society Review, 23, 75-94.

Browne, A. & Williams, K. R. (1993). Gender, intimacy, and lethal violence: Trends from 1976 through 1987. Gender and Society, 7, 78-98.

Burke, P. J., Stets, J. E., & Pirog-Good, M. A. (1987). Gender identity, self-esteem, and physical and sexual abuse in dating relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 272-285.

Campbell, J. C. (1992). Nursing Network on Violence Against Women. Prevention of wife battering: insights from cultural analysis. Response to the Victimization of Women and Children, 14, 18-24.

Campbell, J. C. & Alford, P. (1989). The dark consequences of marital rape. American Journal of Nursing, , 946-949.

Cantos, A. L.., Neidig, P. H., & O’Leary, K. D. (1994). Injuries of women and men in a treatment program for domestic violence. Journal of Family Violence, 9, 113-124.

Cascardi, M., Langhinrichsen, J., & Vivian, D. (1992). Marital aggression: Impact, injury, and health correlates for husbands and wives. Archives of Internal Medicine, 152, 1178-1184.

Coleman, F. L. (1997). Stalking behavior and the cycle of domestic violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 420-432.

Dobash, R. E. & Dobash, R. P. (1977-1978). Wives: The "appropriate" victims of marital violence. Victimology: An International Journal, 2, 426-442.

Ellis, D. & DeKeseredy, W. (1997). Rethinking estrangement, interventions, and intimate femicide. Violence Against Women, 3, 590-609.

Finkelhor, D. & Yllo, K. (1985). License to rape: Sexual Abuse of Wives. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Frieze, I.H. & Browne, A. (1989). Violence in marriage. In L. Ohlin & M. Tonry

(eds.) Family Violence: Crime and Justice, a review of research (pp. 163-2180. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

George, L. K., Winfeld, I., & Blazer, D. G., (1992). Sociocultural factors in sexual assault: Comparison of two representative samples of women. Journal of Social Issues, 48, 105-125.

Hotaling, G. T., & Sugarman, D. B. (1986). An analysis of risk markers in husband to wife violence: The current state of knowledge. Violence and Victims, 1,101-124.

Hotch, D., Grunfeld, A. F., Mackay, K., & Cowan, L. (1996). An emergency department-based domestic violence intervention program: Findings after one year. Journal of Emergency Medicine, 14, 111-117.

Kennedy, L. W. & Dutton, D. G. (1989). The incidence of wife assault in Alberta. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 21, 40-54.

Kilpatrick, D. G., Best, C. L., Saunders, B. E., & Veronen, L. J. (1988). Rape in marriage and in dating relationships: How bad is it for mental health? In R. A. Prentky and V. L. Quinsey (Eds.), Human Sexual Aggression: Current Perspectives (pp. 335-344). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.

Kilpatrick, D.G., Edmunds, C.N., & Seymour, A.K. (1992). Rape in America: A report to the nation. Arlington, VA: National Victim Center & Medical University of South Carolina.

Koss, M. P., Goodman, L. A., Browne, A., Fitzgerald, L. F., Keita, G. P., & Russo, N. F. (1994). No safe haven: Male violence against women at home, at work, and in the community. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.

Langan, P. A. & Innes, C. A. (1986). Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report: Preventing Domestic Violence Against Women. (Washington D. C.: U. S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics).

Makepeace, J. M. (1981). Courtship violence among college students. Family Relations, 30, 97-102.

McLaughlin, I. G., Leonard, K. E., & Senchak, M. (1992). Prevalence and distribution of premarital aggression among couples applying for a marriage license. Journal of Family Violence, 7, 309-319.

McLeer, S. V., & Anwar, R. (1989). A study of battered women presenting in an

emergency department. American Journal of Public Health, 79, 65-66

McLeod, M. (1984). Women against men: An examination of domestic violence based on an analysis of official data and national victimization data. Justice Quarterly, 1, 171-193.

Meloy, J. R. & Gothard, S. (1995). A demographic and clinical comparison of obsessional followers and offenders with mental disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 258-263.

Moore, D. M. (1979). Battered women. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Mustaine, E. E. & Tewksbury, R. (1999). A routine activity theory explanation for women's stalking victimizations. Violence Against Women, 5, 43-62.

Norris, F.H. (1992). Epidemiology of trauma: Frequency and impact of different

potentially traumatic events on different demographic events. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 409-418.

Ochs, H. A., Neuenschwander, M. C., & Dodson, T. B. (1996). Are head, neck, and facial injuries markers of domestic violence? Journal of the American Dental Association?, 127, 757-761.

Painter, K. & Farrington, D. P. (1998). Marital violence in Great Britain and its relationship to marital and non-marital rape. International Review of Victimology, 5, 257-276.

Pence, E. & Paymar, M. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth Model. New York: Springer.

Puzone, C. A., Saltzman, L. E., Kresnow, M., Thompson, M. P., & Mercy, J. A. (2000). National trends in intimate partner homicide: United States, 1976-1995. Violence Against Women, 6, 409-426.

Randall, T. (1990). Domestic violence intervention calls for more than treating

injuries. Journal of the American Medical Association, 262, 939-940.

Randall, M. & Haskall, L. (1995). Sexual violence in women’s lives. Violence Against Women, 1, 6-31.

Riggs, D. S. & O’Leary, K. D. (1996). Aggression between heterosexual dating partners: An examination of a causal model of courtship aggression. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11, 519-540.

Rouse, L. P., Breen, R., & Howell, M. (1988). Abuse in intimate relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 3, 414-429.

Roy, M. (1982). The Abusive Partner. New York: Van Nostrand Rheinhold.

Russel, D. E. H. (1990). Rape in Marriage. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Stark, E., Flitcraft, A., & Frazier, W. (1979). Medicine and patriarchal violence: The social construct of a private event. International Journal of Health Services, 9, 461-498.

Steinmetz, S. (1980). Women and violence: victims and perpetrators. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 34, 334-350.

Stets, J. E. & Straus, M. A, (1990). Gender differences in reporting of marital violence and its medical and psychological consequences. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Straus, M. A. (1990a). Injury and frequency of assault and the representative sample fallacy in measuring wife beating and child abuse. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.). Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 29-47). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Straus, M. A. (1990b). The Conflict Tactics Scales and its critics: an evaluation and new data on validity and reliability. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1986). Societal change and change in family violence from 1975 to 1985 as revealed by two national surveys. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 465-479.

Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. K. (1980). Behind closed doors: Physical violence in the American family. New York: Doubleday/Anchor.

Tjaden, P. & Thoennes, N. (1998). Stalking in America: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Tjaden, P. & Thoennes, N. (2000). Prevalence and consequences of male-to-female and female-to-male intimate partner violence as measured by the National Violence Against Women Survey. Violence Against Women, 6, 142-161.

Ullman, S. E. & Siegel, J. M. (1993). Victim-offender relationship and sexual assault. Violence and Victims, 8, 121-134.

Walker, L. E. (1984). The battered woman syndrome. New York: Springer Publishing Company.

White, J. W., & Koss, M. P. (1991). Courtship violence: Incidence in a national sample of higher education students. Violence and Victims, 6, 247-256.

Wilson, M. I. & Daly, M. (1993). Spousal homicide risk and estrangement. Violence and Victims, 8, 3-16.

Wilson, M., Daly, M., & Daniele, A. (1995). Familicide: the killing of spouse and children. Aggressive Behavior, 21, 275-291.

Zona, M. A., Palarea, R. E., & Lane Jr., J. C. (1998). Psychiatric diagnosis of the offender-victim typology of stalking. In J. R. Meloy (Ed.), The Psychology of Stalking: Clinical and Forensic Perspectives. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.