Typologies of Adolescent Dating Violence

Acts scales, the most common way of measuring partner violence, have been criticized for being too simplistic to capture the complexities of partner violence. An alternative measurement approach is to use typologies that consider various aspects of context. In this study, the authors identified typologies of dating violence perpetration by adolescents. They conducted in-depth interviews with 116 girls and boys previously identified by an acts scale as perpetrators of dating violence. They provided narrative descriptions of their dating violence acts. For boys and girls, many acts considered violent by the acts scale were subsequently recanted or described as nonviolent. From the narratives, they identified four types of female perpetration that were distinguished by motives, precipitating events, and the abuse history of the partners. One type of perpetration accounted for most acts by boys. The findings are discussed relative to dating violence measurement, prevention and treatment, and development of theory.

[1]  X. Arriaga Joking Violence Among Highly Committed Individuals , 2002 .

[2]  D. Wolfe,et al.  Development and validation of the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory. , 2001, Psychological assessment.

[3]  Gregory L. Stuart,et al.  Testing the Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994) batterer typology. , 2000, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[4]  M. P. Johnson,et al.  Research on Domestic Violence in the 1990s: Making Distinctions , 2000 .

[5]  K. Davis,et al.  Severe dating violence and quality of life among south carolina high school students. , 2000, American journal of preventive medicine.

[6]  J. Archer Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: a meta-analytic review. , 2000, Psychological bulletin.

[7]  John M. Gottman,et al.  When Men Batter Women: New Insights into Ending Abusive Relationships , 1998 .

[8]  Vangie A. Foshee,et al.  Gender differences in adolescent dating abuse prevalence, types and injuries , 1996 .

[9]  D. Sugarman,et al.  The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2) , 1996 .

[10]  M. P. Johnson,et al.  Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: two forms of violence against women , 1995 .

[11]  K. O’leary,et al.  Research Paradigms, Values, and Spouse Abuse , 1994 .

[12]  R. Dobash,et al.  The Myth of Sexual Symmetry in Marital Violence , 1992 .

[13]  K. Yllo,et al.  Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse , 1989, Violence and Victims.

[14]  J. Makepeace Gender Differences in Courtship Violence Victimization. , 1986 .

[15]  Patricia A. Gwartney-Gibbs,et al.  Violence in the Context of Dating and Sex , 1985 .

[16]  L. Gordon,et al.  The New Scholarship on Family Violence , 1983, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society.

[17]  Murray A. Straus,et al.  The Dark Side of Families: Current Family Violence Research , 1983 .

[18]  Murray A. Straus,et al.  Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales. , 1979 .

[19]  M. Faulk Men Who Assault Their Wives , 1974, Medicine, science, and the law.

[20]  V. Foshee,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Violent Behavior and Aggression: Adolescent Dating Abuse Perpetration: A Review of Findings, Methodological Limitations, and Suggestions for Future Research , 2007 .

[21]  G. Koch,et al.  An evaluation of Safe Dates, an adolescent dating violence prevention program. , 1998, American journal of public health.

[22]  M. Schwartz Gender and Injury in Spousal Assault , 1987 .

[23]  A. Bandura Social learning theory , 1977 .