Abstract
Scholars who argue for a gender inclusive approach to Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) contend that women and men experience similar rates of IPV victimization. Previous work on gender symmetry in IPV frequently measures physical violence victimization among respondents who report having current partners, providing a point-in-time rather than lifetime assessment of victimization. The 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) data include a violence history calendar that enables the construction of variables measuring violence victimization over the life course. This study examines gender differences in the age at first victimization, the number of perpetrators, and the frequency of IPV over the life course. We assess four types of IPV victimization including psychological aggression, coercive control, physical violence, and sexual violence. Analyses are conducted with event history and multivariate regression models. NISVS data show gender symmetry in past year violence victimization, but substantial gender differences in IPV victimization over the life course. Compared to men, women are victims of IPV at younger ages, experience a higher frequency of violence victimization, and have more perpetrators. When violence is considered across the life course, IPV is gender asymmetrical.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
For reasons outlined above, access to the 2010 NISVS is restricted for safety reasons. As a result, the data are not available to reviewers.
References
Anderson, K. L. (2005). Theorizing gender in intimate partner violence research. Sex Roles, 52, 853–865. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-4204-x
Anderson, K. L. (2013). Why do we fail to ask why about gender and intimate partner violence? Journal of Marriage and Family, 75(2), 314–318. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12001
Anderson, K. L., & Umberson, D. (2001). Gendering violence: Masculinity and power in men’s accounts of domestic violence. Gender & Society, 15(3), 358–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124301015003003
Black, M., Basile, K., Breiding, M. J., Smith, S., Walters, M., Merrick, M., Chen, J., & Stevens, M. (2011). National intimate partner and sexual violence survey: 2010 summary report. https://ncvc.dspacedirect.org/handle/20.500.11990/250
Breiding, M. J. (2014). Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization—National intimate partner and sexual violence survey, United States, 2011. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Surveillance Summaries (Washington DC: 2002), 63(8), 1–18.
Caetano, R., McGrath, C., Ramisetty-Mikler, S., & Field, C. A. (2005). Drinking, alcohol problems and the five-year recurrence and incidence of male to female and female to male partner violence. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 29(1), 98–106. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ALC.0000150015.84381.63
Cannon, C., Lauve-Moon, K., & Buttell, F. (2015). Re-theorizing intimate partner violence through post-structural feminism, queer theory, and the sociology of gender. Social Sciences, 4(3), 668–687. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci4030668
Carbone-López, K., Kruttschnitt, C., & Macmillan, R. (2006). Patterns of intimate partner violence and their associations with physical health, psychological distress, and substance use. Public Health Reports, 121(4), 382–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/003335490612100406
Cherlin, A. J. (2010). The marriage-go-round: The state of marriage and the family in America today. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
Cherlin, A. J., Hurt, T. R., Burton, L. M., & Purvin, D. M. (2004). The influence of physical and sexual abuse on marriage and cohabitation. American Sociological Review, 69(6), 768–789. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900602
Cunningham, M., & Anderson, K. L. (2022). Union status, union dissolution, and intimate partner violence: Investigating Johnson’s typology among heterosexual dating, cohabiting, and married couples. Journal of Family Violence. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-022-00448-9
De Coster, S., & Heimer, K. (2021). Unifying theory and research on intimate partner violence: A feminist perspective. Feminist Criminology, 16(3), 286–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085120987615
DeMaris, A. (2000). Till discord do us part: The role of physical and verbal conflict in union disruption. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(3), 683–692. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00683.x
DeMaris, A. (2001). The influence of intimate violence on transitions out of cohabitation. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(1), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00235.x
Dobash, R. E., & Dobash, R. (1980). Violence against wives: A case against the patriarchy. Open Books.
Dragiewicz, M. (2008). Patriarchy reasserted: Fathers’ rights and anti-VAWA activism. Feminist Criminology, 3(2), 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085108316731
Dutton, D. G. (2012). The case against the role of gender in intimate partner violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17(1), 99–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2011.09.002
Elder, G. H., Johnson, M. K., & Crosnoe, R. (2003). The emergence and development of life course theory. In J. T. Mortimer, & M. J. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the life course (pp. 3–19). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-48247-2_1
Fedina, L., Ashwell, L., Bright, C., Backes, B., Newman, M., Hafner, S., & Rosay, A. B. (2022). Racial and gender inequalities in food, housing, and healthcare insecurity associated with intimate partner and sexual violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 08862605221077231. https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605221077231
Foshee, V. A., Bauman, K. E., Ennett, S. T., Suchindran, C., Benefield, T., & Linder, G. F. (2005). Assessing the effects of the dating violence prevention program safe dates using random coefficient regression modeling. Prevention Science, 6(3), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-005-0007-0
Gelles, R. J., & Straus, M. A. (1988). Intimate violence: The causes and consequences of abuse in the American family. Simon & Schuster.
Halpern-Meekin, S., Manning, W. D., Giordano, P. C., & Longmore, M. A. (2013). Relationship churning, physical violence, and verbal abuse in young adult relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75(1), 2–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.01029.x
Hamby, S. (2009). The gender debate about intimate partner violence: Solutions and dead ends. Psychological Trauma: Theory Research Practice and Policy, 1(1), 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015066
Hamby, S. (2017). A scientific answer to a scientific question: The gender debate on intimate partner violence. Trauma Violence & Abuse, 18(2), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838015596963
Hamel, J. (2020). Explaining symmetry across sex in intimate partner violence: Evolution, gender roles, and the will to harm. Partner Abuse, 11(3), 228–267. https://doi.org/10.1891/PA-2020-0014
Hardesty, J. L., Crossman, K. A., Haselschwerdt, M. L., Raffaelli, M., Ogolsky, B. G., & Johnson, M. P. (2015). Toward a standard approach to operationalizing coercive control and classifying violence types. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77(4), 833–843. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12201
Holmes, S. C., Johnson, N. L., Zlotnick, C., Sullivan, T. P., & Johnson, D. M. (2022). The association between demographic, mental health, and intimate partner violence victimization variables and undergraduate women’s intimate partner violence perpetration. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(1–2), 33–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520907354
Johnson, M. P. (1995). Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57(2), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.2307/353683. JSTOR.
Johnson, M. P. (2006). Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 12(11), 1003–1018. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801206293328
Johnson, M. P. (2011). Gender and types of intimate partner violence: A response to an anti-feminist literature review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16(4), 289–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2011.04.006
Johnson, M. P., & Leone, J. M. (2005). The differential effects of intimate terrorism and situational couple violence: Findings from the national violence against women survey. Journal of Family Issues, 26(3), 322–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X04270345
Johnson, M. P., Leone, J. M., & Xu, Y. (2014). Intimate terrorism and situational couple violence in general surveys: Ex-spouses required. Violence Against Women, 20(2), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801214521324
Johnson, W. L., Giordano, P. C., Manning, W. D., & Longmore, M. A. (2015). The age–ipv curve: Changes in the perpetration of intimate partner violence during adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44(3), 708–726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-014-0158-z
Johnson, N. L., Holmes, S. C., & Johnson, D. M. (2016). It is and it is not: The importance of context when exploring gender differences in perpetration of physical partner violence. Journal of Family Violence, 31(8), 999–1003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-016-9858-3
Kamimura, A., Yoshihama, M., & Bybee, D. (2013). Trajectory of intimate partner violence and healthcare seeking over the life course: Study of japanese women in the Tokyo metropolitan area, Japan. Public Health, 127(10), 902–907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2013.06.003
Kenney, C. T., & McLanahan, S. S. (2006). Why are cohabiting relationships more violent than marriages? Demography, 43(1), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2006.0007
Kernsmith, P. (2005). Exerting power or striking back: A gendered comparison of motivations for domestic violence perpetration. Violence and Victims, 20(2), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1891/vivi.2005.20.2.173
Kurz, D. (1989). Social science perspectives on wife abuse: Current debates and future directions. Gender and Society, 3(4), 489–505. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124389003004007
Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Misra, T. A., Selwyn, C., & Rohling, M. L. (2012). Rates of bidirectional versus unidirectional intimate partner violence across samples, sexual orientations, and race/ethnicities: A comprehensive review. Partner Abuse, 3(2), 199–230. https://doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.3.2.199
Lawson, J. (2012). Sociological theories of intimate partner violence. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 22(5), 572–590. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2011.598748
Lemeshow, S., May, S., & Hosmer, D. W. Jr. (2011). Applied survival analysis: Regression modeling of time-to-event data. John Wiley & Sons.
Melton, H. C., & Sillito, C. L. (2012). The role of gender in officially reported intimate partner abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(6), 1090–1111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260511424498
Messinger, A. M. (2011). Invisible victims: Same-sex ipv in the national violence against women survey. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(11), 2228–2243. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260510383023
Messinger, A. M. (2014). Marking 35 Years of Research on Same-Sex Intimate Partner Violence: Lessons and New Directions. In D. Peterson & V. R. Panfil (Eds.), Handbook of LGBT communities, crime, and justice (pp. 65–85). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-9188-0_4
Pleck, E., Pleck, J. H., Grossman, M., & Bart, P. B. (1978). The battered data syndrome: A comment on Steinmetz’s article. Victimology, 2(3/4), 680–683.
Powney, D., & Graham-Kevan, N. (2019). Male victims of intimate partner violence: A challenge to the gendered paradigm. In J. A. Barry, R. Kingerlee, M. Seager, & L. Sullivan (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of male psychology and mental health (pp. 123–143). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04384-1_7
Rodriguez, E., Lasch, K. E., Chandra, P., & Lee, J. (2001). Family violence, employment status, welfare benefits, and alcohol drinking in the United States: What is the relation? Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 55(3), 172–178. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.55.3.172
Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1997). A life-course theory of cumulative disadvantage and the stability of delinquency. Developmental Theories of Crime and Delinquency, 7, 133–161. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203793350-4
Saunders, D. G. (2002). Are physical assaults by wives and girlfriends a major social problem?: A review of the literature. Violence Against Women, 8(12), 1424–1448. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780102237964
Stark, E. (2009). Coercive control: The entrapment of women in personal life. Oxford University Press.
Steinmetz, S. K. (1977). The battered husband syndrome. Victimology, 2(3–4), 499–509.
Stets, J. E., & Straus, M. A. (1989). The marriage license as a hitting license: A comparison of assaults in dating, cohabiting, and married couples. Journal of Family Violence, 4(2), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01006627
Straus, M. A. (2010). Thirty years of denying the evidence on gender symmetry in partner violence: Implications for prevention and treatment. Partner Abuse, 1(3), 332–362. https://doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.1.3.332
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 Family, 48(3), 465–479. https://doi.org/10.2307/352033
Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. K. (1980). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family. Anchor Press/Doubleday.
Thornton, A., Axinn, W. G., & Teachman, J. D. (1995). The influence of school enrollment and accumulation on cohabitation and marriage in early adulthood. American Sociological Review, 60(5), 762–774. https://doi.org/10.2307/2096321
United States Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2014). National intimate partner and sexual violence survey (NISVS): General population survey raw data. ICPSR34305-v1 ICPSR34305‐v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter‐university Consortium for Political and Social Research [Distributor]. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34305.v1
Walters, M. L., Chen, J., & Breiding, M. J. (2013). The national intimate Partner and sexual violence survey (NISVS): 2010 findings on victimization by sexual orientation. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Willie, T. C., Powell, A., Lewis, J., Callands, T., & Kershaw, T. (2017). Who is at risk for intimate partner violence victimization: Using latent class analysis to explore interpersonal polyvictimization and polyperpetration among pregnant young couples. Violence and Victims, 32(3), 545–564. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-16-00015
Yllo, K. A. (1993). Through a feminist lens: Gender, power, and violence. Current Controversies on Family Violence, 47–62.
Yoshihama, M. (2009). Application of the life history calendar approach: Understanding women’s experiences of intimate partner violence over the life course. Calendar and Time Diary Methods in Life Course Research, 135–156. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412990295
Yoshihama, M., & Bybee, D. (2011). The life history calendar method and multilevel modeling: Application to research on intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 17(3), 295–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801211398229
Yoshihama, M., & Gillespie, B. W. (2002). Age adjustment and recall bias in the analysis of domestic violence data: Methodological improvements through the application of survival analysis methods. Journal of Family Violence, 17(3), 199–221. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016001211182
Yoshihama, M., Gillespie, B., Hammock, A. C., Belli, R. F., & Tolman, R. M. (2005). Does the life history calendar method facilitate the recall of intimate partner violence? Comparison of two methods of data collection. Social Work Research, 29(3), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/29.3.151
Acknowledgements
N/A.
Funding
Funding for the NISVS comes from the Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control with support from the National Institute of Justice and the Department of Defense. The authors have not received funding for any of the research. Dr. Cunningham has conducted some of the work while on a competitively awarded professional leave from Western Washington University.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data analysis were performed by Mick Cunningham. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Mick Cunningham and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate
The manuscript we are submitting consists solely of secondary analysis of data in the 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS). The NISVS was conducted under the auspices of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Information about IRB approval and consent to participate can be found here: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf The NISVS received Institutional Review Board approval from the Research Triangle Institute, International (p. 12). The survey administration included a graduated informed consent plan (p. 11).
Human and Animal Ethics
The NISVS administrators were keenly aware of the potential harm to subjects when collecting data on highly sensitive topics including intimate partner violence and sexual assault. As a result, the survey administrators took a number of steps designed to ensure the safety of the respondents. The interviews were collected by telephone. The graduated informed consent was used so that the survey topics were not revealed until the specific household member selected to take the survey was chosen. Interviewers received on-going training, which included how to establish a safety plan if the respondent needed to exit the interview for safety reasons. Interviewers were also trained to assess the respondent’s emotional state throughout the interview. Respondents were repeatedly told they could skip questions or stop the interview at any time. Finally, at the end of the interview, respondents were provided with information about the National Domestic Violence Hotline and the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network.
As a further step in protecting human subjects, the data were carefully de-identified. They were not released publicly until 2015. The data are archived at the Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). Access to the 2010 NISVS required submission of an application outlining the proposed research plan to ICPSR and the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD).
Dr. Cunningham and Anderson proposed a project entitled “Gendered Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence Victimization,” first to the Institutional Review Board of Western Washington University. The proposal was reviewed and approved at the University level in 2016, then submitted to and approved by ICPSR and NACJD. The agreement was renewed in 2022.
Consent for Publication
N/A
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they do not have financial or non-financial interests that are directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Cunningham, M., L. Anderson, K. Women Experience More Intimate Partner Violence than Men over the Life Course: Evidence for Gender Asymmetry at all Ages in a National Sample. Sex Roles 89, 702–717 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-023-01423-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-023-01423-4