Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Effect of Coercion on Aggression and Mental Health Among Reciprocally Violent Couples

  • Original article
  • Published:
Journal of Family Violence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Researchers have not investigated mental health outcomes among couples who are reciprocally violent towards each other. The present study investigated differences in partner violence (psychological, physical, and sexual) and mental health symptoms (depression, anxiety, hostility, and somatic) between two types of reciprocally violent couples: situational couple violence (SCV) and mutual control violence (MVC). SCV couples use violence to address stressful family conflicts, while MVC couples use violence as a tool to control each other. Participants (N = 609) completed surveys that contained several instruments that measured past violence, coercive behaviors, physical injuries, and mental health symptoms. Results revealed that MVC reported significantly higher levels of violent perpetration and worse physical and mental health than SCV. These findings have implications for understanding the role of coercion in partner violence and mental health, which can be used for the development of appropriate mental health services for couples who are mutually violent towards each other.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, K. L. (2002). Perpetrator or victim? Relationships between intimate partner violence and well-being. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 64, 851–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic view. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651–680.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bogard, M. (1988). Feminist perspective on wife abuse. Newbury, CA: Sage Publication, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. C. (2002). Health consequences of intimate partner violence. Lancet, 359, 1331–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cascardi, M., O’Leary, K. D., & Schlee, K. A. (1999). Co-occurrence and correlates of posttraumatic stress disorder and major depression in physically abused women. Journal of Family Violence, 14, 227–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasgupta, S. D. (2002). A framework for understanding women’s use of nonlethal violence in intimate heterosexual relationships. Violence Against Women, 8, 1364–1389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derogatis, L. R., Lipman, R. S., Rickels, K., et al. (1974). The Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL): A self-report symptom inventory. Behavioral Science, 19, 1–15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dobash, R. E., & Dobash, R. P. (1992). Women, violence, and social change. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., & Ridder, E. M. (2005a). Partner violence and mental health outcomes in a New Zealand Birth Cohort. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 67, 1103–1119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fergusson, D. M., Horwood, L. J., & Ridder, E. M. (2005b). Rejoinder: A response to Johnson. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 67, 1131–1136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham-Kevan, N. (2006). Partner violent typologies. In J. Hamel, & T. Nicholls (Eds.) Family interventions in domestic violence: A handbook of gender-inclusive theory and treatment (pp. 145–163). New York: Springer Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham-Kevan, N., & Archer, J. (2003). Intimate terrorism and common couple violence: A test of Johnson's predictions in four British samples. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(11), 1247–1270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamberger, L. K., & Guse, C. E. (2002). Men’s and women’s use of intimate partner violence in clinical samples. Violence Against Women, 8, 1301–1331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel, J., & Nicholls, T. (2006). Family interventions in domestic violence: A handbook of gender-inclusive theory and treatment. New York: Springfield Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. P. (1995). Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women. Journal of Marraige and the Family, 57, 283–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. P. (1999). Two types of violence against women in the American family: Identifying intimate terrorism and common couple violence. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Family Relations, Irvine, CA.

  • Johnson, M. P. (2001). Conflict and control: Symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. In A. Booth, A. C. Crouter, & M. Clements (Eds.) Couples in conflict (pp. 95–104). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. P. (2005). Domestic violence: It’s not about gender-or is it? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 67, 1126–1130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellner, R. (1987). A symptom questionnaire. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 48, 268–274.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kimmel, M. S. (2002). “Gender symmetry” in domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 8, 1332–1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaRoche, D. (2005). Aspects of the context and consequences of domestic violence – situational couple violence and intimate terrorism in Canada in 1999. Québec, Canada: Institut de la Statistique du Québec.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mechanic, M. (2004). Beyond PTSD: Mental health consequences of violence against women: A response to Briere and Jordan. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1283–1289.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pagelow, M. D. (1984). Family violence. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Plichta, S. B. (2004). Intimate partner violence and physical health consequences: Policy and practice implications. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1296–1323.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Próspero, M. & Sivil, E. (2006). Perpetrators of intimate partner violence: Effects of masculinity and control. Poster presented at the American Psychological Association Convention. New Orleans, LA, Aug

  • Saunders, D. G. (2002). Are physical assaults by wives and girlfriends a major social problem? A review of the literature. Violence Against Women, 8, 1424–1448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, G. M., Lee, H. J., Cuculic, Z., et al. (1976). Two dosages of imipramine in hospitalized endogenous and neurotic depressives. Archives of General Psychiatry, 33, 1093–1102.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1990). Physical violence in American families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Social Work, University of Utah, 561 Jake Garn Blvd., Salt Lake City, UT, 84104, USA

    Moisés Próspero

Authors
  1. Moisés Próspero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moisés Próspero.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Próspero, M. The Effect of Coercion on Aggression and Mental Health Among Reciprocally Violent Couples. J Fam Viol 23, 195–202 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-007-9143-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-007-9143-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation