Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Assessing The Evidence: How Systems That Address Intimate Partner Violence Evaluate The Credibility And Utility Of Research Findings

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

Abstract

Despite advances in practitioner-researcher partnerships, barriers to the uptake of research evidence in practice sectors that address intimate partner violence (IPV) persist. The purpose of this exploratory study was to examine how practitioners across victim services, criminal justice, and law enforcement systems assess the usefulness and credibility of research evidence to their practice and policy-related decision making. Data were derived through qualitative interviews with 37 representatives of victim services, criminal justice, and law enforcement organizations in the state of Washington. Practitioners were asked to describe the criteria and processes used to determine the credibility and usefulness of research evidence they encounter. Practitioners across systems reported that the identity and credibility of the messenger conveying the research evidence, the relevance and applicability of the research to their own practice context, and the rigor of the methods used to derive the evidence are important criteria in assessing its utility and trustworthiness. A subset of respondents reported a suspicion of the research enterprise altogether, and/or a lack of resources available to engage with research evidence. Given the centrality of the messengers of research evidence in practitioners’ assessment of its credibility, IPV systems may be well-served to more deeply invest in research to practice intermediaries who are adequately resourced to translate evidence across sectors. Additional practice and research implications are discussed.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allen, N. E. (2006). An examination of the effectiveness of domestic violence coordinating councils. Violence Against Women, 12, 46–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auchter, B., & Backes, B. L. (2013). NIJ’s program of domestic violence research: Collaborative efforts to build knowledge guided by safety for victims and accountability for perpetrators. Violence Against Women, 19, 713–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801213494703.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ayres, L., Kavanaugh, K., & Knafl, K. A. (2003). Within-case and across-case approaches to qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 13(6), 871–883. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732303013006008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boardman, A. G., Arguelles, M. E., Vaugn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Klinger, J. (2008). Special education teachers’ view of research-based practices. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 168–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, H., Tommyr, L., Lewig, K., & Jack, S. (2014). Factors influencing the uptake of research evidence in child welfare: A synthesis of findings from Australia, Canada, and Ireland. Child Abuse Review, 23, 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2262.

  • Cherney, A., Head, B., Povey, J., Ferguson, M., & Boreham, P. (2015). Use of academic social research by public officials: Exploring preferences and constraints that impact on research use. Evidence & Policy, 11, 169–188. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426514X14138926450067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eccles, M., & Mittman, B. (2006). Welcome to Implementation Science. Implementation Science, 1(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ghaffar, A., Langlois, E. V., Rasanathan, K., Peterson, S., Adedokun, L., & Tran, N. T. (2017). Strengthening health systems through embedded research. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 95(2), 87. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.16.189126.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Goodmark, L. (2012). A troubled marriage: Domestic violence and the legal system. New York: NYU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, L. W. (2008). Making research relevant: If it is an evidence-based practice, where’s the practice based evidence? Family Practice, 5, i20–i24. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmn055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honig, M. I., & Coburn, C. (2008). Evidence-based decision making in school district central offices: Toward a policy and research agenda. Educational Policy, 22, 578–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904807307067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, E. L., Coleman, J., Strikes with a Gun, G, & Sweet Grass, D. (2015). Threading, stitching, and storytelling: Using CBPR and Blackfoot knowledge and cultural practices to improve domestic violence services for indigenous women. Journal of Indigenous Social Development, 4, 1–27.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kaukinen, C., Anderson, K., Jasinkski, J. L., Mustaine, E. E., Powers, R. A., Miller, M. H., Jennings, W. G., Nobles, M., & Yegidis, B. (2017). The direction of violence against women research and evaluation. Women and Criminal Justice, 28, 189–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/08974454.2017.1389670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrner, A., & Allen, N. E. (2009). Still a movement after all these years? Current tensions in the domestic violence movement. Violence Against Women, 15, 656–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindhorst, T. P., Casey, E. A., Willey-Sthapit, C., & Toews, B. (manuscript submitted for review). How research evidence is defined, acquired, and shared across systems that address intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women.

  • MacGregor, J., Wathen, N., Kothari, A., Hundal, P. K., & Naimi, A. (2014). Strategies to promote uptake and use of intimate partner violence and child maltreatment knowledge: An integrative review. BMC Public Health, 14(862), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mold, J. W., & Peterson, K. A. (2005). Primary care practice-based research networks: Working at the interface between research and quality improvement. Annals of Family Medicine, 3(supplement), S20. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moylan, C. A., Lindhorst, T., & Tajima, E. A. (2017). Contested discourses in multidisciplinary sexual assault response teams (SARTs). Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32(1), 3–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, C. E., Smith, P. H., & Avent, J. R. (2010). Solutions to the research-practice gap in domestic violence: A modified Delphi study with domestic violence coalition leaders. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, & Trauma, 19, 424–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771003781354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, C. E., Ong, I., Smith, P. H., Foreman, T., Akers, W., Flasch, P., & Dooley, R. (2015). Linking research and practice to address domestic and sexual violence: Lessons learned from a statewide conference with researchers and practitioners. Journal of Aggression, Conflict, and Peace Research, 7(2), 76–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/JACPR-07-2014-0129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, S. R., Leffler, J. C., & Hansen, B. A. (2009). Toward a research agenda for understanding and improving the use of research evidence. Portland: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, K., Innvar, S., Lorenc, T., Woodman, J., & Thomas, J. (2014). A systematic review of barriers to facilitators of the use of evidence bypolicymakers. BMC Health Services Research, 14. Open Access at http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/14/2.

  • Palinkas, L. A., Wu, Q., Fuentes, D., Finno-Valasquez, M., Holloway, I. W., Garcia, A., & Chamberlain, P. (2015). Innovation and the use of research evidence in youth-serving systems: A mixed-methods study. Child Welfare, 94, 57–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (4th Ed ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Rosenberg, A. (2015). Philosophy of social science (5. ed. ed.). Boulder: Westview Press.

  • Shorey, R. C., Tirone, V. S., & Stuart, G. L. (2014). Coordinated community response components for victims of intimate partner violence: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19(4), 363–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2014.06.001.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Spangaro, J. (2007). Eleven obstacles to translating research into policy on gender-based violence. The Policy Press, 3, 553–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, R. E., Stirman, S. W., & Chambless, D. L. (2012). A qualitative investigation of practicing psychologists’ attitudes toward research-informed practice: Implications for dissemination strategies. Professional Psychology, Research, and Practice, 43, 100–109. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sudderth, L. K. (2006). An uneasy alliance: Law enforcement and domestic violence victim advocates in a rural area. Feminist Criminology, 1, 329–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085106293674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, T. P., Price, C., McPartland, T., Hunter, B. A., & Fisher, B. S. (2017). The researcher-practitioner partnership study (RPPS): Experiences from criminal justice system collaborations studying violence against women. Violence Against Women, 23, 887–907. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801216650290.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, K. A., Goodman, L. A., Vainer, E. S., Heimel, D., Barkai, R., & Collins-Gousby, D. (2018). No sacred cows or bulls’: The story of the domestic violence program evaluation and research collaborative (DVPERC). Journal of Family Violence, 33, 537–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-018-9978-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wandersman, A., Duffy, J., Flaspohler, P., Noonan, R., Lubell, K., Stillman, L., Blachman, M., Dunville, R., & Saul, J. (2008). Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: The interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3), 171–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9174-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wathen, C. N., MacGregor, J. C. D., Sibbald, S. L., & MacMilan, H. L. (2013). Exploring the uptake and framing of research evidence on universal screening for intimate partner violence against women: A knowledge translation case study. Health Research, Policy, and Systems, 11, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by grant NIJ #2014-IJ-CX-0032 from the National Institute of Justice.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erin A. Casey.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Casey, E.A., Lindhorst, T.P. & Willey-Sthapit, C. Assessing The Evidence: How Systems That Address Intimate Partner Violence Evaluate The Credibility And Utility Of Research Findings. J Fam Viol 36, 259–270 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00163-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00163-3

Keywords

Navigation