Research argues that coercive control (CC) is a special case of intimate partner violence (IPV). The present study hypothesized that instead CC is the motivator for other types of IPV, with control of the victim as the goal. When CC fails, physical types of IPV are used. This hypothesized relationship was tested using a large matched sample of 762 divorcing couples participating in divorce mediation. Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the data with CC predicting two latent common factors of the overall level of victimization separately for men and women. Significant causal relationships between CC and the latent construct of victimization for both members of the couples were found. In addition, CC, psychological abuse, sexual assault/intimidation/coercion, threats of and severe physical violence were disproportionately reported as perpetrated by men against women whereas reports of physical abuse (e.g., pushing, shoving, scratching) were not.
Archer, J. ( 2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651-680.
2.
Attala, J.M., Hudson, W.W., & McSweeny, M. ( 1994). A partial validation of two short-form Partner Abuse Scales. Women & Health, 21, 125-139.
3.
Beck, C.J.A., Menke, J.M., O'Hara Brewster, K., & Figueredo, A.J. (2009). Validation of a measure of intimate partner abuse with couples participating in divorce mediation . Journal of Divorce and Remarriage. 50, 295-308.
4.
Beck, C.J.A., & Raghavan, C. (in press). Intimate partner violence screening in custody mediation: The importance of assessing coercive control. Family Court Review .
5.
DeKeseredy, W.S. ( 2006). Future directions. Violence Against Women , 12, 1078-1085.
6.
Dutton, M.A., & Goodman, L.A. ( 2005). Coercion in intimate partner violence: Toward a new conceptualization . Sex Roles, 52, 743-756.
7.
Dutton, D.G., & Nicholls, T.L. (2005). The gender paradigm in domestic violence research and theory: Part 1-The conflict of theory and data . Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10, 680-714.
8.
Field, C.A., & Caetano, R. ( 2005). Intimate partner violence in the US general population . Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20, 463-469.
9.
Figueredo, A.J., & McCloskey, L.A. (1993). Sex, money and paternity: The evolutionary psychology of domestic violence. Ethology & Sociobiology, 14, 353-379.
10.
Figueredo, A.J., Corral-Verdugo, V., Frías-Armenta, M., Bachar, K.J., White, J., McNeill, P.L., et al. (2001). Blood, solidarity, status, and honor: The sexual balance of power and spousal abuse in Sonora, Mexico. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 295-328.
11.
Figueredo, A.J., Montero-Rojas, E., Frías-Armenta, M., & Corral-Verdugo, V. (2009). Individual differences and social contexts: The absence of family deterrence of spousal abuse in San José, Costa Rica. Journal of Social, Evolutionary & Cultural Psychology, 3, 29-48.
12.
Fischer, K., Vidmar, N., & Ellis, R. ( 1993). The culture of battering and the role of mediation in domestic violence cases. Southern Methodist University Law Review, 46, 2117-2174.
13.
Gladden, P.R., Sisco, M., & Figueredo, A.J. (2008). Sexual coercion and life-history strategy. Evolution and Human Behavior. 29, 319-326.
14.
Holtzworth-Munroe, A. ( 2005). Female perpetration of physical aggression against an intimate partner: A controversial new topic of study. Violence and Victims, 20, 251-259.
15.
Johnson, M.P. ( 2006). Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 12, 1003-1018.
16.
Johnson, M.P. ( 2008). A typology of domestic violence: Intimate terrorism, violent resistance, and situational couple violence. Boston : Northeastern University Press.
17.
Jones, D.N., Figueredo, A.J., Dickey, E.D., & Jacobs, W.J. ( 2007). Relations among individual differences in reproductive strategies, sexual attractiveness, affective and punitive intentions, and imagined sexual or emotional infidelity. Evolutionary Psychology , 5, 387-410.
18.
Kelly, J.B., & Johnson, M.P. ( 2008). Differentiation among types of intimate partner violence: Research update and implications for interventions. Family Court Review, 46, 476-499.
19.
Pearson, J. ( 1997). Mediating when domestic violence is a factor: Policies and practices in court-based mediation programs. Mediation Quarterly, 14, 319-335.
20.
Renzetti, C.M. ( 2006). Commentary on Swan and Snow’s "The development of a theory of women’s use of violence in intimate relationships." Violence Against Women, 12, 1046-1049.
21.
SAS Institute, Inc. (1989). SAS language and procedures: Usage (Version 6, 1sted.). Cary, NC: Author.
22.
Shettel-Neuber, J., Bryson, J.B., & Young, L.E. ( 1978). Physical attractiveness of the "other person" and jealousy . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 612-615.
23.
Sisco, M., & Figueredo, A.J. (2008). Similarities between men and women in non-traditional aggressive sexuality: Prevalence, novel approaches to assessment and treatment applications. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 14, 253-266.
24.
Stark, E. ( 2006). Commentary on Johnson’s "Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence." Violence Against Women, 12, 1019-1025.
25.
Stark, E. ( 2007). Coercive control: The entrapment of women in personal life. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
Straus, M.A. ( 1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales. Journal of Marriage and Family, 41, 75-88.
27.
Straus, M.A. ( 2006). Future research on gender symmetry in physical assaults on partners. Violence Against Women, 12, 1086-1097.
28.
Straus, M.A., Hamdy, S.L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D.B. (1996). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2). Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283-316.
29.
Swan, S.C., & Snow, D.L. ( 2006). The development of a theory of women’s use of violence in intimate relationships. Violence Against Women, 12, 1026-1045.
30.
Thornhill, R., & Thornhill, N.W. (1992). The evolutionary psychology of men’s coercive sexuality. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 15, 363-421.
31.
Wilson, M.L., & Daly, M. ( 1992). The man who mistook his wife for a chattel. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides , & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary and the generation of culture (pp. 289-322). New York: Oxford University Press.
