The construct of residential change is instrumental in various criminological theories to predict crime in general and violence specifically. When looking at intimate partner violence in particular, residential change can play a unique role as a marker of forced isolation by an offender or attempted escape by a victim. Currently, the distinct role of residential change on the risk of differing violence types is only conceptual as violence research tends to either overlook issues of gender and implications of the victim— offender relationship or examine one type of violence independent of the others. This study, a parallel empirical examination of the impact of residential change on a woman's risk of intimate partner violence and risk of stranger violence, illustrates that compared to nonmovers, women who recently move are at an increased risk of intimate partner violence that is not analogous for stranger violence.
Avakame, E.F. (1998). How different is violence in the home? An examination of some correlates of stranger and intimate homicide. Criminology , 36, 601-632.
2.
Bachman, R., & Carmody, D.C. (1994). Fighting fire with fire: The effects of victim resistance in intimate versus stranger perpetrated assaults against females . Journal of Family Violence, 9, 317-331.
3.
Baron, L., & Straus, M.A. (1989). Four theories of rape in American society: A state-level analysis. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press
4.
Block, C.R., & Skogan, W.G. (2002). Do collective efficacy and community capacity make a difference “behind closed doors?” Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
5.
Browning, C.R. (2002). The span of collective efficacy: Extending social disorganization theory to partner violence. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64, 833-850.
6.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2004). National Crime Victimization Survey. Washington, DC: Author.
7.
Burgess, A.W., & Roberts, A.R. (1996). Family violence against women and children: Prevalence of assaults and fatalities, family dynamics, and intervention. Crisis Intervention and Time-Limited Treatment, 3, 65-80.
8.
Campbell, J. (1992). “If I can't have you, no one can”: Power and control in homicide of female partners. In R . Radford (Ed.), Femicide: The politics of woman killing (pp. 1-29). Boston: Twayne.
9.
Chapple, C.L., & Hope, T.L. (2003). An analysis of the self-control and criminal versatility of gang and dating violence offenders. Violence and Victims , 18, 671-690.
10.
Clay-Warner, J. (2002). The context of sexual violence: Situational predictors of self-protective actions. Violence and Victims, 18, 543-556.
11.
Dawson, M. (2004). Rethinking the boundaries of intimacy at the end of the century: The role of victim-defendant relationship in criminal justice decision-making over time. Society Review, 38, 105-138.
12.
DeKeseredy, W.S., Alvi, S., Schwartz, M.D., & Tomaszewski, E.A. (2003). Under siege: Poverty and crime in a Canadian public housing community. Lanham, MD : Lexington Books.
13.
Dobash, R.E., & Dobash, R.P. (1979). Violence against wives. New York: Free Press/Macmillan.
14.
Dugan, L., & Mattingly, M.J. (2005). Family and employment consequences of intimate partner violence: A longitudinal analysis (Final report for Grant 2002-IJ-CX-0012). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
15.
Dugan, L., Nagin, D.S., & Rosenfeld, R. (2003). Exposure reduction or retaliation? The effects of domestic violence legislation on intimate-partner homicide. Law and Society Review, 37, 169-198.
16.
Fagan, J., & Wexler, S. (1987). Crime in the home and crime in the streets: The relation between family violence and stranger crime. Violence and Victims, 2, 5-21.
17.
Frye, V., & Wilt, S. (2001). Femicide and social disorganization. Violence Against Women, 7, 335-351.
18.
Gilchrist, E., & Blissett, J. (2002). Magistrates' attitudes to domestic violence and sentencing options. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 41, 348-363.
19.
Kindermann, C., Lynch, J.P., & Cantor, D. (1997). Effects of redesign on victimization estimates . Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
20.
Laster, K., & Douglas, R. (2000). Treating spousal violence “differently.”International Review of Victimology, 7, 115-139.
21.
Lauritsen, J.L. (2001). The social ecology of violent victimization: Individual and contextual effects in the NCVS. Journal of QuantitativeCriminology, 17, 3-32.
22.
Lauritsen, J.L., & Schaum, R.J. (2004). The social ecology of violence against women. Criminology, 42, 323-357.
23.
Loftin, C., Kindley, K., Norris, S.L., & Weiserma, B. (1987). An attribute approach to relationships between offenders and victims in homicide. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 78, 259-271.
24.
Lohr, S.L., & Liu, J. (1994). A comparison of weighted and unweighted analyses in the National Crime Victimization Survey. Journal of QuantitativeCriminology, 10, 343-460.
25.
Lowenkamp, C.T., Cullen, F.T., & Pratt, T.C. (2002). Replicating Sampson and Groves's test of social disorganization theory: Revisiting a criminological classic. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40, 351-373.
26.
Madriz, E. (1997). Nothing bad happens to good girls: Fear of crime in women's lives. Berkeley: University of California Press.
27.
Mattingly, M.J. (2005). After he hits her. . . . Consequences of intimate partner violence. Dissertation Abstracts, AT 3201980.
28.
McCormick, J., Maric, A., Seto, M.C., & Barbaree, H.E. (1998). Relationship to victim predicts sentence length in sexual assault cases. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13, 413-420.
29.
Miles-Doan, R. (1998). Violence between spouses and intimates: Does neighborhood context matter? Social Forces, 77, 623-645.
30.
Mouton, C.P. (2003). Intimate partner violence and health status among older women. Violence Against Women, 9, 1465-1477.
31.
Reiss, A., & Roth, J. A. (Eds.). (1993). Understanding and preventing violence. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32.
Rennison, C.M., & Rand, M.R. (2003). Nonlethal intimate partner violence against women: A comparison of three age cohorts. Violence Against Women , 9, 1417-1428.
33.
Rennison, C.M., & Welchans, S. (2000). Intimate partner violence. Bureau of Justice Statistics special report series. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
34.
Sampson, R. (1997). Collective regulation of adolescent misbehavior: Validation results from eighty Chicago neighborhoods. Journal of Adolescent Research, 12, 227-244.
35.
Schachter, J.P. (2004). Geographic mobility: 2002-2003 (P20-549). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Economic and Statistics Administration.
36.
Shaw, C.R., & McKay, H.D. (1942). Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37.
Titterington, V.B., & Abbott, B.P. (2004). Space city revisited: Patterns of legal outcomes in Houston homicide. Violence and Victims, 19, 83-95.
38.
Tseloni, A. (2000). Personal criminal victimization in the United States: Fixed and random effects of individual and household characteristics. Journal of QuantitativeCriminology, 16, 415-442.
39.
Van Wyk, J.A., Benson, M., Fox, G.L., & DeMaris, A. (2003). Detangling individual-, partner-, and community-level correlates of partner violence. Crime & Delinquency, 49, 412-438.
40.
Waltermaurer, E., McNutt, L.A., & Mattingly, M.L. (2006). Examining the impact of residential change on intimate partner violence risk. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 60, 923-927.
41.
Wilke, D.J., & Vinton, L. (2005). The nature and impact of domestic violence across age cohorts. Affilia Journal of Women and Social Work, 20, 316-328.
