This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (25) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Johnson, M. P. Articles by Leone, J. M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

The Differential Effects of Intimate Terrorism and Situational Couple Violence

Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey

Pennsylvania State University

Janel M. Leone

Pennsylvania State University

Data from the National Violence Against Women Survey show that the two major forms of husband violence toward their wives (intimate terrorism and situational couple violence) have different effects on their victims. Victims of intimate terrorism are attacked more frequently and experience violence that is less likely to stop. They are more likely to be injured, to exhibit more of the symptoms of posttraumatic stress syndrome, to use painkillers (perhaps also tranquilizers), and to miss work. They have left their husbands more often, and when they do leave, they are more likely to acquire their own residence. If we want to understand the true impact of wife abuse from survey data (rather than from agency data), we must make distinctions among types of violence so that the data used to describe battering are not diluted by data regarding other types of partner violence.

Key Words: domestic violence • battering • control • marriage • gender

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. D. Drumm, M. Popescu, and M. L. Riggs Gender Variation in Partner Abuse: Findings From a Conservative Christian Denomination Affilia, February 1, 2009; 24(1): 56 - 68. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. E. Weisbart, R. Thompson, M. Pelaez-Merrick, J. Kim, T. Wike, E. Briggs, D. J. English, and H. Dubowitz Child and Adult Victimization: Sequelae for Female Caregivers of High-Risk Children Child Maltreat, August 1, 2008; 13(3): 235 - 244. [Abstract] [PDF]

				N. M. Capezza and X. B. Arriaga You can degrade but you can't hit: Differences in perceptions of psychological versus physical aggression Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, April 1, 2008; 25(2): 225 - 245. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. A. McPhail, N. B. Busch, S. Kulkarni, and G. Rice An Integrative Feminist Model: The Evolving Feminist Perspective on Intimate Partner Violence Violence Against Women, August 1, 2007; 13(8): 817 - 841. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. L. Anderson Who Gets Out?: Gender as Structure and the Dissolution of Violent Heterosexual Relationships Gender Society, April 1, 2007; 21(2): 173 - 201. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. P. Johnson Conflict and control: gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. Violence Against Women, November 1, 2006; 12(11): 1003 - 1018. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. A. Straus Future research on gender symmetry in physical assaults on partners. Violence Against Women, November 1, 2006; 12(11): 1086 - 1097. [Abstract] [PDF]