Intimate Partner Violence: A Theoretical Analysis

Intimate Partner Violence: A Theoretical Analysis

Introduction

Intimate partner violence occurs when people use violence against a partner that are in an intimate relationship with, such as dating, engaged, or married. Several factor can lead to predictive measure in whether a person is more or less likely to use or be a victim of physical intimate partner violence. These behaviors can be learned from others or if the person has low self-control. This paper will theoretically analyze how micro-level theory, both social learning and self-control, may be used to explain what causes people to be more likely to use physical violence in an intimate partnership.

Micro-level criminological theory

Micro-level theory are applied on an individual

bases, they are used to see what specific individual behaviors a person has to explain why they are a criminal. Both social learning theory and self-control theory are micro-level theories.

Social learning theory

Social learning theory developed from B.K Skinners learning theory and differential association.

Akers and Burgess posit that people observe the social interactions around them, and the rewards or punishments from those social behaviors (Williams III & McShane, 2014). Frequency and duration of repeated behaviors are more likely in making that person it is positively reinforced, or less likely if it is negatively reinforced.

Palmetto, N., Davidson, L. L., Breitbart, V., & Rickert, V. I. (2013).

The purpose of this study is to examine how social learning theory may be used to examine the frequency of physical violence on three categories of women, victimized, perpetrators, and bidirectional, which are in a heterosexual relationship. The question that is

raised in this study is whether the lower the frequency of physical violence in one of the partners, in a relationship that has bidirectional physical violence, will also lower the frequency of physical violence in the other partner. It is a micro-level, quantitative study because it uses a bivariate analysis to determine the frequency of physical violence and indivualized self- report surveys. It reaffirms previous studies by showing that women are more likely to use physical violence against a

partner.

Palmeto el al (2013) used females from aged 15 to 24 attending an urban health clinic, between April and August 2004.

The major steps in preforming the study began with choosing a large, urban healthcare center, out of three candidates. The one selected for the study was chosen because of its diversity and large proportion of younger women than the other two health centers. Next, women that were going to the clinic for an abortion or only refilling prescriptions were not asked to partake in the study because of how it would affect their schedules. After that, 697 women were ask if they would take a survey about physical violence in a relationship using an audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI), and upon completion of the interview awarded the interviewee with a 10 dollar gift card to a clothing store of their choice. The interviewers only required that informed verbal be given by the individuals completing the interview to help protect their anonymity. Of the women that completed it 79 were excluded for either not finishing the survey, being in a same sex relationship, completing it twice, or not being in a relationship with the last year. This left a sample size of 618

women.

The first part of the survey was obtaining background information such as age, race, education, employment, length of relationship, and importance of relationship. It also included things such as number of pregnancies, number of children, history of sexual abuse, if they were hit as a child, and whether or not they had witnessed parental partner violence. The next part of

the survey asked whether the person was a victim or a perpetrator of physical violence and the type of physical violence that was used in the relationship, such as shoving, slapping, punching, kicking, throwing things, and pulling hair. There were three types of data analysis used to measure the results, a two-tailed t test, a chi-square bivariate analysis that determined to significant covariates, and a Cochran-Armitage linear trend was used post hoc.

Palmeto et al found that 34% percent of the women in the study had been a relationship in the last year were physical violence was used at least one time the relationship. Only 3% of women reported being only a victim of physical violence, where as 12% reported that they were perpetrators only of physical violence only, and bidirectional physical violence was reported as 19%. The most reported types of physical violence used, for either gender, were “pushed, shoved, or shook” and “threw something at”. Two indicators that made women more likely to in a relationship of physical violence as a victim only, perpetrator only, or bidirectional were if they had been sexually abused as a child or witnessed intimate partner violence in a parental relationship. Another predictor of physical violence include being African American, which increased likelihood of being a perpetrator only or bidirectional violence by two and half times, however it was not predictive of being a victim only. The number of pregnancies was also predictive of physical violence, being twice as likely if the women had had two or more pregnancies, in either being a victim only or bidirectional violence, but not predictive of being a perpetrator only.

The Palmeto et al (2014) conclude that women are more frequently use physical violence in a bidirectional relationship, than if they are perpetrators only, and that physical violence if more frequently used against women in a bidirectional relationship, than if they are victims only. Women are also more likely than men to used use physical violence against a partner. The

prediction that bidirectional physical violence relationships would be longer based on social learning theory was also found to be true, physically violent bidirectional relationships last two and half time longer than victim only or perpetrator only relationships. The authors also posit that social learning theory is only one theory that can be used to explain the frequency of violence over the course of a relationship.

The authors have few limitations about this study. The first is that the sample is comprised entirely of females, which may lead to aggression being over reported and victimization being underreported. Another limitation is that the sample size for females in the victim only categories was very small, only 16 out of the 618 women fell in that category. The final limitation was that because the study was cross-sectional only the frequency of physical violence was used and not the context surrounding the act, such as if it was self-defense or retaliation.