Based on information 11,408 university students provided on perpetration of physical assault in a romantic relationship, they were classified into three Dyadic Concordance Types (DCTs). We then examined six risk factors drawn from previous literature of partner violence: physical abuse as a child, antisocial personality characteristics, alcohol abuse, coercive control, chronic denigration in a relationship, and patriarchy at the societal level. We hypothesized that some risk factors for assault are different dependent on the DCT. Using multinomial logistic regression, we found that some risk factors were associated with an increase in the risk of a couple being in the Male Only assaulted DCT more than the other two DCTs (e.g., men who were high in antisocial personality characteristics). Other risk factors were found to be associated with a greater increase in the risk a couple being in the Both assaulted DCTs (e.g., chronic denigration). These results suggest that theories about the etiology of partner violence should take into account whether the couple is Male Only, Female Only, and Both assaulted. Identification of the DCTs of cases can be helpful in focusing research, treatment, and prevention of partner violence in a way that better reflects the actual situation.
ArcherJ. (1999). Assessment of the reliability of the Conflict Tactics Scales: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(12), 1263-1289. doi:10.1177/088626099014012003
2.
ArcherJ. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651-680. doi:10.1031//0033-2909.126.5.651
3.
BatesE. A.Graham-KevanN.ArcherJ. (2014). Testing predictions from the Male Control Theory of men’s partner violence. Aggressive Behavior, 40, 42-55. doi:10.1002/ab.21499
4.
BlackM. C.BasileK. C.BreidingM. J.SmithS.WaltersM. L.MerrickM.. . . StevensM. R. (2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010 summary report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
5.
BroderickC. B. (1993). Understanding family process: Basics of family systems theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6.
BuckleyW. (1967). Sociology and modern systems theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
7.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention & National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. (2006). Intimate partner violence: Fact sheet. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/ipvfacts.htm
8.
CharlesD.WhitakerD. J.LeB.SwahnM.DiClementeR. J. (2011). Differences between perpetrators of bidirectional and unidirectional physical intimate partner violence. Partner Abuse, 2, 344-364. doi:10.1891/1946-6560.2.3.344
9.
CortinaJ. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98-104.
10.
DesmaraisS. L.ReevesK. A.NichollsT. L.TelfordR. P.FiebertM. S. (2012). Prevalence of physical violence in intimate relationships, Part 2: Rates of male and female perpetration. Partner Abuse, 3, 170-198. doi:10.1891/1946-6560.3.2.170
11.
DixonK. J.EdwardsK. M.GidyczC. A. (2016). The association of investment model variables and dyadic patterns of physical partner violence: A study of college women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 31(16), 2751-2770. doi:10.1177/0886260515580364
12.
FehringerJ. A.HindinM. J. (2009). Like parent, like child: Intergenerational transmission of partner violence in Cebu, the Philippines. Journal of Adolescent Health, 44(4), 363–371. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.08.012
13.
FeldS. L.StrausM. A. (1989). Escalation and desistance of wife assault in marriage. Criminology, 27, 141-161. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1989.tb00866.x
14.
FelsonR. B.OutlawM. C. (2007). The control motive and marital violence. Violence and Victims, 22, 387-407.
15.
FieldC. A.CaetanoR. (2005). Longitudinal model predicting mutual partner violence among White, Black, and Hispanic couples in the United States general population. Violence and Victims, 20, 499-511. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.2005.20.5.499
16.
ForanH. M.O’LearyK. D. (2008). Alcohol and intimate partner violence: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 1222-1234. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2008.05.001
17.
Fundamental Rights Agency. (2014). Violence against women: An EU-wide survey. Main Results Report. Luxemburg, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
18.
FritzP. A. T.SlepA. M. S.O’LearyK. D. (2012). Couple-level analysis of the relation between family-of-origin aggression and intimate partner violence. Psychology of Violence, 2, 139-153. doi:10.1037/a0027370
19.
GayeA.KlugmanJ.KovacevicM.TwiggS.ZambranoE. (2010). Measuring key disparities in human development: The Gender Inequality Index. New York: United Nations Development Programme.
20.
GrahamK.BernardsS.FlynnA.TremblayP. F.WellsS. (2012). Does the relationship between depression and intimate partner aggression vary by gender, victim–perpetrator role, and aggression severity?Violence and Victims, 27(5), 730-743. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.27.5.730
21.
HambyS. L. (1996). The Dominance Scale: Preliminary psychometric properties. Violence and Victims, 11, 199-212.
22.
Holtzworth-MunroeA.MeehanJ. C.HerronK.RehmanU.StuartG. L. (2000). Testing the Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994) batterer typology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 1000-1019. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.68.6.1000
23.
JohnsonM. P. (2008). A typology of domestic violence: Intimate terrorism, violent resistance, and situational couple violence. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
24.
KarakurtG.CumbieT. (2012). The relationship between egalitarianism, dominance, and violence in intimate relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 27, 115-122. doi:10.1007/s10896-011-9408-y
25.
Kaufman KantorG.StrausM. A. (1987). The drunken bum theory of wife beating. Social Problems, 34, 213-230. Also in Straus and Gelles 1990 Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptations to Violence in 8,145 Families, edited by StrausM.A.GellesR.J.New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. A revised copy in (2003) OrcuttJ.D.RudyD.R. (Eds.) Drugs, Alcohol, and Social Problems. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. (pp. 219–238).
26.
KesslerR. C.MolnarB. E.FeurerI. D.AppelbaumM. (2001). Patterns and mental health predictors of domestic violence in the United States: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 24, 487-508. doi:10.1016/S0160-2527(01)00080-2
27.
KrugE. G.DahlbergL. L.MercyJ. A.ZwiA. B.LozanoR. (2002). World report on violence and health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
28.
Langhinrichsen-RohlingJ.SelwynC.RohlingM. L. (2012). Rates of bidirectional versus unidirectional intimate partner violence across samples, sexual orientations, and race/ethnicities: A comprehensive review. Partner Abuse, 3, 199-230. doi:10.1891/1946-6560.3.2.199
29.
LarocheD. (2005). Aspects of the context and consequences of domestic violence: Situational couple violence and intimate terrorism in Canada in 1999. Quebec City, Canada: Institut de la statistique du Québec, Government of Quebec.
30.
McCauleyH. L.BreslauJ. A.SaitoN.MillerE. (2015). Psychiatric disorders prior to dating initiation and physical dating violence before age 21: Findings from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R). Social Psychiatry & Psychiatric Epidemiology, 50, 1357-1365. doi:10.1007/s00127-015-1044-z
31.
MedeirosR. A.StrausM. A. (2006). Risk factors for physical violence between dating partners: Implications for gender-inclusive prevention and treatment of family violence. In HamelJ. C.NichollsT. (Eds.), Family interventions in domestic violence: A handbook of gender-inclusive theory and treatment (pp. 59-87). New York: Springer Publishing.
32.
MelanderL. A.NoelH.TylerK. A. (2010). Bidirectional, unidirectional, and nonviolence: A comparison of the predictors among partnered young adults. Violence and Victims, 25, 617-630. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.25.5.617
33.
Michel-SmithY.StrausM. A. (2014, June). Dyadic patterns of perpetration of physical assault and injury of dating partners by male and female university students in 32 nations. Paper presented at the Stockholm Criminology Symposium, Stockholm, Sweden.
34.
Michel-SmithY.StrausM. A. (2015, September). Prevalence and concordance in sexual coercion of partners by university student couples in 32 nations. Paper presented at the European Society of Criminology, Porto, Portugal.
35.
MillerE.BreslauJ.PetukhovaM.FayyadJ.GreenJ. G.KolaL.. . . KesslerR. C. (2011). Premarital mental disorders and physical violence in marriage: Cross-national study of married couples. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 199, 330-337. doi:10.1192/bjp.bp.110.084061
36.
MurphyC. M.O’LearyK. D. (1989). Psychological aggression predicts physical aggression in early marriage. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57, 579-582. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.57.5.579
37.
O’LearyK. D.WoodinE. M. (2009). Psychological and physical aggression in couples. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
38.
ReynoldsW. M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38, 119-125. doi:10.1002/1097-4679(198201)38:1<119::AID-JCLP2270380118>3.0.CO;2-I
39.
RodriguezL. M.NeighborsC. (2015). An interdependent look at perceptions of spousal drinking problems and marital outcomes. Alcohol, 49, 597-605. doi:10.1016/j.alcohol.2015.05.002
40.
RodriguezL. M.StrausM. A. (2016). Dyadic conceptualization, measurement, and analysis of family violence. In SturmeyP. (Ed.), Wiley handbook of violence and aggression. New York, NY: John Wiley. Retrieved from http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/
41.
SalisK. L.KliemS.O’LearyK. D. (2014). Conditional inference trees: A method for predicting intimate partner violence. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 40, 430-441. doi:10.1111/jmft.12089
42.
SalisK. L.SalwenJ.O’LearyK. D. (2014). The predictive utility of psychological aggression for intimate partner violence. Partner Abuse, 5, 83-97. doi:10.1891/1946-6560.5.1.83
43.
SlepA. M. S.ForanH. M.HeymanR. E.SnarrJ. D.USAF Family Advocacy Research Program. (2014). Identifying unique and shared risk factors for physical intimate partner violence and clinically-significant physical intimate partner violence. Aggressive Behavior, 41(3), 227-241. doi:10.1002/AB.21565
44.
StetsJ. E.StrausM. A. (1990). Gender differences in reporting of marital violence and its medical and psychological consequences. In StrausM. A.GellesR. J. (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 151-166). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
45.
StithS. M.SmithD. B.PennC. E.WardD. B.TrittD. (2004). Intimate partner physical abuse perpetration and victimization risk factors: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10, 65-98. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2003.09.001
46.
StrausM. A. (1974). Leveling, civility, and violence in the family. Journal of Marriage and Family, 36, 442-445.
47.
StrausM. A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales. Journal of Marriage and Family, 41, 75-88.
48.
StrausM. A. (1990). The Conflict Tactics Scales and its critics: An evaluation and new data on validity and reliability. In StrausM. A.GellesR. J. (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 49-73). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
49.
StrausM. A. (2004). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales: A study of university student dating couples in 17 nations. Cross-Cultural Research, 38, 407-432. doi:10.1177/1069397104269543
50.
StrausM. A. (2008). Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 252-275. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.10.004
51.
StrausM. A. (2009). The national context effect: An empirical test of the validity of cross-national research using unrepresentative samples. Cross-Cultural Research, 43, 183-205. doi:10.1177/1069397109335770
52.
StrausM. A. (2012). Blaming the messenger for the bad news about partner violence by women: The methodological, theoretical, and value basis of the purported invalidity of the Conflict Tactics Scales. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 30, 538-556. doi:10.1002/bsl.2023
53.
StrausM. A. (2015). Dyadic concordance in family violence: A powerful and practical approach to research and practice on perpetration and victimization. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 24, 83-94. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2015.04.011
54.
StrausM. A.DouglasE. M. (2004). A short form of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales, and typologies for severity and mutuality. Violence and Victims, 19, 507-520. doi:10.1891/vivi.19.5.507.63686
55.
StrausM. A.GellesR. J.SteinmetzS. K. (2006). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. (Original work published 1980)
56.
StrausM. A.GozjolkoK. L. (2014). “Intimate terrorism” and gender differences in injury of dating partners by male and female university students. Journal of Family Violence, 29, 51-65. doi:10.1007/s10896-013-9560-7
57.
StrausM. A.HambyS. L.Boney-McCoyS.SugarmanD. B. (1996). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283-316. doi:10.1177/019251396017003001
58.
StrausM. A.HambyS. L.Boney-McCoyS.SugarmanD. B. (2010). Manual for the Personal and Relationships Profile (PRP). Durham: Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire. Retrieved from http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/
59.
StrausM. A.HambyS. L.FinkelhorD.MooreD. W.RunyanD. (1998). Identification of child maltreatment with the Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scales: Development and psychometric data for a national sample of American parents. Child Abuse & Neglect, 22, 249-270. doi:10.1016/S0145-2134(97)00174-9
60.
StrausM. A.KemmererK. (2015, November). Relation of concordance between partners in sexual coercion to relationship distress of male and female partners. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, Washington, DC.
61.
StrausM. A.Michel-SmithY. (2012, November). Relation of violence between parents of university students in 15 nations to student criminogenic beliefs and crime: A comparison of Father-Only, Mother-Only, and mutual parental violence. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, Chicago, IL.
62.
StrausM. A.Michel-SmithY. (2014). Mutuality, severity, and chronicity of violence by Father-Only, Mother-Only, and mutually violent parents as reported by university students in 15 nations. Child Abuse & Neglect, 38, 664-676. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.004
63.
StrausM. A.MickeyE. L. (2012). Reliability, validity, and prevalence of partner violence measured by the Conflict Tactics Scales in male-dominant nations. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 463-474. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2012.06.004
64.
StrausM. A.MouradianV. E. (1999, November19). Preliminary psychometric data for the Personal and Relationships Profile (PRP): A multi-scale tool for clinical screening and research on partner violence. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
65.
StrausM. A.WinstokZ. (2013, August). Relation of dyadic concordance-discordance types of partner violence to depression of male and female university students in 15 Nations. Paper presented at the Society for the Study of Social Problems, New York, NY.
66.
SuitorJ. J.PillemerK.StrausM. A. (1990). Marital violence in a life course perspective. In StrausM. A.GellesR. J. (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 305-319). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
67.
TurchikJ. A.HebenstreitC. L.JudsonS. S. (2016). An examination of the gender inclusiveness of current theories of sexual violence in adulthood: Recognizing male victims, female perpetrators, and same-sex violence. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 17, 133-148. doi:10.1177/1524838014566721
68.
Von BertalanffyL. (1967). General theory of systems: Application to psychology. Social Science Information, 6(6), 125-136. doi:10.1177/053901846700600610
69.
WhitakerD. J.HaileyesusT.SwahnM.SaltzmanL. S. (2007). Differences in frequency of violence and reported injury between relationships with reciprocal and nonreciprocal intimate partner violence. American Journal of Public Health, 97, 941-947.
70.
WolfeD. A.ScottK.Reitzel-JaffeD.WekerleC.GrasleyC.StraatmanA.-L. (2001). Development and validation of the Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 13, 277-293. doi:10.1037/1040-3590.13.2.277
