Domestic violence–specialized programs have been created by the police or the criminal justice system with the intention of improving victims’ protection. This article examines the impact of the first Portuguese coordinated program, involving a specialized prosecution team and a special police unit, the experience of victims in encountering with authorities, and the fulfillment of their expectations on victims’ satisfaction and safety. Data were collected through a telephone survey, using a two-group quasi-experimental design, at two waves (3 and 12 months after the crime report). Victims from the experimental group are more satisfied and reveal a better sense of safety. However, it is only in the second variable that the program has a direct effect on multivariate analysis. Satisfaction mainly comes from the authorities’ demeanor and the expectation fulfillment while it is the authorities’ behavior and the expectation fulfillment that grounds safety.
AldarondoE. (2010). Understanding the contribution of common interventions with men who batter to the reduction of re-assaults. Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 6(4), 87–101.
2.
AngeneL. (2000). Evaluation report for the San Diego county domestic violence courts. San Diego Superior Court.
3.
ApslerR.CumminsM.CarlS. (2003). Perceptions of the police by female victims of domestic partner violence. Violence Against Women, 9, 1318–1335.
4.
BelknapJ. (1990). Police training in domestic violence: Perceptions of training and knowledge of the law. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 16(2), 248–264.
5.
BelknapJ.GrantD. (2018). Fifty years after the 1967 Crime Commission Report: How nonpolicing domestic violence research and policies have changed and expanded. Criminology & Public Policy, 27(2), 467–481.
BuzawaE.AustinT.BannonJ.JacksonJ. (1992). Role of victim preference in determining police response to victims of domestic violence. In BuzawaE.BuzawaC. (Eds.), Domestic violence: The changing criminal justice response (pp. 255–269). Auburn House.
CaseyP.RottmanD. (2003, July). Problem-solving courts: Models, commonalities and trends: The view from the United States [Conference session]. Psychology and Law International, Interdisciplinary Conference on Problem-Solving Courts: An International Perspective, Pre-Conference Workshop, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
11.
ChandekM.PorterC. (1998). The efficacy of expectancy disconfirmation in explaining crime victim satisfaction with the police. Police Quarterly, 1(4), 21–40.
CissnerA.LabriolaM.RempelM. (2015). Domestic violence courts: A multisite test of whether and how they change offender outcomes. Violence Against Women, 21(9), 1102–1122.
14.
CookT.CampbellD. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Rand McNally.
15.
CunhaL. (2014). Fatores que influenciam as decisões judiciais no crime de violência doméstica conjugal [Determinants of judicial decisions in intimate partner violence] Master thesis in Criminology, Faculty of Law, University of Porto.
16.
DarleyJ.PittmanT. (2003). The psychology of compensatory and retributive justice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(4), 324–336.
17.
DavisR.MaxwellC.TaylorB. (2006). Preventing repeat incidents of family violence: Analysis of data from three field experiments. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 2, 183–210.
18.
DavisR.TaylorB. (1997). A proactive response to family violence: The results of a randomized experiment. Criminology, 35(2), 307–333.
19.
DawsonM.DinovitzerR. (2001). Victim cooperation and the prosecution of domestic violence in a specialized court. Justice Quarterly, 18(3), 593–622.
20.
DobashR.DobashR. (1979). Violence against wives: A case against the patriarchy. Free Press.
21.
EckbergD.PodkopaczM. (2002). Domestic violence court: Case processing update and recidivism analysis. Fourth Judicial District of the State of Minnesota.
22.
ExumM.HartmanJ.FridayP.LordV. (2010). Policing domestic violence in the post-SARP era: The impact of a domestic violence police unit. Crime & Delinquency, 60(7), 999–1032.
23.
FaganJ. (1996). The criminalization of domestic violence: Promises and limitations. National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice.
24.
FarrellG.BuckleyA. (1999). Evaluation of a UK police domestic violence unit using repeat victimisation as a performance indicator. The Howard Journal, 38, 42–53.
25.
FarringtonD.GottfredsonD.ShermanL.WelshB. (2002). The Maryland Scientific Methods Scale. In ShermanL.FarringtonD.WelshW.MacKenzieD. (Eds.), Evidence-based crime prevention (pp. 3–21). Routledge.
26.
FridayP.LordV.ExumM.HartmanJ. (2006). Evaluating the impact of a specialized domestic violence police unit: Final report. U.S. Department of Justice.
27.
GonzálezJ.GarridoM. (2015). Satisfacción de las víctimas de violencia de género con la actuación policial en España. Validación del Sistema VioGen [Satisfaction of gender violence victims with the police action in Spain. VioGen System Validation]. Anuario de Psicologia Juridica, 25(1), 29–38.
28.
GoverA.BrankE.MacDonaldJ. (2007). A specialized domestic violence court in South Carolina. Violence Against Women, 13(6), 603–626.
29.
GoverA.MacDonaldJ.AlpertG. (2003). Combating domestic violence: Findings from an evaluation of a local domestic violence court. Criminology & Public Policy, 3, 109–132.
30.
GreenbergJ. (1993). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In CropanzanoR. (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 79–103). Lawrence Erlbaum.
HickmanL.SimpsonS. (2003). Fair treatment or preferred outcome? The impact of police behavior on victim reports of domestic violence incidents. Law & Society Review, 37(3), 393–411.
33.
HovellM.SeidA.LilesS. (2006). Evaluation of a police and social services domestic violence program: Empirical evidence needed to inform public health policies. Violence Against Women, 12(2), 137–159.
34.
JohnsonI. (2007). Victims’ perceptions of police response to domestic violence incidents. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35, 498–510.
35.
KaranA.KeilitzS.DenaroS. (1999). Domestic violence courts: What are they and how should we manage them?Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 50(2), 75–86.
KlevensJ.BakerC.ShelleyG.IngramE. (2008). Exploring the links between components of coordinated community responses and their impact on contact with intimate partner violence services. Violence Against Women, 14, 346–358.
38.
KosterN.KuijpersK.KunstM.Van der LeunJ. (2016). Crime victims’ perceptions of police behavior, legitimacy, and cooperation: A review of the literature. Victims & Offenders, 11(3), 392–435.
LaxminarayanM.BosmansM.PorterR.SosaL. (2013). Victim satisfaction with criminal justice: A systematic review. Victims & Offenders, 8(2), 119–147.
41.
LoganT.WalkerR. (2009). Partner stalking: Psychological dominance or “business as usual?”Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 10(3), 247–270.
42.
MuraokaS. (1996). Use of police services by victims of domestic violence [PhD dissertation, University of Nebraska].
43.
NewmarkL.RempelM.DiffilyK.KaneK. (2001). Specialized felony domestic violence courts: Lessons on implementation and impact from the Kings County experience. Urban Institute.
44.
PetersonR. (2001). Comparing the processing of domestic violence cases to non-domestic violence cases in New York City Criminal Courts. New York City Criminal Justice Agency.
45.
PetrucciC. (2002). Respect as a component in the judge-defendant interaction in a specialised domestic violence court that utilises therapeutic jurisprudence. Criminal Law Bulletin, 38(2), 263–295.
46.
PostL.KlevensJ.MaxwellC.ShelleyG.IngramE. (2008). An examination of whether coordinated community responses affect intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(1), 75–93.
47.
QuannN. (2006). Offender profile and recidivism among domestic violence offenders in Ontario, Canada. Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice.
48.
QuintasJ.SousaP. (2017). Avaliação Científica do Programa ‘Um Passo Mais’ [Scientific Evaluation of the ‘One More Step Program’]. Porto: FDUP, School of Criminology.
49.
ReisigM.ChandekM. (2001). The effects of expectancy disconfirmation on outcome satisfaction in police-citizen encounters. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 24(1), 88–99.
50.
RobinsonA.CookD. (2006). Understanding victim retraction in cases of domestic violence: Specialist courts, government policy, and victim-centred justice. Contemporary Justice Review: Issues in Criminal, Social, and Restorative Justice, 9(2), 189–213.
51.
RobinsonA.StroshineM. (2005). The importance of expectation fulfilment on domestic violence victims’ satisfaction with the police in the UK. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 28(2), 301–320.
52.
RubackR.CaresA.HoskinsS. (2008). Crime victims’ perceptions of restitution: The importance of payment and understanding. Violence and Victims, 23(6), 697–710.
53.
RussellB. (2012). Effectiveness, victim safety, characteristics, and enforcement of protective orders. Partner Abuse, 3(4), 531–552.
54.
RussellM.LightL. (2006). Police and victim perspectives on empowerment of domestic violence victims. Police Quarterly, 9, 375–396.
55.
StephensB.SindenP. (2000). Victims’ voices: Domestic assault victims’ perceptions of police demeanor. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15(5), 534–547.
56.
SunshineJ.TylerT. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review, 37(3), 513–548.
57.
TaylorH. (2013). Evaluating criminal justice interventions in the field of domestic violence—A realistic approach [PhD Thesis, University of Birmingham].
58.
ThibautJ.WalkerL. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum.
59.
TownsendM.HuntD.KuckS.BaxterC. (2005). Law enforcement response to domestic violence calls for service: Final report. National Criminal Justice Reference Service. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/215915.pdf
60.
TrujilloM.RossS. (2008). Police response to domestic violence: Making decisions about risk and risk management. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(4), 454–473.
United Nations. (2010, September). Good practices in national action plans on violence against women—Report of the expert group meeting. United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women.
VisherC.HarrellA.NewmarkL.YahnerJ. (2008). Reducing intimate partner violence: An evaluation of a comprehensive justice system-community collaboration. Criminology & Public Policy, 7(4), 495–523.
65.
WalklateS. (2007). Imagining the victim of crime. Open University Press.
66.
WeiszA.Canales-PortalatinD.NahanN. (2004). An evaluation of victim advocacy within a team approach. In FisherB. (Ed.), Violence against women and family violence: Developments in research, practice and policy (NIJ Number: 199701) (pp. III–3–1). National Institute of Justice. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/199701.pdf
67.
WhetstoneT. (2001). Measuring the impact of a domestic violence coordinated response team. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 24(3), 371–398.
