BelknapJ.ChuA. T.DePrinceA. P. (in press). The roles of phones and computers in threatening and abusing women victims of male intimate partner abuse. Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy.
2.
BowmanC. G. (1992). The arrest experiments: A feminist critique. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83, 201-208.
DePrinceA. P.BelknapJ.LabusJ.BuckinghamS. E.GoverA. R. (2012). The impact of victim-focused outreach on criminal legal system outcomes following police-reported intimate partner abuse. Violence against Women, 18(8), 857–877.
5.
DePrinceA. P.LabusJ.BelknapJ.BuckinghamS.GoverA. (2012). The impact of community-based outreach on psychological distress and victim safety in women exposed to intimate partner abuse. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/a002722410.1037/a0027224
6.
DunfordF. W. (1992). The Measurement of Recidivism in Cases of Spouse Assault. The Journal of Crime and Criminology, 83 (1), 120-136.
7.
DunfordF. W.HuizingaD.ElliottD. S. (1990). The Role of Arrest in Domestic Assault: The Omaha Experiment. Criminology, 28, 183-206.
8.
FrischL. A. (1992). Research that succeeds, policies that fail. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83, 209-216.
9.
GamacheD. (2012). From victim safety to victim engagement. Violence against Women, 18(8), 878-884.
10.
GarvinM. (2012). Harmony or discord between victim agency and the criminal justice system: A comment on DePrince, Belknap, Labus, Buckingham, and Gover. Violence against Women, 18(8), 885-892.
11.
HirschelD. (2012). The benefits of more “victim focused” coordinated community responses to intimate partner violence: A critique of “The impact of victim-focused outreach on criminal legal system outcomes following police-reported intimate partner abuse,” by DePrince, Belknap, Labus, Buckingham, and Gover. Violence against Women, 18(8), 893-901.
12.
HirschelJ. D.HutchisonI. W. (1992). Female spouse abuse and the police response: The Charlotte, North Carolina, Experiment. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83, 73-119.
13.
HirschelJ. D.HutchisonI. W.DeanC. W. (1991, Summer). The Charlotte Spouse Abuse Study. Popular Government, 57, 11-16.
14.
HirschelJ. D.HutchisonI. W.DeanC. W. (1992). The failure of arrest to deter spouse abuse. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 29, 7-33.
15.
LermanL. G. (1992). The decontextualization of domestic violence. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83, 217-240.
16.
PateA. M.HamiltonE. E. (1992). Formal and informal deterrents to domestic violence: The Dade County Spouse Assault Experiment. American Sociological Review, 57, 691-697.
17.
PenceE. (1985). The justice system’s response to domestic assault cases: A guide for policy development. Duluth, MN: Minnesota Program Development.
18.
Praxis International. (2010). The blueprint for safety: An interagency response to domestic violence crimes. St. Paul, MN: Author.
19.
ShermanL. W.BerkR. A. (1984). The specific deterrent effects of arrest for domestic assault. American Sociological Review, 49, 261-272.
20.
ShermanL. W.SchmidtJ. D.RoganD. P.SmithD. A.GartinP. R.CohnE. G.. . . BacichA. R. (1992). The variable effects of arrest on criminal careers: The Milwaukee Domestic Violence Experiment. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83, 137-169.
21.
ZorzaJ. (1992). The criminal law of misdemeanor domestic violence, 1970-1990. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83, 46-72.