research paper about violence

Preventing Violence Against Women and Children: Workshop Summary (2011)

Chapter: 6 papers on research in preventing violence against women and children.

6 Papers on Research in Preventing Violence Against Women and Children

The science behind preventing violence against women and children has evolved greatly over the past several decades. Several speakers offered overviews of the research and described the growing awareness of the complexities of the causes, risk factors, and adverse effects of such violence. They also explored potential intervention points that were illuminated by this discussion.

The first paper is a reprint from the World Health Organization publication Preventing Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Against Women (WHO and LSHTM, 2010b). The full report provides an overview of the magnitude of the issue; this workshop summary includes Chapter 3 , which is an in-depth analysis of preventive interventions in low- and middle-income countries and was the basis for Claudia García-Moreno’s presentation at the workshop.

The second paper is adapted from the International Men and Gender Equality Survey (IMAGES), a multi-country study that explored men’s perspectives on gender norms and violence. The survey examined the evolving views of men on gender equality as well as whether these views affected men’s sense of well-being and their commitment to reducing violence.

The third paper, by Claire Crooks from the University of Western Ontario and the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, provides an overview of the intergenerational transmission of violence. It also explores the ways in which violence against children can have long-term impacts as well as what considerations are valuable in designing interventions to prevent child maltreatment.

The final two papers, from Roger Fallot and Julian Ford, explore secondary and tertiary prevention of the long-term effects of violence and associated trauma by including the “trauma lens” in the provision of social services as well as through the empowerment of individuals who are exposed to violence. Trauma-informed care and psychosocial empowerment are two means by which survivors of violence can overcome potential adverse outcomes and prevent the recurrence of violence.

PREVENTING INTIMATE PARTNER AND SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN: PRIMARY PREVENTION STRATEGIES 1

Intimate partner and sexual violence are not inevitable—their levels vary over time and between places because of a variety of social, cultural, economic, and other factors. This can result in substantial differences between and within countries in the prevalence of intimate partner and sexual violence (WHO and LSHTM, 2010a). Most importantly, this variation shows that such violence can be reduced through well-designed and effective programs and policies. There are important factors related to both perpetration and victimization—such as exposure to child maltreatment, witnessing parental violence, attitudes that are accepting of violence, and the harmful use of alcohol—that can be addressed (WHO and LSHTM, 2010c).

At present, evidence on the effectiveness of primary prevention strategies for intimate partner and sexual violence is limited, with the overwhelming majority of data derived from high-income countries (HICs)—primarily the United States. Consequently, current high priorities in this field include adapting effective programs from high-income to lower-income settings; further evaluating and refining those for which evidence is emerging; and developing and testing strategies that appear to have potential, especially for use in low-resource settings, with rigorous evaluation of their effectiveness. At the same time, the dearth of evidence in all countries means that the generating of evidence and the incorporation of well-designed outcome evaluation procedures into primary prevention programs are top priorities everywhere. This will help to ensure that the efforts made in this area are founded upon a solid evidence base. Furthermore, program developers should be encouraged to explicitly base programs on existing theoretical frameworks and models of behavior change to allow underlying mechanisms to be identified and to make replication easier. Most of the evaluated strategies aimed at preventing intimate partner and sexual violence have

________________

1 Reprinted from World Health Organization and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. 2010. Preventing intimate partner and sexual violence against women: Taking action and generating evidence. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

targeted proximal risk factors—primarily at the individual and relationship levels of the ecological model.

The Need for Upstream Action

In the public health framework, primary prevention means reducing the number of new instances of intimate partner and sexual violence by addressing the factors that make the first-time perpetration of such violence more likely to occur. Primary prevention therefore relies on identifying the “upstream” determinants and then taking action to address these. The impact of widespread, comprehensive programs can then be measured at the population level by comparing the rates at which such violence is either experienced or perpetrated. Given the lifetime prevalence of intimate partner and sexual violence, the hundreds of millions of women worldwide in need of services would outstrip the capacity of even the best-resourced countries (WHO and LSHTM, 2010a). A problem on this scale requires a major focus on primary prevention.

Upstream actions can target risk factors across all four levels of the ecological model. To decrease intimate partner and sexual violence at the population level, it is particularly important to address the societal or outer level of the model.

Such measures include national legislation and supportive policies aimed at social and economic factors—such as income levels, poverty and economic deprivation, patterns of male and female employment, and women’s access to health care, property, education, and political participation and representation. It is sometimes even argued that programs that aim to reduce intimate partner and sexual violence against women without increasing male–female equity will ultimately not succeed in reducing violence against women. However, while many strategies involving legal and educational reform and employment opportunities are being implemented to increase gender equality, few have been assessed for their impact on intimate partner and sexual violence, making the evaluation of such strategies a priority. Any comprehensive intimate partner and sexual violence prevention strategy must address these sociocultural and economic factors through legislative and policy changes and by implementing related programs.

Creating a Climate of Non-Tolerance

Addressing risk factors at the societal level may increase the likelihood of successful and sustainable reductions of intimate partner and sexual violence. For example, when the law allows husbands to physically discipline wives, implementing a program to prevent intimate partner violence may have little impact. National legislation and supportive policies should

therefore be put in place to ensure that women have equal rights to political participation, education, work, social security, and an adequate standard of living. They should also be able to enter freely into a marriage or to leave it, to obtain financial credit, and to own and administer property. Laws and policies that discriminate against women should be changed, and any new legislation and policies should be examined for their impact upon women and men. Legislation and policies that address wider socioeconomic inequalities are likely to reduce other forms of interpersonal violence, which will in turn help to reduce intimate partner and sexual violence.

Legislation and policies that address wider socioeconomic inequalities can make a vital contribution to empowering women and improving their status in society; to creating cultural shifts by changing the norms, attitudes, and beliefs that support intimate partner and sexual violence; and to creating a climate of non-tolerance for such violence.

The human rights of girls and women need to be respected, protected, and fulfilled as part of ensuring the well-being and rights of everyone in society. As a first step toward this, governments should honor their commitments in implementing the following international legislation and human rights instruments:

• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (1979);
• The Convention on the Rights of the Child (1991);
• The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (1993);
• The Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (1995);
• The Millennium Declaration (2000); and
• The Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence Against Women (Convention of Belem do Para, 1994).

Legislation and criminal justice systems must also be in place to deal with cases of intimate partner and sexual violence after the event. These systems should aim to help prevent further violence, facilitate recovery, and ensure access to justice—for example, through the provision of specialized police units, restraining orders, and multi-agency sexual assault response teams. Potentially, legal protection against intimate partner and sexual violence helps to reinforce non-violent social norms by sending the message that such acts will not be tolerated. Measures to criminalize abuse by intimate partners and to broaden the definition of rape have been instrumental in bringing these issues out into the open and dispelling the notion that such violence is a private family matter. In this regard, they have been very important in shifting social norms (Heise and García-Moreno, 2002; Jewkes et

al., 2002). However, the evidence surrounding the deterrent value of arrest in cases of intimate partner violence shows that it may be no more effective in reducing violence than other police responses, such as issuing warnings or citations, providing counseling, or separating couples (Fagan and Browne, 1994; Garner et al., 1995). Some studies have also shown increased abuse following arrest, particularly for unemployed men and those living in impoverished areas (Fagan and Browne, 1994; Garner et al., 1995). Protective orders can be useful, but enforcement is uneven, and there is evidence that they have little effect on men with serious criminal records (Heise and García-Moreno, 2002). In cases of rape, reforms related to the admissibility of evidence and removing the requirement for victims’ accounts to be corroborated have also been useful but are ignored in many courts throughout the world (Du Mont and Parnis, 2000; Jewkes et al., 2002).

Currently, on the whole, sufficient evidence of the deterrent effect of criminal justice system responses on intimate partner and sexual violence is still lacking (Dahlberg and Butchart, 2005). Dismantling hierarchical constructions of masculinity and femininity predicated on the control of women and eliminating the structural factors that support inequalities are likely to make a significant contribution to preventing intimate partner and sexual violence. However, these are long-term goals. Strategies aimed at achieving these long-term objectives should be complemented by measures with more immediate effects that are informed by the evidence base presented in this paper.

ASSESSING THE EVIDENCE FOR DIFFERENT PREVENTION APPROACHES

From the perspective of public health, a fundamental question is, “Do intimate partner and sexual violence prevention programs work?” That is to say, are there certain programs or strategies that are effective in preventing or reducing intimate partner and sexual violence? Effectiveness can only be demonstrated using rigorous research designs, such as randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental designs. These typically compare the outcomes of an experimental group (which receives the program) with a control or comparison group (which is as equivalent as possible to the experimental group but which does not receive the program). One major concern is to be able to rule out alternative explanations for any observed changes in outcome in order to be confident that the changes really were due to the program and not some other factor.

Although “testimonials” are not a sound basis for evaluating the effectiveness of a program, they can provide insights into its running and on whether participants find it worthwhile. However, approaches that are based upon testimonials might expend significant resources and capacity on

programs that may be ineffective or may even make things worse (Dahlberg and Butchart, 2005). Various criteria have now been proposed to more systematically evaluate the effectiveness of different programs. The most stringent criteria involve program evaluation using experimental or quasi-experimental designs; evidence of significant preventive effects; evidence of sustained effects; and the independent replication of outcomes.

In spite of the emphasis on and visibility of efforts to promote gender equality and prevent intimate partner and sexual violence, very few of the programs reviewed in this paper meet all of these criteria, while others have not been subjected to any kind of scientific evaluation. Rigorous scientific evaluation of programs for preventing intimate partner and sexual violence are even rarer in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The field of intimate partner and sexual violence prevention must therefore be considered to be at its earliest stages in terms of having an established evidence base for primary prevention strategies, programs, and policies. The limited evidence base for intimate partner and sexual violence prevention has three important implications for this paper.

First, the paper extrapolates, when relevant, from the stronger evidence base for child maltreatment and youth violence prevention but clearly signals that these extrapolations remain speculative. Much, however, can be learned from the literature on youth violence and child maltreatment prevention.

Second, the paper describes those primary prevention programs that have the potential to be effective either on the grounds of theory or knowledge of risk factors—even if there is currently little or no evidence to support them or where, in certain cases, they have not yet been widely implemented. In the process, an attempt is made to draw attention to the underlying theories, principles, and mechanisms on which the programs are based. However, it is noted that a firm theoretical base and consistency with identified risk factors do not guarantee the success of a program.

Third, the paper includes programs developed in LMIC settings on condition that they have some supporting evidence (even if it is weak) or are currently in the process of being evaluated, that they appear to have potential on theoretical grounds, or that they address known risk factors. The inclusion criteria are designed on the one hand to avoid setting the bar of methodological standards too high—which would lead to the exclusion of many of the programs developed in low-resource settings on the grounds that they have no or low-quality evidence supporting them. On the other hand, setting the bar too low would run the risk of appearing to endorse programs unsupported by evidence. However, the limitations of the evidence presented are clearly spelt out and the need for rigorous outcome evaluation studies emphasized.

Although still in its early stages, there are sound reasons to believe that this field is poised to expand rapidly in coming years. Some programs have been demonstrated to be effective following rigorous outcome evaluations, evidence is beginning to emerge to support the effectiveness of many more, and suggestions for potential strategies have proliferated. Furthermore, tried and tested methods for developing effective evidence-based primary prevention programs and policies for other forms of interpersonal violence have been reported. The field of evidence-based intimate partner and sexual violence prevention now requires an open mind to promising approaches and to innovative new ideas at all stages of the life cycle.

SUMMARY TABLES OF PRIMARY PREVENTION STRATEGIES AND PROGRAMS

Table 6-1 summarizes the strength of evidence for the effectiveness of those strategies to prevent intimate partner violence and sexual violence for which some evidence is available. Strategies are grouped according to life stage. An important distinction must be drawn between a strategy and a specific program. Although specific programs may have been demonstrated to be effective, this in no way implies that all other programs categorized under the same strategy are also effective. For example, the Nurse Family Partnership, developed in the United States, is a home-visitation program that has been demonstrated to be effective in preventing child maltreatment. Nevertheless, it is the only program within the broader strategy of home visitation (which includes a multitude of different programs) that is supported by solid evidence of its effectiveness (MacMillan et al., 2009). The outcome measures of effectiveness are described in Box 6-1 .

Strategies are ranked for their effectiveness in preventing intimate partner violence and sexual violence as follows:

• Effective: strategies that include one or more programs demonstrated to be effective. Effective refers to being supported by multiple well-designed studies showing prevention of perpetration and/or experience of intimate partner and/or sexual violence.
• Emerging evidence: strategies that include one or more programs for which evidence of effectiveness is emerging. Emerging evidence refers to being supported by one well-designed study showing prevention of perpetration and/or experience of intimate partner and/or sexual violence or studies showing positive changes in knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs related to intimate partner violence and/or sexual violence.
• Effectiveness unclear: strategies that include one or more programs of unclear effectiveness due to insufficient or mixed evidence.
• Emerging evidence of ineffectiveness: strategies that include one or more programs for which evidence of ineffectiveness is emerging. Emerging evidence refers to being supported by one well-designed study showing lack of prevention of perpetration and/or experience of intimate partner and/or sexual violence or studies showing an absence of changes in knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs related to intimate partner violence and/or sexual violence.
• Ineffective: strategies that include one or more programs shown to be ineffective. Ineffective refers to being supported by multiple well-designed studies showing lack of prevention of perpetration and/or experience of intimate partner and/or sexual violence.
• Probably harmful: strategies that include at least one well-designed study showing an increase in perpetration and/or experience of intimate partner and/or sexual violence or negative changes in knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs related to intimate partner and/or sexual violence.

As shown in Table 6-1 , there is currently only one strategy for the prevention of intimate partner violence that can be classified “effective” at preventing actual violence. This is the use of school-based programs to prevent violence within dating relationships. However, only three such programs—described below—have been demonstrated to be effective, and these findings cannot be extrapolated to other school-based programs using a different approach, content, or intensity. At present, there are no correspondingly evaluated effective programs against sexual violence.

TABLE 6-1 Primary Prevention Strategies for Intimate Partner Violence and Sexual Violence for Which Some Evidence Is Available

1—Effective: strategies that include one or more programs demonstrated to be effective; effective refers to being supported by multiple well-designed studies showing prevention of perpetration and/or experiencing of intimate partner and/or sexual violence;

2—Emerging evidence of effectiveness: strategies that include one or more programs for which evidence of effectiveness is emerging; emerging evidence refers to being supported by one well-designed study showing prevention of perpetration and/or experiencing of intimate partner and/or sexual violence or studies showing positive changes in knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs related to intimate partner violence and/or sexual violence;

3—Effectiveness unclear: strategies that include one or more programs of unclear effectiveness due to insufficient or mixed evidence;

4—Emerging evidence of ineffectiveness: strategies that include one or more programs for which evidence of ineffectiveness is emerging; emerging evidence refers to being supported by one well-designed study showing lack of prevention of perpetration and/or experience of intimate partner and/or sexual violence or studies showing an absence of changes in knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs related to intimate partner violence and/or sexual violence;

5—Ineffective: strategies that include one or more programs shown to be ineffective; ineffective refers to being supported by multiple well-designed studies showing lack of prevention of perpetration and/or experiencing of intimate partner and/or sexual violence;

6—Probably harmful: strategies that include at least one well-designed study showing an increase in perpetration and/or experience of intimate partner and/or sexual violence or negative changes in knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs related to intimate partner and/or sexual violence; N/A—Not applicable.

BOX 6-1 Outcome Measures of Effectiveness

The effectiveness of a program can be evaluated in terms of three different types of outcome—each of which can be measured at different intervals after the program:

• Changes in knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs regarding intimate partner and sexual violence. This is the weakest of the three outcomes because changes in knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs do not necessarily lead to changes in violent behavior. In this respect, even successful programs in this area cannot be assumed to be effective at preventing actual intimate partner or sexual violence without further research demonstrating corresponding reductions in violent behavior.
• Reductions in the perpetration of intimate partner or sexual violence.
• Reductions in the experience of intimate partner or sexual violence.

Intimate partner violence is not a unitary construct and can take different forms, including physical, sexual, and psychological violence. Despite this, outcome evaluations generally do not examine effectiveness in relation to these different types of violence—nor are programs generally designed to address specific types of intimate partner violence in particular. It is possible that programs considered to be effective or promising may only be so for certain forms of intimate partner violence (Whitaker et al., 2007a).

Table 6-2 lists those strategies for which there is currently no evidence or very weak evidence but that appear to have potential on the grounds of theory, known risk factors, or outcome evaluations that are methodologically of lower quality; it also includes some promising strategies that are currently undergoing evaluation.

All the strategies reviewed have been organized according to the main life stages. When strategies are relevant to more than one life stage, they have been categorized under the stage at which they are most often delivered. Strategies relevant to all life stages are described last. Because of the way programs are organized, intimate partner violence is considered here to include instances of sexual violence that occur within an intimate partnership, while sexual violence is used here to refer to sexual violence occurring outside intimate partnerships (i.e., perpetrated by friends, acquaintances, or strangers). Dating violence can be considered to incorporate both possibilities because dating partners can range from being little more than acquaintances to more intimate partners. However, in Table 6-1 and Table 6-2 dating violence is classified for the sake of convenience under intimate partner violence.

TABLE 6-2 Primary Prevention Strategies for Intimate Partner Violence and Sexual Violence with Potential

During Infancy, Childhood, and Early Adolescence

Home-visitation and parent-education programs to prevent child maltreatment.

As noted in earlier sections of this document, a history of child maltreatment substantially increases the risk of an individual becoming either a perpetrator or victim of intimate partner violence and of sexual violence. It is therefore reasonable to assume that preventing child maltreatment has the potential to reduce subsequent intimate partner and sexual violence (Foshee et al., 2009). However, direct evidence of the effect of such programs on the levels of intimate partner violence is currently still lacking.

In general, however, reducing the risk of the different forms of child maltreatment reviewed in Preventing Child Maltreatment: A Guide to Taking Action and Generating Evidence (WHO and International Society for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, 2006) can contribute to reducing the intergenerational transmission of violence and abuse. The most promising strategies for preventing child maltreatment in this area include home-visitation and parent-education programs (Mikton and Butchart, 2009). However, neither type of program has been evaluated for its long-term effects on the prevention of intimate partner and sexual violence among the grown-up children of parents who were involved in such programs.

Improve Maternal Mental Health

Maternal depression (which affects at least 1 in 10 new mothers) can interfere with good bonding and attachment processes. This in turn

increases the risk of persistent conduct disorders in children (a key risk factor for the later perpetration of violence) by as much as five-fold (Meltzer et al., 2003). Effective approaches for addressing maternal depression include early recognition (antenatally and postnatally) followed by peer and social support, psychological therapies, and antidepressant medication (National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health, 2007). The long-term effects on the children of mothers treated for maternal depression in terms of their later involvement in intimate partner and sexual violence have not been assessed, but the approach appears to have potential.

Identify and Treat Conduct and Emotional Disorders in Children

Conduct disorders in childhood and adolescence—a precursor of antisocial personality disorder—are associated with an increased risk of experiencing and/or perpetrating intimate partner and sexual violence. Additionally, emotional disorders are associated with later depression and anxiety in adult years and can increase the risk of postnatal depression and persistent maternal depression. As outlined above, these in turn contribute to as much as a five-fold increased risk of emotional or conduct disorders in the children of mothers with poor mental health (Meltzer et al., 2003). The early identification and effective treatment of conduct and emotional disorders in childhood and adolescence could therefore be expected to reduce the occurrence of subsequent intimate partner and sexual violence.

Good evidence exists of the links between early conduct disorder and later involvement in violence as both victim and perpetrator and of the effectiveness of interventions to reduce conduct disorder and youth offending. However, despite their potential, there is at present no evidence showing that the strategy of identifying and treating conduct and emotional disorders in childhood or early adolescence leads to reductions in intimate partner and sexual violence during later adolescence and adulthood.

Interventions for Children and Adolescents Subjected to Child Maltreatment and/or Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence

Because children or adolescents who have been subjected to child maltreatment or exposed to parental violence are at increased risk of becoming the perpetrators and victims of intimate partner and sexual violence, interventions in this area are particularly important.

One meta-analysis examined 21 programs involving psychological interventions targeted at children and adolescents who had experienced child maltreatment (Skowron and Reinemann, 2005). Results suggested that psychological treatments for child maltreatment yielded improvements among participants: Some 71 percent of treated children appeared to be functioning

better than their non-treated counterparts. All of the interventions were designed to improve cognitive, emotional, and behavioral outcomes, with 11 of the studies considered to be experimental. A randomized trial of one of these programs used adolescent dating violence as an outcome and found a reduction in the experiencing and perpetration of physical and emotional abuse (Wolfe et al., 2003).

Psychological interventions for children and adolescents subjected to child maltreatment and/or exposed to intimate partner violence therefore appear to represent a strategy for the prevention of intimate partner violence supported by emerging evidence. Their effect on sexual violence remains unclear at present.

School-Based Social and Emotional Skills Development

Factors such as impulsiveness, lack of empathy, and poor social competence—which may be indicative of conduct disorder, a precursor of antisocial personality disorder—are important individual risk factors for perpetrating various forms of violence, including intimate partner and sexual violence. Cognitive-behavioral skills training programs and social development programs that address these factors in children and young adolescents are therefore promising strategies for preventing subsequent violence. These programs seek to promote pro-social behavior and to provide social and emotional skills such as problem solving, anger management, increased capacity for empathy, perspective taking, and non-violent conflict resolution. They can either be population-based or targeted at those at high risk and are typically delivered in schools. Although there is strong evidence that such programs can be effective in reducing youth violence and improving social skills, there is currently no evidence that they can reduce sexual and dating violence among adolescents and young adults or intimate partner and sexual violence later in life (Lösel and Beelmann, 2003). Nonetheless, they appear to have potential in preventing subsequent intimate partner violence and sexual violence.

School-Based Training to Help Children to Recognize and Avoid Potentially Sexually Abusive Situations

School-based programs to prevent child sexual abuse by teaching children to recognize and avoid potentially sexually abusive situations are run in many parts of the world, but evaluated examples come mainly from the United States. A recent systematic review of reviews found that although school-based programs to prevent child sexual abuse are effective at strengthening knowledge and protective behaviors against this type of abuse, evidence showing whether such programs reduce its actual

occurrence is lacking (Mikton and Butchart, 2009). Two studies that measured future experience of sexual abuse as an outcome reported mixed results (Finkelhor et al., 1995; Gibson and Leitemberg, 2000). Nonetheless, emerging evidence of their effectiveness in preventing subsequent sexual abuse victimization appears to support the use of such programs. Further research on the long-term impact on actual sexual abuse victimization is, however, required (Finkelhor, 2009).

Bullying Prevention Programs

Bullying has both immediate and long-term consequences on perpetrators and victims, including social isolation and the exacerbation of antisocial behavior that can lead to juvenile and adult crime (for perpetrators) and depression, suicidal ideation, social isolation, and low self-esteem (for victims). Some of these consequences may increase the risk of later involvement in intimate partner and/or sexual violence either as perpetrator or victim. A number of reviews have concluded that bullying prevention programs are effective in reducing bullying (Smith et al., 2004; Baldry and Farrington, 2007). A systematic review and meta-analysis of school-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization showed that, overall, school-based bullying prevention programs are effective in reducing both bullying and being bullied (Farrington and Ttofi, 2009). On average, bullying perpetration decreased by 20 to 23 percent and the experiencing of being bullied decreased by 17 to 20 percent.

Although such programs are likely to have broader potential benefits, evidence of their effect on the experiencing or perpetrating of intimate partner and/or sexual violence later in life is limited. A number of studies, however, have demonstrated an association between bullying and sexual harassment. Some sexual violence prevention programs in the United States include bullying prevention components for elementary- and middle-school-age children (Basile et al., 2009).

During Adolescence and Early Adulthood

School-based programs to prevent dating violence.

Dating violence is an early form of partner violence, occurring primarily in adolescence and early adulthood, and experienced within a “dating relationship.” Dating violence prevention programs have been the most evaluated of all intimate partner violence prevention programs, with 12 evaluations of adolescent dating violence prevention programs, including 5 randomized trials (Foshee et al., 2008). Targeted at early sexual relationships, in contexts where marriage is usually entered into from about 20

years of age, these programs have been shown to prevent dating violence and sexual violence. Furthermore, dating violence appears to be a risk factor for intimate partner violence later in life and is also associated with injuries and health-compromising behaviors, such as unsafe sex, substance abuse, and suicide attempts (Smith et al., 2003; Wolfe et al., 2009). Accordingly, the prevention of dating violence can be assumed to be preventive of intimate partner and sexual violence in later life (Foshee et al., 2009).

One dating violence prevention program that has been well evaluated using a randomized controlled design is Safe Dates. Positive effects were noted in all four published evaluations (Foshee et al., 1998, 2000, 2004, 2005). Foshee et al. (2005) examined the effects of Safe Dates in preventing or reducing perpetration and victimization over time using four waves of follow-up data. The program significantly reduced psychological, moderate physical, and sexual dating violence perpetration at all four follow-up periods. The program also significantly reduced severe physical dating abuse perpetration over time, but only for adolescents who reported no or average prior involvement in severe physical perpetration at baseline. Program effects on the experiencing of sexual dating violence over time were marginal. Safe Dates did not prevent or reduce the experiencing of psychological dating abuse. Program effects were primarily due to changes in dating violence norms, gender role norms, and awareness of community services. The program did not affect conflict-management skills. The program was found to have had a greater impact upon primary prevention as opposed to preventing re-abuse among those with a history of previous abuse (Foshee et al., 1996, 1998, 2000, 2004, 2008).

Two school-based programs for preventing dating violence in Ontario, Canada, have also been evaluated (Wolfe et al., 2003, 2009). An outcome evaluation of The Fourth R: Skills for Youth Relationships used a cluster-randomized design and found that, based on self-reported perpetration at 2.5-year follow-up, rates of physical dating violence were 7.4 percent in the program group and 9.8 percent in the control group—a difference of 2.4 percent. However, for reasons not fully understood, this decrease of self-reported perpetration was found in boys (7.1 percent in controls versus 2.7 percent in intervention students) but not in girls (12.1 percent versus 11.9 percent). The program—evaluated by sampling more than 1,700 hundred students aged 14 to 15 years from 20 public schools—was integrated into the existing health and physical education curriculum and taught in sex-segregated classes. An underlying theme of healthy, nonviolent relationship skills was woven throughout the 21 lessons, which included extensive skills development using graduated practice with peers to develop positive strategies for dealing with pressures and the resolution of conflict without abuse or violence. The cost of training and materials averaged 16 Canadian dollars per student (Wolfe et al., 2009).

The other Canadian school-based program that has been evaluated is the Youth Relationship Project (Wolfe et al., 2003). This community-based program aimed to help 14- to 16-year-olds who had been maltreated as children to develop healthy non-abusive relationships with dating partners. The program educated participants on both healthy and abusive relationships and helped them to acquire conflict resolution and communication skills. A randomized controlled trial showed that the program had been effective in reducing incidents of physical and emotional abuse and the symptoms of emotional distress over a 16-month period after the program (Wolfe et al., 2003). These three school-based programs therefore appear to be effective for the prevention of physical, sexual, and emotional violence in dating relationships in adolescents and may also help to prevent intimate partner and sexual violence among adults. However, there are a number of necessary caveats concerning dating violence prevention programs. Although high-quality evaluations of the three programs described above found reduced violence at moderately long follow-up periods, the evaluations of most other programs have been of poor quality, used short follow-up periods, and only included knowledge and attitude changes as outcomes (for which some positive effects were found). Whether changes in knowledge and attitudes lead to corresponding changes in behavior is uncertain (Whitaker et al., 2006). Moreover, further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of dating violence prevention programs in the longer term, when integrated with programs for the prevention of other forms of violence, and when delivered outside North America and in resource-poor settings. A particular concern that has been raised about programs such as Safe Dates is the extent to which they are culture-bound to North America and hence may be of limited value in LMICs.

School-Based Multi-Component Violence Prevention Programs

Universal multi-component programs are the most effective school-based violence prevention programs (Dusenbury et al., 1997; Adi et al., 2007; Hahn et al., 2007). Such programs are delivered to all pupils and go beyond the normal components of curriculum-based teaching to include teacher training in the management of behavior, parenting education, and peer mediation. There can also be after-school activities and/or community involvement. One systematic review estimated that, on average, universal multi-component programs reduced violence by 15 percent in schools that delivered the programs compared to those that did not (Hahn et al., 2007).

School-based multi-component violence prevention programs have mostly focused upon bullying and youth violence as outcomes. Given that the risk factors for youth violence and intimate partner and sexual violence are to some extent shared, such programs would appear to have some

potential for preventing these latter forms of violence. However, there is currently no evidence of their effectiveness in these areas.

Sexual Violence Prevention Programs for School and College Populations

In the United States, the majority of programs for the primary prevention of sexual violence by strangers, acquaintances, and non-intimate dating partners have focused on college students—though they have also increasingly been delivered to high school and middle school pupils. In settings where few go into higher education this approach has obvious limitations. Developmentally, it makes sense to educate young people in appropriate and inappropriate sexual behavior at a time when their sexual identities are forming and their attitudes to romantic partners are beginning to take shape. However, once again there is a severe paucity of evidence to confirm the effectiveness or otherwise of such programs (Schewe, 2007).

Two recent systematic reviews in the United States have evaluated the effectiveness of specific primary prevention programs in this area. The first of these included college, high-school, and middle-school populations and found that programs usually included several components (most often the challenging of rape myths, information on acquaintance and date rape, statistics on rape, and risk reduction and protective prevention skills) (Morrison et al., 2004). Of the 50 studies reviewed, 7 (14 percent) showed exclusively positive effects on knowledge and attitudes, but none used the actual experiencing or perpetration of violence as outcomes; 40 (80 percent) reported mixed effects; and 3 (6 percent) indicated no effect. The studies also had a number of serious methodological limitations that led the reviewers to conclude that the effectiveness of such programs remains unclear. These limitations included the use of knowledge and attitude as the only outcome measures, studies of higher-quality design showing poorer results, and the positive effects of the programs being found to diminish over time.

The second systematic review examined 69 education programs for college students on sexual assault and found little evidence of the effectiveness of such programs in preventing such assaults or in increasing levels of rape empathy (the cognitive–emotional recognition of a rape victim’s trauma) or awareness (Anderson and Whiston, 2005). However, the programs evaluated were found to increase factual knowledge about rape and to beneficially change attitudes toward it. The acute shortage of studies that use behavior as outcomes led the authors to conclude that more research using such outcomes was needed before definitive conclusions could be reached. The effectiveness of such programs, on the basis of these two reviews, is currently unclear. It has been found that the provision of “factual” information as part of addressing rape myths appears to have no effect on attitudes to rape or on the levels of empathy for its victims (Schewe, 2007).

Evaluation studies indicate that rape awareness and knowledge programs based on imparting such information rarely work. Similarly, educating women on effective self-defense strategies without teaching them actual self-defense skills has been found to be of questionable value and may even be potentially harmful in some contexts (Schewe, 2007). Two evaluations of programs that focused on a discussion of self-defense strategies without teaching the corresponding skills found no reduction in sexual assault risk at follow-up (Breitenbecher and Gidycz, 1998; Breitenbecher and Scarce, 2001). Rape prevention programs that use a style of personal confrontation with participants actually appear to be harmful. One study evaluating such a program found that it resulted in greater tolerance among men of the justifiability of rape (Fisher, 1986).

A number of other approaches have been tried for which there is presently very limited evidence of effectiveness. Encouraging victim empathy has been associated with both improvements and worsening of attitudes toward sexual violence and the acceptance of rape myths (Schewe, 2007). Educating women on how to avoid high-risk situations (such as hitchhiking, abusing alcohol, or becoming involved with older men) has also led to mixed results, and it too has been associated with greater acceptance of rape myths. To avoid the encouragement of victim-blaming, it is crucial that such education is delivered to female-only audiences. There have also been mixed indications of the effectiveness of programs that emphasize the negative consequences of sexual violence to men and that try to persuade them to see such sex as less rewarding than consensual sex.

Finally, several programs for preventing sexual violence have been proposed that have as yet been neither widely implemented nor evaluated. These include providing universal rape prevention education and parent education in sexual violence prevention throughout schools and workplaces, educating teachers and coaches about sexual violence and its prevention, and changing organizational practices to include activities such as mandatory training in the prevention of violence against women.

During Adulthood

Empowerment and participatory approaches to reduce gender inequality.

Empowerment is an approach that helps individuals and communities to identify their own problems and to develop, through participatory methods, the resources, skills, and confidence needed to address them. This approach emphasizes the role of individuals and communities as agents of change and prioritizes community ownership and leadership of the entire process. Comprehensive programs deal with the community as a whole or

with multiple subgroups of the population, have several components, and are designed to effect social change by creating a supportive environment for changing individual and community attitudes and behavior. Such approaches often utilize a combination of participatory rapid needs assessment, education or training, public awareness campaigns, and community action (Lankester, 1992).

Two examples of empowerment approaches for preventing intimate partner violence are the use of microfinance with gender-equality training and the Stepping Stones training package.

A number of initiatives involving microfinance have now been established to increase the economic and social power of women. These initiatives provide small loans to mobilize income-generating projects that can alleviate poverty. Stand-alone credit and rural development programs such as Grameen Bank and the Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee target women and appear to show some promise in reducing intimate partner violence. However, the evaluation of such programs needs to take into account reports of lenders exploiting disadvantaged borrowers with very high rates of interest, which can trap people in debt and contribute to further poverty, as well as reports of increases in intimate partner violence (Kabeer, 2001; Rhyne, 2001). Disagreements over the control of newly acquired assets and earnings combined with women’s changing attitudes toward traditional gender roles, improved social support, and greater confidence in defending themselves against male authority has sometimes led to marital conflicts and violence against women perpetrated by their partners (Schuler et al., 1996). Increases in violence following participation in credit programs have also been reported elsewhere, at least in the initial stages of membership (Rahman, 1999; Ahmed, 2005). Pre-existing gender roles appear to affect the violence-related outcomes of credit programs—in communities with rigid gender roles, women’s involvement can result in increased levels of intimate partner violence not seen in communities with more flexible gender roles (Koenig et al., 2003). The outcome evaluations conducted to date of such stand-alone microfinance programs have not been as rigorous as that of the Intervention with Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity (IMAGE) program described in Box 6-2 .

Although microfinance programs can operate as discrete entities, IMAGE is an example of such a program that also incorporates education sessions and skills-building workshops to help change gender norms, improve communication in relationships, and empower women in other ways and has been shown to be effective at reducing intimate partner violence (Kim et al., 2009). Through education and skills building for women and engagement with boys and men and the broader community, IMAGE was effective in reducing intimate partner violence and supporting women. This was achieved without producing the type of negative effects seen in other

BOX 6-2 Intervention with Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity (IMAGE)

One of the most rigorously evaluated and successful microfinance and women’s empowerment programs to date has been the Intervention with Microfinance for AIDS and Gender Equity (IMAGE) in South Africa. This program targets women living in the poorest households in rural areas, and combines a microfinance program with training and skills-building sessions on preventing HIV infection, and on gender norms, cultural beliefs, communication, and intimate partner violence.

The program also encourages wider community participation to engage men and boys. It aims to improve women’s employment opportunities, increase their influence in household decisions and their ability to resolve marital conflicts, strengthen their social networks, and reduce HIV transmission.

A randomized controlled trial found that two years after completing the program, participants reported experiencing 55 percent fewer acts of violence by their intimate partners in the previous 12 months than did members of a control group. In addition, participants were more likely to disagree with statements that condone physical and sexual violence toward an intimate partner (52 percent of participants versus 36 percent of the control group).

settings where cultural shifts and other changes have taken place in the absence of efforts to engage men.

The Stepping Stones training package is another participatory approach that promotes communication and relationship skills within communities. Training sessions are run in parallel for single-sex groups of women and men. Originally designed for the prevention of HIV infection, several communities have now incorporated elements of violence prevention. The approach has been used in 40 LMICs in Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America. Versions of the program have now been evaluated in a number of countries (Welbourn, 2009). The most thorough evaluation to date has been a randomized controlled trial in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa, with participants aged 15 to 26 years. This study indicated that a lower proportion of men who had participated in the program committed physical or sexual intimate partner violence in the two years following the program compared with men in a control group (Jewkes et al., 2008).

Furthermore, an evaluation in Gambia compared two villages where the program was carried out with two control villages and followed participating couples over one year. It found that, compared to couples not receiving the program, communication was improved and quarrelling reduced in participating couples. In addition, participating men were found

to be more accepting of a wife’s refusal to have sex and less likely to beat her (Paine et al., 2002).

SASA! is an “activist kit” for mobilizing communities to prevent violence against women, focusing in particular on the connection between HIV/AIDS and violence against women. “Sasa” is a Kiswahili word meaning “now,” and the kit includes practical resources; activities-monitoring and assessment tools to support local activism, media, and advocacy activities; and communication and training materials. It targets community norms and traditional gender roles and aims to change knowledge, attitudes, skills, and behavior to redress the power imbalance between men and women. It was created by Raising Voices, a Uganda-based nongovernmental organization that works in the Horn of Africa and Southern Africa. The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Raising Voices, the Kampala-based Center for Domestic Violence Prevention, and Makerere University are currently conducting a joint randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of the approach.

Thus evidence is emerging of the effectiveness in LMICs of empowerment and participatory approaches in preventing intimate partner violence through microfinance combined with gender-equality training and through the Stepping Stones training package.

The results of the SASA! evaluation are expected to provide further evidence on the effectiveness of this type of program, which seems to have potential for reducing intimate partner violence. There is a need to replicate and scale up this type of approach. Several other participatory and community-empowerment strategies to prevent intimate partner violence may be of value, although these have seldom been implemented as primary prevention strategies or rigorously evaluated. Couples counseling focuses on violence and/or substance abuse and may be effective for couples who have not resorted to intimate partner violence but who may be at risk. Family programs to promote positive communication and healthy relationships and prevent family violence might also be effective in preventing both intimate partner and sexual violence, given the importance of family factors in their development. In Ecuador one intimate partner violence prevention program that was implemented (but not evaluated) consisted of close friends or relatives being assigned to “monitor” newlyweds and to intervene should serious conflict arise. There is also some initial evidence that social cohesion among residents increases a community’s capacity to manage crime and violence (by increasing “collective efficacy”), leading to decreases in both lethal and non-lethal intimate partner violence. Such community-level interventions can beneficially change community-level characteristics and warrant further evaluation.

Home Visitation Programs to Prevent Intimate Partner Violence

A systematic review of home visitation programs (Bilukha et al., 2005) identified only one evaluation study (Eckenrode et al., 2000) that examined the effect of home visitation on levels of intimate partner violence. No significant difference in the incidence of such violence among the program and control groups was found.

A five-year project (2007-2012) funded by U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is currently under way, which will develop, test, and evaluate a program to reduce intimate partner violence among low-income women enrolled in the Nurse Family Partnership during pregnancy and in the first two years postpartum. The Nurse Family Partnership is a nurse home visitation program of demonstrated effectiveness in reducing child maltreatment. The primary aims are to develop a model for an in-home intimate partner violence prevention program for enrolled mothers at risk of such violence, to test the feasibility and acceptability of the program, and in a randomized controlled study to compare the effectiveness of the approach to that of the Nurse Family Partnership alone.

An evaluation of the Hawaii Healthy Start Program—an early childhood home visitation program—found that when compared with a control group, the participation of mothers was associated with reduced perpetration and experiencing of intimate partner violence. The effect persisted for the first three years of a child’s life, with small decreases in both the perpetration and experiencing of maternal intimate partner violence at follow-up when the child was seven and nine years old (Bair-Merritt et al., 2010). Evidence for the effectiveness of such programs can currently thus be considered to be unclear.

U.S. Air Force Multi-Component Program to Prevent Suicide

This program was primarily aimed at reducing the rate of suicide among U.S. Air Force (USAF) personnel but was also shown to reduce “family violence,” which included both intimate partner violence and child maltreatment. The program was based upon:

• the full involvement of the USAF leadership to ensure the program had the support of the entire service;
• incorporation of suicide prevention into professional military education;
• community education and training of military personnel to identify risk factors, provide appropriate intervention, and refer individuals who were potentially at risk of suicide; and
• the creation of a multidisciplinary team consisting of mental health providers, medical providers, and chaplains who could respond to traumatic events at the community level, including suicides.

The program reduced the rate of suicide by 33 percent and the rates of severe and moderate family violence by 54 percent and 30 percent, respectively. Because of the combination of intimate partner violence and child maltreatment in the same outcome measure, it is not possible to determine the effect of the program on intimate partner violence specifically (Knox et al., 2003); hence this program is considered to have potential, rather than being supported by emerging evidence.

All Life Stages

Reduce access to and harmful use of alcohol.

Harmful use of alcohol is associated with the perpetration of intimate partner and sexual violence (WHO and LSHTM, 2010c). It can therefore be hypothesized that reducing both access to alcohol and its harmful use will lead to reductions in intimate partner and sexual violence. However, the relationship between harmful use of alcohol and violence is complex—not everyone who drinks is at equally increased risk of committing violence, and intimate partner and sexual violence can occur at high rates in cultures where alcohol use is taboo. Furthermore, there is disagreement among experts on whether or not alcohol can be considered to be a “cause” of intimate partner and sexual violence or whether it is better viewed as a moderating or contributory factor. It seems clear, however, that individual and societal beliefs that alcohol causes aggression can lead to violent behavior being expected when individuals are under the influence of alcohol and to alcohol being used to prepare for and excuse such violence. To date, research focusing on the prevention of alcohol-related intimate partner and sexual violence is scarce. There is, however, some emerging evidence suggesting that the following strategies aimed at reducing alcohol consumption may be effective in preventing intimate partner violence:

• Reducing alcohol availability: In Australia, a community intervention that included restricting the hours of sale of alcohol in one town reduced the number of domestic violence victims presenting to hospital (Douglas, 1998). In Greenland, a coupon-based alcohol rationing system implemented in the 1980s that entitled adults to alcohol equivalent to 72 beers per month saw a subsequent 58 percent reduction in the number of police call outs for domestic

quarrels (Finnish Foundation for Alcohol Studies and World Health Organization, 2003).

• Regulating alcohol prices: Increasing the price of alcohol is an effective means of reducing alcohol-related violence in general (Chaloupka et al., 2002). Although research evaluating the effectiveness of this approach in reducing intimate partner violence specifically is scarce, one study using economic modeling estimated that in the United States a 1 percent increase in the price of alcohol may decrease the probability of intimate partner violence toward women by about 5 percent (Markowitz, 2000).
• Treatment for alcohol-use disorders: In the United States, treatment for alcohol dependence among males significantly decreased husband-to-wife and wife-to-husband intimate partner violence 6 and 12 months later, suggesting that such treatment may also be an effective primary prevention measure (Stuart et al., 2003).

Intimate partner and sexual violence may also be reduced through primary prevention programs to reduce the more general harms caused by alcohol (Anderson et al., 2009). Approaches for which effectiveness is well supported by evidence include:

• Making alcohol less available: This can be achieved by introducing minimum purchase-age policies and reducing the density of alcohol retail outlets and the hours or days alcohol can be sold. Such an approach has been shown to lead to fewer alcohol-related problems, including homicide and assaults (Duailibi et al., 2007).
• Banning of alcohol advertising: Alcohol is marketed through increasingly sophisticated advertising in mainstream media; through the linking of alcohol brands to sports and cultural activities; through sponsorships and product placements; and through direct marketing via the Internet, podcasting, and mobile telephones. The strongest evidence for the link between alcohol advertising and consumption comes from longitudinal studies on the effects of various forms of alcohol marketing—including exposure to alcohol advertising in traditional media and promotion in the form of movie content and alcohol-branded merchandise—on the initiation of youth drinking and on riskier patterns of youth drinking (Anderson et al., 2009). However, evidence showing that such measures reduce intimate partner and sexual violence is currently lacking.
• Individually directed interventions to drinkers already at risk: These include screening and brief interventions. Alcohol screening and brief interventions in primary health care settings have

proven effective in reducing levels and intensity of consumption in LMICs and HICs (Finnish Foundation for Alcohol Studies and World Health Organization, 2003). However, their direct effect on alcohol-related intimate partner violence has not been measured. Evidence indicates that drinkers may reduce their consumption by as much as 20 percent following a brief intervention and that heavy drinkers who receive such an intervention are twice as likely to reduce their alcohol consumption as heavy drinkers who receive no intervention. Brief interventions include the opportune provision of advice and information in health or criminal justice settings (typically during a 5- to 10-minute period) but can also extend to several sessions of motivational interviewing or counseling (FPH, 2008; Sheehan, 2008).

School-based education on alcohol does not appear to reduce harm, but public-information and education programs (while again apparently ineffective at reducing alcohol-related harm) can increase the attention given to alcohol on public and political agendas (Anderson et al., 2009).

As with most primary prevention programs to prevent intimate partner and sexual violence, programs to reduce access to and harmful use of alcohol have mainly been conducted and evaluated in HICs, and little is known of their suitability or effectiveness outside such countries. For many LMICs, programs such as efforts to strengthen and expand the licensing of outlets could be of great value in reducing alcohol-related intimate partner and sexual violence. In many developing societies, a large proportion of alcohol production and sales currently takes place in unregulated informal markets. One study in São Paolo, Brazil, found that just 35 percent of alcohol outlets surveyed had a license of some form, and that alcohol vendors (whether licensed or not) faced few apparent restrictions on trading (Laranjeira and Hinkly, 2002). Furthermore, in many LMICs there are far fewer specialist health facilities, reducing the opportunities for alcohol treatment or screening. In such settings it may instead be beneficial to develop the role of primary health care workers or general practitioners in identifying and alleviating the harmful use of alcohol.

Although evidence for the effectiveness of measures to reduce access to and harmful use of alcohol is only beginning to emerge and high-quality studies showing their impact on intimate partner and sexual violence are still largely lacking, alcohol-related programs for the prevention of intimate partner violence and sexual violence appear promising. The strong association between alcohol and intimate partner and sexual violence suggests that primary prevention interventions to reduce the harm caused by alcohol could potentially be effective. Approaches to preventing alcohol-related intimate partner and sexual violence should also address the social acceptability of

excessive drinking as a mitigating factor in violence, while altering normative beliefs about masculinity and heavy drinking. There remains a pressing need for additional research to evaluate the effectiveness of such approaches in reducing intimate partner and sexual violence, especially in LMICs.

Change Social and Cultural Norms Related to Gender That Support Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence

Cultural and social gender norms are the rules or “expectations of behavior” that regulate the roles and relationships of men and women within a specific cultural or social group. Often unspoken, these norms define what is considered appropriate behavior, govern what is and is not acceptable, and shape the interactions between men and women. Individuals are discouraged from violating these norms through the threat of social disapproval or punishment or because of feelings of guilt and shame in contravening internalized norms of conduct. Often traditional social and cultural gender norms make women vulnerable to violence from intimate partners, place women and girls at increased risk of sexual violence, and condone or support the acceptability of violence ( Box 6-3 ).

Efforts to change social norms that support intimate partner and sexual violence are therefore a key element in the primary prevention of these

BOX 6-3 Examples of Social and Cultural Norms That Support Violence Against Women

• A man has a right to assert power over a woman and is considered socially superior. Examples: India (Mitra and Singh, 2007), Nigeria (Ilika, 2005), and Ghana (Amoakohene, 2004).
• A man has a right to physically discipline a woman for “incorrect” behavior. Examples: India (Go et al., 2003), Nigeria (Adegoke and Oladeji, 2008), and China (Liu and Chan, 1999).
• Physical violence is an acceptable way to resolve conflict in a relationship. Example: United States (Champion and Durant, 2001).
• Intimate partner violence is a “taboo” subject. Example: South Africa (Fox et al., 2007).
• Divorce is shameful. Example: Pakistan (Hussain and Khan, 2008).
• Sex is a man’s right in marriage. Example: Pakistan (Hussain and Khan, 2008).
• Sexual activity (including rape) is a marker of masculinity. Example: South Africa (Petersen et al., 2005).
• Girls are responsible for controlling a man’s sexual urges. Example: South Africa (Ilika, 2005; Petersen et al., 2005).

forms of violence. Approaches have been adopted, although rarely evaluated, throughout the world to break the silence that often surrounds intimate partner and sexual violence, to try to inform and influence social attitudes and social norms on the acceptability of violence, and to build political will to address the problem. The use of research findings for advocacy has been shown to be promising in bringing attention to, and raising awareness of, the problem and in contributing to the shaping of reforms and policies (Ellsberg et al., 1997). Currently the three main approaches for changing social and cultural norms that support intimate partner and sexual violence are social norms theory (i.e., correcting misperceptions that the use of such violence is a highly prevalent normative behavior among peers), media awareness campaigns, and working with men and boys. Often several approaches are used in one program.

Social norms theory assumes that people have mistaken perceptions of other people’s attitudes and behaviors. The prevalence of risk behaviors (such as heavy alcohol use or tolerance of violent behavior) is usually overestimated, while protective behaviors are normally underestimated. This affects individual behavior in two ways: (1) by increasing and justifying risk behaviors, and (2) by increasing the likelihood of an individual remaining silent about any discomfort caused by risky behaviors (thereby reinforcing social tolerance). The social norms approach seeks to rectify these misperceptions by generating a more realistic understanding of actual behavioral norms, thereby reducing risky behavior.

In the United States, the social norms approach has been applied to the problem of sexual violence among college students. Among such students, men appeared to underestimate both the importance most men and women place on sexual consent and the willingness of most men to intervene against sexual assault (Fabiano et al., 2003). Although the evidence is limited, some positive results have been reported. In one university in the United States, the A Man Respects a Woman project aimed to reduce the sexual assault of women, increase accurate perceptions of non-coercive sexual behavior norms, and reduce self-reported coercive behaviors by men. The project used a social norms marketing campaign targeting men, a theater presentation addressing socialization issues, and male peer-to-peer education. Evaluation of the campaign two years after its implementation found that men had more accurate perceptions of other men’s behavior and improved attitudes and beliefs regarding sexual abuse. For example, a decreased percentage of men believed that the average male student has sex when his partner is intoxicated; will not stop sexual activity when asked to if he is already sexually aroused; and, when wanting to touch someone sexually, tries and sees how they react. However, the percentage of men indicating that they have sex when their partner is intoxicated increased (Bruce, 2002).

Media awareness campaigns are a common approach to the primary prevention of intimate partner and sexual violence. Campaign goals might include raising public awareness (for example, about the extent of the problem, about intimate partner violence, and sexual violence as violations of women’s human rights and about men’s role in ending violence against women); providing accurate information; dispelling myths and stereotypes about intimate partner violence and sexual violence; and changing public opinion. Such campaigns have the potential to reach large numbers of people. An example of a media-awareness campaign is Soul City in South Africa. This multimedia health promotion and change project examines a variety of health and development issues, imparts information and aims to change social norms, attitudes, and practice. It is directed at individuals, communities, and the socio-political environment. One of its components aims to change the attitudes and norms that support intimate partner and sexual violence. This multi-level intervention was launched over six months and consisted of a series of television and radio broadcasts, print materials, and a helpline. In partnership with a national coalition on preventing intimate partner violence, an advocacy campaign was also directed at the national government with the aim of achieving implementation of the Domestic Violence Act of 1998. The strategy aimed for impact at multiple levels from individual knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and behavior to community dialogue, shifting social norms, and the creating of an enabling legal and social environment for change. An independent evaluation of the program included national surveys before and after the intervention, focus groups, and in-depth interviews with target audience members and stakeholders at various levels. It found that the program had facilitated implementation of the Domestic Violence Act of 1998, had positively impacted on problematic social norms and beliefs (such as that intimate partner violence is a private matter), and had improved levels of knowledge of where to seek help. Attempts were also made to measure its impact on violent behavior, but there were insufficient data to determine this accurately (Usdin et al., 2005).

As the Soul City project indicates, evidence is emerging that media campaigns combined with other educational opportunities can change knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs related to intimate partner and sexual violence. Although good campaigns can increase knowledge and awareness, influence perceptions and attitudes, and foster political will for action, evidence of their effectiveness in changing behavior remains insufficient (Whitaker et al., 2007a).

Working with men and boys —There has been an increasing tendency to focus efforts to change social and cultural norms on adolescent males or younger boys using universal or targeted programs that are delivered

through a variety of mechanisms, including school-based initiatives, community mobilization, and public awareness campaigns.

Objectives typically include increasing an individual’s knowledge, changing attitudes toward gender norms and violence, and changing social norms around masculinity, power, gender, and violence. Some programs also aim to develop the capacity and confidence of boys and young men to speak up and intervene against violence, with the goal of changing the social climate in which it occurs (Katz, 2006). Failure to engage men and boys in prevention may result in the type of negative effects seen in some settings where cultural shifts and other changes have taken place in the absence of efforts to engage them ( Box 6-4 ).

BOX 6-4 Nicaraguan Backlash Shows the Need to Engage Men as Well

Since 2000, Nicaragua has pioneered a number of initiatives to protect women against domestic violence. These have included:

• a network of police stations for women (Comisaria de la Mujer) where women who have been abused can receive psychological, social, and legal support;
• a ministry for family affairs (Mi Familia), which among other responsibilities ensures that shelter is available to women and children who suffer domestic violence; and
• reform of the national reproductive health program to address gender and sexual abuse.

During the same period, civil society groups have campaigned to promote the rights of women and to empower them to oppose domestic abuse. Because of these efforts, the reported frequency of intimate partner violence and sexual violence against women has increased dramatically. The more advocacy and awareness, the more likely women will report violence against them. For example, the number of reported cases of sexual violence received by the Comisaria de la Mujer rose from 4,174 (January to June 2003) to 8,376 (January to June 2004).

Researchers at the Universidad Centro Americana and the Institute for Gender Studies say a number of factors explain this increase—growing awareness among women that the cultural traditions that foster violence are no longer acceptable under international law and the Nicaraguan Domestic Violence Law, and better reporting of cases as women are encouraged to speak out. However, as Nicaraguan women have more actively opposed male hegemony, domestic conflicts have also increased and more men have resorted to intimate partner violence. These findings suggest that responses to intimate partner violence must not focus exclusively on women, but must also target men to prevent this type of backlash (Schopper et al., 2006).

A review of programs that work with men and boys to prevent violence against women (Barker et al., 2007) included 13 primary prevention programs, 5 of which were implemented in LMICs. Four of these programs were judged by the reviewers to be “effective,” six “promising,” and three “unclear.” For example, one community outreach and mobilization campaign in Nicaragua judged to be effective was called Violence Against Women: A Disaster We Can Prevent as Men (Solórzano et al., 2000). This was aimed at men aged 20-39 years who were affected by Hurricane Mitch. The campaign’s main messages addressed men’s ability and responsibility to help prevent or reduce violence against their partners. Constructing masculinity without intimate partner violence was a group-education program aimed at men in periurban districts of Managua, Nicaragua (Welsh, 1997). The effect of the program was, however, unclear because of the weakness of the outcome evaluation.

Indeed, the methodological quality of most of the outcome evaluations was very low, and outcome measures consisted mainly of attitude changes and self-reported rates of gender-based violence, often using only small sample sizes. One campaign in New South Wales in Australia—Violence Against Women: It’s Against All the Rules—targeted 21- to 29-year-old men and aimed to influence their attitudes. Sports celebrities delivered the message that violence toward women is unacceptable and that a masculine man is not a violent man. It also sought to enhance the community’s capacity to challenge and address violence against women. A post-campaign survey indicated that the campaign achieved some positive results: 83 percent of the respondents reported that the message of the campaign was that violence against women is “not on,” and 59 percent of respondents could recall the campaign slogan. However, 91 percent of the target group reported that the issue was not one they would talk about with their peers, irrespective of the campaign.

Similarly, in the United States Men Can Stop Rape runs a public education campaign for men and boys with the message: “My strength is not for hurting.” This campaign runs in conjunction with Men of Strength (MOST) clubs—a primary prevention program that provides high-school-age young men with a structured and supportive space to learn about healthy masculinity and the redefining of male strength.

Although programs to alter cultural and social norms are among the most visible and ubiquitous of all strategies for preventing intimate partner and sexual violence, they remain one of the least evaluated. Even where evaluations have been undertaken, these have typically measured changes in attitudes and beliefs rather than in the occurrence of the violent behaviors themselves, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions on their effectiveness in actually preventing intimate partner and sexual violence. Nonetheless, some evidence is emerging to support the use of the three types of programs reviewed above in changing the social and cultural gender norms

that support intimate partner and sexual violence. However, these must now be taken to scale and more rigorously evaluated.

KEY MESSAGES

• To achieve change at the population level it is important to target societal-level factors in the primary prevention of intimate partner and sexual violence. Approaches include the enactment of legislation and the development of supporting policies that protect women, addressing discrimination against women, and helping to move the culture away from violence—thereby acting as a foundation for further prevention work.
• Currently, there are no strategies of demonstrated effectiveness for preventing sexual violence outside intimate partner or dating relationships. Only one strategy has been demonstrated to be effective in preventing intimate partner violence, namely school-based programs for adolescents to prevent violence within dating relationships—and this still needs to be assessed for use in resource-poor settings.
• Although it is too early to consider them proven, evidence is emerging of the effectiveness of several other strategies for the prevention of intimate partner and sexual violence, particularly the use of microfinance with gender equality training and of programs that promote communication and relationship skills within communities.
• Developing the evidence base for programs for the primary prevention of intimate partner and sexual violence is still very much in the early stages. But there is every reason to believe that rigorous outcome evaluations of existing programs and the development of new programs based on sound theory and known risk factors will lead to a rapid expansion in coming years.

INTERNATIONAL MEN AND GENDER EQUALITY SURVEY 2

Gary barker, juan manuel contreras, brian heilman, ajay singh, ravi verma, and marcos nascimento.

The International Men and Gender Equality Survey (IMAGES) is a comprehensive household questionnaire on men’s attitudes and practices—as well as women’s opinions and reports of men’s practices—on a wide

2 Adapted from: Barker, G., J. M. Contreras, B. Heilman, A. K. Singh, R. K. Verma, and M. Nascimento. 2011. Evolving men: Initial results from the International Men and Gender Equality Survey (IMAGES). Washington, DC: International Center for Research on Women.

variety of topics related to gender equality. From 2009 to 2010, household surveys were administered to more than 8,000 men and 3,500 women ages 18 to 59 in Brazil, Chile, Croatia, India, Mexico, and Rwanda. Topics in the questionnaire included gender-based violence, health and health-related practices, household division of labor, men’s participation in care-giving and as fathers, men’s and women’s attitudes about gender and gender-related policies, transactional sex, men’s reports of criminal behavior, and quality of life. This report focuses on the initial, comparative analysis of results from the men’s questionnaires across the six countries, with women’s reports on key variables.

Methodology

IMAGES followed standard procedures for carrying out representative household surveys in each participating city, with the exception of Rwanda, where the survey is a nationally representative household sample. The survey was carried out in one or more urban settings in each country (and rural and urban areas in Rwanda) with men and women ages 18 to 59, guided by the following parameters:

• The men’s questionnaire has approximately 250 items and took from 45 minutes to an hour to administer; the questionnaire for women is slightly shorter and took from 35 minutes to an hour to administer. The survey instruments were pretested in the participating countries, and the study protocol was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) of the International Center for Research on Women and by in-country IRBs, when such existed.
• The survey instrument was designed to be relevant for adult men and women in stable, co-habitating relationships as well as those not in a stable relationship; women and men who define themselves as heterosexual as well as men and women of different sexual orientations and practices; and women and men who have children in the household (biological or otherwise) and those who do not.
• Double-back translation of the questionnaire was carried out to ensure comparability and consistency of questions across settings. Some country-specific questions were included; some countries excluded items because of local political or cultural considerations.
• In Brazil, Chile, Mexico, and Rwanda the questionnaire was an interviewer-administered paper questionnaire. In India the questionnaire was carried out using hand-held computers, with a mixture of self-administered questions and interviewer-asked questions. In Croatia the questionnaire was self-administered (using a paper

questionnaire). Standard procedures were followed for ensuring anonymity and confidentiality.

• All research sites followed standard World Health Organization (WHO) practices for carrying out research on intimate partner violence in terms of offering referrals and information for services and special training of interviewers. Following these guidelines, men and women were not interviewed from the same household in any of the research sites.
• More sensitive questions were asked later in the questionnaire, and some key variables were included in multiple questions (to compare and thus be more informed in affirming validity). The questionnaire was pretested in all the settings prior to application.
• In all settings, male interviewers interviewed male respondents, and female interviewers interviewed female respondents, with the exception of Mexico, where some interviews with men were carried out by female interviewers (but only women interviewed women).
• Survey locations were chosen to represent different contexts in each country to achieve a mixture of major urban areas and a secondary city or cities. Within a survey location, neighborhoods or blocks were chosen based on population distributions from the most recent census data. Rural areas were included only in Rwanda and Croatia. Stratified random sampling and probability proportion to size sampling methods were used within each neighborhood or community to ensure the inclusion of adequate sample sizes by age and residence (and also socioeconomic status in the case of Chile).
• Although every participating country’s questionnaire included questions on all the themes that make up IMAGES, the questionnaire is not identical in all countries; thus data are not available from every country for every question. The questionnaire in Rwanda was the most abbreviated of the six study countries because of the much larger sample size—and thus the sheer number of interviews—required to make the study nationally representative. In those cases where Rwandan data does not appear in a table or figure in this document, that particular question was not included in the Rwandan questionnaire.

The questionnaire covers key topics in gender equality, including intimate relationships, family dynamics, and key health and social vulnerabilities for men. Based on previous research that found associations between early childhood exposure to violence and different gendered practices related to childrearing, items on childhood antecedents to particular men’s practices were included. Specific topics in the questionnaire include:

• Employment. Employment experience; unemployment and underemployment; stress and reactions associated with unemployment; reaction by spouse/partner when unemployed; income differentials between men and women; perceived gender dynamics in the workplace; work–life balance; and job satisfaction.
• Education. Educational attainment; perceived gender norms and patterns in school.
• Childhood experiences. Victimization by violence as children; witnessing of gender-based violence; gender-related attitudes perceived in family of origin; changes perceived from previous generation to the present; gender balance in work/child care in family of origin; gender patterns of childhood friendships.
• Relations at home (in current household). Marital/cohabitation status; division/participation in household chores; perceived satisfaction in family life; household decision making; time use in specific domestic chores and family care, including child care.
• Parenting and men’s relationships with their children (and with non-related children who may live in the household). Number of children; living situation of each child; time/money spent in care of each child; use of paternity/maternity leave; perceptions/attitudes toward existing parental leave in country; and child-care arrangements.
• Attitudes toward women and masculinity. Attitudes toward gender equality (using the Gender-Equitable Men [GEM] Scale and other measures); attitudes toward various gender-equality policies that may have been implemented in each country.
• Health and quality of life. Lifestyle questions (substance use, exercise, etc.); use of health services; sexual and reproductive behavior (contraceptive use, condom use); sexually transmitted infections, including HIV (past history, HIV testing); satisfaction with sexual relations; mental health issues (depression, suicide ideation); social support; use of/victimization by violence in other contexts; morbidity.
• Partner relations and spousal relations. Current relationship status/satisfaction; use of services/help-seeking in times of violence or relationship stress; relationship history.
• Relationship, gender-based violence, and transactional sex. Use of violence (physical, sexual, psychological) against partner (using WHO protocol); victimization of violence by partner (using WHO protocol); men’s use of sexual violence against non-partners; men’s self-reported purchasing of sex or paying for sex, including with underage individuals.
• Sexual behavior. Sexual experience; sexual orientation; behaviors related to sexual and reproductive health, HIV/AIDS; use of health services related to sexual and reproductive health.

Analytical Strategy

The report focuses on men’s attitudes and practices related to relationship dynamics, parenting and caregiving, health-related practices and vulnerabilities, violence (intimate partner violence and other forms), transactional sex, and attitudes toward existing gender equality policies. Women’s reports of men’s practices are included for some key variables.

The selection of questions in this initial data analysis was informed by previous research confirming the associations or impact of early childhood experiences, individually held gender-related attitudes, educational attainment, age (as a proxy of generational differences as well as developmental stage), social class (or income), and employment status and economic stress on women’s and men’s attitudes and practices in terms of their intimate relationships, their sexual practices, their use of violence, their domestic practices, and their health-seeking behaviors. Men’s knowledge of and attitudes toward key policy issues related to gender equality are also included. The report focuses on descriptive statistics and bi-variate analyses of the associations between these practices and educational levels, economic or work-related stress, gender-related attitudes, and age. In all cases where statistically significant differences are reported, these are at the p < .05 level as assessed using the Pearson’s chi-square test. As noted earlier, we also have an interest in understanding generational changes, or changes over time, in terms of men’s practices. IMAGES is not a longitudinal study; nonetheless, by comparing responses stratified by age groups we can make some inferences about generational change.

Key Findings

Work-related stress.

Work-related stress is commonplace in all survey sites. Between 34 percent and 88 percent of men in the survey sites reported feeling stress or depression because of not having enough income or enough work. Men who experienced work-related stress were more likely to report depression, suicide ideation, previous arrests, and use of violence against intimate partners.

Gender Attitudes

Men showed tremendous variation in their gender-related attitudes, with India and Rwanda showing the most inequitable attitudes. As a measure of men’s and women’s gender-related attitudes, IMAGES applied the GEM Scale. Rwandan and Indian men consistently supported the least

equitable norms among the settings studied. For example, for the statement “Changing diapers, giving kids a bath and feeding kids are the mother’s responsibility,” only 10 percent of men in Brazil agreed, whereas 61 percent in Rwanda and more than 80 percent in India agreed with the statement. Men with higher educational attainment and married men had more equitable attitudes; unmarried men had the least equitable attitudes. Homophobic attitudes were common, although they varied tremendously by context. Men who said they would be ashamed to have a gay son ranged from 43 percent of men in Brazil to a high of 92 percent in India. A slightly lower, but still high proportion of men said that being around homosexual men makes them uncomfortable, ranging from a low of 21 percent of men in Brazil to a high of 89 percent in India. Younger men and men with higher levels of education were generally less homophobic.

Relationship Dynamics and Domestic Duties

Younger men, men with more education, and men who saw their fathers do domestic work are more likely to carry out domestic duties. Nearly half of men in all the sites said they play an equal or greater role in one or more household duties—with the exception of India, where only 16 percent of men reported that they played an equal or greater role in household duties. These household or domestic duties included washing clothes, repairing the house, buying food, cleaning the house, cleaning the bathroom or toilet, preparing food, and paying the bills. The tasks that men said they play an equal or greater role in are those traditionally associated with men—namely repairing the house, paying bills, and buying groceries. Men reported higher levels of sexual and relationship satisfaction than women. Women who said their partners do more domestic work are more sexually satisfied. Men reported relatively high rates of sexual satisfaction with their current stable partners, ranging from 77 percent in Croatia to 98 percent in India. In all the countries except India, men who reported more gender-equitable attitudes were more likely to report being sexually satisfied with their current female partner. In India, Brazil, and Croatia, women who reported that their male partner plays an equal or greater role in one or more domestic duties also reported higher levels of overall relationship and sexual satisfaction.

Parenting and Involvement in Childbirth

The majority of men were neither in the delivery room nor in the hospital for the birth of their last child. In Chile, however, a dramatic generational shift is under way in men’s presence at childbirth. Younger Chilean men reported much greater rates of presence in the delivery room

for the birth of their last child than older men. This shift is largely due to a national policy, aimed at “humanizing” the birth process, which encourages women to have a male partner or other person of their choice present during birth at public maternity wards. Men are taking few days of paid or unpaid paternity leave. Among men who took leave, the average duration ranged from 3.36 to 11.49 days of paid leave and from 3.8 to 10 days of unpaid leave. Younger men and men with more education were more likely to take leave. Close to half of men with children said they are involved in some daily care-giving. Unemployed men are dramatically more likely to participate in the care of children than employed men. For men with children under age four, play is the most common daily activity in which they participate (as affirmed by women and men).

Health Practices and Vulnerabilities

Men’s rates of regular abuse of alcohol—defined as having five or more drinks in one night on a once monthly or greater basis—vary from 23 percent in India to 69 percent in Brazil and are significantly higher than women’s reported alcohol abuse in all survey sites. In most sites, younger men and men with more inequitable gender attitudes are more likely to regularly abuse alcohol. High proportions of women who reported having sought an abortion affirmed that a male partner was involved in the decision to seek an abortion (ranging from 39 percent to 92 percent). Men reported high self-esteem, with the exceptions of Croatia and India; at the same time, men showed relatively high levels of depression and suicide ideation. The rates of experiencing depression at least once in the past month ranged from 9 percent in Brazil to a high of 33 percent in Croatia. The percentages of male respondents who reported having suicidal thoughts “sometimes or often” in the past month ranged from 1 percent in Brazil and Mexico to 5 percent in Croatia.

Violence and Criminal Practices

Men reported lifetime rates of physical intimate partner violence ranging from 25 percent to 40 percent, with women reporting slightly higher rates. Factors associated with men’s use of violence were rigid gender attitudes, work stress, experiences of violence in childhood, and alcohol use. Men’s reports of perpetration of sexual violence against women and girls ranged from 6 percent to 29 percent; in India and Mexico the majority of sexual violence took place against a current or former partner. Relatively high percentages of men reported ever having participated in criminal or delinquent acts; between 6 percent and 29 percent of men reported ever having been arrested. In terms of factors associated with

men’s participation in criminal activity, men’s socioeconomic situation was the most significant. Men who owned firearms or carried out violence or criminal behavior were also more likely to report having used intimate partner violence.

Transactional Sex

Between 16 and 56 percent of men surveyed said they have paid for sex at least once. Men with lower educational attainment and less gender-equitable attitudes and men who reported less sexual satisfaction with their current partner were more likely to have paid for sex.

Knowledge and Attitudes About Policies and Laws Related to Gender Equality

Men in all the countries, with the exception of India, were generally supportive of gender equality, with 87 percent to 90 percent agreeing that “Men do not lose out when women’s rights are promoted.” Even when asked about specific policies—quotas for women in executive positions, in university enrollment, or in government—men’s support for such policies was reasonably high, with 40 percent to 74 percent of men supporting such quotas. Among themes related to gender equality, men reported the highest exposure to campaigns about gender-based violence. At the same time, across the sites, men showed negative attitudes toward laws related to gender-based violence.

Overall, IMAGES results affirm that gender equality should be promoted as a gain for women and men. Change seems to be happening as younger men and men with higher levels of education show more gender-equitable attitudes and practices. Men who reported more gender-equitable attitudes are more likely to be happy, to talk to their partners, and to have better sex lives. Women who reported that their partners participate in daily care work report higher levels of relationship and sexual satisfaction. Findings suggest that most men in most of the survey sites accept gender equality in the abstract even if they are not yet living it in their daily practices.

THE SCIENCE OF PREVENTION/ INTERRUPTING THE CYCLE OF VIOLENCE

Claire crooks, ph.d. centre for addiction and mental health, centre for prevention science and university of western ontario.

This summary describes what we know and, perhaps more importantly, what we don’t know about intervening in the cycle of violence. It encompasses both direct child abuse and exposure to domestic violence. First, the term cycle of violence is clarified, as it is a term that has been adopted into the everyday lexicon without much clarity of concept. Next is a review of some of the key findings from comprehensive review papers summarizing child abuse prevention. Finally, five gaps are identified that indicate possible future directions for research into primary prevention in this domain.

What Is the Cycle of Violence?

The cycle of violence is a phrase used to describe the observed intergenerational pattern by which many children and youth who experience direct or indirect exposure to violence later come to perpetrate violence in their own relationships. For example, children who experience child abuse and are exposed to domestic violence are at an elevated risk for perpetrating dating violence and domestic violence. Essentially, there is a continuity in their relationships such that problems with violence are evident in different ways at different times. Researchers tend to look at this cycle from different vantage points depending on their main areas of interest. Bullying researchers, for example, might note that children who bully others are more likely to perpetrate dating violence as adolescents. 3 Dating violence researchers might look at the continuity of violence between dating and adult intimate partner relationships. The investigation of direct and indirect exposure to violence has even been segmented, with child abuse researchers tending to focus on the former and domestic violence researchers tending to take on the latter. The result is a greatly segmented landscape, but one that can be pieced together to depict the cycle shown in Figure 6-1 .

3 Bullying prevention programs have been researched quite extensively and are outside the purview of this summary. Bullying/peer aggression was included in the cycle of violence figure as a reminder that children exposed to family violence have difficulties in multiple settings and often perpetrate or experience violence in relationships outside their families. A holistic approach to the impact of violence on children’s lives requires a commitment to beginning to piece together these formerly disparate areas of research.

FIGURE 6-1 Cycles of violence. SOURCE: Crooks, 2011.

It is crucial to understand that the cycle of violence is probabilistic, not determinative. That is, experiencing child abuse increases the risk for subsequently perpetrating violence in relationships, but there is significant variability in trajectories. There are a few important qualifiers for the cycle of violence idea, and they are discussed below.

Abusive Behavior Is Multiply Determined

There is no one pathway to abusive behavior. Rather, it is a final com mon pathway for a host of social, behavioral, biological, and personality risk factors. Results of a 20-year prospective study show that children’s direct and indirect exposure to violence are important risk factors for perpetration of abusive behavior (Ehrensaft et al., 2001). Furthermore, the risk for experiencing intimate partner violence as an adult (as a victim or perpetrator) increases with the number of types of abuse and additional stressors experienced as a child (Whitfield et al., 2003). At the same time, many children and youth who are abused do not become perpetrators of abuse with their own children. A review of studies suggested that approximately one-third became seriously inept, abusive, or neglectful as parents of their own children; an additional one-third remained at risk for perpetrating child abuse because of their vulnerability to social stress; while the remaining one-third were not abusive (Oliver, 1993).

Experiences of Abuse Show a Dosage Response

The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study 4 carried out jointly by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Kaiser Permanente has conclusively demonstrated a dosage effect for child maltreatment. This ongoing longitudinal study has been analyzing the relationships between multiple categories of childhood trauma and negative health and behavioral outcomes later in life. David Finkelhor’s work on poly-victimization is also instructive in identifying both the high frequency of poly-victimization and the relationship between multiple forms of abuse and poor outcomes for children (Finkelhor et al., 2009). Research with adolescents has docu mented this same relationship between multiple forms of abuse and the perpetration of violent delinquency as an adolescent, with each additional form of abuse translating to a 124 percent increase in the relative odds of engaging in violent delinquency (Crooks et al., 2007).

Co-Existing Adversities Increase the Likelihood of Negative Outcomes

Abuse affects different children differently. The ACE Study has documented the additive detrimental effects of experiences such as exposure to woman abuse, a parent with substance abuse or mental health problems, and incarceration of a parent. Low socioeconomic status can further compound difficulties for children who are experiencing child abuse. Conversely, access to protective factors (including at least one stable, nonviolent caregiver) can mitigate these impacts (Herrenkohl et al., 2008).

To summarize what we know about childhood experiences of abuse and exposure to domestic violence as a risk factor for perpetrating violence as an adolescent or adult, it is clear that childhood exposure to violence is a strong risk factor. However, there is still considerable variability among individual outcomes, and additional risk or protective factors can either exacerbate or mitigate the risk conferred by child abuse. Cumulative experiences of child abuse tend to lead to more negative outcomes, both in terms of perpetrating violence and a whole host of other negative social and physical health outcomes. The cycle of violence depicts the what of intergenerational transmission, but it does not explain the how or why. It is important to understand the cycle of violence in terms of how it works, because understanding the mechanisms underlying the intergenerational transmission of violence provides an important basis for understanding intervention opportunities.

4 Results of the study are available at http://www.cdc.gov/ace/index.htm .

How Does the Cycle of Violence Work?

At a superficial level, the intergenerational transmission of violence seems counterintuitive—if someone knows how devastating it is to be abused as a child, how can he or she turn around and do the same thing as a parent? The answer lies in understanding the impact of child abuse on a developing child and understanding how experiences of child direct and indirect exposure to violence change how an individual sees the world and others around him or her. This understanding also explains why child exposure to violence is not something that a person can just “get over.” Three particularly useful frameworks and theories for explaining the intergenerational cycle of violence are attachment, social learning theory, and trauma.

The Role of Attachment

Attachment refers to the quality of the relationship that develops between an infant and his or her primary caregiver(s) (Bowlby, 1980, 1990). Secure attachment emerges within the context of responsive caregiving. The extent to which an infant is fed when she is hungry, changed when she is wet and uncomfortable, and soothed when she is upset or afraid provides a basis for secure attachment. This first relationship becomes a template for future relationships and organizes the way an infant comes to see the world: Is it a safe and predictable place or a scary and bizarrely unpredictable one? Decades of research demonstrate that when attachment develops in a disorganized manner, an individual is at risk for ongoing difficulties in relationships with others. Child abuse and attachment are connected in a number of ways, including the development of attachment, the impacts of abuse, and the later perpetration of abuse (Bacon and Richardson, 2001). Experiences of direct and indirect child exposure to violence undermine the potential for secure attachment and provide an early experience of relationships as dangerous and unpredictable.

Although attachment is most often discussed in the context of parent–infant relationships, it continues to play an important role throughout a youth’s development. Recent longitudinal research demonstrated that youth dually exposed to direct and indirect violence (i.e., child abuse and exposure to domestic violence) were less attached to their parents in adolescence than those who experienced only direct or only indirect exposure (Sousa et al., 2011). Furthermore, attachment to parents during adolescence played an important protective role against antisocial behavior, independent of abuse status.

Social Learning Theory

Social learning theory is a well-established paradigm that highlights the importance of reinforcement for promoting certain behavioral responses and inhibiting others (Bandura, 1977, 1986). Furthermore, our experi ences with behavior and reinforcement come to shape our attitudes and attributions. One of the key tenets of social learning theory is that humans learn very well from modeling, that is, from what they see others do. This modeling is not indiscriminate. Children do not copy everything around them, but they copy what they see that works. When they are exposed directly and indirectly to violence, they learn harsh but effective lessons about power and may come to see the world as made up of victims and victimizers (Dodge et al., 1994). Given such a dichotomy, they may begin to model after the victimizer to avoid further abuse. These children develop a hostile attribution bias , which is a cognitive framework for expecting the worse, even in threat-neutral situations (Fontaine, 2010). As a result, these children seem hostile and aggressive to their peers, and may be rejected by their more pro-social peers (Dodge et al., 1990). There is some evidence that exposure to family violence is a bigger contributor to later pro-violence attitudes (such as comfort with aggression, aggressive responses to shame, excitement about guns, and violence as means of preserving power) than violence experienced in the school or community (Slovak et al., 2007). In addition to underscoring the importance of what children learn, social learning theory would also draw attention to what these children do not learn, namely, egalitarian relationships, non-violent approaches to conflict resolution, and emotional regulation skills.

A third perspective that has been explored for understanding the cycle of violence is the trauma perspective. Based on his work with adolescent boys who have perpetrated lethal violence, James Garbarino has identified a process which he refers to as “hibernation of the soul” (Garbarino, 1999). Essentially, under conditions of severe, early, and chronic violence, these children may come to suppress their more humane aspects as a survival mechanism. The detachment from emotion and compassion that allows a person to survive chronic abuse is the same detachment that facilitates perpetration of severe violence without apparent remorse. Even in less extreme cases of trauma, the dysregulation of anger and arousal that develop create potent risk factors for the intergenerational transmission of violence. A significant literature has emerged to support these processes from a neurobiological perspective, which demonstrates that over-activation of the fight or flight response can result in a weak foundation for the development

of emotional regulation and self-soothing (van der Kolk and Greenberg, 1987).

In considering these three frameworks for understanding the cycle of violence—attachment, social learning, and trauma—it is evident that there are no quick fixes for breaking this cycle. Child abuse does not arise because of a lack of discipline; consequently, get-tough approaches with parents will not redress the risks. Similarly, it does not arise merely from a lack of parental support; as such, increasing support without targeting the underlying causes will not be very successful in preventing and reducing a child’s direct and indirect exposure.

What Programs Are Effective or Promising?

In efforts to prevent child abuse and exposure to domestic violence, there are a number of points for possible intervention. Prevention in other areas is often divided into universal (or primary), selective (or secondary), and indicated (or tertiary). However, an argument can be made that using this type of classification locates the abuse with the victim and pathologizes the experience of abuse. Macmillan and colleagues have proposed an alternative schema for identifying intervention points, presented in Figure 6-2 (Macmillan et al., 2009). With this approach it is clear that one can work to prevent abuse before it occurs, to prevent abuse from recurring, and to prevent impairment following abuse. Each of these targets is necessary in a comprehensive approach, and different strategies will be effective at different points.

FIGURE 6-2 Intervention to prevent child maltreatment and associated impairment. SOURCE: Macmillan et al., 2009.

Comprehensive reviews to identify what works to prevent child abuse or recurrence of child abuse follow one of two basic approaches. The first approach is to look across all previous summaries and reviews and amalgamate all of the existing evidence (Mikton and Butchart, 2009). This approach provides a somewhat bleak picture, because when studies are combined, results are generally mixed or disappointing. However, such an approach can be misleading because it includes studies that vary greatly in quality both in terms of the intervention and the research design. By contrast, the review by MacMillan and colleagues looks at high-quality programs that have shown good effects under reasonable research conditions but perhaps have yet to be replicated (Macmillan et al., 2009). Reviewing the existing studies in these two ways finds three approaches that can be considered effective or promising. Additional approaches may improve protective factors or reduce risk factors, but these three are the only ones that have been shown to prevent the occurrence or recurrence of abuse.

Home Visitation

Home visitation is the most effective child maltreatment prevention program to date (Macmillan et al., 2009). There is considerable variability in home-visiting interventions in terms of their models, service delivery, and home staffing. Two models, the Nurse-Family Partnership and the Early Start program, have been shown to be effective in reducing some indicators of child abuse. However, effects have not been uniform across other approaches to home visiting, and there are a few caveats for the success of home visiting. First, most of what we know is based on David Olds’ pioneering work, and efforts to replicate his work have had mixed success. Second, home visitation has proved to be more effective when carried out by nurses than by paraprofessionals. Third, it may be more effective with certain types of families (such as first-time mothers) than others (Macmillan et al., 2009). Finally, the presence of domestic violence may undermine the effectiveness of home visiting. In the Elmira Home Visiting study the intervention reduced reports of child maltreatment, but not for families with mothers reporting more than 28 incidents of domestic violence (Eckenrode et al., 2000).

Parent Training and Education

The results for parent training and education in general are mixed, but there are two programs that have evidence supporting their use. First, the Positive Parenting Program (Triple P) has shown promise in one study for preventing abuse, and replication is currently under way. The Triple P uses multiple levels of social learning–based programs to meet the needs of different families and offers five levels of intervention with increasing intensity

to match higher-needs families (Prinz et al., 2009). Mark Chaffin and colleagues’ work on Parent–Child Interaction Training has also been very promising in that it has been shown effective in lowering recurrence of physical child abuse (Chaffin et al., 2004). Parent–Child Interaction Training uses behavioral conditioning principles and provides immediate and detailed feedback for parents in their interactions with their children. It has been shown to both increase positive interactions and decrease recurrence of child abuse. Both of these programs warrant further investigation, particularly with larger samples of fathers, as most research has focused on mothers.

Educational Prevention of Abusive Head Trauma

The final effective strategy to date is education aimed at preventing abusive head injury (also known as shaken baby syndrome). Offered mainly through hospitals, this education offers normative information about babies’ crying, coping strategies for parents, and the impacts of shaking an infant. There is a one study to date that found that the introduction of this program lowered the rates of abusive head trauma (Dias et al., 2005). Additional trials are under way. This program appears to be a cost-effective way to reduce one specific type of child abuse.

Interventions Lacking Empirical Evidence

Consistent with the general move to positive psychology, there has been much interest in interventions that build on parents’ strengths. Many of these approaches use a mentoring or mutual support model of parents helping other parents in a way to normalize intervention and build informal support networks. The general benefits of mentoring and of encouraging strong social networks are widely accepted, but these approaches have not been found effective in the prevention of child exposure to direct or indirect violence (Macmillan et al., 2009). It is critical to recognize the distinction. A parenting program may increase parents’ satisfaction with parenting, improve their social connections, and even lead to more positive attitudes and skills, and yet it may not reduce direct child abuse or exposure to domestic violence. If a program is being espoused as a child abuse prevention program, then the research must look at child abuse outcomes and not rely on proxies or interpret the promotion of positive parenting attitudes and skills as synonymous with the prevention of abuse.

Preventing Child Exposure to Direct and Indirect Violence: The Big Picture

A review of the state of the science of child abuse prevention reveals a number of basic facts. First, there are some effective and promising

interventions, but even these have limited evidence compared to many other areas of social and medical science. Second, it obscures the picture to collapse evidence across types of intervention (e.g., with meta-analytic techniques) with no consideration for the quality or features of the program. Quality of implementation matters, training of implementers matters, and matching the intervention to the risk level of the families matters. Third, at this point there is little available evidence concerning programs that are effective for preventing emotional abuse. Finally, there have not been any trials on programs to reduce exposure to domestic violence. Community-based approaches to preventing domestic violence have not been well researched, and there are no studies evaluating strategies for preventing exposure when domestic violence is occurring. On a more hopeful note, there are many innovative interventions in varying degrees of development and evaluation. It takes a long time to reach the point where a randomized controlled trial or multi-site replication is feasible.

Gaps and Challenges

A review of the state of the research shows clearly that while we have an emerging idea of effective practice in some specific areas, there are still many gaps. Below are five gaps in research and practice.

Where Are the Dads?

Much research has focused exclusively on mothers or not included enough fathers for useful subgroup analysis. This lack of representation in research mirrors the child protection policies and practices, which tend to focus on mothers and view fathers as either dangerous or irrelevant. The reality is that men who have perpetrated violence often remain part of their children’s lives and require specific and intentional strategies to change attitudes and beliefs that support their abusive behavior, particularly when these men have also abused the children’s mothers (Scott and Crooks, 2004). Furthermore, there is a dearth of programs that both address the gendered nature of violence and address men’s abuse of their intimate partners and children concurrently. The Fathering After Violence initiative 5 for men who have been abusive to intimate partners and the Caring Dads program 6 for men who have been abusive to their partners and their children are exceptions to the rule.

5 See http://endabuse.org/section/programs/children_families/_breaking_cycle .

6 See http://www.caringdadsprogram.com .

Is Stopping the Violence Enough for Positive Child Outcomes?

When we look for successful outcomes in research, we often use the idea of recidivism or repeat violence as a sign of failure, but the corollary to that is that success is equated with no further violence. The reality is that, in the life of a child who has been victimized, just stopping the violence might not be good enough. There has been some discussion about restorative parenting and applying restorative justice models to the parent–child relationship, but we do not actually have a good sense yet about what that looks like or the implications for the child. Some work has been done in this area of child sexual abuse, but very little has been carried out that looks at father–child relationship restoration after domestic violence. There is a significant need to develop and evaluate protocols for deciding when it is safe to restore parent–child relationships post-violence and how this can be achieved with minimal risk to children.

Compartmentalization of Efforts

There have been some big strides in breaking down silos between types of abuse since the “Greenbook” was published as a model for collaboration between child protection and domestic violence sectors (Schecter and Edleson, 1999), but there is still too much compartmentalization within fields. Often researchers emphasize one type of abuse without looking at the complexities of poly-victimization or, what is even trickier, the co-occurrence of perpetration and victimization. For example, most research and programming for children exposed to domestic violence still does not inquire about the direct victimization experience of the children, particularly for abuse perpetrated by the victim parent. There are philosophical and practical reasons for these practices, but they hinder a fuller understanding and more effective response to children.

What Do Culturally Relevant Programs Look Like?

Virtually every paper or chapter ends with a plea for more culturally diverse and appropriate services, yet we have only scratched the surface in exploring what this really means. Is it merely resources translated into different languages? Is it trained therapists from the same ethnic or cultural background as the families? Is it program manuals that have different faces on them? It can be argued that we need to go much further than these superficial changes and that we have not done a good job of documenting or evaluating these processes of cultural adaptation. The challenge for cultural adaptation is further complicated when we look at implementing promising practices on a global scale, particularly in countries with less developed child protection or mental health systems.

What Is an Effective Specialized Response in the Highest Risk Cases?

Finally, for the most high-risk families, there is a complexity in terms of system involvement and information sharing that can only be addressed by collaboration across systems. Any comprehensive approach to preventing violence against children requires specialized responses that can be activated in the most high-risk cases. With the advent of domestic violence homicide review committees, a clearer picture of the risk factors for lethality to women and their children is emerging (Jaffe et al., 2003; Campbell, 2005; Jaffe and Juodis, 2006). In these cases, home visiting and parent education are not sufficient or appropriate for the degree of risk. In addition to developing clinical interventions for a wide range of families, we need to develop specialized collaborative protocols for the highest-risk cases.

In closing, although reviews that combine all interventions of a certain type tell a disheartening story, there are some bright spots in our search for effective interventions. Home visiting, parent education and training, and education approaches to abusive head trauma have all shown promise and a solid degree of evidence. The science is at the point where we know enough to know that there are no easy answers and no quick fixes. Different families need different types of support and intervention at different points in time, and we need to develop a comprehensive and coordinated system of care to ensure that no children fall between the cracks. It is a colossal task, but a vital one, because at the end of the day our children need to be safe from abuse and violence to develop to their full potential and grow into the type of adults who will contribute to a compassionate and productive society.

TRAUMA-INFORMED CARE: A VALUES-BASED CONTEXT FOR PSYCHOSOCIAL EMPOWERMENT

Roger d. fallot, ph.d. community connections.

We make a fundamental distinction between trauma-informed care and trauma-specific services (Harris and Fallot, 2001). Psychosocially empowering, trauma-specific interventions take as their primary goals ameliorating trauma-related difficulties and facilitating trauma recovery and healing. The Trauma Recovery and Empowerment Model, Seeking Safety, Trauma Affect Regulation: Guide for Education and Therapy (TARGET), the Boston Consortium Model, and Beyond Trauma, among others, are manualized approaches to helping women (and sometimes men as well) develop the skills necessary to cope more effectively with the impact of violence and abuse and to avoid revictimization (Harris, 1998; Najavits, 2002;

Covington, 2003; Ford and Russo, 2006; van Lier et al., 2009; Amaro, 2011). These interventions and many individual ones that focus primarily on post-traumatic stress disorder, such as exposure therapy, cognitive processing therapy, and other cognitive-behavioral approaches (e.g., Mueser et al., 2008), are an important component of trauma-informed care (Resick et al., 2008; Powers et al., 2010).

However, “cultures of trauma-informed care” refer to the programmatic, organizational, and community contexts that are necessary and valuable in supporting survivors and the staff who serve them. Any setting can be trauma-informed when it takes fully into account what we know about trauma, its impact, and the diverse, individualized paths to trauma recovery. In this way, not only behavioral health care settings but also primary care institutions, schools, and even correctional facilities can be trauma-informed. When an organizational culture becomes trauma-informed, it becomes more welcoming and hospitable for trauma survivors (as well as the rare individual who does not have a history of exposure to violence); it minimizes the possibility of revictimization; it indirectly facilitates healing, recovery, and empowerment; and it builds collaborations throughout the service system.

Trauma-informed care is important for a number of reasons:

• Trauma and, in particular, violent victimization are pervasive.
• The impact of trauma is broad, extending well beyond the post-traumatic stress disorders frequently perceived to be the most common outcome.
• The impact of trauma is often deep and life-shaping.
• Trauma, especially caused by interpersonal violence, is often self-perpetuating.
• Violence is even more common in the lives of those who are socially and politically vulnerable, including the poor, many racial and ethnic minorities, women and children, those diagnosed with mental health or substance abuse problems, and people who are developmentally disabled.
• Trauma affects the way people approach the human service setting, heightening fear and suspiciousness.
• The service system itself has too often been retraumatizing.

Retraumatization in the behavioral health care setting is one of the experiences that originally fueled awareness of the need for trauma-informed care (Jennings, 1998). Two types of retraumatization are noteworthy. First are the many ways in which traumagenic dynamics may be replicated in service provision. Examples include providers’ lack of interest in traumatic violence or their disbelief of individuals’ reports of violent victimization; both of these patterns may replicate earlier experiences, in which signs and

reports of violence were minimized or denied. Coercive approaches involving involuntary medication and hospitalization are still too common in many settings. And the presumption of incompetence (e.g., the inability to handle one’s own finances) may be a part of standard operating procedure in many programs, a visible reminder of the ways in which survivors’ skills are overlooked.

Second are instances of “sanctuary harm” (Robins et al., 2005). Consumers surveyed about their experiences in behavioral health care settings report violence and the fear of violence (including physical restraint and seclusion) as well as negative interactions with staff involving disrespect and humiliation. Taken as a whole, then, it is not surprising that one prominent psychiatrist has written that the past 30 years has evinced a continuing story of “destroying sanctuary” in the human services system (Bloom and Farragher, 2010).

As a counter to this destructive organizational culture, we have developed a model of trauma-informed care that builds on core values of safety, trustworthiness, choice, collaboration, and empowerment (Fallot and Harris, 2008, 2009). These values are key antidotes to the toxic effects of violence in the lives of consumers and staff members in human service delivery settings. For those who have been exposed to violence repeatedly and unpredictably, physical and emotional safety is a high priority. For those individuals affected by violence perpetrated by those who were supposed to be family or institutional caretakers, trustworthiness is a high priority. For those whose sense of voice and control has been attenuated by violent victimization, choice is a high priority. For those who have experienced the world as consistently arrayed in one-up, one-down relationships in which they have been the one down, the realistic offer to share power in a collaborative way is a high priority. And for those who have felt powerless to do anything about these other realities, empowerment is a high priority.

As a change in organizational culture, then, trauma-informed care extends far beyond any new service; it involves the physical setting, each contact, each activity, and each relationship in the organization. It extends beyond the training of clinical staff by engaging with all staff (including administrators, service staff, and support staff) and, importantly, all consumers to direct and monitor this change. Finally, trauma-informed care represents an opportunity to make these values into a routine part of the setting; it is broader than simply being “trained” in this approach.

Cultures of trauma-informed care balance trauma-specific emphases on individual empowerment and skills development with organizational emphases on safety, trustworthiness, choice, collaboration, and empowerment. This approach is consistent with other values-based approaches that have become prominent in the past two decades in behavioral health: recovery orientation, gender responsiveness, and cultural competence (Farkas et al.,

2005; Covington, 2007; Whitaker et al., 2007a). Furthermore, the core values of trauma-informed care are consistent with, and strongly supportive of, many evidence-based interventions, such as motivational interviewing, shared decision making, and psychosocial empowerment groups.

Basic shifts in both understanding and practice are fundamental in changing a traditional human service or community culture to one that is trauma-informed. Our protocol for developing a culture of trauma-informed care thus emphasizes both a paradigm shift in understanding and a thoroughly collaborative way to change practice (Harris and Fallot, 2001; Fallot and Harris, 2009). For instance, one of the key changes in understanding is establishing a “trauma first” mode of thinking about a consumer or staff member. Thus, we adopt a “trauma lens” through which other aspects of a person’s life may be viewed. Rather than asking, implicitly or explicitly, “What is wrong with you?” or “What is your problem?” we ask “What have you been through?” and “How have you tried to cope with it?” This basic change in orientation affects the organization’s view of not only consumers and staff members but also the nature of trauma itself, the services provided, and the relationship between consumer and provider. As the basic questions change, so do the approaches, from “Here is what I can do to fix you,” to “How can you and I work together to further your goals for recovery and healing?” Collaborative decision making and planning pervade trauma-informed cultures; not only are consumers’ opinions frequently sought and incorporated into individual service planning and organizational strategies, but also staff perspectives become central to administrators’ thinking as well.

In putting these ideas into practice, we address six domains of organizational culture in human service settings; three are service-level domains, and three are at the systems-level (Fallot and Harris, 2009):

Services-level changes in a culture of trauma-informed care:

• Informal service procedures and settings
• Formal service policies
• Trauma screening, assessment, service planning, and trauma-specific services

Systems-level changes in a culture of trauma-informed care:

• Administrative support for developing and sustaining this culture
• Staff training and education
• Human resources practices

As an example, let us examine our approach to informal service procedures and settings. Here we ask agency workgroups representing all constituencies (upper-level administrators, supervisors and middle management, service staff, support staff, and consumers) to review the sequence of

settings, activities, and people to whom consumers are likely to be exposed from the time of their first call to their final visit. We sometimes recommend a walk-through, in which staff literally put themselves in the place of consumers by going through the same procedures as a new consumer would in entering the agency. Once each physical setting, activity, contact, and relationship has been outlined, we ask key questions related to the core values:

• How can we ensure physical and emotional safety for consumers throughout our organization and larger system of care?
• How can we maximize trustworthiness? Make tasks clear? Maintain appropriate boundaries?
• How can we enhance consumer choice and control?
• How can we maximize collaboration and the sharing of power with consumers?
• How can we prioritize consumer empowerment and skill-building at every opportunity?

Agencies have taken this task on with enthusiasm, developing creative solutions to identified problems in these domains. For example, one residential substance abuse setting had a large sign that read “Denial stops here” over the entrance to the residential areas of its building. Deciding that this sign did not create a hospitable or emotionally safe first impression of their setting, they replaced it with a “Welcome” sign that was much more inviting. Clearer and more positive signs, more comfortable waiting rooms (with adequate space and with minimal intrusion of security staff), more positive first contacts via phone or in person, better lighting in hallways and outdoors, and more private intake procedures—among many others—are examples of the sorts of changes organizations have made in efforts to create safer and more welcoming environments.

Once this process is completed, we ask organizational workgroups to follow the same procedure, this time with a focus on the staff’s experiences of safety, trustworthiness, choice, collaboration, and empowerment. We have seen this “parallel process” with regard to trauma-related concerns played out repeatedly in a wide variety of settings. Simply put, only when staff members’ experiences of physical and emotional safety, of trustworthy relationships (with their co-workers and with supervisors and administrators), of choice in how they go about their daily work, of collaborative power-sharing with administrators and supervisors (so that staff input is weighed significantly), and of empowerment (so that staff members have the resources they need to do their jobs well) are in place is the staff able to create similar experiences for consumers.

Trauma-informed cultures of care develop over time with the collaboration and support of administrators who recognize the invaluable

perspectives of both staff and consumers. We have gathered qualitative data in support of this shift in organizational cultures. Consumers report that they feel more accepted. One woman said, for example, “Before this initiative, I had to leave an important part of myself on the doorstep to this agency; now I can bring my whole self inside.” Consumers, staff, and administrators frequently comment that the initiative fostered more collaborative relationships among them. Built on safety and trustworthiness and supported by valuing choice and empowerment, the capacity to share power meaningfully has become a hallmark of trauma-informed care.

As a values-based context strongly supportive of evidence-based trauma-specific interventions, trauma-informed organizational cultures represent a powerful source of engagement for women and their children who have been exposed to violence (Cocozza et al., 2005; Morrissey et al., 2005). (Also see the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s Women, Co-Occurring Disorders, and Violence Study for related discussions and findings. 7 ) To the extent that secondary and tertiary prevention of such violence relies on creating settings that are welcoming and engaging for individuals with complex histories of violent victimization, trauma-informed care is an increasingly central requirement for programs designed to assist women and children.

ENHANCING EMOTION REGULATION: A FRAMEWORK FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN EXPOSED TO VIOLENCE

Julian d. ford, ph.d. university of connecticut school of medicine.

The health care and social service professions tend to approach the question of how to assist women and children who are victims of violence by doing research on, and developing practice guidelines for, the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Forbes et al., 2010). Extensive surveys of scientifically validated and clinically promising PTSD treatments have been compiled by the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, the Clinical Resource Efficiency Support Team (part of the Northern Ireland Health Service), the American Psychiatric Association, the British National Institute for Clinical Excellence, the Institute of Medicine, and the Australian Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health at the University of Melbourne (CREST, 2003; APA, 2004; VA, 2004; NICE, 2005; IOM, 2006; Australian Centre

7 Available at http://pathprogram.samhsa.gov/Resource/Women-Co-Occurring-Disordersand-Violence-Study-Program-Summary-21101.aspx .

for Posttraumatic Mental Health, 2007; Foa et al., 2009). These guidelines were developed to address diagnostic criteria for PTSD in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (APA, 1997).

Although laudable in that they have made the possible benefits of carefully developed therapies for PTSD increasingly known to professionals who treat victims of violence, this medicalized approach to helping victims recover from violence has several key limitations. First, the very terms, “victim” and “treatment” suggest a degree of passivity and deficiency that does a grave injustice to the typically extremely courageous and resilient survivors of violence. Violence temporarily disempowers those who must survive it, but even prolonged and horrific violence does not strip the survivor of the capacity to be empowered. Being viewed as broken or defective and therefore in need of corrective treatment as a result of having suffered violence adds injury (as well as insult) to injury. Although therapeutic treatments can be empowering, this is the case only to the extent that they emphasize helping the violence survivor restore or build their strengths. PTSD therapies definitely have been shown through both scientific and clinical research to empower children and adults who have experienced violence (Courtois et al., 2009; Ford and Cloitre, 2009). However, PTSD treatments tend to provide education and therapy based primarily on a view of PTSD as a breakdown of courage (i.e., avoidance of trauma reminders or memories) or deficits in arousal and anxiety management (i.e., hyperarousal, hypervigilance).

Recent research provides a basis for a paradigm shift from a pathology/deficit perspective to a framework of psychological empowerment for interventions for survivors of violence. Women and children who have been exposed to violence often suffer from aftereffects that either do not fit the criteria for PTSD or that involve symptoms and difficulties in daily living that go well beyond PTSD (Rayburn et al., 2005; Schumm et al., 2006; Ford et al., 2008, 2009, 2010, in press-b; Gill et al., 2008; Mongillo et al., 2009; Briggs-Gowan et al., 2010; Seng et al., in review). Although these sequelae might at first glance seem to be consistent with the pathology perspective (e.g., depression, panic, dissociation, addiction, oppositional–defiance, eating disorders, personality disorders, guilt, shame, complicated bereavement), in fact what they demonstrate is the extreme degree of biological, psychological, and interpersonal adaptation required to survive violence (Ford, 2005; Ford and Cloitre, 2009; Ford et al., 2009). These adaptations require substantial strength and resilience, rather than being markers for or the results of pathology or deficiencies (Herman, 1992; Courtois et al., 2009).

As a result of this paradigm shift, in the past decade an impressive array of psychological empowerment interventions has been developed for children and adults who have experienced violence and related forms of complex trauma (Courtois et al., 2009; Ford and Cloitre, 2009). As summarized

by Courtois and colleagues, psychological empowerment interventions are built upon the following two central philosophical foundations:

• Recognizing the uniqueness of the individual . The model is organized around recognition of the primacy and uniqueness of the individual and the maintenance of his/her welfare. Treatment is not one-size-fits-all; rather, each client is assessed, and treatment is planned differentially according to the specific needs of the individual. This is a phenomenological approach…. A “whole person” philosophy prevails: Although symptoms, deficits, and distress are reasons for seeking treatment and generally become the targets for intervention, the individual’s strengths, resources, resilience, personalized needs, values, and contexts are identified and reinforced.
• Personal empowerment. A strengths- and resilience-based philosophy of personal empowerment and self-determination encourages the therapist to seek to understand the individual’s unique phenomenological experience and its specific meaning and its relationship to symptoms, distress, and treatment goals. The individual has authority over the meaning and interpretation of his/her personal life history, current needs and preferences, and goals for the future. The therapist functions as an active, empathic, and responsive listener and a guide to enable the client to openly voice, examine, and therapeutically work through feelings of confusion, shame, or other emotions that have been suppressed or forbidden. The therapist seeks to create relational conditions where the client is emotionally validated and is “seen” and appreciated, to counter the invalidiation experiences typically associated with attachment trauma and subsequent victimization and to encourage emotional expression and development. The therapist strives to create conditions within the treatment that are as egalitarian as possible and that encourage collaboration with and empowerment of the client; however, the responsibilities and inherent power differences in the treatment relationship are explicitly acknowledged. The therapist seeks to use power effectively on the individual’s behalf while simultaneously encouraging the client’s development and autonomy. Importantly, the therapist conveys an openness to the client’s questioning of authority (including that of the therapist) and supports the client’s ultimate authority over his/her life, memories, and therapeutic engagement and progress. Moreover, the therapist is careful to maintain appropriate boundaries and limitations and is responsible for avoiding dual relationships and situations in which the client might be subject to pressure, coercion, or exploitation intentionally or inadvertently by the therapist. Treatment should be based in a shared plan that is systematic (not laissez-faire), utilizes effective strategies … organized around a careful assessment and a planned sequence of interventions that are hierarchically ordered and sequenced (86-87; italics in original).

A recent meta-analysis of therapy outcome studies with adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse found that cognitive behavior therapy was superior to other modalities for anxiety, depression, and other internalizing problems but not for problems more specifically related to emotion dysregulation (e.g., externalizing or interpersonal problems) (Taylor and Harvey, 2010). Thus, some violence survivors, particularly those with extensive victimization histories, may respond best to therapy focused on enhancing emotion regulation. Survivors who have severe difficulties with emotion regulation and their therapists also may prefer not to engage in trauma memory processing or to not do so until the client has acquired emotion regulation skills (Cook et al., 2004; Cloitre et al., 2010). Three manualized psychosocial intervention models that do not include trauma memory processing have been designed to enhance skills for emotion regulation, anxiety management, and interpersonal functioning. Skills Training for Emotion and Interpersonal Regulation (STAIR) has shown promise in reducing PTSD and depression symptoms and in enhancing emotion regulation with women survivors of violence (Cloitre et al., 2010). Seeking Safety has shown promise in reducing PTSD and substance use problems with girls and women (Najavits et al., 2006; Zlotnick et al., 2009). Although STAIR and Seeking Safety address emotion regulation, they emphasize becoming more assertively aware and expressive of emotions as a way to overcome excessively negative emotion states and dysfunctional avoidance of trauma memories or reminders of those memories.

Trauma Affect Regulation: Guide for Education and Therapy (TARGET) acknowledges the extreme emotional distress (e.g., depression, anxiety, anger, guilt, shame, and grief) or emotionally numbed and shutdown feelings (e.g., dissociation) that violence survivors often suffer (Ford and Russo, 2006). However, these PTSD or trauma-related “symptoms” are currently viewed as adaptive, rather than maladaptive or dysfunctional, reactions which reflect a change in the stress response system in the body that is protective of the individual. TARGET teaches a single sequential skill set described by the mnemonic FREEDOM, designed based on research showing that emotion regulation involves recognizing, modulating, and recovering from negative emotion states as well as accessing and sustaining positive emotion states (Eisner et al., 2009; Kessler and Staudinger, 2009). Restoring affect regulation is described as requiring seven practical steps or skills denoted by FREEDOM: Focusing the mind on one thought at a time; Recognizing current triggers for emotional reactions; distinguishing dysregulated (“reactive”) versus adaptive (“main”) Emotions; Evaluations (thoughts); goal Definitions; behavioral Options; and self-statements affirming that taking responsibility for recovering from intense emotions is crucial not only to one’s own personal well-being but also to Making a positive contribution to primary relationships (e.g., as a parent) and the community.

TARGET has been evaluated in a series of real-world effectiveness studies as a group therapy for women and men in substance abuse treatment as well as for incarcerated women, as a one-to-one therapy for low-income women with complex trauma histories and girls involved in delinquency, and as a combined group and milieu intervention for girls and boys placed in juvenile detention centers (Frisman et al., 2008, Ford et al., in press-b, in preparation; Ford and Hawke, in review). Group and milieu interventions enable participants to provide one another with peer modeling, support, and guidance as well as potentially enabling the program or community in which they take place to become “trauma informed” (Fallot and Harris, 2008). Consistent with this view, TARGET was found to enable women and men recovering from substance abuse to maintain a sense of realistic confidence and optimism (“sobriety self-efficacy”), where others who received substance abuse treatment as usual showed a marked decline in this important resilience factor (Frisman et al., 2008). The benefits to the entire setting were evident in findings from the evaluation of TARGET in youth detention centers, in which every session of TARGET received by a girl or boy was associated with a reduction in the number of behavioral incidents and punitive sanctions imposed by staff during the first two weeks of youths’ stay in the facilities (Ford and Hawke, in review). On the other hand, many girls or women who have experienced violence may prefer the privacy of a one-to-one therapy intervention, and TARGET showed evidence of helping both underserved women and girls to not only reduce their PTSD symptoms but also to increase their ability to regulate emotions (Ford et al., in press-a, in press-b).

Implications of a Psychological Empowerment Approach for Violence Survivors

To the extent that knowledge is power, providing women and children who have experienced violence with de-stigmatizing explanations of why they are struggling with persistent emotional distress and how they can draw upon their inherent personal strengths to regain their emotional balance is a very direct and essential form of psychological empowerment. Equally, if not more, important is bringing this same knowledge to the many professionals, advocates, policy makers, funders, jurists, and regulators who determine how scarce societal resources will be allocated both to prevent violence and to restore the lives and well-being of survivors of violence. If violence changes how survivors’ bodies respond to subsequent stressors (non-violent as well as violent), then traumatic stress disorders such as PTSD and its more complex variants are simply extreme versions of the out-of-balance emotional states that everyone experiences. Therefore, if recovery from the aftereffects of violence involves regaining or restoring

innate capacities for re-setting the body’s stress reaction systems—and, in so doing, regaining or restoring the innate ability to regulate emotions and maintain a generally healthy balanced emotional state despite expectable perturbations—it is essential that not only violence survivors but also the public at large (including those key determiners and providers of services) are informed about why and how emotion regulation is essential not only for survivors of violence but also on a larger scale to prevent violence. With this perspective, it becomes possible to understand not only the aftereffects of violence but also violence itself as resulting at least in part from emotion dysregulation on a broad scale (e.g., uncivil discourse in politics or extreme economic and social disparities). Knowledge and skills regarding emotion regulation are essential not just for violence survivors, but for everyone.

Adegoke, T. G., and D. Oladeji. 2008. Community norms and cultural attitudes and beliefs factors influencing violence against women of reproductive age in Nigeria. European Journal of Scientific Research 20:265-273.

Adi, Y., A. Killoran, K. Janmohamed, and S. Stewart-Brown. 2007. Systematic review of the effectiveness of interventions to promote mental wellbeing in children in primary education. Report 1: Universal approaches: non-violence related outcomes. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.

Ahmed, S. M. 2005. Intimate partner violence against women: Experiences from a woman-focused development programme in Matlab, Bangladesh. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition 23(1):95-101.

Amaro, H. 2011. The Boston Consortium Model: Treatment of trauma among women with substance use disorders. Paper presented at Workshop on Preventing Violence against Women and Children, Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC. January 28.

Amoakohene, M. I. 2004. Violence against women in Ghana: A look at women’s perceptions and review of policy and social responses. Social Science and Medicine 59:2373-2385.

Anderson, L. A., and S. C. Whiston. 2005. Sexual assault education programs: A meta-analytic examination of their effectiveness. Psychology of Women Quarterly 29:374-388.

Anderson, P., D. Chisholm, and D. C. Fuhr. 2009. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of policies and programmes to reduce the harm caused by alcohol. The Lancet 373(9682):2234-2246.

APA (American Psychiatric Association). 1997. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM), fourth edition . Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

APA. 2004. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with acute stress disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Australian Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health. 2007. Australian guidelines for the treatment of adults with acute stress disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Centre for Posttraumatic Mental Health.

Bacon, H., and S. Richardson. 2001. Attachment theory and child abuse: An overview of the literature for practitioners. Child Abuse Review 10:377-397.

Bair-Merritt, M. H., J. M. Jennings, R. Chen, L. Burrell, E. MacFarlane, L. Fuddy, and A. K. Duggan. 2010. Reducing maternal intimate partner violence after the birth of a child: A randomized controlled trial of the Hawaii Healthy Start home visitation program. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 164(1):16-23.

Baldry, A. C., and D. P. Farrington. 2007. Effectiveness of programs to prevent school bullying. Victims and Offenders 2(2):183-204.

Bandura, A. 1977. Social learning theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. 1986. Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Barker, G., C. Ricardo, and M. Nascimento. 2007. Engaging men and boys in changing gender based inequity in health: Evidence from programme interventions. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

Basile, K. C., M. F. Hertz, and S. E. Back. 2009. Intimate partner violence and sexual violence victimization assessment instruments for use in healthcare settings: Version 1. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Bilukha, O., R. A. Hahn, A. Crosby, M. T. Fullilove, A. Liberman, E. Moscicki, S. Snyder, F. Tuma, P. Corso, A. Schofield, P. A. Briss, and Task Force on Community Preventive Services. 2005. The effectiveness of early childhood home visitation in preventing violence: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 28:11-39.

Bloom, S., and B. Farragher. 2010. Destroying sanctuary: The crisis in human service delivery systems . New York: Oxford University Press.

Bowlby, J. 1980. Attachment and loss . New York: Basic.

Bowlby, J. 1990. A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development . London: Routledge.

Breitenbecher, K. H., and C. A. Gidycz. 1998. Empirical evaluation of a program designed to reduce the risk of multiple sexual victimization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 13:472-488.

Breitenbecher, K. H., and M. Scarce. 2001. An evaluation of the effectiveness of a sexual assault education program focusing on psychological barriers to resistance. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 16:387-407.

Briggs-Gowan, M. J., J. D. Ford, L. Fraleigh, K. McCarthy, and A. S. Carter. 2010. Prevalence of exposure to potentially traumatic events in a healthy birth cohort of very young children in the northeastern United States. Journal of Traumatic Stress 23(6):725-733.

Bruce, S. 2002. The “A Man” campaign: Marketing social norms to men to prevent sexual assualt. The Report on Social Norms, Working paper, No. 5 . Little Falls, NJ: PaperClip Communications.

Campbell, J. C. 2005. Assessing dangerousness in domestic violence cases: History, challenges, and opportunities. Criminology & Public Policy 4:653-672.

Chaffin, M., J. F. Silovsky, B. Funderburk, L. A. Valle, E. V. Brestan, T. Balachova, S. Jackson, J. Lensgraf, and B. L. Bonner. 2004. Parent–child interaction therapy with physically abusive parents: Efficacy for reducing future abuse reports. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 72(3):500-510.

Chaloupka, F. J., M. Grossman, and H. Saffer. 2002. The effects of price on alcohol consumption and alcohol-related problems. Alcohol Research and Health 26(1):22-34.

Champion, H. L., and R. H. Durant. 2001. Exposure to violence and victimization and the use of violence by adolescents in the United States. Minerva Pediatrics 53:189-197.

Cloitre, M., K. C. Stovall-McClough, K. Nooner, P. Zorbas, S. Cherry, C. L. Jackson, W. Gan, and E. Petkova. 2010. Treatment for PTSD related to childhood abuse: A randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Psychiatry 167(8):915-924.

Cocozza, J. J., E. W. Jackson, K. Hennigan, J. P. Morrissey, B. G. Reed, R. D. Fallot, and S. Banks. 2005. Outcomes for women with co-occurring disorders and trauma: Program-level effects. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 28(2):109-119.

Cook, J. M., P. P. Schnurr, and E. B. Foa. 2004. Bridging the gap between posttraumatic stress disorder research and clinical practice. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training 41:374-387.

Courtois, C. A., J. D. Ford, and M. Cloitre. 2009. Best practices in psychotherapy for adults. In C. A. Courtois and J. D. Ford, eds., Treating complex traumatic stress disorders: An evidence-based guide (pp. 82-103). New York: Guilford Press.

Covington, S. 2003. Beyond trauma: A healing journey for women . City Center, MN: Hazelden.

Covington, S. 2007. Women and addiction: A gender-responsive approach . Clinical innovators series. City Center, MN: Hazelden.

CREST. 2003. The management of post traumatic stress disorder in adults. Belfast, Ireland: Clinical Resource Efficiency Support Team.

Crooks, C. V. 2011. Cycles of violence. Paper presented at Workshop on Preventing Violence Against Women and Children, Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC. January 28.

Crooks, C. V., K. L. Scott, D. A. Wolfe, D. Chiodo, and S. Killip. 2007. Understanding the link between childhood maltreatment and violent delinquency: What do schools have to add? Child Maltreatment 12(3):269-280.

Dahlberg, L. L., and A. Butchart. 2005. State of the science: Violence prevention efforts in developing and developed countries. International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion 12(2):93-104.

Dias, M. A., K. Smith, K. deGuehery, P. Mazur, V. Li, and M. L. Shaffer. 2005. Preventing abusive head trauma among infants and young children: A hospital-based, parent education program. Pediatrics 115:e470-477.

Dodge, K. A., J. D. Coie, G. S. Pettit, and J. M. Price. 1990. Peer status and aggression in boys’ groups: Developmental and contextual analyses. Child Development 61(5):1289-1309.

Dodge, K. A., G. S. Pettit, and J. E. Bates. 1994. Effects of physical maltreatment on the development of peer relations. Development and Psychopathology 6:43-55.

Douglas, M. 1998. Restriction of the hours of sale of alcohol in a small community: A beneficial impact. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 22:714-719.

Du Mont, J., and D. Parnis. 2000. Sexual assault and legal resolution: Querying the medical collection of forensic evidence. Medicine and Law 19:779-792.

Duailibi, S., W. Ponicki, J. Grube, I. Pinsky, R. Laranjeira, and M. Raw. 2007. The effect of restricting opening hours on alcohol-related violence. American Journal of Public Health 97:2276-2280.

Dusenbury, L., M. Falco, A. Lake, R. Brannigan, and K. Bosworth. 1997. Nine critical elements of promising violence prevention programs. Journal of School Health 67:409-414.

Eckenrode, J., B. Ganzel, C. R. Henderson, Jr., E. Smith, D. L. Olds, J. Powers, R. Cole, H. Kitzman, and K. Sidora. 2000. Preventing child abuse and neglect with a program of nurse home visitation: The limiting effects of domestic violence. JAMA 284(11):1385-1391.

Ehrensaft, M. K., P. Cohen, J. Brown, E. Smailes, H. Chen, and J. G. Johnson. 2001. Intergenerational transmission of partner violence: A 20-year prospective study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 71:741-753.

Eisner, L. R., S. L. Johnson, and C. S. Carver. 2009. Positive affect regulation in anxiety disorders. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 23(5):645-649.

Ellsberg, M., J. Liljestrand, and A. Winkwist. 1997. The Nicaraguan Network of Women Against Violence: Using research and action for change. Reproductive Health Matters, 5(10):82-92.

Fabiano, P., H. W. Perkins, A. Berkowitz, J. Linkenbach, and C. Stark. 2003. Engaging men as social justice allies in ending violence against women: Evidence for a social norms approach. Journal of American College Health 52:105-112.

Fagan, J., and A. Browne. 1994. Violence between spouses and intimates: Physical aggression between women and men in intimate relationships. In A. J. Reiss, Jr., and J. A. Roth, eds. Understanding and preventing violence, Volume 3: Social Influences (pp. 115-292). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Fallot, R. D., and M. Harris. 2008. Trauma-informed services. In G. Reyes, J. D. Elhai and J. D. Ford, eds. The Encyclopedia of Psychological Trauma . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

Fallot, R. D., and M. Harris. 2009. Creating cultures of trauma-informed care: A self-assessment and planning protocol . Washington, DC: Community Connections.

Farkas, M., C. Gagne, W. Anthony, and J. Chamberlin. 2005. Implementing recovery oriented evidence based programs: Identifying the critical dimensions. Community Mental Health Journal 41(2):141-158.

Farrington, D. P., and M. M. Ttofi. 2009. School-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization. Campbell Systematic Reviews. Oslo, Norway: Campbell Collaboration.

Finkelhor, D. 2009. The prevention of childhood sexual abuse. The Future of Children 19(2):169-194.

Finkelhor, D., N. Asdigian, and J. Dziuba-Leatherman. 1995. The effectiveness of victimization prevention instruction: An evaluation of children’s responses to actual threats and assaults. Child Abuse and Neglect 19:141-153.

Finkelhor, D., R. K. Ormrod, and H. A. Turner. 2009. Lifetime assessment of poly-victimization in a national sample of children and youth. Child Abuse and Neglect 33(7):403-411.

Finnish Foundation for Alcohol Studies. 2003. Alcohol in developing societies: A public health approach. Helsinki and Geneva: Finnish Foundation for Alcohol Studies and World Health Organization.

Fisher, G. J. 1986. College student attitudes toward forcible date rape: Changes after taking a human sexuality course. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy 12:42-46.

Foa, E. B., T. Keane, M. J. Friedman, and J. A. Cohen, eds. 2009. Effective treatments for PTSD, 2nd ed. New York: Guilford.

Fontaine, R. G. 2010. New developments in developmental research on social information processing and antisocial behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 38(5):569-573.

Forbes, D., M. Creamer, J. I. Bisson, J. A. Cohen, B. E. Crow, E. B. Foa, M. J. Friedman, T. M. Keane, H. S. Kudler, and R. J. Ursano. 2010. A guide to guidelines for the treatment of PTSD and related conditions. Journal of Traumatic Stress 23(5):537-552.

Ford, J. D. 2005. Treatment implications of altered neurobiology, emotion regulation and information processing following child maltreatment. Psychiatric Annals 35:410-419.

Ford, J. D., and M. Cloitre. 2009. Best practices in psychotherapy for children and adolescents. In C. Courtois and J. D. Ford, eds., Treating complex traumatic stress disorders: An evidence-based guide (pp. 59-81). New York: Guilford.

Ford, J. D., D. F. Connor, and J. Hawke. 2009. Complex trauma among psychiatrically impaired children: A cross-sectional, chart-review study. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 70(8):1155-1163.

Ford, J. D., J. D. Elhai, D. F. Connor, and B. C. Frueh. 2010. Poly-victimization and risk of posttraumatic, depressive, and substance use disorders and involvement in delinquency in a national sample of adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health 46(6):545-552.

Ford, J. D., J. K. Hartman, J. Hawke, and J. Chapman. 2008. Traumatic victimization, posttraumatic stress disorder, suicidal ideation, and substance abuse risk among juvenile justice-involved youths. Journal of Child and Adolescent Trauma 1:75-92.

Ford, J. D., and J. Hawke. In review. Trauma emotion regulation psychoeducation group attendance is associated with reduced disciplinary incidents and sanctions in juvenile detention facilities. Journal of Child and Adolescent Trauma .

Ford, J. D., and E. Russo. 2006. Trauma-focused, present-centered, emotional self-regulation approach to integrated treatment for posttraumatic stress and addiction: Trauma Adaptive Recovery Group Education and Therapy (TARGET). American Journal of Psychotherapy 60(4):335-355.

Ford, J. D., K. Steinberg, J. Hawke, J. Levine, and W. Zhang. In press-a. Evaluation of trauma emotion regulation—Guide for education and therapy (TARGET) with traumatized girls involved in delinquency. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology .

Ford, J. D., K. Steinberg, and W. Zhang. In press-b. Emotion regulation and social problem-solving psychotherapies for high-risk mothers with PTSD. Behavior Therapy .

Foshee, V. A., G. F. Linder, K. E. Bauman, S. A. Langwick, X. B. Arriaga, J. L. Health, P. M. McMahon, and S. Bangdiwala. 1996. The Safe Dates project: Theoretical basis, evaluation design, and selected baseline findings. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 12(5):39-47.

Foshee, V. A., K. E. Bauman, X. B. Arriaga, R. W. Helms, G. G. Koch, and G. F. Linder. 1998. An evaluation of Safe Dates, an adolescent dating violence prevention program. American Journal of Public Health 88(1):45-50.

Foshee, V. A., K. E. Bauman, W. F. Greene, G. G. Koch, G. F. Linder, and J. E. MacDougall. 2000. The Safe Dates program: 1-year follow-up results. American Journal of Public Health 90(10):1619-1622.

Foshee, V. A., K. E. Bauman, S. T. Ennett, G. F. Linder, T. Benefield, and C. Suchindran. 2004. Assessing the long-term effects of the Safe Dates program and a booster in preventing and reducing adolescent dating violence victimization and perpetration. American Journal of Public Health 94(4):619-624.

Foshee, V. A., K. E. Bauman, S. T. Ennett, C. Suchindran, T. Benefield, and G. F. Linder. 2005. Assessing the effects of the dating violence prevention program “Safe Dates” using random coefficient regression modeling. Prevention Science 6:245-258.

Foshee, V. A., K. J. Karriker–Jaffe, H. L. Reyes, S. T. Ennett, C. Suchindran, K. E. Bauman, and T. Benefield. 2008. What accounts for demographic differences in trajectories of adolescent dating violence? An examination of intrapersonal and contextual mediators. Journal of Adolescent Health 42(6):596-604.

Foshee, V. A., M. L. Reyes, and S. Wyckoff. 2009. Approaches to preventing psychological, physical, and sexual partner abuse. In D. O’Leary and E. Woodin, eds., Psychological and physical aggression in couples: Causes and interventions (pp. 165-190). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Fox A. M., S. S. Jackson, N. B. Hansen, N. Gasa, M. Crewe, and K. J. Sikkema. 2007. In their own voices: A qualitative study of women’s risk for intimate partner violence and HIV in South Africa. Violence Against Women 13:583-602.

FPH (U.K. Faculty of Public Health). 2008. Alcohol and public health. Faculty of Public Health position statement: U.K. Faculty of Public Health.

Frisman, L., J. D. Ford, H. Lin, S. Mallon, and R. Chang. 2008. Outcomes of trauma treatment using the TARGET model. Journal of Groups in Addiction and Recovery 3:285-303.

Garbarino, J. 1999. Lost boys: Why our sons turn violent and how we can save them . New York: The Free Press.

Garner, J., J. Fagan, and C. Maxwell. 1995. Published findings from the Spouse Assault Replication Program: A critical review. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 11:3-28.

Gibson, L. E., and H. Leitemberg. 2000. Child sexual abuse prevention programs: Do they decrease the occurrence of child sexual abuse? Child Abuse & Neglect 24:1115-1125.

Gill, J. M., G. G. Page, P. Sharps, and J. C. Campbell. 2008. Experiences of traumatic events and associations with PTSD and depression development in urban health care-seeking women. Journal of Urban Health 85(5):693-706.

Go, V. F., S. C. Johnson, M. E. Bentley, S. Sivaram, A. K. Srikrishnan, D. D. Celentano, and S. Solomon. 2003. Crossing the threshold: Engendered definitions of socially acceptable domestic violence in Chennai, India. Culture, Health and Sexuality 5:393-408.

Hahn, R., D. Fuqua-Whitley, H. Wethington, J. Lowy, A. Crosby, M. Fullilove, R. Johnson, A. Liberman, E. Moscicki, L. Price, S. Snyder, F. Tuma, S. Cory, G. Stone, K. Mukhopadhaya, S. Chattopadhyay, and L. Dahlberg. 2007. Effectiveness of universal school-based programs to prevent violent and aggressive behavior: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 33(2 Suppl):S114-S129.

Harris, M. 1998. Trauma recovery and empowerment: A clinician’s guide for working with women in groups . New York: The New Press.

Harris, M., and R. D. Fallot, eds. 2001. Using trauma theory to design service systems . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Heise, L., and C. García-Moreno. 2002. Violence by intimate partners. In E. G. Krug, ed., World report on violence and health (pp. 87-121). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

Herman, J. L. 1992. Trauma and recovery . New York: Basic Books.

Herrenkohl, T. I., C. Sousa, E. A. Tajima, R. C. Herrenkohl, and C. A. Moylan. 2008. Intersection of child abuse and children’s exposure to domestic violence. Trauma Violence Abuse 9(2):84-99.

Hussain, R., and A. Khan. 2008. Women’s perceptions and experiences of sexual violence in marital relationships and its effect on reproductive health. Health Care for Women International 29:468-483.

Ilika, A. L. 2005. Women’s perception of partner violence in a rural Igbo community. African Journal of Reproductive Health 9:77-88.

IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2006. Posttraumatic stress disorder: Diagnosis and assessment . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Jaffe, P. G., and M. Juodis. 2006. Children as victims and witnesses of domestic homicide: Lessons learned from domestic violence death review committees. Juvenile and Family Court Journal 57(3):13-28.

Jaffe, P. G., N. K. D. Lemon, and S. E. Poisson. 2003. Child custody and domestic violence: A call for safety and accountability . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Jennings, A. 1998. On being invisible in the mental health system. In B. L. Levin, A. K. Blanch, and A. Jennings, eds. Women’s mental health services: A public health perspective (pp. 326-347). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Jewkes, R., M. Nduna, J. Levin, N. Jama, K. Dunkle, A. Puren, and N. Duwury. 2008. Impact of Stepping Stones on incidence of HIV and HSV-2 and sexual behaviour in rural South Africa: Cluster randomised controlled trial. British Medical Journal 337:383-387.

Jewkes, R., P. Sen, and C. García-Moreno. 2002. Sexual violence. In E. G. Krug, ed. World report on violence and health (pp. 149-181). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

Kabeer, N. 2001. Conflicts over credit: Re-evaluating the empowerment potential of loans to women in rural Bangladesh. World Development 29(1):63-84.

Katz, J. 2006. The macho paradox: Why some men hurt women and how all men can help . Napierville, IL: Sourcebooks.

Kessler, E. M., and U. M. Staudinger. 2009. Affective experience in adulthood and old age: The role of affective arousal and perceived affect regulation. Psychology and Aging 24(2):349-362.

Kim, J. C., G. Ferrari, T. Abramsky, C. H. Watts, J. R. Hargreaves, L. A. Morison, G. Phetla, J. D. H. Porter, and P. Pronyk. 2009. Assessing the incremental benefits of combining health and economic interventions: Experience from the IMAGE study in rural South Africa. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 87:824-832.

Knox K. L., D. A. Litts, G. W. Talcott, J. C. Feig, and E. D. Caine. 2003. Risk of suicide and related adverse outcomes after exposure to a suicide prevention programme in the US Air Force: Cohort study. British Medical Journal 327:1376-1381.

Koenig, M. A., A. Saifuddin, H. Mian Bazle, and A. B. M. Khorshed-Alam-Mozumder. 2003. Women’s status and domestic violence in rural Bangladesh: Individual- and community-level effects. Demography 40(2):269-288.

Lankester, T. 1992. Setting up community health programmes: A practical manual for use in developing countries . London: Macmillan Press.

Laranjeira, R., and D. Hinkly. 2002. Evaluation of alcohol outlet density and its relation with violence. Revista de Saude Publica 36(4):455-461.

Liu, M., and C. Chan. 1999. Enduring violence and staying in marriage: Stories of battered women in rural China. Violence Against Women 5:1469-1492.

Lösel, F., and A. Beelmann. 2003. Effects of child skills training in preventing antisocial behaviour: A systematic review of randomized evaluations. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 587:84-109.

Macmillan, H. L., C. N. Wathen, J. Barlow, D. M. Fergusson, J. M. Leventhal, and H. N. Taussig. 2009. Interventions to prevent child maltreatment and associated impairment. Lancet 373(9659):250-266.

Markowitz, S. 2000. The price of alcohol, wife abuse, and husband abuse. Southern Economic Journal 67:279-303.

Meltzer, H., R. Gatward, T. Corbin, R. Goodman, and T. Ford. 2003. Persistence, onset, risk factors and outcomes of childhood mental disorders . London: Office for National Statistics, HMSO.

Mikton, C., and A. Butchart. 2009. Child maltreatment prevention: A systematic review of reviews. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 87(5):353-361.

Mitra, A., and P. Singh. 2007. Human capital attainment and gender empowerment: The Kerala paradox. Social Science Quarterly 88:1227-1242.

Mongillo, E. A., M. Briggs-Gowan, J. D. Ford, and A. S. Carter. 2009. Impact of traumatic life events in a community sample of toddlers. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 37(4):455-468.

Morrison, A., M. Ellsberg, and S. Bott. 2004. Addressing gender-based violence in the Latin American and Caribbean region: A critical review of interventions. Washington, DC: World Bank Policy Research.

Morrissey, J. P., E. W. Jackson, A. R. Ellis, H. Amaro, V. B. Brown, and L. M. Najavits. 2005. Twelve-month outcomes of trauma-informed interventions for women with co-occurring disorders. Psychiatric Services 56(10):1213-1222.

Mueser, K. T., S. D. Rosenberg, H. Xie, M. K. Jankowski, E. E. Bolton, W. Lu, J. L. Hamblen, H. J. Rosenberg, G. J. McHugo, and R. Wolfe. 2008. A randomized controlled trial of cognitive-behavioral treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder in severe mental illness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 76(2):259-271.

Najavits, L. M. 2002. Seeking safety: A treatment manual for PTSD and substance abuse . New York: Guilford Press.

Najavits, L. M., R. J. Gallop, and R. D. Weiss. 2006. Seeking safety therapy for adolescent girls with PTSD and substance use disorder: A randomized controlled trial. Jounal of Behavioral Health Services and Research 33(4):453-463.

National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health. 2007. Antenatal and postnatal mental health. NICE Clinical Guideline No 45 . London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence.

NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence.). 2005. Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD): The management of PTSD in adults and children in primary and secondary care. London, UK: National Institute for Clinical Excellence.

Oliver, J. E. 1993. Intergenerational transmission of child abuse: Rates, research, and clinical implications. American Journal of Psychiatry 150(9):1315-1324.

Paine, K., G. Hart, M. Jawo, S. Ceesay, M. Jallow, L. Morison, G. Walraven, K. McAdam, and M. Shaw. 2002. Before we were sleeping, now we are awake: Preliminary evaluation of the Stepping Stones sexual health programme in the Gambia. African Journal of AIDS Research 1(1):39-40.

Petersen, I., A. Bhana, and M. McKay. 2005. Sexual violence and youth in South Africa: The need for community based prevention interventions. Child Abuse & Neglect 29:1233-1248.

Powers, M. B., J. M. Halpern, M. P. Ferenschak, S. J. Gillihan, and E. B. Foa. 2010. A meta-analytic review of prolonged exposure for posttraumatic stress disorder. Clinical Psychology Review 30(6):635-641.

Prinz, R. J., M. R. Sanders, C. J. Shapiro, D. J. Whitaker, and J. R. Lutzker. 2009. Population-based prevention of child maltreatment: The U.S. Triple P system population trial. Prevention Science 10(1):1-12.

Rahman, A. 1999. Women and microcredit in rural Bangladesh: Anthropological study of the rhetoric and realities of Grameen Bank lending . Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Rayburn, N. R., S. L. Wenzel, M. N. Elliott, K. Hambarsoomians, G. N. Marshall, and J. S. Tucker. 2005. Trauma, depression, coping, and mental health service seeking among impoverished women. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 73(4):667-677.

Resick, P. A., T. E. Galovski, M. O’Brien Uhlmansiek, C. D. Scher, G. A. Clum, and Y. Young-Xu. 2008. A randomized clinical trial to dismantle components of cognitive processing therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder in female victims of interpersonal violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 76(2):243-258.

Rhyne, E. 2001. Mainstreaming microfinance: How lending to the poor began, grew, and came of age in Bolivia . Green Haven, CT: Kumarian Press.

Robins, C. S., J. A. Sauvageot, K. J. Cusack, S. Suffoletta-Maierle, and B. C. Frueh. 2005. Consumers’ perceptions of negative experiences and “sanctuary harm” in psychiatric settings. Psychiatric Services 56(9):1134-1138.

Schecter, S., and J. Edleson. 1999. Effective intervention in domestic violence and child maltreatment cases: Guidelines for policy and practice. Reno, NV: National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges.

Schewe, P. A. 2007. Interventions to prevent sexual violence. In L. Doll, ed. Handbook of injury and violence prevention (pp. 183-201). New York: Springer.

Schopper, D., J.-D. Lormand, and R. Waxweiler. 2006. Developing policies to prevent injuries and violence: Guidelines for policy-makers and planners. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

Schuler, S. R., S. M. Hashemi, A. P. Riley, and S. Akhter. 1996. Credit programs, patriarchy and men’s violence against women in rural Bangladesh. Social Science and Medicine 43(12):1729-1742.

Schumm, J. A., M. Briggs-Phillips, and S. E. Hobfoll. 2006. Cumulative interpersonal traumas and social support as risk and resiliency factors in predicting PTSD and depression among inner-city women. Journal of Traumatic Stress 19(6):825-836.

Scott, K. L., and C. V. Crooks. 2004. Effecting change in maltreating fathers: Critical principles for intervention planning. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice 11:95-111.

Seng, J., W. D’Andrea, and J. D. Ford. In review. Psychological trauma history and empirically derived psychiatric syndromes in a community sample of women in prenatal care. Psychological Trauma .

Sheehan, D. 2008. Alcohol, health and wider social impact. SE Regional Public Health Group Information Series No. 1. London: Department of Health.

Skowron, E. A., and D. H. S. Reinemann. 2005. Psychological interventions for child maltreatment: A meta-analysis. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, and Training 42:52-71.

Slovak, K., C. Carlson, and L. Helm. 2007. The influence of family violence on youth attitudes. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal 24:77-99.

Smith, J. D., B. H. Schneider, P. K. Smith, and K. Ananiadou. 2004. The effectiveness of whole-school antibullying programs: A synthesis of evaluation research. School Psychology Review 33:548-561.

Smith, P. H., J. W. White, and L. J. Holland. 2003. A longitudinal perspective on dating violence among adolescent and college-age women. American Journal of Public Health 93(7):1104-1109.

Solórzano, I., H. Abaunza, and C. Molina. 2000. Evaluación de impacto de la campaña contra las mujeres un desastre que los hombres si podemos evitar [impact evaluation of the campaign violence against women: A disaster we can prevent as men]. Managua: CANTERA.

Sousa, C., T. I. Herrenkohl, C. A. Moylan, E. A. Tajima, J. B. Klika, R. C. Herrenkohl, and M. J. Russo. 2011. Longitudinal study on the effects of child abuse and children’s exposure to domestic violence, parent-child attachments, and antisocial behavior in adolescence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 26(1):111-136.

Stuart, G. L., S. E. Ramsey, T. M. Moore, C. W. Kahler, L. E. Farrell, P. R. Recupero, and R. A. Brown. 2003. Reductions in marital violence following treatment for alcohol dependence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 18:1113-1131.

Taylor, J. E., and S. T. Harvey. 2010. A meta-analysis of the effects of psychotherapy with adults sexually abused in childhood. Clinical Psychology Review 30(6):749-767.

Usdin, S., E. Scheepers, S. Goldstein, and G. Japhet. 2005. Achieving social change on gender-based violence: A report on the impact evaluation of Soul City’s fourth series. Social Science and Medicine 61(11):2434-2445.

VA (U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs). 2004. Management of posttraumatic stress . Washington, DC: Department of Veterans Affairs.

van der Kolk, B. A., and M. S. Greenberg. 1987. The psychobiology of the trauma response: Hyperarousal, constriction, and addition to traumatic reexposure. In B. A. van der Kolk, ed. Psychological trauma (pp. 63-87). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

van Lier, P., F. Vitaro, E. Barker, H. Koot, and R. Tremblay. 2009. Developmental links between trajectories of physical violence, vandalism, theft, and alcohol-drug use from childhood to adolescence. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 37(4):481-492.

Welbourn, A. 2009. Stepping Stones—List of surveys and reports to 2006 and some quotes from Stepping Stones users around the world. Some brief notes prepared for the UNAIDS pre-think tank meeting on Evaluation Strategies for Prevention Interventions, Geneva. Available at http://www.steppingstonesfeedback.org/resources/22/Welbourn_Quotes_UNAIDS_Presentation_2009.pdf (accessed April 29, 2011).

Welsh, P. 1997. Hacia una masculinidad sin violencia en las relaciones de pareja [toward masculinity without partner violence]. Managua: CANTERA.

Whitaker, D. J., C. K. Baker, and I. Arias. 2007a. Interventions to prevent intimate partner violence. In L. Doll, ed., Handbook of injury and violence prevention (pp. 203-223). New York: Springer.

Whitaker, D. J., C. K. Baker, C. Pratt, E. Reed, S. Suri, C. Pavlos, B. J. Nagy, and J. Silverman. 2007b. A network model for providing culturally competent services for intimate partner violence and sexual violence. Violence Against Women 13(2):190-209.

Whitaker, D. J., S. Morrison, C. Lindquist, S. R. Hawkins, J. A. O’Neil, and A. M. Nesius. 2006. A critical review of interventions for the primary prevention of perpetration of partner violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior 11(2):151-166.

Whitfield, C. L., R. F. Anda, S. R. Dube, and V. J. Felitti. 2003. Violent childhood experiences and the risk of intimate partners violence in adults: Assessment in a large health maintenance organization. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 18:166-185.

Wolfe, D. A., C. Crooks, P. Jaffe, D. Chiodo, R. Hughes, W. Ellis, L. Stitt, and A. Donner. 2009. A school-based program to prevent adolescent dating violence: A cluster randomized trial. Archives of Paediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 163(8):692-699.

Wolfe, D. A., C. Wekerle, K. Scott, A. L. Straatman, C. Grasley, and D. Reitzel-Jaffe. 2003. Dating violence prevention with at-risk youth: A controlled outcome evaluation. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 71(2):279-291.

WHO (World Health Organization) and International Society for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect. 2006. Preventing child maltreatment: A guide to taking action and generating evidence Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

WHO and LSHTM (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine). 2010a. The nature, magnitude and consequences of intimate partner and sexual violence. In Preventing intimate partner and sexual violence against women: Taking action and generating evidence . Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

WHO and LSHTM. 2010b. Preventing intimate partner and sexual violence against women: Taking action and generating evidence. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

WHO and LSHTM. 2010c. Risk and protective factors for intimate partner and sexual violence. In Preventing intimate partner and sexual violence against women: Taking action and generating evidence . Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.

Zlotnick, C., J. Johnson, and L. M. Najavits. 2009. Randomized controlled pilot study of cognitive-behavioral therapy in a sample of incarcerated women with substance use disorder and PTSD. Behavior Therapy 40(4):325-336.

Violence against women and children is a serious public health concern, with costs at multiple levels of society. Although violence is a threat to everyone, women and children are particularly susceptible to victimization because they often have fewer rights or lack appropriate means of protection. In some societies certain types of violence are deemed socially or legally acceptable, thereby contributing further to the risk to women and children. In the past decade research has documented the growing magnitude of such violence, but gaps in the data still remain. Victims of violence of any type fear stigmatization or societal condemnation and thus often hesitate to report crimes. The issue is compounded by the fact that for women and children the perpetrators are often people they know and because some countries lack laws or regulations protecting victims. Some of the data that have been collected suggest that rates of violence against women range from 15 to 71 percent in some countries and that rates of violence against children top 80 percent. These data demonstrate that violence poses a high burden on global health and that violence against women and children is common and universal.

Preventing Violence Against Women and Children focuses on these elements of the cycle as they relate to interrupting this transmission of violence. Intervention strategies include preventing violence before it starts as well as preventing recurrence, preventing adverse effects (such as trauma or the consequences of trauma), and preventing the spread of violence to the next generation or social level. Successful strategies consider the context of the violence, such as family, school, community, national, or regional settings, in order to determine the best programs.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

Gender‐Based Violence

• December 2006
• Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1087(1):178-205
• 1087(1):178-205

• Arizona State University

• Saint Xavier University

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Antonia Laura Philipa Jakobi

• Jean Parker
• Adriana Haro
• CRIME DELINQUENCY

• Robert E. Babcock
• Carrie A. Kortegast
• Tameshnie Deane
• Carly Stewart

• BMC Wom Health
• Mearg Eyasu Kifle

• Sekgobela Hellen

• Aslı Telseren Ömeroğlu
• Gail Elizabeth Wyatt

• Cindy M. Notgrass
• Aletha C. Huston
• Edward Donnerstein

• Diana Zuckerman
• Marian Meyers
• Janis Sanchez-Hucles
• Mary Ann Dutton

• Murray A. Straus
• Richard J. Gelles
• Suzanne K. Stienmetz
• Claire M. Renzetti
• J.L. Edleson
• Raquel Kennedy Bergen
• Peter Jaffe
• Violence Vict

• Michele Bograd

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

• Open access
• Published: 20 June 2023

A qualitative quantitative mixed methods study of domestic violence against women

• Mina Shayestefar 1 ,
• Mohadese Saffari 1 ,
• Razieh Gholamhosseinzadeh 2 ,
• Monir Nobahar 3 , 4 ,
• Majid Mirmohammadkhani 4 ,
• Seyed Hossein Shahcheragh 5 &
• Zahra Khosravi 6  

BMC Women's Health volume  23 , Article number:  322 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

10k Accesses

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Violence against women is one of the most widespread, persistent and detrimental violations of human rights in today’s world, which has not been reported in most cases due to impunity, silence, stigma and shame, even in the age of social communication. Domestic violence against women harms individuals, families, and society. The objective of this study was to investigate the prevalence and experiences of domestic violence against women in Semnan.

This study was conducted as mixed research (cross-sectional descriptive and phenomenological qualitative methods) to investigate domestic violence against women, and some related factors (quantitative) and experiences of such violence (qualitative) simultaneously in Semnan. In quantitative study, cluster sampling was conducted based on the areas covered by health centers from married women living in Semnan since March 2021 to March 2022 using Domestic Violence Questionnaire. Then, the obtained data were analyzed by descriptive and inferential statistics. In qualitative study by phenomenological approach and purposive sampling until data saturation, 9 women were selected who had referred to the counseling units of Semnan health centers due to domestic violence, since March 2021 to March 2022 and in-depth and semi-structured interviews were conducted. The conducted interviews were analyzed using Colaizzi’s 7-step method.

In qualitative study, seven themes were found including “Facilitators”, “Role failure”, “Repressors”, “Efforts to preserve the family”, “Inappropriate solving of family conflicts”, “Consequences”, and “Inefficient supportive systems”. In quantitative study, the variables of age, age difference and number of years of marriage had a positive and significant relationship, and the variable of the number of children had a negative and significant relationship with the total score and all fields of the questionnaire (p < 0.05). Also, increasing the level of female education and income both independently showed a significant relationship with increasing the score of violence.

Conclusions

Some of the variables of violence against women are known and the need for prevention and plans to take action before their occurrence is well felt. Also, supportive mechanisms with objective and taboo-breaking results should be implemented to minimize harm to women, and their children and families seriously.

Peer Review reports

Violence against women by husbands (physical, sexual and psychological violence) is one of the basic problems of public health and violation of women’s human rights. It is estimated that 35% of women and almost one out of every three women aged 15–49 experience physical or sexual violence by their spouse or non-spouse sexual violence in their lifetime [ 1 ]. This is a nationwide public health issue, and nearly every healthcare worker will encounter a patient who has suffered from some type of domestic or family violence. Unfortunately, different forms of family violence are often interconnected. The “cycle of abuse” frequently persists from children who witness it to their adult relationships, and ultimately to the care of the elderly [ 2 ]. This violence includes a range of physical, sexual and psychological actions, control, threats, aggression, abuse, and rape [ 3 ].

Violence against women is one of the most widespread, persistent, and detrimental violations of human rights in today’s world, which has not been reported in most cases due to impunity, silence, stigma and shame, even in the age of social communication [ 3 ]. In the United States of America, more than one in three women (35.6%) experience rape, physical violence, and intimate partner violence (IPV) during their lifetime. Compared to men, women are nearly twice as likely (13.8% vs. 24.3%) to experience severe physical violence such as choking, burns, and threats with knives or guns [ 4 ]. The higher prevalence of violence against women can be due to the situational deprivation of women in patriarchal societies [ 5 ]. The prevalence of domestic violence in Iran reported 22.9%. The maximum of prevalence estimated in Tehran and Zahedan, respectively [ 6 ]. Currently, Iran has high levels of violence against women, and the provinces with the highest rates of unemployment and poverty also have the highest levels of violence against women [ 7 ].

Domestic violence against women harms individuals, families, and society [ 8 ]. Violence against women leads to physical, sexual, psychological harm or suffering, including threats, coercion and arbitrary deprivation of their freedom in public and private life. Also, such violence is associated with harmful effects on women’s sexual reproductive health, including sexually transmitted infection such as Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), abortion, unsafe childbirth, and risky sexual behaviors [ 9 ]. There are high levels of psychological, sexual and physical domestic abuse among pregnant women [ 10 ]. Also, women with postpartum depression are significantly more likely to experience domestic violence during pregnancy [ 11 ].

Prompt attention to women’s health and rights at all levels is necessary, which reduces this problem and its risk factors [ 12 ]. Because women prefer to remain silent about domestic violence and there is a need to introduce immediate prevention programs to end domestic violence [ 13 ]. violence against women, which is an important public health problem, and concerns about human rights require careful study and the application of appropriate policies [ 14 ]. Also, the efforts to change the circumstances in which women face domestic violence remain significantly insufficient [ 15 ]. Given that few clear studies on violence against women and at the same time interviews with these people regarding their life experiences are available, the authors attempted to planning this research aims to investigate the prevalence and experiences of domestic violence against women in Semnan with the research question of “What is the prevalence of domestic violence against women in Semnan, and what are their experiences of such violence?”, so that their results can be used in part of the future planning in the health system of the society.

This study is a combination of cross-sectional and phenomenology studies in order to investigate the amount of domestic violence against women and some related factors (quantitative) and their experience of this violence (qualitative) simultaneously in the Semnan city. This study has been approved by the ethics committee of Semnan University of Medical Sciences with ethic code of IR.SEMUMS.REC.1397.182. The researcher introduced herself to the research participants, explained the purpose of the study, and then obtained informed written consent. It was assured to the research units that the collected information will be anonymous and kept confidential. The participants were informed that participation in the study was entirely voluntary, so they can withdraw from the study at any time with confidence. The participants were notified that more than one interview session may be necessary. To increase the trustworthiness of the study, Guba and Lincoln’s criteria for rigor, including credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability [ 16 ], were applied throughout the research process. The COREQ checklist was used to assess the present study quality. The researchers used observational notes for reflexivity and it preserved in all phases of this qualitative research process.

Qualitative method

Based on the phenomenological approach and with the purposeful sampling method, nine women who had referred to the counseling units of healthcare centers in Semnan city due to domestic violence in February 2021 to March 2022 were participated in the present study. The inclusion criteria for the study included marriage, a history of visiting a health center consultant due to domestic violence, and consent to participate in the study and unwillingness to participate in the study was the exclusion criteria. Each participant invited to the study by a telephone conversation about study aims and researcher information. The interviews place selected through agreement of the participant and the researcher and a place with the least environmental disturbance. Before starting each interview, the informed consent and all of the ethical considerations, including the purpose of the research, voluntary participation, confidentiality of the information were completely explained and they were asked to sign the written consent form. The participants were interviewed by depth, semi-structured and face-to-face interviews based on the main research question. Interviews were conducted by a female health services researcher with a background in nursing (M.Sh.). Data collection was continued until the data saturation and no new data appeared. Only the participants and the researcher were present during the interviews. All interviews were recorded by a MP3 Player by permission of the participants before starting. Interviews were not repeated. No additional field notes were taken during or after the interview.

The age range of the participants was from 38 to 55 years and their average age was 40 years. The sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in table below (Table  1 ).

Five interviews in the courtyards of healthcare centers, 2 interviews in the park, and 2 interviews at the participants’ homes were conducted. The duration of the interviews varied from 45 min to one hour. The main research question was “What is your experience about domestic violence?“. According to the research progress some other questions were asked in line with the main question of the research.

The conducted interviews were analyzed by using the 7 steps Colizzi’s method [ 17 ]. In order to empathize with the participants, each interview was read several times and transcribed. Then two researchers (M.Sh. and M.N.) extracted the phrases that were directly related to the phenomenon of domestic violence against women independently and distinguished from other sentences by underlining them. Then these codes were organized into thematic clusters and the formulated concepts were sorted into specific thematic categories.

In the final stage, in order to make the data reliable, the researcher again referred to 2 participants and checked their agreement with their perceptions of the content. Also, possible important contents were discussed and clarified, and in this way, agreement and approval of the samples was obtained.

Quantitative method

The cross-sectional study was implemented from February 2021 to March 2022 with cluster sampling of married women in areas of 3 healthcare centers in Semnan city. Those participants who were married and agreed with the written and verbal informed consent about the ethical considerations were included to the study. The questionnaire was completed by the participants in paper and online form.

The instrument was the standard questionnaire of domestic violence against women by Mohseni Tabrizi et al. [ 18 ]. In the questionnaire, questions 1–10, 11–36, 37–65 and 66–71 related to sociodemographic information, types of spousal abuse (psychological, economical, physical and sexual violence), patriarchal beliefs and traditions and family upbringing and learning violence, respectively. In total, this questionnaire has 71 items.

The scoring of the questionnaire has two parts and the answers to them are based on the Likert scale. Questions 11–36 and 66–71 are answered with always [ 4 ] to never (0) and questions 37–65 with completely agree [ 4 ] to completely disagree (0). The minimum and maximum score is 0 and 300, respectively. The total score of 0–60, 61–120 and higher than 121 demonstrates low, moderate and severe domestic violence against women, respectively [ 18 ].

In the study by Tabrizi et al., to evaluate the validity and reliability of this questionnaire, researchers tried to measure the face validity of the scale by the previous research. Those items and questions which their accuracies were confirmed by social science professors and experts used in the research, finally. The total Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.183, which confirmed that the reliability of the questions and items of the questionnaire is sufficient [ 18 ].

Descriptive data were reported using mean, standard deviation, frequency and percentage. Then, to measure the relationship between the variables, χ2 and Pearson tests also variance and regression analysis were performed. All analysis were performed by using SPSS version 26 and the significance level was considered as p < 0.05.

Qualitative results

According to the third step of Colaizzi’s 7-step method, the researcher attempted to conceptualize and formulate the extracted meanings. In this step, the primary codes were extracted from the important sentences related to the phenomenon of violence against women, which were marked by underlining, which are shown below as examples of this stage and coding.

The primary code of indifference to the father’s role was extracted from the following sentences. This is indifference in the role of the father in front of the children.

“Some time ago, I told him that our daughter is single-sided deaf. She has a doctor’s appointment; I have to take her to the doctor. He said that I don’t have money to give you. He doesn’t force himself to make money anyway” (p 2, 33 yrs).

“He didn’t value his own children. He didn’t think about his older children” (p 4, 54 yrs).

The primary code extracted here included lack of commitment in the role of head of the household. This is irresponsibility towards the family and meeting their needs.

“My husband was fired from work after 10 years due to disorder and laziness. Since then, he has not found a suitable job. Every time he went to work, he was fired after a month because of laziness” (p 7, 55 yrs).

“In the evening, he used to get dressed and go out, and he didn’t come back until late. Some nights, I was so afraid of being alone that I put a knife under my pillow when I slept” (p 2, 33 yrs).

A total of 246 primary codes were extracted from the interviews in the third step. In the fourth step, the researchers put the formulated concepts (primary codes) into 85 specific sub-categories.

Twenty-three categories were extracted from 85 sub-categories. In the sixth step, the concepts of the fifth step were integrated and formed seven themes (Table  2 ).

These themes included “Facilitators”, “Role failure”, “Repressors”, “Efforts to preserve the family”, “Inappropriate solving of family conflicts”, “Consequences”, and “Inefficient supportive systems” (Fig.  1 ).

Themes of domestic violence against women

Some of the statements of the participants on the theme of “ Facilitators” are listed below:

Husband’s criminal record

“He got his death sentence for drugs. But, at last it was ended for 10 years” (p 4, 54 yrs).

Inappropriate age for marriage

“At the age of thirteen, I married a boy who was 25 years old” (p 8, 25 yrs).

“My first husband obeyed her parents. I was 12–13 years old” (p 3, 32 yrs).

“I couldn’t do anything. I was humiliated” (p 1, 38 yrs).

“A bridegroom came. The mother was against. She said, I am young. My older sister is not married yet, but I was eager to get married. I don’t know, maybe my father’s house was boring for me” (p 2, 33 yrs).

“My parents used to argue badly. They blamed each other and I always wanted to run away from these arguments. I didn’t have the patience to talk to mom or dad and calm them down” (p 5, 39 yrs).

Overdependence

“My husband’s parents don’t stop interfering, but my husband doesn’t say anything because he is a student of his father. My husband is self-employed and works with his father on a truck” (p 8, 25 yrs).

“Every time I argue with my husband because of lack of money, my mother-in-law supported her son and brought him up very spoiled and lazy” (p 7, 55 yrs).

Bitter memories

“After three years, my mother married her friend with my uncle’s insistence and went to Shiraz. But, his condition was that she did not have the right to bring his daughter with her. In fact, my mother also got married out of necessity” (p 8, 25 yrs).

Some of their other statements related to “ Role failure” are mentioned below:

Lack of commitment to different roles

“I got angry several times and went to my father’s house because of my husband’s bad financial status and the fact that he doesn’t feel responsible to work and always says that he cannot find a job” (p 6, 48 yrs).

“I saw that he does not want to change in any way” (p 4, 54 yrs).

“No matter how kind I am, it does not work” (p 1, 38 yrs).

Some of their other statements regarding “ Repressors” are listed below:

Fear and silence

“My mother always forced me to continue living with my husband. Finally, my father had been poor. She all said that you didn’t listen to me when you wanted to get married, so you don’t have the right to get angry and come to me, I’m miserable enough” (p 2, 33 yrs).

“Because I suffered a lot in my first marital life. I was very humiliated. I said I would be fine with that. To be kind” (p1, 38 yrs).

“Well, I tell myself that he gets angry sometimes” (p 3, 32 yrs).

Shame from society

“I don’t want my daughter-in-law to know. She is not a relative” (p 4, 54 yrs).

Some of the statements of the participants regarding the theme of “ Efforts to preserve the family” are listed below:

Hope and trust

“I always hope in God and I am patient” (p 2, 33 yrs).

Efforts for children

“My divorce took a month. We got a divorce. I forgave my dowry and took my children instead” (p 2, 33 yrs).

Some of their other statements regarding the “ Inappropriate solving of family conflicts” are listed below:

Child-bearing thoughts

“My husband wanted to take me to a doctor to treat me. But my father-in-law refused and said that instead of doing this and spending money, marry again. Marriage in the clans was much easier than any other work” (p 8, 25 yrs).

Lack of effective communication

“I was nervous about him, but I didn’t say anything” (p 5, 39 yrs).

“Now I am satisfied with my life and thank God it is better to listen to people’s words. Now there is someone above me so that people don’t talk behind me” (p 2, 33 yrs).

Some of their other statements regarding the “ Consequences” are listed below:

Harm to children

“My eldest daughter, who was about 7–8 years old, behaved differently. Oh, I was angry. My children are mentally depressed and argue” (p 5, 39 yrs).

After divorce

“Even though I got a divorce, my mother and I came to a remote area due to the fear of what my family would say” (p 2, 33 yrs).

Social harm

“I work at a retirement center for living expenses” (p 2, 33 yrs).

“I had to go to clean the houses” (p 5, 39 yrs).

Non-acceptance in the family

“The children’s relationship with their father became bad. Because every time they saw their father sitting at home smoking, they got angry” (p 7, 55 yrs).

Emotional harm

“When I look back, I regret why I was not careful in my choice” (p 7, 55 yrs).

“I felt very bad. For being married to a man who is not bound by the family and is capricious” (p 9, 36 yrs).

Some of their other statements regarding “ Inefficient supportive systems” are listed below:

Inappropriate family support

“We didn’t have children. I was at my father’s house for about a month. After a month, when I came home, I saw that my husband had married again. I cried a lot that day. He said, God, I had to. I love you. My heart is broken, I have no one to share my words” (p 8, 25 yrs).

“My brother-in-law was like himself. His parents had also died. His sister did not listen at all” (p 4, 54 yrs).

“I didn’t have anyone and I was alone” (p 1, 38 yrs).

Inefficiency of social systems

“That day he argued with me, picked me up and threw me down some stairs in the middle of the yard. He came closer, sat on my stomach, grabbed my neck with both of his hands and wanted to strangle me. Until a long time later, I had kidney problems and my neck was bruised by her hand. Given that my aunt and her family were with us in a building, but she had no desire to testify and was afraid” (p 3, 32 yrs).

Undesired training and advice

“I told my mother, you just said no, how old I was? You never insisted on me and you didn’t listen to me that this man is not good for you” (p 9, 36 yrs).

Quantitative results

In the present study, 376 married women living in Semnan city participated in this study. The mean age of participants was 38.52 ± 10.38 years. The youngest participant was 18 and the oldest was 73 years old. The maximum age difference was 16 years. The years of marriage varied from one year to 40 years. Also, the number of children varied from no children to 7. The majority of them had 2 children (109, 29%). The sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in the table below (Table  3 ).

The frequency distribution (number and percentage) of the participants in terms of the level of violence was as follows. 89 participants (23.7%) had experienced low violence, 59 participants (15.7%) had experienced moderate violence, and 228 participants (60.6%) had experienced severe violence.

Cronbach’s alpha for the reliability of the questionnaire was 0.988. The mean and standard deviation of the total score of the questionnaire was 143.60 ± 74.70 with a range of 3-244. The relationship between the total score of the questionnaire and its fields, and some demographic variables is summarized in the table below (Table  4 ).

As shown in the table above, the variables of age, age difference and number of years of marriage have a positive and significant relationship, and the variable of number of children has a negative and significant relationship with the total score and all fields of the questionnaire (p < 0.05). However, the variable of education level difference showed no significant relationship with the total score and any of the fields. Also, the highest average score is related to patriarchal beliefs compared to other fields.

The comparison of the average total scores separately according to each variable showed the significant average difference in the variables of the previous marriage history of the woman, the result of the previous marriage of the woman, the education of the woman, the education of the man, the income of the woman, the income of the man, and the physical disease of the man (p < 0.05).

In the regression model, two variables remained in the final model, indicating the relationship between the variables and violence score and the importance of these two variables. An increase in women’s education and income level both independently show a significant relationship with an increase in violence score (Table  5 ).

The results of analysis of variance to compare the scores of each field of violence in the subgroups of the participants also showed that the experience and result of the woman’s previous marriage has a significant relationship with physical violence and tradition and family upbringing, the experience of the man’s previous marriage has a significant relationship with patriarchal belief, the education level of the woman has a significant relationship with all fields and the level of education of the man has a significant relationship with all fields except tradition and family upbringing (p < 0.05).

According to the results of both quantitative and qualitative studies, variables such as the young age of the woman and a large age difference are very important factors leading to an increase in violence. At a younger age, girls are afraid of the stigma of society and family, and being forced to remain silent can lead to an increase in domestic violence. As Gandhi et al. (2021) stated in their study in the same field, a lower marriage age leads to many vulnerabilities in women. Early marriage is a global problem associated with a wide range of health and social consequences, including violence for adolescent girls and women [ 12 ]. Also, Ahmadi et al. (2017) found similar findings, reporting a significant association among IPV and women age ≤ 40 years [ 19 ].

Two others categories of “Facilitators” in the present study were “Husband’s criminal record” and “Overdependence” which had a sub-category of “Forced cohabitation”. Ahmadi et al. (2017) reported in their population-based study in Iran that husband’s addiction and rented-householders have a significant association with IPV [ 19 ].

The patriarchal beliefs, which are rooted in the tradition and culture of society and family upbringing, scored the highest in relation to domestic violence in this study. On the other hand, in qualitative study, “Normalcy” of men’s anger and harassment of women in society is one of the “Repressors” of women to express violence. In the quantitative study, the increase in the women’s education and income level were predictors of the increase in violence. Although domestic violence is more common in some sections of society, women with a wide range of ages, different levels of education, and at different levels of society face this problem, most of which are not reported. Bukuluki et al. (2021) showed that women who agreed that it is good for a man to control his partner were more likely to experience physical violence [ 20 ].

Domestic violence leads to “Consequences” such as “Harm to children”, “Emotional harm”, “Social harm” to women and even “Non-acceptance in their own family”. Because divorce is a taboo in Iranian culture and the fear of humiliating women forces them to remain silent against domestic violence. Balsarkar (2021) stated that the fear of violence can prevent women from continuing their studies, working or exercising their political rights [ 8 ]. Also, Walker-Descarte et al. (2021) recognized domestic violence as a type of child maltreatment, and these abusive behaviors are associated with mental and physical health consequences [ 21 ].

On the other hand and based on the “Lack of effective communication” category, ignoring the role of the counselor in solving family conflicts and challenges in the life of couples in the present study was expressed by women with reasons such as lack of knowledge and family resistance to counseling. Several pathologies are needed to investigate increased domestic violence in situations such as during women’s pregnancy or infertility. Because the use of counseling for couples as a suitable solution should be considered along with their life challenges. Lin et al. (2022) stated that pregnant women were exposed to domestic violence for low birth weight in full term delivery. Spouse violence screening in the perinatal health care system should be considered important, especially for women who have had full-term low birth weight infants [ 22 ].

Also, lack of knowledge and low level of education have been found as other factors of violence in this study, which is very prominent in both qualitative and quantitative studies. Because the social systems and information about the existing laws should be followed properly in society to act as a deterrent. Psychological training and especially anger control and resilience skills during education at a younger age for girls and boys should be included in educational materials to determine the positive results in society in the long term. Manouchehri et al. (2022) stated that it seems necessary to train men about the negative impact of domestic violence on the current and future status of the family [ 23 ]. Balsarkar (2021) also stated that men and women who have not had the opportunity to question gender roles, attitudes and beliefs cannot change such things. Women who are unaware of their rights cannot claim. Governments and organizations cannot adequately address these issues without access to standards, guidelines and tools [ 8 ]. Machado et al. (2021) also stated that gender socialization reinforces gender inequalities and affects the behavior of men and women. So, highlighting this problem in different fields, especially in primary health care services, is a way to prevent IPV against women [ 24 ].

There was a sub-category of “Inefficiency of social systems” in the participants experiences. Perhaps the reason for this is due to insufficient education and knowledge, or fear of seeking help. Holmes et al. (2022) suggested the importance of ascertaining strategies to improve victims’ experiences with the court, especially when victims’ requests are not met, to increase future engagement with the system [ 25 ]. Sigurdsson (2019) revealed that despite high prevalence numbers, IPV is still a hidden and underdiagnosed problem and neither general practitioner nor our communities are as well prepared as they should be [ 26 ]. Moreira and Pinto da Costa (2021) found that while victims of domestic violence often agree with mandatory reporting, various concerns are still expressed by both victims and healthcare professionals that require further attention and resolution [ 27 ]. It appears that legal and ethical issues in this regard require comprehensive evaluation from the perspectives of victims, their families, healthcare workers, and legal experts. By doing so, better practical solutions can be found to address domestic violence, leading to a downward trend in its occurrence.

Some of the variables of violence against women have been identified and emphasized in many studies, highlighting the necessity of policymaking and social pathology in society to prevent and use operational plans to take action before their occurrence. Breaking the taboo of domestic violence and promoting divorce as a viable solution after counseling to receive objective results should be implemented seriously to minimize harm to women, children, and their families.

Limitations

Domestic violence against women is an important issue in Iranian society that women resist showing and expressing, making researchers take a long-term process of sampling in both qualitative and quantitative studies. The location of the interview and the women’s fear of their husbands finding out about their participation in this study have been other challenges of the researchers, which, of course, they attempted to minimize by fully respecting ethical considerations. Despite the researchers’ efforts, their personal and professional experiences, as well as the studies reviewed in the literature review section, may have influenced the study results.

Data Availability

Data and materials will be available upon email to the corresponding author.

Abbreviations

Intimate Partner Violence

Human Immunodeficiency Virus

Organization WH. Violence against women prevalence estimates, 2018: global, regional and national prevalence estimates for intimate partner violence against women and global and regional prevalence estimates for non-partner sexual violence against women. World Health Organization; 2021.

Huecker MR, Malik A, King KC, Smock W. Kentucky Domestic Violence. StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL) ineligible companies. Disclosure: Ahmad Malik declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies. Disclosure: Kevin King declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies. Disclosure: William Smock declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.: StatPearls Publishing Copyright © 2023, StatPearls Publishing LLC.; 2023.

Gandhi A, Bhojani P, Balkawade N, Goswami S, Kotecha Munde B, Chugh A. Analysis of survey on violence against women and early marriage: Gyneaecologists’ perspective. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2021;71(Suppl 2):76–83.

Article   Google Scholar  

Sugg N. Intimate partner violence: prevalence, health consequences, and intervention. Med Clin. 2015;99(3):629–49.

Google Scholar  

Abebe Abate B, Admassu Wossen B, Tilahun Degfie T. Determinants of intimate partner violence during pregnancy among married women in Abay Chomen district, western Ethiopia: a community based cross sectional study. BMC Womens Health. 2016;16(1):1–8.

Adineh H, Almasi Z, Rad M, Zareban I, Moghaddam A. Prevalence of domestic violence against women in Iran: a systematic review. Epidemiol (Sunnyvale). 2016;6(276):2161–11651000276.

Pirnia B, Pirnia F, Pirnia K. Honour killings and violence against women in Iran during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(10):e60.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Balsarkar G. Summary of four recent studies on violence against women which obstetrician and gynaecologists should know. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2021;71:64–7.

Ellsberg M, Jansen HA, Heise L, Watts CH, Garcia-Moreno C. Intimate partner violence and women’s physical and mental health in the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence: an observational study. The lancet. 2008;371(9619):1165–72.

Chasweka R, Chimwaza A, Maluwa A. Isn’t pregnancy supposed to be a joyful time? A cross-sectional study on the types of domestic violence women experience during pregnancy in Malawi. Malawi Med journal: J Med Association Malawi. 2018;30(3):191–6.

Afshari P, Tadayon M, Abedi P, Yazdizadeh S. Prevalence and related factors of postpartum depression among reproductive aged women in Ahvaz. Iran Health care women Int. 2020;41(3):255–65.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Gebrezgi BH, Badi MB, Cherkose EA, Weldehaweria NB. Factors associated with intimate partner physical violence among women attending antenatal care in Shire Endaselassie town, Tigray, northern Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study, July 2015. Reproductive health. 2017;14:1–10.

Duran S, Eraslan ST. Violence against women: affecting factors and coping methods for women. J Pak Med Assoc. 2019;69(1):53–7.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Devries KM, Mak JY, Garcia-Moreno C, Petzold M, Child JC, Falder G, et al. The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science. 2013;340(6140):1527–8.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Mahapatro M, Kumar A. Domestic violence, women’s health, and the sustainable development goals: integrating global targets, India’s national policies, and local responses. J Public Health Policy. 2021;42(2):298–309.

Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry: sage; 1985.

Colaizzi PF. Psychological research as the phenomenologist views it. 1978.

Mohseni Tabrizi A, Kaldi A, Javadianzadeh M. The study of domestic violence in Marrid Women Addmitted to Yazd Legal Medicine Organization and Welfare Organization. Tolooebehdasht. 2013;11(3):11–24.

Ahmadi R, Soleimani R, Jalali MM, Yousefnezhad A, Roshandel Rad M, Eskandari A. Association of intimate partner violence with sociodemographic factors in married women: a population-based study in Iran. Psychol Health Med. 2017;22(7):834–44.

Bukuluki P, Kisaakye P, Wandiembe SP, Musuya T, Letiyo E, Bazira D. An examination of physical violence against women and its justification in development settings in Uganda. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(9):e0255281.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Walker-Descartes I, Mineo M, Condado LV, Agrawal N. Domestic violence and its Effects on Women, Children, and families. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2021;68(2):455–64.

Lin C-H, Lin W-S, Chang H-Y, Wu S-I. Domestic violence against pregnant women is a potential risk factor for low birthweight in full-term neonates: a population-based retrospective cohort study. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(12):e0279469.

Manouchehri E, Ghavami V, Larki M, Saeidi M, Latifnejad Roudsari R. Domestic violence experienced by women with multiple sclerosis: a study from the North-East of Iran. BMC Womens Health. 2022;22(1):1–14.

Machado DF, Castanheira ERL, Almeida MASd. Intersections between gender socialization and violence against women by the intimate partner. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2021;26:5003–12.

Holmes SC, Maxwell CD, Cattaneo LB, Bellucci BA, Sullivan TP. Criminal Protection orders among women victims of intimate Partner violence: Women’s Experiences of Court decisions, processes, and their willingness to Engage with the system in the future. J interpers Violence. 2022;37(17–18):Np16253–np76.

Sigurdsson EL. Domestic violence-are we up to the task? Scand J Prim Health Care. 2019;37(2):143–4.

Moreira DN, Pinto da Costa M. Should domestic violence be or not a public crime? J Public Health. 2021;43(4):833–8.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors of this study appreciate the Deputy for Research and Technology of Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Social Determinants of Health Research Center of Semnan University of Medical Sciences and all the participants in this study.

Research deputy of Semnan University of Medical Sciences financially supported this project.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Allied Medical Sciences, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Mina Shayestefar & Mohadese Saffari

Amir Al Momenin Hospital, Social Security Organization, Ahvaz, Iran

Razieh Gholamhosseinzadeh

Department of Nursing, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Monir Nobahar

Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Monir Nobahar & Majid Mirmohammadkhani

Clinical Research Development Unit, Kowsar Educational, Research and Therapeutic Hospital, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Seyed Hossein Shahcheragh

Student Research Committee, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Zahra Khosravi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

M.Sh. contributed to the first conception and design of this research; M.Sh., Z.Kh., M.S., R.Gh. and S.H.Sh. contributed to collect data; M.N. and M.Sh. contributed to the analysis of the qualitative data; M.M. and M.Sh. contributed to the analysis of the quantitative data; M.SH., M.N. and M.M. contributed to the interpretation of the data; M.Sh., M.S. and S.H.Sh. wrote the manuscript. M.Sh. prepared the final version of manuscript for submission. All authors reviewed the manuscript meticulously and approved it. All names of the authors were listed in the title page.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mina Shayestefar .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This article is resulted from a research approved by the Vice Chancellor for Research of Semnan University of Medical Sciences with ethics code of IR.SEMUMS.REC.1397.182 in the Social Determinants of Health Research Center. The authors confirmed that all methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. All participants accepted the participation in the present study. The researchers introduced themselves to the research units, explained the purpose of the research to them and then all participants signed the written informed consent. The research units were assured that the collected information was anonymous. The participant was informed that participating in the study was completely voluntary so that they can safely withdraw from the study at any time and also the availability of results upon their request.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

All authors declare that there are no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shayestefar, M., Saffari, M., Gholamhosseinzadeh, R. et al. A qualitative quantitative mixed methods study of domestic violence against women. BMC Women's Health 23 , 322 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-023-02483-0

Download citation

Received : 28 April 2023

Accepted : 14 June 2023

Published : 20 June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-023-02483-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Domestic violence
• Cross-sectional studies
• Qualitative research

BMC Women's Health

ISSN: 1472-6874

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Domestic Violence Awareness

Information & authors, metrics & citations, view options, information, published in.

Affiliations

Funding information, export citations.

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download. For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu .

To download the citation to this article, select your reference manager software.

There are no citations for this item

View options

Login options.

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Purchase Options

Purchase this article to access the full text.

PPV Articles - American Journal of Psychiatry

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR ® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Share article link

Copying failed.

PREVIOUS ARTICLE

Next article, request username.

Can't sign in? Forgot your username? Enter your email address below and we will send you your username

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username

Create a new account

Change password, password changed successfully.

Your password has been changed

Reset password

Can't sign in? Forgot your password?

Enter your email address below and we will send you the reset instructions

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to reset your password.

Your Phone has been verified

As described within the American Psychiatric Association (APA)'s Privacy Policy and Terms of Use , this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences. Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

Gun Violence: Prediction, Prevention, and Policy

• Gun Violence and Crime

Gun violence is an urgent, complex, and multifaceted problem. It requires evidence-based, multifaceted solutions. Psychology can make important contributions to policies that prevent gun violence. Toward this end, in February 2013 the American Psychological Association commissioned this report by a panel of experts to convey research-based conclusions and recommendations (and to identify gaps in such knowledge) on how to reduce the incidence of gun violence — whether by homicide, suicide, or mass shootings — nationwide.

Following are chapter-by-chapter highlights and short summaries of conclusions and recommendations of the report’s authors. More information and supporting citations can be found within the chapters themselves.

Antecedents to Gun Violence: Developmental Issues

A complex and variable constellation of risk and protective factors makes persons more or less likely to use a firearm against themselves or others. For this reason, there is no single profile that can reliably predict who will use a gun in a violent act. Instead, gun violence is associated with a confluence of individual, family, school, peer, community, and sociocultural risk factors that interact over time during childhood and adolescence. Although many youths desist in aggressive and antisocial behavior during late adolescence, others are disproportionately at risk for becoming involved in or otherwise affected by gun violence. The most consistent and powerful predictor of future violence is a history of violent behavior.  P revention efforts guided by research on developmental risk can reduce the likelihood that firearms will be introduced into community and family conflicts or criminal activity.  Prevention efforts can also reduce the relatively rare occasions when severe mental illness contributes to homicide or the more common circumstances when depression or other mental illness contributes to suicide. Reducing incidents of gun violence arising from criminal misconduct or suicide is an important goal of broader primary and secondary prevention and intervention strategies. Such strategies must also attend to redirecting developmental antecedents and larger sociocultural processes that contribute to gun violence and gun-related deaths.

Antecedents to Gun Violence: Gender and Culture

Any account of gun violence in the United States must be able to explain both why males are perpetrators of the vast majority of gun violence and why the vast majority of males never perpetrate gun violence. Preliminary evidence suggests that changing perceptions among males of social norms about behaviors and characteristics associated with masculinity may reduce the prevalence of intimate partner and sexual violence. Such interventions need to be further tested for their potential to reduce gun violence. The skills and knowledge of psychologists are needed to develop and evaluate programs and settings in schools, workplaces, prisons, neighborhoods, clinics, and other relevant contexts that aim to change gendered expectations for males that emphasize self-sufficiency, toughness, and violence, including gun violence.

What Works: Gun Violence Prediction and Prevention at the Individual Level

Although it is important to recognize that most people suffering from a mental illness are not dangerous, for those persons at risk for violence due to mental illness, suicidal thoughts, or feelings of desperation, mental health treatment can often prevent gun violence. Policies and programs that identify and provide treatment for all persons suffering from a mental illness should be a national priority. Urgent attention must be paid to the current level of access to mental health services in the United States; such access is woefully insufficient. Additionally, it should be noted that behavioral threat assessment is becoming a standard of care for preventing violence in schools, colleges, and the workplace and against government and other public officials. Threat assessment teams gather and analyze information to assess if a person poses a threat of violence or self-harm, and if so, take steps to intervene.

What Works: Gun Violence Prevention at the Community Level

Prevention of violence occurs along a continuum that begins in early childhood with programs to help parents raise emotionally healthy children and ends with efforts to identify and intervene with troubled individuals who are threatening violence. The mental health community must take the lead in advocating for community-based collaborative problem-solving models to address the prevention of gun violence. Such models should blend prevention strategies in an effort to overcome the tendency within many community service systems to operate in silos. There has been some success with community-based programs involving police training in crisis intervention and with community members trained in mental health first aid. These programs need further piloting and study so they can be expanded to additional communities as appropriate. In addition, public health messaging campaigns on safe gun storage are needed. The practice of keeping all firearms appropriately stored and locked must become the only socially acceptable norm.

What Works: Policies to Reduce Gun Violence

The use of a gun greatly increases the odds that violence will lead to a fatality: This problem calls for urgent action. Firearm prohibitions for high-risk groups — domestic violence offenders, persons convicted of violent misdemeanor crimes, and individuals with mental illness who have been adjudicated as being a threat to themselves or to others — have been shown to reduce violence. The licensing of handgun purchasers, background check requirements for all gun sales, and close oversight of retail gun sellers can reduce the diversion of guns to criminals. Reducing the incidence of gun violence will require interventions through multiple systems, including legal, public health, public safety, community, and health. Increasing the availability of data and funding will help inform and evaluate policies designed to reduce gun violence.

Dewey Cornell, PhD, and Nancy G. Guerra, EdD

Gun violence is an important national problem leading to more than 31,000 deaths and 78,000 nonfatal injuries every year. Although the rate of gun homicides in the United States has declined in recent years, U.S. rates remain substantially higher than those of almost every other nation in the world and are at least seven times higher than those of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and many others (see Alpers & Wilson).

Guns are not a necessary or sufficient cause of violence and can be used legally for a variety of sanctioned activities. Still, they are especially lethal weapons that are used in approximately two thirds of the homicides and more than half of all suicides in the United States. Every day in the United States, approximately 30 persons die of homicides and 53 persons die of suicides committed by someone using a gun (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2013a). Guns also provide individuals with the capacity to carry out multiple-fatality shootings that inflict great trauma and grief on our society, and the public rightly insists on action to make our communities safer.

Gun violence demands special attention. At the federal level, President Barack Obama announced a new “Now Is the Time” plan (White House, 2013) to address firearm violence to better protect children and communities and issued 23 related executive orders to federal agencies. The importance of continued research to address firearm violence is reflected in the 2013 report of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the National Research Council (NRC) "Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence. "  This report calls for a public health approach that emphasizes the importance of accurate information on the number and distribution of guns in the United States, including risk factors and motivations for acquisition and use, the association between exposure to media violence and any subsequent perpetration of gun violence, and how new technology can facilitate prevention. The report also outlines a research agenda to facilitate programs and policies that can reduce the occurrence and impact of firearm-related violence in the United States.

Psychology can make an important contribution to policies that prevent gun violence. Rather than debate whether “people” kill people or “guns” kill people, a reasonable approach to facilitate prevention is that “people with guns kill people.” The problem is more complex than simple slogans and requires careful study and analysis of the different psychological factors, behavioral pathways, social circumstances, and cultural factors that lead to gun violence. Whether prevention efforts should focus on guns because they are such a powerful tool for violence, on other factors that might have equal or greater impact, or on some combination of factors should be a scientific question settled by evidence.

Toward this end, the American Psychological Association (APA) commissioned this report, with three goals. First, this report is intended to focus on gun violence, recognizing that knowledge about gun violence must be related to a broader understanding of violence. Second, the report reviews what is known from the best current science on antecedents to gun violence and effective prevention strategies at the individual, community, and national levels. Finally, the report identifies policy directions, gaps in the literature, and suggestions for continued research that can help address unresolved questions about effective strategies to reduce gun violence. For over a decade, research on gun violence has been stifled by legal restrictions, political pressure applied to agencies not to fund research on certain gun-related topics, and a lack of funding. The authors of this report believe the cost of gun violence to our society is too great to allow these barriers to remain in place.

The Role of Mental Health and Mental Illness

An important focus of this report is the role that mental health and mental illness play in why individuals commit firearm-related violence and how this can inform preventive efforts. This focus undoubtedly brings to mind shootings such as those in Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., and Tucson, Ariz. However, it is important to realize that mass fatality incidents of this type, although highly publicized, are extremely rare, accounting for one tenth of 1 percent of all firearm-related homicides in the United States (CDC, 2013a). Moreover, serious mental illness affects a significant percentage of the U.S. population, with prevalence estimates in the general population as high as 5 percent (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA], 2012). This is quite significant, given that the term serious mental illness is typically reserved for the most debilitating kinds of mental disorder, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and the most severe forms of depression, but can include other mental disorders that result in acute functional impairment.

Although many highly publicized shootings have involved persons with serious mental illness, it must be recognized that persons with serious mental illness commit only a small proportion of firearm-related homicides; the problem of gun violence cannot be resolved simply through efforts focused on serious mental illness (Webster & Vernick, 2013a). Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of people with serious mental illness do not engage in violence toward others and should not be stereotyped as dangerous (Sirotich, 2008).

It also is important to recognize that for the small proportion of individuals whose serious mental illness does predispose them to violence, there are significant societal barriers to treatment. Psychiatric hospitalization can be helpful, but treatment can be expensive, and there may not be appropriate follow-up services in the community. Civil commitment laws, which serve to protect individuals from being unreasonably detained or forced into treatment against their will, can also prevent professionals from treating someone who does not recognize his or her need for treatment.

Other kinds of mental disorders that do not rise to the level of serious mental illness also are associated with gun violence and criminal behavior generally. For example, conduct disorder and antisocial personality disorder are associated with increased risk for violence. (This link is not surprising because violent behavior is counted as one of the symptoms that helps qualify someone for the diagnosis.) Nevertheless, there are well-established, scientifically validated mental health treatment programs for individuals with these disorders, such as multisystemic therapy, that can reduce violent recidivism (Henggeler, 2011). Substance abuse is another form of mental disorder that is a risk factor for violence in the general population and also increases the risk for violence among persons with serious mental illness (Van Dorn, Volavka, & Johnson, 2012).

These observations reflect the complexity of relationships among serious mental illness, mental disorders, and violence. In contrast to homicide, suicide accounts for approximately 61 percent of all firearm fatalities in the United States (CDC, 2013a), and more than 90 percent of persons who commit suicide have some combination of depression, symptoms of other mental disorders, and/or substance abuse (Moscicki, 2001). This suggests that mental health and mental illness are especially relevant to understanding and preventing suicide, the leading type of firearm-related death.

Prediction and Prevention

The prediction of an individual’s propensity for violence is a complex and challenging task for mental health professionals, who often are called upon by courts, correctional authorities, schools, and others to assess the risk of an individual’s violence. Mental health professionals are expected to take action to protect potential victims when they judge that their patient or client poses a danger to others. However, decades of research have established that there is only a moderate ability to identify individuals likely to commit serious acts of violence. Much depends on the kind of violence and the time frame for prediction. For example, there are specialized instruments for the assessment of violence risk among sex offenders, civilly committed psychiatric patients, and domestic violence offenders. However, the time frame and focus for these predictions often are broadly concerned with long-term predictions that someone will ever be violent with anyone rather than whether a person will commit a particular act of targeted violence.

Research has moved the field beyond the assessment of “dangerousness” as a simple individual characteristic applicable in all cases to recognize that predictive efforts must consider a range of personal, social, and situational factors that can lead to different forms of violent behavior in different circumstances. Moreover, risk assessment has expanded to include concepts of risk management and interventions aimed at reducing risk.

In making predictions about the risk for mass shootings, there is no consistent psychological profile or set of warning signs that can be used reliably to identify such individuals in the general population. A more promising approach is the strategy of behavioral threat assessment , which is concerned with identifying and intervening with individuals who have communicated threats of violence or engaged in behavior that clearly indicates planning or preparation to commit a violent act. A threat assessment approach recognizes that individuals who threaten targeted violence are usually troubled, depressed, and despondent over their circumstances in life. A threat assessment leads to interventions intended to reduce the risk of violence by taking steps to address the problem that underlies the threatening behavior. Such problems can range from workplace conflicts to schoolyard bullying to serious mental illness. One of the most influential threat assessment models was developed by the U.S. Secret Service (Fein et al., 2002; Vossekuil, Fein, Reddy, Borum, & Modzelski, 2002) and has been adapted for use in schools, colleges, business settings, and the U.S. military.

The limited ability to make accurate predictions of violence has led some to question whether prevention is possible. This is a common misconception, because prevention does not require prediction of a specific individual’s behavior . For example, public health campaigns have reduced problems ranging from lung cancer to motor vehicle accidents by identifying risk factors and promoting safer behaviors even though it is not possible to predict whether a specific individual will develop lung cancer or have a motor vehicle accident (Mozaffarian, Hemenway, & Ludwig, 2013). A substantial body of scientific evidence identifies important developmental, familial, and social risk factors for violence. In addition, an array of rigorously tested psychological and educational interventions facilitate healthy social development and reduce aggressive behavior by teaching social skills and problem-solving strategies. It is important that policymakers and stakeholders recognize the value of prevention.

Prevention measures also should be distinguished from security measures and crisis response plans. Prevention must begin long before a gunman comes into a school or shopping center. Prevention efforts are often conceptualized as taking place on primary, secondary, and tertiary levels:

• Primary prevention (also called universal prevention) consists of efforts to promote healthy development in the general population. An example would be a curriculum to teach all children social skills to resist negative peer influences and resolve conflicts peacefully.
• Secondary prevention (also called selective prevention) involves assistance for individuals who are at increased risk for violence. Mentoring programs and conflict-mediation services are examples of such assistance.
• Tertiary prevention (also called indicated prevention) consists of intensive services for individuals who have engaged in some degree of aggressive behavior and could benefit from efforts to prevent a recurrence or escalation of aggression. Programs to rehabilitate juvenile offenders are examples.

Throughout this report, we discuss evidence-based prevention programs relevant to the issue of firearm-related violence.

Research can help us understand and prevent gun violence. The psychological research summarized in this report can inform public policy and prevention efforts designed to promote public safety and reduce violence. Gun violence is not a simple, discrete category of crime; it shares characteristics with other forms of violence, and it can be a product of an array of cultural, social, psychological, and situational factors. Nevertheless, there is valuable psychological knowledge that can be used to make our communities safer.

Robert Kinscherff, PhD, JD; Nancy G. Guerra, EdD; and Ariel A. Williamson, MA

Youth gun violence is often sensationalized and misunderstood by the general public, in part because of increasingly public acts of violence and related media coverage (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006; Williams, Tuthill, & Lio, 2008). In truth, only a small number of juvenile offenders commit the majority of violent juvenile crimes in the United States (Williams et al., 2008). Most juvenile offenders commit “nonperson” offenses, usually in terms of property and technical (parole) violations (Sickmund, Sladky, Kang, & Puzzanchera, 2011). For example, in 2010, the majority of juvenile offenses were nonperson offenses such as property offenses (27.2 percent), drug offenses (8.4 percent), public order offenses (10.7 percent), technical violations (14.4 percent), and status offenses (4.6 percent) — that is, crimes defined by minor (under age 18) status, such as alcohol consumption, truancy, and running away from home (Sickmund et al., 2011). Additionally, young adults between the ages of 18 and 34 are the most likely to commit violent crimes like homicide and to do so using a gun, compared with individuals under 18 (Cooper & Smith, 2011).

A subgroup of youth is particularly vulnerable to violence and victimization. Minority males constitute a disproportionate number of youths arrested and adjudicated, with 60 percent of all arrested youths identifying as part of a racial/ethnic minority group (Sickmund et al., 2011). Males also outnumber females in arrest rates for every area except status offenses and technical violations. Urban African American males are at substantially greater risk for involvement in gun-related homicides as perpetrators and as victims (CDC, 2013a; Spano, Pridemore, & Bolland, 2012). However, the majority of the infrequent but highly publicized shootings with multiple fatalities, such as those at Sandy Hook Elementary School or the Aurora, Colo., movie theater, have been committed by young White males.

This presents a picture of a small number of youths and young adults who are at an increased risk for involvement in gun violence. In the United States, these youths are somewhat more likely to be males of color growing up in urban areas. But it also is important to understand that most young males of all races and ethnicities — and most people in general — are not involved in serious violence and do not carry or use guns inappropriately.

How did this small subset of youths and young adults come to be involved in serious gun violence? Is there a “cradle-to-prison” pipeline, particularly for youths of color living in poverty and in disadvantaged urban areas, that triggers a cascade of events that increase the likelihood of gun violence (Children’s Defense Fund, 2009)? A developmental perspective on antecedents to youth gun violence can help us design more effective prevention programs and strategies.

This chapter describes the biological and environmental risk factors that begin early in development and continue into adolescence and young adulthood. Developmental studies that link children’s aggressive behavior to more serious involvement in the criminal justice system suggest the accumulation and interaction of many risks in multiple contexts (Dodge, Greenberg, Malone, & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 2008; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). There is no single biological predisposition, individual trait, or life experience that accounts for the development and continuity of violent behavior or the use of guns. Rather, violence is associated with a confluence of individual, family, school, peer, community, and sociocultural risk factors that interact over time during childhood and adolescence (Brennan, Hall, Bor, Najman, & Williams, 2003; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). Risk for gun violence involves similar risk processes, although the complexity and variability of individuals means there is no meaningful profile that allows reliable prediction of who will eventually engage in gun violence. Nevertheless, developmental factors beginning in utero may increase the risk of aggressive behavior and lead to gun violence — especially when guns are readily available and part of an aggressive or delinquent peer culture.

Early-Onset Aggression

Early onset of aggressive behavior significantly increases risk for later antisocial behavior problems. The most consistent and powerful predictor of future violence is a history of violent behavior, and risk increases with earlier and more frequent incidents. Longitudinal work has shown that having a first arrest between 7 and 11 years of age is associated with patterns of long-term adult offending (Loeber, 1982). Children who are highly aggressive throughout childhood and continue to have serious conduct problems during adolescence have been identified as “life-course persistent” (LCP) youths (Moffitt, 1993). Examining longitudinal data from a large birth cohort in New Zealand, Moffitt (1993) created a taxonomy of antisocial behavior that differentiates LCP youths from an “adolescence-limited” subgroup. The latter subgroup characterizes those who engage in antisocial behaviors during adolescence and usually desist by adulthood. By contrast, LCP youths display more severe early aggression in childhood and develop a pattern of chronic violence during adolescence and into adulthood.

Both biological and environmental risks during prenatal development, infancy, and early childhood contribute to the development of early-onset aggression and the LCP developmental trajectory (Brennan et al., 2003; Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Moffitt, 2005). Pre- and postnatal risks associated with early-onset aggression include maternal substance abuse during pregnancy, high levels of prenatal stress, low birth weight, birth complications and injuries (especially those involving anoxia), malnutrition, and exposure to environmental toxins like lead paint (Brennan et al., 2003; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). According to Moffitt (1993), these early developmental risks disrupt neural development and are associated with neuropsychological deficits, particularly in executive functioning and verbal abilities.

Along with neuropsychological deficits, poor behavioral control and a difficult temperament are associated with the development of early-onset aggression (Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Moffitt, 1993). Children with difficult temperaments are typically irritable, difficult to soothe, and highly reactive. These patterns of behavior often trigger negative and ineffective reactions from parents and caregivers that can escalate into early aggressive behavior (Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Wachs, 2006). Family influences, such as familial stress and negative parent–child interactions, can interact with a child’s individual characteristics, leading to increased aggressive behavior during childhood.

Family Influences

Highly aggressive children who engage in serious acts of violence during later childhood and adolescence also are exposed to continued environmental risks throughout development (Dodge et al., 2008). The family context has been found to be quite influential in the development and continuity of antisocial behavior. Particularly for early-onset aggressive youths raised in families that are under a high degree of environmental stress, aggressive child behavior and negative parenting practices interact to amplify early-onset aggression. Examples of family risk factors include low parent–child synchrony and warmth, poor or disrupted attachment, harsh or inconsistent discipline (overly strict or permissive), poor parental monitoring, the modeling of antisocial behavior, pro-violent attitudes and criminal justice involvement, and coercive parent–child interaction patterns (Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Farrington, Jolliffe, Loeber, Stouthamer-Loeber, & Kalb, 2001; Hill, Howel, Hawkins, & Battin-Pearson, 1999; Patterson, Forgatch, & DeGarmo, 2010).

Coercive parent–child interactions have been associated with the emergence of aggressive behavior problems in children (Patterson et al., 2010). In these interactions, children learn to use coercive behaviors such as temper tantrums to escape parental discipline. When parents acquiesce to these negative behaviors, they inadvertently reward children for coercive behaviors, reinforcing the idea that aggression or violence is adaptive and can be used instrumentally to achieve goals. These interaction patterns tend to escalate in their severity (e.g., from whining, to temper tantrums, to hitting, etc.) and frequency, leading to increased aggression and noncompliance (Patterson et al., 2010). Such behaviors also generalize across contexts to children’s interactions with others outside the home, including with teachers, other adults, and peers. Indeed, prevention research has shown that intervening with at-risk families to improve parenting skills can disrupt the pathway from early-onset aggressive behavior to delinquency in adolescence (Patterson et al., 2010).

Other family risk factors for youths with early predispositions to aggression may be especially relevant to increased risk for gun violence. For instance, research has shown that many families with children own firearms and do not keep them safely stored at home (Johnson, Miller, Vriniotis, Azrael, & Hemenway, 2006). Although keeping firearms at home is not a direct cause of youth gun violence, the rates of suicides, homicides, and unintentional firearm fatalities are higher for 5–14-year-olds who live in states or regions in which rates of gun ownership are more prevalent (Miller, Azrael, & Hemenway, 2002). Poor parental monitoring and supervision, which are more general risk factors for involvement in aggression and violent behaviors (Dodge et al., 2008), may be especially salient in risk for gun violence. For example, impulsive or aggressive children who are often unsupervised and live in a home with access to guns may be at risk.

The family also is an important context for socialization and the development of normative beliefs or perceptions about appropriate social behavior that become increasingly stable during early development and are predictive of later behavior over time (Huesmann & Guerra, 1997). These beliefs shape an individual’s social-cognitive understanding about whether and under what circumstances threatened or actual violence is justified. Children who develop beliefs that aggression is a desirable and effective way to interact with others are more likely to use coercion and violence instrumentally to achieve goals or solve problems (Huesmann & Guerra, 1997). Antisocial attitudes and social-cognitive distortions (e.g., problems in generating nonviolent solutions, misperceiving hostile/aggressive intent by others, justifying acts of violence that would be criminal) can also increase risk for violence (Borum & Verhaagen, 2006; Dodge & Pettit, 2003).

Families can play a role in establishing and maintaining normative beliefs about violence and gun usage. For example, pro-violence attitudes and the criminality of parents and siblings during childhood have been found to predict adolescent gang membership and delinquency (Farrington et al., 2001; Hill et al., 1999). Youths from families that encourage the use of guns for solving problems also may be exposed to such attitudes in other contexts (in communities, with peers, and in the media) and may perceive firearms to be an appropriate means to solve problems and protect themselves.

School and Peer Influences

The school setting is another important context for child socialization. Children who enter school with high levels of aggressive behavior, cognitive or neurobiological deficits, and poor emotional regulation may have difficulty adjusting to the school setting and getting along with peers (Dodge et al., 2008; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). Highly aggressive children who have learned to use aggression instrumentally at home will likely use such behavior with teachers, increasing the chances that they will have poor academic experiences and low school engagement (Patterson et al., 2010). Academic failure, low school interest, truancy, and school dropout are all correlated with increased risk for problem behavior and delinquency, including aggression and violence (Dodge & Pettit, 2003). This risk is strongest when poor academic achievement begins in elementary school and contributes to school underachievement and the onset of adolescent problem behaviors, such as substance use and drug trafficking, truancy, unsafe sexual activity, youth violence, and gang involvement (Dodge et al., 2008; Guerra & Bradshaw, 2008).

Involvement in these risk behaviors also is facilitated by affiliation with deviant peers, particularly during adolescence (Dodge et al., 2008). Research has shown that children who are aggressive, victimized, and academically marginalized from the school setting may suffer high levels of peer rejection that amplify preexisting aggressive behaviors (Dodge et al., 2008; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). Longitudinal work indicates that experiences of academic failure, school marginalization, and peer rejection interact to produce affiliations with similarly rejected, deviant, and/or gang-involved peers. Friendships between deviant peers provide youths with “training” in antisocial behaviors that reinforce and exacerbate preexisting aggressive tendencies (Dishion, Véronneau, & Meyers, 2010; Dodge et al., 2008). Peer deviancy training is a primary mechanism in the trajectory from overt, highly aggressive behaviors during childhood to more covert processes during adolescence, such as lying, stealing, substance use, and weapon carrying (Dishion et al., 2010; Patterson et al., 2010).

The larger school context also can interact with youths’ experiences of academic failure, peer rejection, and deviant peer affiliations to influence the continuity of antisocial behavior. Poorly funded schools located in low-income neighborhoods have fewer resources to address the behavioral, academic, mental health, and medical needs of their students. In addition, these schools tend to have stricter policies toward discipline, are less clinically informed about problem behaviors, and have stronger zero tolerance policies that result in more expulsions and suspensions (Edelman, 2007). This contextual factor is important, as youths who are attending and engaged in school are less likely to engage in delinquent or violent behavior, whereas marginalized and rejected youths, particularly in impoverished schools, are at increased risk for aggression and violence at school and in their communities. Schools that provide safe environments that protect students from bullying or criminal victimization support student engagement, reduce incidents of student conflict that could result in volatile or violent behavior, and diminish risks that students will bring weapons to school.

Although few homicides (< 2 percent) and suicides occur at school or during transportation to and from school (Roberts, Zhang, & Truman, 2012) and widely publicized mass school shootings are rare, research indicates that a small number of students do carry guns or other weapons. In 2011, 5.1 percent of high school students in Grades 9–12 reported carrying a gun in the 30 days prior to the survey, and 5.4 percent of students had carried a weapon (gun, knife, or club) on school grounds at least once in the 30 days prior to the survey (Eaton et al., 2012). Studies show that youths who carry guns are more likely to report involvement in multiple problem behaviors, to be affiliated with a gang, to overestimate how many of their peers carry guns, and to have a high need for interpersonal safety. For instance, student reports of involvement in and exposure to risk behaviors at school such as physical fighting, being threatened, using substances, or selling drugs on school grounds have been positively correlated with an increased likelihood of carrying weapons to school (Furlong, Bates, & Smith, 2001).

In another study of high school students, 5.5 percent of urban high school students reported that they carried a gun in the year prior to the study, but students estimated that 32.6 percent of peers in their neighborhoods carried guns, a substantial overestimation of the actual gun-carrying rates. Lawful, supervised gun carrying by juveniles is not the concern of this line of research; however, when unsupervised youths carry guns in high-violence neighborhoods, they may be more likely to use guns to protect themselves and resolve altercations. Gun-carrying youths in this study had higher rates of substance use, violence exposure, gang affiliation, and peer victimization (Hemenway, Vriniotis, Johnson, Miller, & Azrael, 2011). Additionally, many gun-carrying youths had lower levels of perceived interpersonal safety (Hemenway et al., 2011). Research has also revealed that deviant peer group affiliations during specific periods of adolescent development may increase the risk for gun violence. For example, research findings have shown that gang membership in early adolescence is significantly associated with increased gun carrying over time. This changes somewhat in late adolescence and young adulthood, when gun carrying is linked more to involvement in drug dealing and having peers who illegally own guns (Lizotte, Krohn, Howell, Tobin, & Howard, 2000).

Communities Matter

The community context is an additional source of risk for the development and continuity of antisocial behavior. Living in extremely disadvantaged, underresourced communities with high levels of crime and violence creates serious obstacles to healthy development. Recent estimates show that currently in the United States, 16.4 million children live in poverty and 7.4 million of those live in extreme poverty (i.e., an annual income of less than half of the federal poverty level; Children’s Defense Fund, 2012). One in four children under 5 years of age is poor during the formative years of brain development. In addition, 22 percent of children who have lived in poverty do not graduate from high school, compared with 6 percent of children who have never been poor (Children’s Defense Fund, 2012). For families and youths, living in poverty is associated with high levels of familial stress, poor child nutrition, elevated risks of injury, and limited access to adequate health care (Adler & Steward, 2010; Patterson et al., 2010). Ethnic minority youth in the United States are overrepresented in economically struggling communities. These environmental adversities can, in turn, compromise children’s health status and functioning in other environments and increase the risk for involvement in violent behaviors, contributing significantly to ethnic and cultural variations in the rates of violence (Borum & Verhaagen, 2006).

In a community context, the degree to which children have access to adequate positive resources (e.g., in terms of health, finances, nutrition, education, peers, and recreation), have prosocial and connected relationships with others, and feel safe in their environment can significantly affect their risk for involvement in violent behaviors. Aggressive children and adolescents who are living in neighborhoods with high levels of community violence, drug and firearm trafficking, gang presence, and inadequate housing may have increased exposure to violence and opportunities for involvement in deviant behavior. Compared with communities that have better resources, disenfranchised and impoverished communities may also lack social, recreational, and vocational opportunities that contribute to positive youth development. Youths with high levels of preexisting aggressive behavior and emerging involvement with deviant or gang-involved peers may be especially at risk for increased violent behavior and subsequent criminal justice involvement when exposed to impoverished and high-crime communities.

Exposure to violence in one’s community, a low sense of community safety, unsupervised access to guns, and involvement in risky community behaviors such as drug dealing all contribute to youths’ involvement in gun carrying and gun violence. Decreased community perceptions of neighborhood safety and higher levels of social (e.g., loitering, public substance use, street fighting, prostitution, etc.) and physical (e.g., graffiti, gang signs, and discarded needles, cigarettes, and beer bottles) neighborhood disorder have been associated with increased firearm carrying among youths (Molnar, Miller, Azrael, & Buka, 2004). A study of African American youths living in poverty found that those who had been exposed to violence prior to carrying a gun were 2.5 times more likely than nonexposed youths to begin carrying a gun at the next time point, even when controlling for gang involvement (Spano et al., 2012). This study also indicated that after exposure to violence, youths were more likely to start carrying guns in their communities (Spano et al., 2012).

Studies have shown that apart from characteristics like conduct problems and prior delinquency, youths who are involved in gang fighting and selling drugs are also more likely to use a gun to threaten or harm others (e.g., Butters, Sheptycki, Brochu, & Erikson, 2011). Involvement in drug dealing in one’s community appears to be particularly risky for gun carrying during later adolescence and early adulthood, possibly due to an increased need for self-protection (Lizotte et al., 2000). Taken together, these studies show that firearm possession may be due to interactions between the need for self-protection in violent communities and increased involvement in delinquent behaviors.

Sociocultural Context: Exposure to Violent Media

Child and adolescent exposure to violent media, a more distal, sociocultural influence on behavior, is also important when considering developmental risks for gun violence. Decades of experimental, cross-sectional, and longitudinal research have documented that exposure to violent media, in movies and television, is associated with increased aggressive behaviors, aggressive thoughts and feelings, increased physiological arousal, and decreased prosocial behaviors (e.g., Anderson et al., 2003; Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Huesmann, 2010; Huesmann, Moise-Titus, Podolski, & Eron, 2003). In light of ongoing advances in technology, research has been expanded to include violent content in video games, music, social media, and the Internet (Anderson et al., 2010; IOM & NRC, 2013).

Findings on associations between violent media exposure and aggressive behavior outcomes have held across differences in culture, gender, age, socioeconomic status, and intellect (e.g., Anderson et al., 2010; Huesmann et al., 2003). Social-cognitive theory on violent media exposure suggests that these images are part of children’s socialization experiences, similar to violence exposure in interpersonal and community contexts (Huesmann, 2010). The viewing of violent images can serve to desensitize children to violence and normalize violent behavior, particularly when children have previously developed beliefs that aggression and violence are an acceptable means of achieving goals or resolving conflicts.

It is important to note that the link between violent media exposure and subsequent violent behaviors does not demonstrate a direct causal effect but instead shows how some children may be more susceptible to this risk factor than others. For instance, Huesmann et al. (2003) found that identification with aggressive characters on television and the perception that television violence was real were robust predictors of later aggression over time. Additionally, there is no established link between violent media exposure and firearm usage in particular. However, given the substantial proportion of media that includes interactions around firearms (e.g., in video games, movies, and television shows), the IOM and NRC (2013) recently identified a crucial need to examine specific associations between exposure to violent media and use of firearms. Exposure to violent media, especially for youths with preexisting aggressive tendencies and poor parental monitoring, may be an important contextual factor that amplifies risk for violent behavior and gun use.

Summary and Conclusions

The relatively small number of youths most likely to persist in serious acts of aggression (including increased risk of gun violence) have often experienced the following:

• Early childhood onset of persistent rule-breaking and aggression
• Socialization into criminal attitudes and behaviors by parents and caretakers who themselves are involved in criminal activities
• Exposure in childhood to multiple adverse experiences in their families and communities
• Social dislocation and reduced opportunities due to school failure or underachievement
• Persisting affiliation with deviant peers or gangs engaged in delinquent/criminal misconduct and with attitudes and beliefs that support possession and use of guns
• Broad exposure to sociocultural influences such as mass media violence and depictions of gun violence as an effective means of achieving goals or status

Most youths — even those with chronic and violent delinquent misconduct — desist in aggressive and antisocial behavior during late adolescence, and no single risk factor is sufficient to generate persisting violent behavior. Still, many are disproportionately at risk for becoming perpetrators or victims of gun violence. Homicide remains the second leading cause of death for teens and young adults between the ages of 15 and 24. In 2010, there were 2,711 infant, child, and adolescent victims of firearm deaths. In that year, 84 percent of homicide victims between the ages of 10 and 19 were killed with a firearm, and 40 percent of youths who committed suicide between the ages 15 and 19 did so with a gun (CDC, 2013a). 1

There is no one developmental trajectory that specifically leads to gun violence. However, prevention efforts guided by research on developmental risk can reduce the likelihood that firearms will be introduced into community and family conflicts or criminal activity. Prevention efforts can also reduce the relatively rare occasions when severe mental illness contributes to homicide or the more common circumstances when depression or other mental illness contributes to suicide.

Reducing incidents of gun violence arising from criminal misconduct or suicide is an important goal of broader primary and secondary prevention and intervention strategies. Such strategies must also attend to redirecting developmental antecedents and larger sociocultural processes that contribute to gun violence and gun-related deaths.

1 The 2010 data shown here are available online .

Eric Mankowski, PhD

Any account of gun violence in the United States must consider both why males are the perpetrators of the vast majority of gun violence and why the vast majority of males never perpetrate gun violence. An account that explains both phenomena focuses, in part, on how boys and men learn to demonstrate and achieve manhood through violence, as well as the differences in opportunities to demonstrate manhood among diverse groups of males. Although evidence exists for human biological and social-environmental systems interacting and contributing to aggressive and violent behavior, this review focuses on the sociocultural evidence that explains males’ higher rates of gun violence.

Reducing the propensity for some males to engage in violence will involve both social and cultural change. Hence, this section reviews existing research on the relationships between sex, gender (i.e., masculinity), and the perpetration and victimization of gun violence in the United States. The intersection of gender, race/ethnicity, and economic disadvantage is also considered in explaining the rates of gun violence across diverse communities. Finally, the relationships between masculinity, gender socialization, and gun violence are analyzed to identify gender-related risk factors for gun violence that can be targeted for prevention strategies and social policy.

Sex Differences in Gun Violence

Prevalence and Risk Men represent more than 90 percent of the perpetrators of homicide in the United States and are also the victims of the large majority (78 percent) of that violence (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2008; Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI], 2007). Homicide by gun is the leading cause of death among Black youth, the second leading cause of death among all male youth, and the second or third leading cause of death among female youth (depending on the specific age group) (e.g., Miniño, 2010; Webster, Whitehill, Vernick, & Curriero, 2012). In addition, roughly four times as many youths visit hospitals for gun-induced wounds as are killed each year (CDC, 2013a).

Even more common than homicide, suicide is another leading cause of death in the United States, and most suicides are completed with a firearm. Males complete the large majority of suicides; depending on the age group, roughly four to six times as many males as females kill themselves with firearms (CDC, 2013a). Among youth, suicide ranks especially high as a cause of death. It is the third leading cause of death of 15–24-year-olds and the sixth leading cause of death for 5–14-year-olds. However, the rate of suicide and firearm suicide gradually increases over the lifespan. In addition to gender and age differences in prevalence, sizable differences also exist among ethnic groups. Firearm suicide generally is at least twice as high among Whites than among Blacks and other racial groups from 1980 to 2010 (CDC, 2013a), and White males over the age of 65 have rates that far exceed all other major groups.

Perpetrator–Victim Relationship and Location The prevalence of gun violence strongly depends not only on the sex of the offender but also on the offender’s relationship to the victim and the location of the violence (Sorenson, 2006). Both men and women are more likely to be killed with firearms by someone they know than by a stranger. Specifically, men are most likely to be killed in a public place by an acquaintance, whereas women are most likely to be killed in the home by a current or former spouse or dating partner (i.e., “intimate partner”). Women compared with men are especially likely to be killed by a firearm used by an intimate partner.

Women are killed by current or former intimate partners four to five times more often than men (Campbell, Glass, Sharps, Laughon, & Bloom, 2007), including by firearm. These sex differences in victimization do not appear to hold in the limited data available on same-sex intimate partner homicide; it is more common for men to kill their male partners than for women to kill their female partners (Campbell et al., 2007). Notably, these sex differences in gun violence, as a function of the type of perpetrator–victim relationships, are also found in nonfatal gun violence when emergency room visits are examined (Wiebe, 2003).

A disproportionate number of gun homicides occur in urban areas. Conversely, a disproportionate number of firearm suicides occur in rural (compared with urban) areas (Branas, Nance, Elliott, Richmond, & Schwab, 2004). Although they are highly publicized, less than 2 percent of the homicides of children occur in schools (Borum, Cornell, Modzeleski, & Jimerson, 2010; CDC, 2008, 2013b). There are even fewer “random” or “mass” school shootings in which multiple victims are killed at the same time.

Gun Access and Possession A person must own or obtain a gun to be able to commit gun violence. Research shows that there are sex differences in access to and carrying a gun. Males are roughly two to four times as likely as females to have access to a gun in the home or to possess a gun (Swahn, Hamming, & Ikeda, 2002; Vaughn et al., 2012). In turn, gun carrying is a key risk factor for gun violence perpetration and victimization. For example, gun carrying is associated with dating violence victimization among adolescents, with boys more likely to be victimized than girls (Yan, Howard, Beck, Shattuck, & Hallmark-Kerr, 2010).

Conclusions based on sex differences in access to guns should be drawn with some caution, given that there also appear to be sex differences in the reporting of guns in the home. Men report more guns in the home than do women from the same household (e.g., Ludwig, Cook, & Smith, 1998; Sorenson & Cook, 2008), a sex difference that appears to stem specifically from the substantially higher level of contact with and experience in handling and using guns among boys than girls in the same household (Cook & Sorenson, 2006). Nonetheless, the presence of guns in the home remains predictive of gun violence.

Gender and Gun Violence

Robust sex and race differences in firearm violence have been established. Examined next is how the socialization of men as well as differences in living conditions and opportunities among diverse groups of boys and men help explain why these differences occur.

Making Gender Visible in the Problem of Gun Violence Gender remains largely invisible in research and media accounts of gun violence. In particular, gender is not used to explain the problem of “school shootings,” despite the fact that almost every shooting is perpetrated by a young male. Newspaper headlines and articles describe “school shooters,” “violent adolescents,” and so forth, but rarely call attention to the fact that nearly all such incidents are perpetrated by boys and young men. Studies of risk factors for school shootings may refer accurately to the perpetrators generally as “boys” but largely fail to analyze gender (e.g., Verlinden, Hersen, & Thomas, 2000).

The large sex differences in gun violence should not be overlooked simply because the vast majority of boys and men do not perpetrate gun violence or excused as “boys will be boys.” The size of sex differences in the prevalence of gun violence differs substantially within regions of the United States (Kaplan & Geling, 1998) and across countries (e.g., Ahn, Park, Ha, Choi, & Hong, 2012), which further suggests that gender differences in sociocultural environments are needed to explain sex differences in gun violence.

Masculinity, Power, and Guns Status as a “man” is achieved by the display of stereotypically masculine characteristics, without which one’s manhood is contested. Although the particular characteristics defining manhood and the markers of them can vary across subcultural contexts (Connell, 1995), masculinity has, historically, generally been defined by aggressive and risk-taking behavior, emotional restrictiveness (particularly the vulnerable emotions of fear and sadness, and excepting anger), heterosexuality, and successful competition (Brannon, 1976; Kimmel, 1994; O’Neil, 1981). Such normative characteristics of traditional masculinity are in turn directly related to numerous factors that are associated with gun violence. For example, risk taking is associated with adolescent males’ possession of and access to guns (Vittes & Sorenson, 2006).

Social expectations and norms, supported by social and organizational systems and practices, privilege boys who reject or avoid in themselves anything stereotypically feminine, act tough and aggressive, suppress emotions (other than anger), distance themselves emotionally and physically from other men, and strive competitively for power. Men of color, poor men, gay men, and men from other marginalized groups differ substantially in their access to opportunities to fulfill these manhood ideals and expectations in socially accepted ways. For example, men with less formal educational and economic opportunity, who in the United States are disproportionately Black and Latino, cannot fulfill expectations to be successful breadwinners in socially acceptable ways (e.g., paid, legal employment) as easily as White men, and gay men have less ability to demonstrate normative heterosexual masculinity where they cannot legally marry or have children.

At the same time, higher levels of some forms of violence victimization and perpetration (including suicide) are found among these disadvantaged groups. For example, gay youth are more likely than heterosexual males to commit suicide, and African American male youth are disproportionately the victims of gun violence. Such structural discrimination can be seen reflected in implicit cognitive biases against these group members. Virtual simulations of high-threat incidents, such as those used to train police officers, reliably demonstrate a “shooter bias” in which actors are more likely to shoot Black male targets than those from other race-gender groups (i.e., Black women, White men, and White women) (Plant, Goplen, & Kunstman, 2011).

Even to the extent that it is achieved, manhood status is theorized as precarious, needing to be protected and defended through aggression and violence, including gun violence, in order to avoid victimization from (mostly) male peers (Connell, 1995). Paradoxically, as in all competition, the more convincingly manhood is achieved, the more vulnerable it becomes to challenges or threats and thus requires further defending, often with increasing levels and displays of toughness and violence. The dynamic of these expectations of manhood and their enforcement is like a tight box (Kivel, 1998). Boys and men are either trapped inside this box or, in violating the expectations by stepping out of the box, risk being targeted by threats, bullying, and other forms of violence.

Adherence to stereotypic masculinity, in turn, is commonly associated with stress and conflict, poor health, poor coping and relationship quality, and violence (Courtenay 2000; Hong, 2000). Men’s gender role stress and conflict are directly associated with various forms of interpersonal aggression and violence, including the perpetration of intimate partner violence and suicide (Feder, Levant, & Dean, 2010; Moore & Stuart, 2005; O’Neil, 2008). Men with more restricted emotionality and more restricted affection with other men are more likely to be aggressive, coercive, or violent (O’Neil, 2008). These dimensions of masculinity also are related to a number of other harmful behaviors that are, in turn, associated directly with gun violence and other forms of aggression (see O’Neil, 2008, for a review). For example, the effect of alcohol consumption on intimate partner violence is greater among men than women (Moore, Elkins, McNulty, Kivisto, & Handsel, 2011), and alcohol consumption may be associated with lethal male-to-male violence at least partly because it is associated with carrying a gun (Phillips, Matusko, & Tomasovic, 2007).

In addition, accumulating research evidence indicates a relationship between gender and many of the factors that are associated with suicide (e.g., substance abuse, unemployment; Payne, Swami, & Stanistreet, 2008). Beliefs in traditional masculinity are related to suicidal thoughts, although differently across age cohorts (Hunt, Sweeting, Keoghan, & Platt, 2006). Men’s historic role as economic providers in heterosexual families typically ends with their retirement from the workforce. Suicide rates, including firearm suicide, increase dramatically at precisely this point in the life course (i.e., age 65 and older), whereas they decrease among women this age. The increase in suicide rates among White men at age 65 and older does not occur among Black men, who as a group have much higher levels of unemployment throughout their lives and consequently may not experience the same sense of loss of meaning or entitlement. Male firearm suicide also increases dramatically in adolescence and early adulthood, precisely the years during which young men’s sense of manhood is developing.

Beliefs about gender and sexual orientation also help explain sex differences in fatal hate crimes involving guns. Key themes in male gender role expectations are anti-femininity (Brannon, 1976) and homophobia (Kimmel, 1994). Boys are expected to rid themselves of stereotypically feminine characteristics (e.g., “you throw like a girl,” “big boys don’t cry”). Gun violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered persons can be understood in this context. One explanation of these hate crimes is that they are perpetrated to demonstrate heterosexual masculinity to male peer group members. These homicides, compared with violent crimes in which the victim is (or is perceived to be) heterosexual, often are especially brutal and are more commonly perpetrated by groups of men rather than individual men or women. However, such homicides appear to be perpetrated less often using firearms, which suggests motives beyond a desire to kill — for example, expressing intense hatred or transferring negative affect directly onto the victim (Gruenwald, 2012).

Male role expectations for achievement of success and power, combined with restricted emotionality, may have dangerous consequences, particularly for boys who suffer major losses and need help. A majority of the males who have completed homicides at schools had trouble coping with a recent major loss. Many had also experienced bullying or other harassment (Vossekuil et al., 2002). Such characteristics cannot and should not be used to develop risk profiles of attackers because school shootings are such rare events, and so many men who share these same characteristics never will perpetrate gun violence. However, when male gender and characteristics associated with male gender are highly common among attackers, it is responsible to ask how male gender contributes to school shootings and other forms of gun violence.

In their case studies of male-perpetrated homicide-suicides at schools, Kalish and Kimmel (2010) speculated that a sense of “aggrieved entitlement” may be common among the shooters. In this view, the young men see suicide and revenge as appropriate, even expected, responses for men to perceived or actual victimization. Related findings emerged from a similar analysis of all “random” school shootings (those with multiple, nontargeted victims) from 1982 to 2001 (Kimmel & Mahler, 2003). With a small number of exceptions, the vast majority were committed by White boys (26 of 28) in suburban or rural (not urban) areas (27 of 28). Many of these boys also had experienced homophobic bullying.

Masculinity and Beliefs About Guns Sex differences in beliefs about guns may begin at an early age as a function of parental socialization and attitudes. Fathers, particularly White fathers, are more permissive than mothers of their children, particularly sons, playing with toy guns (Cheng et al., 2003). Through the socialization of gender, boys and men may come to believe that displaying a gun will enhance their masculine power. Carrying a weapon is, in fact, instrumental in fulfilling male gender role expectations. Estimates of a person’s physical size and muscularity are greater when they display a gun (or large knife) than other similarly sized and shaped objects (e.g., drill, saw), even when the person is only described and not visible. This perception persists despite no apparent correlation between actual gun ownership and size or muscularity (Fessler, Holbrook, & Snyder, 2012). Guns symbolically represent some key elements of hegemonic masculinity — power, hardness, force, aggressiveness, coldness (Connell, 1995; Stroud, 2012).

Implications for Prevention and Policy

Sex Differences in Attitudes Toward Gun Policies Policies and laws addressing the manufacture, purchase, and storage of guns have been advocated in response to the prevalence of gun violence. Perhaps reflecting their differential access to firearms and differential perpetration and victimization rates, men and women hold different attitudes about such gun control policies. Females are generally much more favorable toward gun restriction and control policies (e.g., Vittes, Sorenson, & Gilbert, 2003).

Prevention Programs Addressing Gender The foregoing analysis of the link between gender and gun violence suggests the potential value of addressing gender in efforts to define the problem of gun violence and develop preventive responses. Preliminary evidence suggests that correcting and changing perceptions among men of social norms regarding beliefs about behaviors and characteristics that are associated with stereotypic masculinity may reduce the prevalence of intimate partner and sexual violence (Fabiano, Perkins, Berkowitz, Linkenbach, & Stark, 2003; Neighbors et al., 2010). However, the effect of such interventions in specifically reducing gun violence remains to be tested. The skills and knowledge of psychologists are needed to develop and evaluate programs and settings in schools, workplaces, prisons, neighborhoods, clinics, and other relevant contexts that aim to change gendered expectations for males that emphasize self-sufficiency, toughness, and violence, including gun violence.

Robert Kinscherff, PhD, JD; Arthur C. Evans Jr., PhD; Marisa R. Randazzo, PhD; and Dewey Cornell, PhD

A natural starting point for the prevention of gun violence is to identify individuals who are at risk for violence and in need of assistance. Efforts focused on at-risk individuals are considered secondary prevention because they are distinguished from primary or universal prevention efforts that address the general population. Secondary prevention strategies for gun violence can include such actions as providing prompt mental health treatment for an acutely depressed and suicidal person or conducting a threat assessment of a person who has threatened gun violence against a spouse or work supervisor.

To be effective, strategies to prevent gun violence should be tailored to different kinds of violence. One example is the distinction between acts of impulsive violence (i.e., violence carried out in the heat of the moment, such as an argument that escalates into an assault) and acts of targeted or predatory violence (i.e., acts of violence that are planned in advance of the attack and directed toward an identified target). The incidents of mass casualty gun violence that have garnered worldwide media attention, such as the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., at a movie theater Aurora, Colo., at the Fort Hood military base, and at a political rally in a shopping center in Tucson, Ariz., are all examples of targeted or predatory violence. Distinguishing between impulsive violence, targeted/predatory violence, and other types of violence is important because they are associated with different risk factors and require different prevention strategies.

Predicting and Preventing Impulsive Gun Violence

Research on impulsive violence has enabled scientists to develop moderately accurate predictive models that can identify individuals who are more likely than other persons to engage in this form of violence. These models cannot determine with certainty whether a particular person will engage in violence — just whether a person is at greater likelihood of doing so. This approach is known as a violence risk assessment or clinical assessment of dangerousness . A violence risk assessment is conducted by a licensed mental health professional who has specific training in this area. The process generally involves comparing the person in question with known base rates for those of the same age/gender who have committed impulsive violence and then determining whether the person in question has individual risk factors that would increase that person’s likelihood of engaging in impulsive violence. In addition, the process involves examining individual protective factors that would decrease the person’s overall likelihood of engaging in impulsive violence. Research that has identified risk and protective factors for impulsive violence is limited in that more research has been conducted on men than women and on incarcerated or institutionalized individuals than on those in the general population. Nevertheless, this approach can be effective for determining someone’s relative likelihood of engaging in impulsive violence.

Some risk factors for impulsive violence are static — for example, race and age — and cannot be changed. But those factors that are dynamic — for example, unmet mental health needs for conditions linked with violence to self (such as depression) or others (such as paranoia), lack of mental health care, abuse of alcohol — are more amenable to intervention and treatment that can reduce the risk for gun violence. Secondary prevention strategies to prevent impulsive gun violence can include having a trained psychologist or other mental health professional treat the person’s acute mental health needs or substance abuse needs. There must be a vigorous and coordinated response to persons whose histories include acts of violence, threatened or actual use of weapons, and substance abuse, particularly if they have access to a gun. This response should include a violence risk assessment by well-trained professionals and referral for any indicated mental health treatment, counseling and mediation services, or other forms of intervention that can reduce the risk of violence.

Youths and young adults who are experiencing an emerging psychosis should be referred for prompt assessment by mental health professionals with sufficient clinical expertise with psychotic disorders to craft a clinical intervention plan that includes risk management. In some cases, secondary prevention measures may include a court-ordered emergency psychiatric hospitalization where a person can receive a psychiatric evaluation and begin treatment. Criteria for allowing such involuntary evaluations vary by state but typically can occur only when someone is experiencing symptoms of a serious mental illness and, as a result, potentially poses a significant danger to self or others. There is an urgent need to improve the effectiveness of emergency commitment procedures because of concerns that they do not provide sufficient services and follow-up care.

Predicting and Preventing Targeted or Predatory Gun Violence

Acts of targeted or predatory violence directed at multiple victims, including crimes sometimes referred to as rampage shootings and mass shootings, 2 occur far less often in the United States than do acts of impulsive violence (although targeted violence garners far more media attention). Acts of targeted violence have not been subject to study that has developed statistical models like those used for estimating a person’s likelihood of impulsive violence. Although it seems appealing to develop checklists of warning signs to construct a profile of individuals who commit these kinds of crimes, this effort, sometimes described as psychological profiling, has not been successful. Research has not identified an effective or useful psychological profile of those who would engage in multiple casualty gun violence. Moreover, efforts to use a checklist profile to identify these individuals fail in part because the characteristics used in these profiles are too general to be of practical value; such characteristics are also shared by many nonviolent individuals.

Because of the limitations of a profiling approach, practitioners have developed the behavioral threat assessment model as an alternative means of identifying individuals who are threatening, planning, or preparing to commit targeted violence. Behavioral threat assessment also emphasizes the need for interventions to prevent violence or harm when a threat has been identified, so it represents a more comprehensive approach to violence prevention. The behavioral threat assessment model is an empirically based approach that was developed largely by the U.S. Secret Service to evaluate threats to the president and other public figures and has since been adapted by the U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education (Fein et al., 2002; Vossekuil et al., 2002) and others (Cornell, Allen, & Fan, 2012) for use in schools, colleges and universities, workplaces, and the U.S. military. Threat assessment teams are typically multidisciplinary teams that are trained to identify potentially threatening persons and situations. They gather and analyze additional information, make an informed assessment of whether the person is on a pathway to violence — that is, determine whether the person poses a threat of interpersonal violence or self-harm — and if so, take steps to intervene, address any underlying problem or treatment need, and reduce the risk for violence.

Behavioral threat assessment is seen as the emerging standard of care for preventing targeted violence in schools, colleges, and workplaces, as well as against government officials and other public figures. The behavioral threat assessment approach is the model currently used by the U.S. Secret Service to prevent violence to the U.S. president and other public officials, by the U.S. Capitol Police to prevent violence to members of Congress, by the U.S. State Department to prevent violence to dignitaries visiting the United States, and by the U.S. Marshals Service to prevent violence to federal judges (see Fein & Vossekuil, 1998). The behavioral threat assessment model also is recommended in two American national standards: one for higher education institutions (which recommends that all colleges and universities operate behavioral threat assessment teams; see ASME-Innovative Technologies Institute, 2010) and one for workplaces (which recommend s similar teams to prevent workplace violence; see ASIS International and Society for Human Resource Management, 2011). In addition, a comprehensive review conducted by a U.S. Department of Defense (2010) task force following the Fort Hood shooting concluded that threat assessment teams or threat management units (i.e., teams trained in behavioral threat assessment and management procedures) are the most effective tool currently available to prevent workplace violence or insider threats like the attack at Fort Hood.

Empirical research on acts of targeted violence has shown that many of those attacks were carried out by individuals motivated by personal problems who were at a point of desperation. In their troubled state of mind, these individuals saw no viable solution to their problems and could envision no future. The behavioral threat assessment model is used not only to determine whether a person is planning a violent attack but also to identify personal or situational problems that could be addressed to alleviate desperation and restore hope. In many cases, this includes referring the person to mental health services and other sources of support. In some of these cases, psychiatric hospitalization may be needed to address despondence and suicidality. Nonpsychiatric resources also can help alleviate the individual’s problems or concerns. Resources such as conflict resolution, credit counseling, job placement assistance, academic accommodations, veterans’ services, pastoral counseling, and disability services all can help address personal problems and reduce desperation. When the underlying personal problems are alleviated, people who may have posed a threat of violence to others no longer see violence as their best or only option.

Predicting and Preventing Violence by Those With Acute Mental Illness

When treating a person with acute or severe mental illness, mental health professionals may encounter situations in which they need to determine whether their patient (or client) is at risk for violence. Typically, they would conduct a violence risk assessment if the clinician’s concern is about risk for impulsive violence, as discussed previously. Clinicians also can conduct — or work with a team to help conduct — a threat assessment if their concern involves targeted violence. The available research suggests that mental health professionals should be concerned when a person with acute mental illness makes an explicit threat to harm someone or is troubled by delusions or hallucinations that encourage violence, but even in these situations, violence is far from certain. Although neither a violence risk assessment nor a threat assessment can yield a precise prediction of someone’s likelihood of violence, it can identify high-risk situations and guide efforts to reduce risk. It is important to emphasize that prevention does not require prediction; interventions to reduce risk can be beneficial even if it is not possible to determine who would or would not have committed a violent act.

When their patients (or clients) pose a risk of violence to others, mental health professionals have a legal and ethical obligation to take appropriate action to protect potential victims of violence. This obligation is not easily carried out for several reasons. First, mental health professionals have only a modest ability to predict violence, even when assisted by research-validated instruments. Mental health professionals who are concerned that a patient is at high risk for violence may be unable to convince their patient to accept hospitalization or some other change in treatment. They can seek involuntary hospitalization or treatment, but civil commitment laws (that vary from state to state) generally require convincing evidence that a person is imminently dangerous to self or others. There is considerable debate about the need to reform civil commitment laws in a manner that both protects individual liberties and provides necessary protection for society.

There is no guarantee that voluntary or involuntary treatment of a potentially dangerous individual will be effective in reducing violence risk, especially when the risk for violence does not arise from a mental illness but instead from intense desperation resulting from highly emotionally distressing circumstances or from antisocial orientation and proclivities for criminal misconduct. When individuals with prior histories of violence are released from treatment facilities, they typically need continued treatment and monitoring for potential violence until they stabilize in community settings. Jurisdictions vary widely in the resources available to achieve stability in the community and in the legal ability to impose monitoring or clinical care on persons who decline voluntary services.

Furthermore, if unable to obtain civil commitment to a protective setting, mental health professionals must consider other protective actions permitted in their jurisdictions, which may include warning potential victims that they are in danger or alerting local law enforcement, family members, employers, or others. Whether their particular jurisdiction mandates a response to “warn or protect” potential victims or leaves this decision to the discretion of the clinician, mental health professionals are often reluctant to take such actions because they are concerned that doing so might damage the therapeutic relationship with their patient and drive patients from treatment or otherwise render effective treatment impossible.

Another post-hospitalization strategy is to prohibit persons with mental illness from acquiring a firearm. The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibited persons from purchasing a firearm if they had been involuntarily committed to a psychiatric inpatient unit. The Brady Handgun Violence Act (1994), known as the Brady Law, began the process of background checks to identify individuals who might attempt to purchase a firearm despite prohibitions. There is some evidence that rates of gun violence are reduced when these procedures are adequately implemented, but research, consistent implementation, and refinement of these procedures are needed (Webster & Vernick, 2013a).

Predicting and Preventing Gun-Based Suicide

Suicide accounts for approximately 61 percent of all firearm fatalities in the United States — 19,393 of the 31,672 firearm deaths reported by the CDC for 2010 (Murphy, Xu, & Kochanek, 2013). When there is concern that a person may be suicidal, mental health professionals can conduct suicide screenings and should rely on structured assessment tools to assess that person’s risk to self. Behavioral threat assessment also may be indicated in such situations if the potentially suicidal individual may also pose a threat to others.

More than half of suicides are accomplished by firearms and most commonly with a firearm from the household (Miller, Azrael, Hepburn, Hemenway, & Lippmann, 2006). More than 90 percent of persons who commit suicide had some combination of symptoms of depression, symptoms of other mental disorders, and/or substance abuse (Moscicki, 2001). Ironically, although depression is the condition most closely associated with attempted or completed suicide, it is also less likely than schizophrenia or other disorders to prompt an involuntary civil commitment or other legal triggers that can prevent some persons with mental illness from possessing firearms. As in behavioral threat assessment, suicide risk may be reduced through identifying and providing support in solving the problems that are driving a person to consider suicide. In many cases the person may need a combination of psychological treatment and psychiatric medication.

Tragic shootings like the ones at Sandy Hook Elementary School and the movie theater in Aurora, Colo., spark intense debate as to whether specific gun control policies would significantly diminish the number of mass shooting incidents. This debate includes whether or how to restrict access to firearms, especially with regard to persons with some mental illnesses. Another line of debate concerns whether to limit access to certain types of firearms (e.g., reducing access to high-capacity magazines). Empirical evidence documents the efficacy of some firearms restrictions, but because the restrictions often are not well implemented and have serious limitations, it is difficult to conduct the kind of rigorous research needed to fairly evaluate their potential for reducing gun violence.

The often-debated Brady Law (1994) does not consistently prevent persons with mental illness from acquiring a firearm. The prohibition applies only to persons with involuntary commitments and omits both persons with voluntary admissions and those with no history of inpatient hospitalization. The law does not prevent a person with a history of involuntary commitment from obtaining a previously owned firearm or one possessed by a friend or relative. Additional problems with implementing the Brady Law include incomplete records of involuntary commitments, background checks limited to purchases from licensed gun dealers, and exceptions from background checks for firearms purchased during gun shows.

Despite these limitations and gaps, there is some scientific evidence that background checks reduce the rate of violent gun crimes by persons whose mental health records disqualify them from legally obtaining a firearm. A study of one state (Connecticut) found that the risk of violent criminal offending among persons with a history of involuntary psychiatric commitment declined significantly after the state began reporting these individuals to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (Swanson et al., 2013). This study supports the value of additional research to investigate strategies for limiting access to firearms by persons with serious mental illness.

In contrast, access to appropriate mental health treatment can work to reduce violence at the individual level. For example, one major finding of the MacArthur Risk Assessment study (Monahan et al., 2001) was that getting continued mental health treatment in the community after release from a psychiatric hospitalization reduced the number of violent acts by those who had been hospitalized. In other studies, outpatient mental health services, including mandated services, have been effective in preventing or reducing violent and harmful behavior (e.g., New York State Office of Mental Health, 2005; N.Y. Mental Hygiene Law [Kendra’s Law], 1999; O’Keefe, Potenza, & Mueser, 1997; Swanson et al., 2000).

There is abundant scientific research demonstrating the effectiveness of treatment for persons with severe mental illness such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. However, there are social, economic, and legal barriers to treatment. First, there is a persistent social stigma associated with mental illness that deters individuals from seeking treatment for themselves or for family members. Public education to increase understanding of and support for persons with serious mental illness and to encourage access to treatment is needed.

Second, mental health treatment, especially inpatient hospitalization, is expensive, and persons with mental illness often cannot access this level of care or afford it. Commercial insurers often have limitations on hospital care or do not cover intensive services that are alternatives to inpatient admission. Public sector facilities such as community mental health centers and state-operated psychiatric hospitals have experienced many years of shrinking government support; demand for their services exceeds their capacity. Many mental health providers limit their services to the most acute cases and cannot extend services after the immediate crisis has resolved.

Third, there are complex legal barriers to the provision of mental health services when an individual does not desire treatment or does not believe he or she is in need of treatment. A severe mental illness can impair an individual’s understanding of his or her condition and need for treatment, but a person with mental illness may make a rational decision to refuse treatment that he or she understandably regards as ineffective, aversive, or undesirable for some reason (e.g., psychiatric medications can produce unpleasant side effects and hospitalization can be a stressful experience).

When an individual refuses to seek treatment, it may be difficult to determine whether this decision is rational or irrational. To protect individual liberties, laws throughout the United States permit involuntary treatment only under stringent conditions, such as when an individual is determined to be imminently dangerous to self or others due to a mental illness. People who refuse treatment but are not judged to be imminently dangerous (a difficult and ambiguous standard) fall into a “gray zone” (Evans, 2013). Some individuals with serious mental illness pose a danger to self or others that is not imminent, and often it is not possible to monitor them adequately or determine precisely when they become dangerous and should be hospitalized on an involuntary basis. In other situations, the primary risk posed by the individual does not arise from mental illness but from his or her willingness to engage in criminal misconduct for personal gain.

Furthermore, when a person is committed to a psychiatric hospital on an involuntary basis, treatment is limited in scope. Once the person is no longer regarded as imminently dangerous (the criteria differ across states), he or she must be released from treatment even if not fully recovered; that person may be vulnerable to relapse into a dangerous state. In some cases of mass shootings, persons who committed the shooting were known to have a serious mental illness, but authorities could not require treatment when it was needed. In other cases, authorities were not aware of an individual’s mental illness before the attempted or actual mass shooting incident.

A related problem is that the onset or recurrence of serious mental illness can be difficult to detect. Symptoms of mental illness may emerge slowly, often in late adolescence or early adulthood, and may not be readily apparent to family members and friends. A person hearing voices or experiencing paranoid delusions may hide these symptoms and simply seem preoccupied or distressed but not seriously ill. A person who has been treated successfully for a serious mental illness may experience a relapse that is not immediately recognized. There is a great need for public education about the onset of serious mental illness, recognition of the symptoms of mental illness, and increased emphasis on the importance of seeking prompt treatment.

_______________

2 The FBI (n.d.) defines mass murder as incidents that occur in one location (or in closely related locations during a single attack) and that result in four or more casualties. Mass murder shootings are much less common than other types of gun homicides. They are also not a new phenomenon. Historically, most mass murder shootings occurred within families or in criminal activities such as gang activity and robberies. Rampage killings is a term used to describe some mass murders that involve attacks on victims in unprotected settings (such as schools and colleges, workplaces, places of worship) and public places (such as theaters, malls, restaurants, public gatherings). However, these shootings are often planned well in advance and carried out in a methodical manner, so the term rampage is a misnomer.

Ellen Scrivner, PhD, ABPP; W. Douglas Tynan, PhD, ABPP; and Dewey Cornell, PhD

Prevention of violence occurs along a continuum that begins in early childhood with programs to help parents raise healthy children and ends with efforts to identify and intervene with troubled individuals who threaten violence. A comprehensive community approach recognizes that no single program is sufficient and there are many opportunities for effective prevention. Discussion of effective prevention from a community perspective should include identification of the community being examined. Within the larger community, many stakeholders are affected by gun violence that results in a homicide, suicide, or mass shooting.

Such stakeholders include community and public safety officials, schools, workplaces, neighborhoods, mental health and public health systems, and faith-based groups. When it comes to perpetrating gun violence, however, a common thread that exists across community groups is the recognition that someone, or possibly several people, may have heard something about an individual’s thoughts and/or plans to use a gun. Where do they go with that information? How do they report it so that innocent people are not targeted or labeled unfairly — and how can their information initiate a comprehensive and effective crisis response that prevents harm to the individual of concern and the community?

To date, there is little research to help frame a comprehensive and effective prevention strategy for gun violence at the community level. One of the most authoritative reviews of the body of gun violence research comes from the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences (see Wellford, Pepper, & Petrie, 2004). In reviewing a range of criminal justice initiatives designed to reduce gun violence, such as gun courts, enhanced sentencing, and problem-based policing, Wellford et al. concluded that problem-oriented policing, also known as place-based initiatives or target policing, holds promise, particularly when applied to “hot spots” — areas in the community that have high crime rates. They included studies on programs such as the Boston Gun Project (see Kennedy, Braga, & Piehl, 2001), more commonly known as Operation Ceasefire, in their review and concluded that although many of these programs may have reduced youth homicides, there is only modest evidence to suggest that they effectively lowered rates of crime and violence, given the confounding factors that influence those rates and are difficult to control. In other words, the variability in the roles of police, prosecutors, and the community creates complex interactions that can confound the levels of intervention and affect sustainability.

Wellford et al.’s (2004) conclusions were supported by the findings of the 2011 Firearms and Violence Research Working Group (National Institute of Justice, 2011), which also questioned whether rigorous evaluations are possible given the reliability and validity of the data. Wellford et al. advocated for continued research and development of models that include collaboration between police and community partners and for examination of different evaluation methodologies.

There are varied prevention models that address community issues. When it comes to exploring models that specifically address preventing the recent episodes of gun violence that have captured the nation’s attention, however, the inevitable conclusion is that there is a need to develop a new model that would bring community stakeholders together in a collaborative, problem-solving mode, with a goal of preventing individuals from engaging in gun violence, whether directed at others or self-inflicted. This model would go beyond a single activity and would blend several strategies as building blocks to form a workable systemic approach. It would require that community service systems break their tendencies to operate in silos and take advantage of the different skill sets already available in the community — for example:

• Police are trained in crisis intervention skills with a primary focus on responding to special populations such as those with mental illness.
• Community members are trained in skilled interventions such as Emotional CPR  and Mental Health First Aid — consumer-based initiatives that use neighbor-to-neighbor approaches that direct people in need of care to appropriate mental health treatment.
• School resource officers are trained to show a proactive presence in schools.

Each group may provide a solution to a piece of the problem, but there is nothing connecting the broad range of activities to the type of collaborative system needed to implement a comprehensive, community-based strategy to prevent gun violence. From a policy and practice perspective, no one skill set or one agency can provide the complete answer when it comes to developing a prevention methodology. However, some models developed through the community policing reform movement may be relevant because they are generally acknowledged to have been useful in reducing violence against women and domestic violence and in responding to children exposed to violence. These community policing models involve collaborative problem solving as a way to safeguard the community as opposed to relying only on arrest procedures. Moreover, they engage the community in organized joint efforts to produce public safety (Peak, 2013).

Another initiative, Project Safe Neighborhoods ( PSN ), is also relevant. PSN, a nationwide program that began in 2001 and was designed specifically to reduce gun violence, has some similarity to the community policing model. PSN involved the 94 U.S. attorneys in cities across the country in a prominent leadership role, ensured flexibility across jurisdictions, and required cross-agency buy-in, though there seems to have been less formalized involvement with mental health services. Nevertheless, it used a problem-solving approach that was aimed at getting guns off the streets, and the results of varied outcome assessments demonstrate that it was successful in reducing gun violence, particularly when the initiatives were tailored to the gun violence needs of specific communities (McGarrell et al., 2009).

A common approach used by PSN involved engaging the community to establish appropriate stakeholder partnerships, formulating strategic planning on the basis of identification and measurement of the community problem, training those involved in PSN, providing outreach through nationwide public service announcements, and ensuring accountability through various reporting mechanisms. The PSN problem-solving steps, with some adaptations, could provide a useful strategy for initiating collaborative problem solving with relevant community stakeholders in the interest of reducing gun violence and victimization through prevention.

The models discussed here illustrate how community engagement and collaboration helped break new ground in response to identified criminal justice problems, but they could be strengthened considerably by incorporating the involvement of professional psychology. The need for collaboration was again highlighted at a Critical Issues in Policing meeting (Police Executive Research Forum, 2012) as part of a discussion on connecting agency silos by building bridges across systems. Because police and mental health workers often respond to the same people, there is a need for collaboration on the best way to do this without compromising their roles. This emphasis takes the discussion beyond the student/school focus and expands it to include the use of crisis intervention teams (CIT) and community advocacy groups as additional resources for achieving the goal of preventing violence in the community.

The CIT model was another result of community policing reform that brought police and mental health services together to provide a more effective response to the needs of special populations, particularly mental health-related cases. Developed in Memphis in 1988 but now deployed in many communities across the country, the CIT model trains CIT officers to deescalate situations involving people in crises and to use jail diversion options, if available, rather than arrests. Although research on the effectiveness of CITs is generally limited to outcome studies in select cities, the model continues to gain prominence. In fact, the National Alliance on Mental Illness ( NAMI ) has established a NAMI CIT Center and is promoting the expansion of CIT nationwide. Studies by Borum (2000), Steadman, Deane, Borum, and Morrissey (2000), and Teller, Munetz, Gil, and Ritter (2006) have illustrated that high-risk encounters between individuals with mental illness and police can be substantially improved through CIT training, particularly when there are options such as drop-off centers, use of diversion techniques, and collaborations between law enforcement, mental health, and family members. Each plays a significant role in ensuring that city or county jails do not become de facto institutions for those in mental health crises.

Crisis intervention teams were also a major focus of a 2010 policy summit (International Association of Chiefs of Police [IACP], 2012). The summit, hosted by SAMHSA, the Bureau of Justice Assistance, and IACP, produced a 23-item action agenda. Although the summit focused on decriminalizing the response to persons with mental illness and was not directed specifically at dealing with people who perpetrate gun violence, some of their recommendations did apply. The central theme of the agenda encouraged law enforcement and mental health service systems to engage in mutually respectful working relationships, collaborate across partner agencies, and establish local multidisciplinary advisory groups. These partnerships would develop policy, protocols, and guidelines for informing law enforcement encounters with persons with mental illness who are in crisis, including a protocol that would enable agencies to share essential information about those individuals and whether the nature of the crisis could provoke violent behavior. They further recommended that these types of protocols be established and maintained by the multidisciplinary advisory group and that training be provided in the community to sensitize community members to signs of potential danger and how to intervene in a systematic way.

A Police Foundation (2013) roundtable on gun violence and mental health reported that some police departments have reached out to communities and offered safe storage of firearms when community members have concern about a family member’s access to firearms in the home. As a service to the community, the police would offer to keep guns secured in accessible community locations until the threat has subsided and the community member requests the return. The police would also confer with mental health practitioners regarding a designated family or community member on an as-needed basis. This strategy is consistent with a community threat assessment approach in which law enforcement authorities engage proactively with the community to reduce the risk of violence when an individual poses a risk.

Gun Violence in Schools

Gun violence in schools has been a national concern for more than two decades. Although school shootings are highly traumatic events and have brought school safety to the forefront of public attention, schools are very safe environments compared with other community settings (Borum et al., 2010). Less than 2 percent of homicides of school-aged children occur in schools. Over a 20-year period, there have been approximately 16 shooting deaths in U.S. schools each year (Fox & Burstein, 2010), compared with approximately 32,000 shooting deaths annually in the nation as a whole (Hoyert & Xu, 2012).

The Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994 made federal education funding contingent upon states requiring schools to expel for at least one year any student found with a firearm at school. This mandate strengthened the emerging philosophy of zero tolerance as a school disciplinary policy. According to the APA Zero Tolerance Task Force (2008), this policy was predicated on faulty assumptions that removing disobedient students would motivate them to improve their behavior, deter misbehavior by other students, and generate safer school conditions. The task force found no scientific evidence to support these assumptions and, on the contrary, concluded that the practice of school suspension had negative effects on students and a disproportionately negative impact on students of color and students with disabilities.

After the 1999 shooting at Columbine High School, both the FBI (O’Toole, 2000) and the U.S. Secret Service (Vossekuil et al., 2002) conducted studies of school shootings and concluded that schools should not rely on student profiling or checklists of warning signs to identify potentially violent students. They cautioned that school shootings were statistically too rare to predict with accuracy and that the characteristics associated with student shooters lacked specificity, which means that numerous nonviolent students would be misidentified as dangerous. Both law enforcement agencies recommended that schools adopt a behavioral threat assessment approach, which, as noted earlier, involves assessment of students who threaten violence or engage in threatening behavior and then individualized interventions to resolve any problem or conflict that underlies the threat. One of the promising features of threat assessment is that it provides schools with a policy alternative to zero tolerance. Many schools across the nation have adopted threat assessment practices. Controlled studies of the "Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines" have shown that school-based threat assessment teams are able to resolve student threats safely and efficiently and to reduce school suspension rates (Cornell et al., 2012; Cornell, Gregory, & Fan, 2011; Cornell, Sheras, Gregory, & Fan, 2009).

The Role of Health and Mental Health Providers in Gun Violence Prevention

The health care system is an important point of contact for families regarding the issue of gun safety. Physicians’ counseling of individuals and families about firearm safety has in some cases proven to be an effective prevention measure and is consistent with other health counseling about safety. According to the 2012 policy statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP):

The AAP supports the education of physicians and other professionals interested in understanding the effects of firearms and how to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with their use. HHS should establish a program to support gun safety training and counseling programs among physicians and other medical professionals. The program should also provide medical and community resources for families exposed to violence.

The AAP’s Bright Futures practice guide urges pediatricians to counsel parents who possess guns that storing guns safely and preventing access to guns reduce injury by as much as 70 percent and that the presence of a gun in the home increases the risk for suicide among adolescents. A randomized controlled trial indicates that health care provider counseling, when linked with the distribution of cable locks, has been demonstrated to increase safer home storage of firearms (Barkin et al., 2008). The removal of guns or the restriction of access should be reinforced for children and adolescents with mood disorders, substance abuse (including alcohol), or a history of suicide attempts (Grossman et al., 2005). Research is needed to identify the best ways to avoid unintended consequences while achieving intended outcomes.

In recent years, legal and legislative challenges have emerged that test the ability of physicians and other medical professionals to provide guidance on firearms. For example, in 2011 the state of Florida enacted the Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act, which prevented physicians from providing such counsel under threat of financial penalty and potential loss of licensure. The law has been permanently blocked from implementation by a U.S. district court. Similar policies have been introduced in six other states: Alabama, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and West Virginia. The fundamental right of all health and mental health care providers to provide counseling to individuals and families must be protected to mitigate risk of injury to people where they live, work, and play.

It is apparent that long before the events at Sandy Hook Elementary School, many public health and public safety practitioners were seeking strategies to improve responses to violence in their communities and have experienced some success through problem-solving projects such as PSN and CIT. Yet there is still a need to rigorously evaluate and improve these efforts. In the meantime, basic safety precautions must be emphasized to parents by professionals in health, education, and mental health.

Public health messaging campaigns around safe storage of firearms are needed. The practice of keeping firearms stored and locked must be encouraged, and the habit of keeping loaded, unlocked weapons available should be recognized as dangerous and rendered socially unacceptable. To keep children and families safe, good safety habits have to become the only socially acceptable norm.

Susan B. Sorenson, PhD, and Daniel W. Webster, ScD, MPH

The use of a gun greatly increases the odds that violence will result in a fatality. In 2010, the most recent year for which data are available, an estimated 17.1 percent of the interpersonal assaults with a gunshot wound resulted in a homicide, and 80.7 percent of the suicide attempts in which a gun was used resulted in death (CDC, 2013a). By contrast, the most common methods of assault (hands, fists, and feet) and suicide attempt (ingesting pills) in 2010 resulted in death in only 0.009 percent and 2.5 percent of the incidents, respectively (CDC, 2013a). 3

As shown in Figure 1, in the past 30 years, the percentage of deaths caused by gunfire has stabilized to about 68 percent for homicides and, as drug overdoses have increased, dropped to 50 percent for suicide. There are more gun suicides than gun homicides in the United States. In 2010, 61.2 percent (19,392) of the 31,672 gun deaths in the United States were suicides (CDC, 2013a).

Figure 1. Deaths Attributed to Firearms, 1981–2010

Note: Data are from the Web-Based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS™), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/fatal.html.

Much of the public concern about guns and gun violence focuses on interpersonal violence, and public policy mirrors this emphasis. Although there is no standard way to enumerate each discrete gun law, most U.S. gun laws focus on the user of the gun. Relatively few focus on the design, manufacture, distribution, advertising, or sale of firearms (Teret & Wintemute, 1993). Fewer yet address ammunition.

The focus herein is on the lifespan of guns — from design and manufacture to use — and the policies that could address the misuse of guns. It is critical to understand how policies create conditions that affect access to and use of guns. Because they constitute the largest portion of guns used in homicides (FBI, 2012a), handguns are the focus of most laws. Despite the substantial human and economic costs of gun violence in the United States and the ongoing debate about the effectiveness of gun regulations, scientifically rigorous evaluations are not available for many of these policies (Wellford et al., 2004). The dearth of such research on gun policies is due, in part, to the lack of government funding on this topic because of the political influences of the gun lobby (e.g., Kellermann & Rivara, 2013).

Design and Manufacture

The type of handguns manufactured in the United States has changed. Pistols overtook revolvers in manufacturing in the mid-1980s. In addition, the most widely sold pistol went from a .22 caliber in 1985 to a 9 mm or larger (e.g., .45 caliber pistols) by 1994 (Wintemute, 1996), with smaller, more concealable pistols favored by permit holders as well as criminals. This shift has been described as increasing the lethality of handguns, although, according to our review, no research has examined whether the change in weapon design has led to an increased risk of death. Such research may not be feasible given that the aforementioned weapons — that is, small, concealable pistols — still likely constitute a small portion of the estimated 283 million guns in civilian hands in the United States (Hepburn, Miller, Azrael, & Hemenway, 2007). The disproportionate appearance of such pistols among guns that were traced by law enforcement following their use in a crime has been attributed to the ease with which smaller guns can be concealed and their low price point (Koper, 2007; Wright, Wintemute, & Webster, 2010).

Ammunition, by contrast, is directly related to lethality. Hollow-point bullets are used by hunters because, in part, they are considered a more humane way to kill. The physics of hollow-point bullets are such that, upon impact, they will tumble inside the animal and take it down. Some bullets have been designed to be frangible, that is, to break apart upon impact and thus cause substantial internal damage. By contrast, the physics of full metal jacket bullets are such that, unless they hit a bone, they are likely to continue on a straight trajectory and pass through the animal, leaving it wounded and wandering. Hollow-point bullets are used by law enforcement to reduce over-penetration (i.e., when a bullet passes through its intended target and, thus, risks striking others).

Some design features would substantially reduce gun violence. One of the most promising ideas is that of “smart guns” that can be fired only by an authorized user. For example, young people, who are prohibited due to their age from legally purchasing a firearm, typically use a gun from their own home to commit suicide (Johnson, Barber, Azrael, Clark, & Hemenway, 2010; Wright, Wintemute, & Claire, 2008) and to carry out a school shooting (CDC, 2003). If personalized to an authorized adult in the home, the gun could not be operated by the adolescent or others in the home, thus rendering it of little use to the potential suicide victim or school shooter. During the Clinton administration, the federal government made a modest investment in the research and development of personalized firearms. There also was considerable private investment in technologies that would prevent unauthorized users from being able to fire weapons. Efforts to create these “smart guns” have resulted in multiple patent applications. Armatix GmbH, a German company, has designed and produced a personalized pistol that is being sold in several Western European nations and has been approved for importation to the United States. Although the cost of this new personalized gun is very high, it is believed that personalized guns can be produced at a cost that would be affordable by many (Teret & Merritt, 2013).

The assault weapons ban (the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act), enacted for a 10-year period beginning in 1994, provided a good opportunity to assess the effectiveness of restricting the manufacturing, sale, and possession of a certain class of weapons. “Assault weapons,” however, are difficult to conceal and are used rarely in most street crime or domestic violence. Assault weapons are commonly used in mass shootings in which ammunition capacity can determine the number of victims killed or wounded. Because multiple bullets are not an issue in suicide, one would not expect changes in such deaths either. Perhaps not surprisingly, an effect of the ban could not be detected on total gun-related homicides (Koper, 2013; Koper & Roth, 2001).

Unfortunately, prior research on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban did not focus on the law’s effects on mass shootings or the number of persons shot in such shootings. Assault weapons or guns with large-capacity ammunition feeding devices account for half of the weapons used in mass shootings such as at Sandy Hook Elementary School (see Follman & Aronson , 2013). Mass shootings with these types of weapons result in about 1.5 times as many fatalities as those committed with other types of firearms (Roth & Koper, 1997).

Distribution

The distribution of guns is largely the responsibility of a network of middlemen between gun manufacturers and gun dealers. When a gun is recovered following its use (or suspected use) in a crime, law enforcement routinely requests that the gun be traced — that is, the serial number is reported to the manufacturer, who then contacts the distributor and/or dealer who, in turn, reviews records to determine the original purchaser of a specific weapon. The number of gun traces is such that the manufacturers get many calls about their guns each day. One researcher estimated that Smith and Wesson, with about 10 percent of market share, received a call every seven to eight minutes about one of their guns (Kairys, 2008). Thus, one could reasonably expect that manufacturers would have some knowledge of which distributors sell guns that are disproportionately used in crime, and distributors would, in turn, know which retailers disproportionately sell guns used in crime.

Following in the footsteps of cities and states that had successfully sued the tobacco industry under state consumer protection and antitrust laws for costs the public incurred in caring for smokers, beginning in the late 1990s cities and states began to file claims against firearm manufacturers in an attempt to recover the costs of gun violence they incurred. In response, in 2005, Congress enacted and President George W. Bush signed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which prohibits civil liability lawsuits against “manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others” ( 15 U.S.C. §§ 7901-7903 ). Thus, the option of using litigation, a long-standing and sometimes controversial tool by which to address entrenched public health problems (e.g., Lytton, 2004), was severely restricted.

Advertising

Advertisements for guns have largely disappeared from classified ads in newspapers. By contrast, advertising in magazines, specifically gun magazines, is strong (Saylor, Vittes, & Sorenson, 2004). Such advertising is subject to the same Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulations as other consumer products. In 1996, several organizations filed a complaint with the FTC after documenting multiple cases of what they asserted to be false and misleading claims about home protection (for specific examples, see Vernick, Teret, & Webster, 1997). As of November 1, 2013, the FTC had not ruled on the complaint. However, the firearm industry changed its practices such that by 2002, self-protection was an infrequent theme in advertisements for guns (Saylor et al., 2004). To our knowledge, current advertising has not been studied. New issues relevant to the advertising of guns include online advertisements by private sellers who are not obligated to verify that purchasers have passed a background check, online ads from prohibited purchasers seeking to buy firearms, the marketing of military-style weapons to civilians, and the marketing of firearms to underage youth (for examples and more information, see Kessler & Trumble, 2013; Mayors Against Illegal Guns, 2013; McIntire, 2013; Violence Policy Center, 2011).

Sales and Purchases

Gun sales have been increasing in the United States. The FBI reported a substantial jump in background checks (a proxy for gun sales) in the days following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings. In fact, of the 10 days with the most requests for background checks since the FBI started monitoring such information, 7 of them were within 8 days of Sandy Hook (FBI, 2013). Guns can be purchased from federally licensed firearm dealers or private, unlicensed sellers in a variety of settings, including gun shows, flea markets, and the Internet.

Responsible sales practices (for examples, see Mayors Against Illegal Guns, n.d.) rely heavily on the integrity of the seller. And usually that responsibility is well placed: Over half (57 percent) of the guns traced (i.e., submitted by law enforcement, usually in association with a crime, to determine the original purchaser of the weapon) were originally sold by only 1.2 percent of federally licensed firearm dealers (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms [ATF], 2000). However, there are problems. Sometimes a person who is prohibited from purchasing a gun engages someone else, who is not so prohibited, to purchase a gun for him or her. The person doing the buying is called a “straw purchaser.” Straw purchase attempts are not uncommon; in a random sample of 1,601 licensed dealers and pawnbrokers in 43 states, two thirds reported experiencing straw purchase attempts (Wintemute, 2013b).

Two studies tested the integrity of licensed firearm dealers by calling the dealers and asking whether they could purchase a handgun on behalf of someone else (in the studies, a boyfriend or girlfriend), a straw purchase transaction that is illegal. In the study of a sample of gun dealers listed in telephone directories of the 20 largest U.S. cities, the majority of gun dealers indicated a willingness to sell a handgun under the illegal straw purchase scenario (Sorenson & Vittes, 2003). In a similar study of licensed gun dealers in California, a state with relatively strong regulation and oversight of licensed gun dealers, one in five dealers expressed a willingness to make the illegal sale (Wintemute, 2010). Programs such as the ATF and National Sports Shooting Council’s “Don’t Lie for the Other Guy,” which provides posters and educational materials to display in gun stores as well as tips for gun dealers on how to identify and respond to straw purchase attempts, have not been evaluated.

It is important to be able to identify high-risk dealers because, in 2012, the ATF had insufficient resources to monitor federally licensed gun dealers (Horwitz, 2012); there were 134,997 unlicensed gun dealers in April 2013 (ATF, 2013). Some states have recognized the limited capacity of the ATF and the weaknesses of federal laws regulating gun dealers and enacted their own laws requiring the licensing, regulation, and oversight of gun dealers (Vernick, Webster, & Bulzacchelli, 2006) and, when enforced, these laws appear to reduce the diversion of guns to criminals shortly after a retail sale (Webster, Vernick, & Bulzacchelli, 2009). Undercover stings and lawsuits against gun dealers who facilitate illegal straw sales have also been shown to reduce the diversion of guns to criminals (Webster, Bulzacchelli, Zeoli, & Vernick, 2006; Webster & Vernick, 2013b).

To help ensure that guns are not sold to those who are prohibited from purchasing them, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System ([NICS], part of the Brady Law) was developed so that the status of a potential purchaser could be checked immediately by a federally licensed firearm dealer. Prohibited purchasers include, but are not limited to, convicted felons, persons dishonorably discharged from the military, those under a domestic violence restraining order, and, in the language of the federal law, persons who have been adjudicated as mentally defective or have been committed to any mental institution (see 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (1)-(9) and (n)). About 0.6% of sales have been denied on the basis of these criteria since NICS was established in 1998 (FBI, 2012b).

A substantial portion of firearm sales and transfers, however, is not required to go through a federally licensed dealer or a background check requirement; this includes, in most U.S. states, private party sales including those that are advertised on the Internet and those that take place at gun shows where licensed gun dealers who could process background checks are steps away. Some evidence suggests that state policies regulating private handgun sales reduce the diversion of guns to criminals (Vittes, Vernick, & Webster, 2013; Webster et al., 2009; Webster, Vernick, McGinty, & Alcorn, 2013).

The ability to check the background of a potential purchaser nearly instantly means that in many states, someone who is not a prohibited purchaser can purchase a gun within a matter of minutes. Ten states and the District of Columbia have a waiting period (sometimes referred to as a “cooling-off” period) for handguns ranging from 3 (Florida and Iowa) to 14 (Hawaii) days (Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 2012). The efficacy of waiting periods has received little direct research attention.

With the exception of misdemeanor domestic violence assault, federal law and laws in most states prohibit firearm possession of those convicted of a crime only if the convictions are for felony offenses in adult courts. Research has shown that misdemeanants who were legally able to purchase handguns committed crimes involving violence following those purchases at a rate 2–10 times higher than that of handgun purchasers with no prior convictions (Wintemute, Drake, Beaumont, & Wright, 1998). Wintemute and colleagues (Wintemute, Wright, Drake, & Beaumont, 2001) examined the impact of a California law that expanded firearm prohibitions to include persons convicted of misdemeanor crimes of violence. In their study of legal handgun purchasers with criminal histories of misdemeanor violence before and after the law, denial of handgun purchases due to a prior misdemeanor conviction was associated with a significantly lower rate of subsequent violent offending.

Persons who are legally determined to be a danger to others or to themselves as a result of mental illness are prohibited by federal law from purchasing and possessing firearms. A significant impediment to successful implementation of this law is that the firearm disqualifications due to mental illness often are not reported to the FBI’s background check system. As mentioned earlier, in 2007 Connecticut began reporting these disqualifications to the background check system. In a ground-breaking study, Swanson and colleagues (2013) studied the effects of this policy change on individuals who would most likely be affected — that is, those who were legally prohibited from possessing firearms due solely to the danger posed by their mental illnesses. They found that the rate of violent crime offending was about half as high among those whose mental illness disqualification was reported to the background system compared with those whose mental illness disqualification was not reported.

Federal law allows an individual to buy several guns, even hundreds, at once; the only requirement is that a multiple-purchase form be completed (18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)(A)(2009)). Large bulk purchases have been linked to gun trafficking (Koper, 2005). Policies such as one-handgun-a-month have rarely been enacted. Evaluations of these laws document mixed findings (Webster et al., 2009, 2013;Weil & Knox, 1996).

The United States was one of the signers of the Geneva Convention, which prohibits the use of hollow-point bullets in war (the goal being to wound but not kill wartime enemies), but hollow-point bullets are available to civilians in the United States. A hunting license is not a prerequisite for the purchase of hollow-point bullets in the United States. California passed a law requiring a thumbprint for ammunition purchases; the law was ruled “unconstitutionally vague” by a Superior Court judge in 2011, but some municipalities (e.g., Los Angeles, Sacramento) have similar local ordinances in effect.

In 2004, a national survey found that 20 percent of the U.S. adult population reported they own one or more long-guns (shotguns or rifles), and 16 percent reported they own a handgun (Hepburn et al., 2007). Self-protection was the primary reason for owning a gun. Most people who have a gun have multiple guns, and half of gun owners reported owning four or more guns. In fact, 4 percent of the population is estimated to own 65 percent of the guns in the nation.

Nationally representative studies suggest that the mental health of gun owners is similar to that of individuals who do not own guns (Miller, Barber, Azrael, Hemenway, & Molnar, 2009; Sorenson & Vittes, 2008). However, gun owners are more likely to binge drink and drink and drive (Wintemute, 2011).

In perhaps the methodologically strongest study to date to examine handgun ownership and mortality, Wintemute and colleagues found a strong association between the purchase of a handgun and suicide: “In the first year after the purchase of a handgun, suicide was the leading cause of death among handgun purchasers, accounting for 24.5 percent of all deaths” (Wintemute, Parham, Beaumont, Wright, & Drake, 1999). The risk of suicide remained elevated (nearly twofold and sevenfold, respectively, for male and female handgun purchasers) at the end of the 6-year study period. Men’s handgun purchase was associated with a reduced risk of becoming a homicide victim (0.69); women’s handgun purchase, by contrast, was associated with a 55 percent increase in risk of becoming a homicide victim. A waiting period may reduce immediate risk but appears not to eliminate short- or long-term risk for suicide.

Risk can extend to others in the home. Efforts to educate children about guns (largely to stay away from them), when tested with field experiments, indicate they are generally ineffective (e.g., Hardy, 2002). Child Access Prevention (CAP) laws focus on the responsibilities of adults; adults are held criminally liable for unsafe storage of firearms around children. CAP laws have been associated with modest decreases in unintentional shootings of children and the suicides of adolescents (Webster & Starnes, 2000; Webster, Vernick, Zeoli, & Manganello, 2004).

Most gun-related laws focus on the user of the gun (e.g., increased penalties for using a gun in the commission of a crime). Some research suggests that having been threatened with a gun, as well as the perpetrator’s having access to a gun and using a gun during the fatal incident, is associated with increased risk of women becoming victims of intimate partner homicide (Campbell et al., 2003). Regarding sales, note that persons with a domestic violence misdemeanor or under a domestic violence restraining order are prohibited by federal law from purchasing and possessing a firearm and ammunition. Research to date indicates that firearm restrictions for persons subject to such laws have reduced intimate partner homicides by 6 percent to 19 percent (Vigdor & Mercy, 2006; Zeoli & Webster, 2010).

As with initial discussions about motor vehicle safety, which focused on what was then referred to as the “nut behind the wheel,” current discussions about gun users sometimes involve terms such as “good guys” and “bad guys.” Although intuitively appealing, such categories seem to assume a static label and do not take into account the fact that “good guys” can become “bad guys” and “bad guys” can become “good guys.” One way an armed “good guy” can become a “bad guy” is to use a gun in a moment of temporary despondence or rage (Bandeira, 2013; Wintemute, 2013a).

Research on near-miss suicide attempts among young adults indicates that impulsivity is of concern. About one fourth of those whose suicide attempt was so severe they most likely would have died reported first thinking about suicide five minutes before attempting it (Simon et al., 2001). Although an estimated 90 percent of those who attempt suicide go on to die of something else (i.e., they do not subsequently kill themselves; for a review, see Bostwick & Pankratz, 2000), for those who use a gun, as noted in opening paragraph of this chapter, there generally is not a second chance.

Given the complexity of the issue, a multifaceted approach will be needed to reduce firearm-related violence (see, for example, Chapman & Alpers, 2013). Not all ideas that on the surface seem to be useful actually are. For example, gun buyback programs may raise awareness of guns and gun violence in a community but have not been shown to reduce mortality (Makarios & Pratt, 2012). Such data can inform policy. President Obama’s January 2013 executive orders about gun violence include directing the CDC to research the causes and prevention of gun violence. The federal government has since announced several funding opportunities for research related to gun violence. And the recent Institute of Medicine and National Research Council (2013) report called for lifting access restrictions on gun-related administrative data (e.g., data related to dealers’ compliance with firearm sales laws, gun trace data) that could be used to identify potential intervention and prevention points and strategies. So perhaps more data will be available to inform and evaluate policies designed to reduce gun violence.

The focus of this section has largely been on mortality. The scope of the problem is far greater, however. For every person who dies of a gunshot wound, there are an estimated 2.25 people who are hospitalized or receive emergency medical treatment for a nonfatal gunshot wound (Gotsch, Annest, Mercy, & Ryan, 2001). And guns are used in the street and in the home to intimidate and coerce (e.g., Sorenson & Wiebe, 2004; Truman, 2011).

Single policies implemented by themselves have been shown to reduce certain forms of gun violence in the United States. Adequate implementation and enforcement as well as addressing multiple intervention points simultaneously may improve the efficacy of these laws even more. After motor vehicle safety efforts expanded to include the vehicle, roadways, and other intervention points (vs. a focus on individual behavior), motor vehicle deaths dropped precipitously and continue to decline (CDC, 1999, 2013a). A multifaceted approach to reducing gun violence will serve the nation well.

3 The 2010 data used to calculate current rates shown here are available at http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/ .

Adler, N. E., & Steward, J. (2010). Health disparities across the lifespan: Meaning, methods, and mechanisms. In N. E. Adler & J. Steward (Eds.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Vol. 1186. The biology of disadvantage: Socioeconomic status and health (pp. 5–23). New York, NY: New York Academy of Sciences.

Ahn, M. H., Park, S., Ha, K., Choi, S. H., & Hong, J. P. (2012). Gender ratio comparisons of the suicide rates and methods in Korea, Japan, Australia, and the United States. Journal of Affective Disorders, 142, 161–165. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2012.05.008

Alpers, P., & Wilson, M. (2013, August 14). Global impact of gun violence: Firearms, public health and safety. Retrieved from http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region

American Academy of Pediatrics, Council on Injury, Violence, and Poison Prevention Executive Committee. (2012). Firearm-related injuries affecting the pediatric population. Pediatrics, 130 (5), e1416–e1423. doi:10.1542/peds.2012-2481

American Psychological Association, Zero Tolerance Task Force. (2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. American Psychologist, 63, 852–862. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.852

Anderson, C. A., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E., Huesmann, L. R., Johnson, J. D., Linz, D., . . . Wartella, E. (2003). The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4 (3) , 81–110. doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2003.pspi_1433.x

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353–359. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00366

Anderson, C. A., Shibuya, A., Ihori, N., Swing, E. L., Bushman, B. J., Sakamoto, A., . . . Saleem, M. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in Eastern and Western countries: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 151–173. doi:10.1037/a0018251

ASIS International and Society for Human Resource Management. (2011). Workplace violence prevention and intervention: An American standard (ASIS/SHRM WVP.1-2011). New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.

ASME-Innovative Technologies Institute. (2010). A risk analysis standard for natural and man-made hazards to higher education: A standard for academia . New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.

Bandeira, A. R. (2013). Brazil: Gun control and homicide reduction. In D. Webster & J. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 213–223). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Barkin, S. L., Finch, S. A., Ip, E. H., Scheindlin, B., Craig, J. A., Steffes, J., . . . Wasserman, R. C. (2008). Is office-based counseling about media use, timeouts, and firearm storage effective? Results from a cluster-randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics, 122 (1), e15–e25. Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/122/1/e15.full

Borum, R. (2000). Improving high risk encounters between people with mental illness and police. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 28, 332–337.

Borum, R., Cornell, D., Modzeleski, W., & Jimerson, S. R. (2010). What can be done about school shootings? A review of the evidence. Educational Researcher, 39, 27–37. doi:10.3102/0013189X09357620

Borum, R., & Verhaagen, D. (2006). Assessing and managing violence risk in juveniles. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Bostwick, J. M., & Pankratz, V. S. (2000). Affective disorders and suicide risk: A reexamination. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157 (12), 1925–1932. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.157.12.1925

Brady Handgun Violence Act, 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq. (1994).

Branas, C. C., Nance, M. L., Elliott, M. R., Richmond, T. S., & Schwab, C. W. (2004). Urban–rural shifts in intentional firearm death: Different causes, same results. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 1750–1755. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448529/

Brannon, R. (1976). The male sex role: Our culture’s blueprint for manhood, what it’s done for us lately. In D. David & R. Brannon (Eds.), The forty-nine percent majority: The male sex role (pp. 1–48). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Brennan, P. A., Hall, J., Bor, W., Najman, J. M., & Williams, G. (2003). Integrating biological and social processes in relation to early-onset persistent aggression in boys and girls. Developmental Psychology, 39, 309–323. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.309

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. (2000). Following the gun: Enforcing federal laws against firearms traffickers . Retrieved from http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/Following_the_Gun

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. (2013). Report of active firearms licenses – License type by state statistics . Retrieved from https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/inside-atf/2013/0413-ffl-type-by-state.pdf

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2008). National Crime Victimization Survey: Criminal victimization in the United States, 2006 statistical tables (NCJ 223436). Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus06.pdf

Butters, J. E., Sheptycki, J., Brochu, S., & Erikson, P. G. (2011). Guns and sublethal violence: A comparative study of at-risk youth in two Canadian cities. International Criminal Justice Review, 4, 402–426.

Campbell, J. C., Glass, N., Sharps, P. W., Laughon, K., & Bloom, T. (2007). Intimate partner homicide: Review and implications of research and policy. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 8, 246–260. doi:10.1177/1524838007303505

Campbell, J. C., Webster, D., Koziol-McLain, J., Block, C., Campbell, D., Curry, M. A., . . . Laughon, K. (2003). Risk factors for femicide in abusive relationships: Results from a multisite case control study. American Journal of Public Health , 93 (7), 1089–1097. doi:10.2105/AJPH.93.7.1089

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (1999). Motor-vehicle safety: A 20th century public health achievement. MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 48 (18), 369–374. (Erratum published June 11, 1999, MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 48 (22), p. 473)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2003). Source of firearms used by students in school-associated violent deaths — United States, 1992–1999. MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 52 (9), 169–172.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2008). School-associated student homicides — United States, 1992–2006. MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 57 (2), 33–36. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5702a1.htm

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013a, August 23). Injury prevention & control: Data & statistics (WISQARS™). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013b, February 22). School violence: Data and statistics. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/schoolviolence/data_stats.html

Chapman, S., & Alpers, P. (2013). Gun-related deaths: How Australia stepped off “The American path.” Annals of Internal Medicine, 158 (10), 770–771. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-158-10-201305210-00624

Cheng, T. L., Brenner, R. A., Wright, J. L., Sachs, H. C., Moyer, P., & Rao, M. (2003). Community norms on toy guns. Pediatrics, 111 (1), 75–79. doi:10.1542/peds.111.1.75

Children’s Defense Fund. (2009, February 19). Cradle to Prison Pipeline Campaign. Retrieved from http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data-publications/data/cradle-prison-pipeline-summary-report.pdf

Children’s Defense Fund. (2012). The state of America’s children handbook . Retrieved from http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data-publications/data/soac-2012-handbook.html

Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge, MA: Polity.

Cook, P. J., & Sorenson, S. (2006). The gender gap among teen survey respondents: Why are boys more likely to report a gun in the home than girls? Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22, 61–76. doi: 10.1007/s10940-005-9002-7

Cooper, A., & Smith, E. L. (2011, November). Homicide trends in the United States, 1980–2008. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=31

Cornell, D., Allen, K., & Fan, X. (2012). A randomized controlled study of the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines in kindergarten through grade 12. School Psychology Review, 41, 100–115.

Cornell, D., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2011). Reductions in long-term suspensions following adoption of the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines. Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 95, 175–194. doi:0192636511415255v1

Cornell, D., Sheras, P., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2009). A retrospective study of school safety conditions in high schools using the Virginia Threat Assessment Guidelines versus alternative approaches. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 119–129. doi:10.1037/a0016182

Courtenay, W. H. (2000). Constructions of masculinity and their influence on men’s well-being: A theory of gender and health. Social Science & Medicine, 50 , 1385–1401. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00390-1

Dishion, T. J., Véronneau, M-H., & Myers, M. W. (2010). Cascading peer dynamics underlying the progression from problem behavior to violence in early to late adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 22 (3), 603–619. doi: 10.1017/S0954579410000313

Dodge, K. A., Greenberg, M. T., Malone, P. S., & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2008). Testing an idealized dynamic cascade model of the development of serious violence in adolescence. Child Development, 79, 1907–1927. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01233.x

Dodge, K. A., & Pettit, G. S. (2003). A biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 39, 349–371. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.349

Eaton, D. K., Kann, L., Kinchen, S., Shanklin, S., Flint, K. H., Hawkins, J., . . . Wechsler, H. (2012, June 8). Youth risk behavior surveillance — United States, 2011. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 61 (4). Retrieved from the CDC website: http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/yrbs/index.htm

Edelman, M. W. (2007). The cradle to prison pipeline: An American health crisis. Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy, 4 (3). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2007/jul/07_0038.htm

Evans, A. C., Jr. (2013, January 11). Mental health’s great gray area . Retrieved from http://articles.philly.com/2013-01-11/news/36281940_1_mental-illness-mental-health-health-issues

Fabiano, P. M., Perkins, H. W., Berkowitz, A., Linkenbach, J., & Stark, C (2003). Engaging men as social justice allies in ending violence against women: Evidence for a social norms approach. Journal of American College Health , 52, 105–108. doi: 10.1080/07448480309595732

Farrington, D. P., Jolliffe, D., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Kalb, L. M. (2001). The concentration of offenders in families and family criminality in the prediction of boys’ delinquency. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 579–596. doi:10.1006/jado.2001.0424

Feder, J., Levant, R. F., & Dean, J. (2010). Boys and violence: A gender-informed analysis. Psychology of Violence, 1, 3–12. doi: 10.1037/2152-0828.1.S.3

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (n.d.). Serial murder: Multi-disciplinary perspectives for investigators. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2007). Crime in the United States, 2007. Retrieved from http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2012a). Crime in the United States, 2011 . Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2012b). National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) operations 2012 . Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/2012-operations-report

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2013). NICS firearm background checks: Top 10 highest days/weeks. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/nics-firearm-background-checks-top-10-highest-days-and-weeks-033113.pdf

Fein, R. A., & Vossekuil, F. (1998). Protective intelligence and threat assessment investigations: A guide for state and local law enforcement officials. Washington, DC: U.S. Secret Service.

Fein, R., Vossekuil, B., Pollack, W., Borum, R., Modzeleski, W., & Reddy, M. (2002). Threat assessment in schools: A guide to managing threatening situations and to creating safe school climates. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Secret Service.

Fessler, D. M. T., Holbrook, C., & Snyder, J. K. (2012). Weapons make the man (larger): Formidability is represented as size and strength in humans. PLOS ONE, 7 (4), e32751. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0032751

Follman, M., & Aronson, G. (2013, January 30). “A killing machine”: Half of all mass shooters used high-capacity magazines. Mother Jones. Retrieved from http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/high-capacity-magazines-mass-shootings

Fox, J. A., & Burstein, H. (2010). Violence and security on campus: From preschool through college. Denver, CO: Praeger.

Furlong, M. J., Bates, M. P., & Smith, D. C. (2001). Predicting school weapon possession: A secondary analysis of the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Survey. Psychology in the Schools, 38, 127–139. doi:10.1002/pits.1005

Gotsch, K. E., Annest, J. L., Mercy, J. A., & Ryan, G. W. (2001). Surveillance for fatal and nonfatal firearm-related injuries — United States, 1993–1998. MMWR, 50 (SS02), 1–32.

Grossman, D. C., Mueller, B. A., Riedy, C., Dowd, M. D., Villaveces, A., Prodzinski, J., . . . Harruff, R. (2005). Gun storage practices and risk of youth suicide and unintentional firearm injuries. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 293, 707–714. doi:10.1001/jama.293.6.707

Gruenwald, J. (2012). Are anti-LGBT homicides in the United States unique? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27 (18), 3601–3623.

Guerra, N. G., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2008). Linking the prevention of problem behaviors and positive youth development: Core competencies for positive youth development. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 122, 1–17.

Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C., § 44-101 et seq. (1968).

Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994, 20 U.S.C. § 8921-23 (1994).

Hardy, M. S. (2002). Teaching firearm safety to children: Failure of a program. Journal of  Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 23 (2), 71–76.

Hemenway, D., Vriniotis, M., Johnson, R. M., Miller, M., & Azrael, D. (2011). Gun carrying by high school students in Boston, MA: Does overestimation of peer gun carrying matter? Journal of Adolescence, 34, 997–1003. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.11.008

Henggeler, S. W. (2011). Efficacy studies to large-scale transport: The development and validation of multisystemic therapy programs. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 7,  351–381. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032210-104615

Hepburn, L., Miller, M., Azrael, D., & Hemenway, D. (2007). The U.S. gun stock: Results from the 2004 National Firearms Survey. Injury Prevention, 13 (1), 15–19. doi:10.1136/ip.2006.013607

Hill, K. G., Howell, J. C., Hawkins, J. D., & Battin-Pearson, S. R. (1999). Childhood risk factors for adolescent gang membership: Results from the Seattle Social Development Project. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36 (3), 300–322. doi:10.1177/0022427899036003003

Hong, L. (2000). Toward a transformed approach to prevention: Breaking the link between masculinity and violence. Journal of American College Health, 48 (6), 269–279. doi: 10.1080/07448480009596268

Horwitz, S. (2012, December 17). ATF, charged with regulating guns, lacks resources and leadership. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com

Hoyert, D. L., & Xu, J. (2012). Deaths: Preliminary data for 2011. National Vital Statistics Reports, 61 (6). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

Huesmann, L. R. (2010). Nailing the coffin shut on doubts that violent video games stimulate aggression: Comment on Anderson et al. (2010). Psychological Bulletin, 2, 179–181. doi:10.1037/a0018567

Huesmann, L. R., & Guerra, N. G. (1997). Children’s normative beliefs about aggression and aggressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 408–419. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.408

Huesmann, L. R., Moise-Titus, J., Podolski, C-L., & Eron, L. D. (2003). Longitudinal relations between children’s exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and violent behavior in young adulthood: 1977–1992. Developmental Psychology, 39, 201–221. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.201

Hunt, K., Sweeting, H., Keoghan, M., & Platt, S. (2006). Sex, gender role orientation, gender role attitudes and suicidal thoughts in three generations: A general population study. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 41 (8), 641–647. doi: 10.1007/s00127-006-0074-y

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2013). Priorities for research to reduce the threat of firearm-related violence. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18319

International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2012). Building safer communities: Improving police response to persons with mental illness: Recommendations from the IACP National Policy Summit. Retrieved from http://www.theiacp.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=JyoR%2fQBPIxA%3d&tabid=87

Johnson, R. M., Barber, C., Azrael, D., Clark, D. E., & Hemenway, D. (2010). Who are the owners of firearms used in adolescent suicides? Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior, 40 (6), 609–611. doi:10.1521/suli.2010.40.6.609

Johnson, R. M., Miller, M., Vriniotis, M., Azrael, D., & Hemenway, D. (2006). Are household firearms stored less safely in homes with adolescents? Analysis of a national random sample of parents. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 160, 788–792. doi:10.1001/archpedi.160.8.788

Kairys, D. (2008). Philadelphia freedom: Memoir of a civil rights lawyer . Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Kalish, R., & Kimmel, M. (2010). Suicide by mass murder: Masculinity, aggrieved entitlement, and rampage school shootings. Health Sociology Review, 19 (4), 451–464.

Kaplan, M. S., & Geling, O. (1998). Firearm suicides and homicides in the United States: Regional variations and patterns of gun ownership. Social Science & Medicine, 46,  1227–1233. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(97)10051-X

Kellermann, A. L., & Rivara, R. (2013). Silencing the science on gun research. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 309 (6), 549–550. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.208207

Kennedy, D. M., Braga, A. A., & Piehl, A. M. (2001). Reducing gun violence: The Boston Gun Project’s Operation Ceasefire (NIJ 188741). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/188741.pdf

Kessler, J., & Trumble, S. (2013, August). The virtual loophole: A survey of online gun sales. Retrieved from http://content.thirdway.org/publications/719/Third_Way_Report_-_The_Virtual_Loophole-_A_Survey_of_Online_Gun_Sales.pdf

Kimmel, M. S. (1994). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame, and silence in the construction of gender identity. In H. Brod & M. Kaufman (Eds.), Theorizing masculinities (pp. 119–141). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kimmel, M. S, & Mahler, M. (2003). Adolescent masculinity, homophobia, and violence: Random school shootings, 1982–2001. American Behavioral Scientist, 46, 1439–1458. doi: 10.1177/0002764203046010010

Kivel, P. (1998). Men’s work: How to stop the violence that tears our lives apart (2nd ed.). City Center, MN: Hazelden.

Koper, C. S. (2005). Purchase of multiple firearms as a risk factor for criminal gun use: Implications for gun policy and enforcement. Criminology and Public Policy, 4 (4), 749–778. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00354.x

Koper, C. S. (2007). Crime gun risk factors: Buyer, seller, firearm, and transaction characteristics associated with criminal gun use and trafficking (Report to the National Institute of Justice). Retrieved from www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/221074.pdf

Koper, C. S. (2013). America’s experience with the federal assault weapons ban, 1994–2004: Key findings and implications. In D. Webster & J. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 157–171). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Koper, C. S., & Roth, J. A. (2001). The impact of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban on gun violence outcomes: An assessment of multiple outcome measures and some lessons for policy evaluation. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17 (1), 33–74. doi:10.1023/A:1007522431219

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (2012, May 21). Waiting periods policy summary. Retrieved from http://smartgunlaws.org/waiting-periods-policy-summary

Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Howell, J. C., Tobin, K., & Howard, G. J. (2000). Factors influencing gun carrying among young urban males over the adolescent-young adult life course. Criminology, 38, 811–834.

Loeber, R. (1982). The stability of antisocial and delinquent child behavior: A review. Child Development, 53, 1431–1446.

Ludwig, G., Cook, P. J., & Smith, T. W. (1998). The gender gap in reporting household gun ownership. American Journal of Public Health, 88 (11), 1715–1718.

Lytton, T. D. (2004, Winter). Using litigation to make public health policy: Theoretical and empirical challenges in assessing product liability, tobacco, and gun litigation. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, 556–564.

Makarios, M. D., & Pratt, T. C. (2012). The effectiveness of policies and programs that attempt to reduce firearm violence: A meta-analysis. Crime & Delinquency, 58 (2), 222–244.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns. (n.d.). Responsible firearms retail partnership . Retrieved from http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/partnership/partnership.shtml

Mayors Against Illegal Guns. (2013, September). Felon seeks firearm: No strings attached. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/images/FINAL_NO_STRINGS_REPORT.pdf

McGarrell, E. F., Hipple, N. K., Corsoro, N., Bynum, T. S., Perez, H., Zimmermann, C. A., & Garmo, M. (2009). Project Safe Neighborhoods: A national program to reduce gun violence (Final rep.). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/226686.pdf

McIntire, M. (2013, January 26). Selling a new generation on guns. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/us/selling-a-new-generation-on-guns.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

Miller, M., Azrael, D., & Hemenway, D. (2002). Firearm availability and unintentional firearm death, suicide, and homicide among 5–14 year olds. Journal of Trauma, 52, 267–275.

Miller, M., Azrael, D., Hepburn, L., Hemenway D., & Lippmann, S. J. (2006). The association between changes in household firearm ownership and rates of suicide in the United States, 1981–2002 . Injury Prevention, 12, 178–182. doi:10.1136/ip.2005.010850

Miller, M., Barber, C., Azrael, D., Hemenway, D., & Molnar, B. E. (2009). Recent psychopathology, suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts in households with and without firearms: Findings from the National Comorbidity Study Replication. Injury Prevention, 15 (3), 183–187. doi:10.1136/ip.2008.021352.

Miniño, A. M. (2010). Mortality among teenagers aged 12–19 years: United States, 1999–2006 (NCHS Data Brief No. 37). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db37.pdf

Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescent-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.674

Moffitt, T. E. (2005). The new look of behavioral genetics in developmental psychopathology: Gene-environment interplay in antisocial behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 131 , 533-554. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.4.533

Molnar, B. E., Miller, M. J., Azrael, D., & Buka, S. L. (2004). Neighborhood predictors of concealed firearm carrying among children and adolescents: Results from the project on human development in Chicago neighborhoods. Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, 158, 657–664.

Monahan, J., Steadman, H., Silver, E., Appelbaum, P. S., Robbins, P. C., Mulvey, E. P., … Banks, S. (2001) . Rethinking risk assessment: The MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Moore, T. M., Elkins, S. R., McNulty, J. K., Kivisto, A. J., & Handsel, V. A. (2011). Alcohol use and intimate partner violence perpetration among college students: Assessing the temporal association using electronic diary technology. Psychology of Violence, 1 (4), 315–328. doi: 10.1037/a0025077

Moore, T. M., & Stuart, G. L. (2005). A review of the literature on masculinity and partner violence. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 6 (1), 46–61. doi: 10.1037/1524-9220.6.1.46

Moscicki, E. K. (2001). Epidemiology of completed and attempted suicide: Toward a framework for prevention. Clinical Neuroscience Research, 1, 310–323. doi://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1566-2772(01)00032-9

Mozaffarian, D., Hemenway, D., & Ludwig, D. S. (2013). Curbing gun violence: Lessons from public health successes. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 309,  551–552. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.38.

Murphy, S. L., Xu, J., & Kochanek, D. (2013). Deaths: Final data for 2010. National Vital Statistics Reports, 61 (4). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf

National Institute of Justice. (2011). Firearms and Violence Research Working Group meeting summary 2011 . Retrieved from http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/working-group/2011-summary.htm

Neighbors, C., Walker, D., Mbilinyi, L., O’Rourke, A., Edleson, J. L., Zegree, J., & Roffman, R. A. (2010). Normative misperceptions of abuse among perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 16, 370–386. doi: 10.1177/1077801210363608

New York State Office of Mental Health. (2005, March). Kendra’s Law: Final report on the status of assisted outpatient treatment. Retrieved from http://www.omh.ny.gov/omhweb/Kendra_web/KHome.htm

N.Y. Mental Hygiene Law (Kendra’s Law), § 9.60 (McKinney 1999).

O’Keefe, C., Potenza, D. P., & Mueser, K. T. (1997). Treatment outcomes for severely mentally ill patients on conditional discharge to community-based treatment. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 185, 409–411. 

O’Neil, J. M. (1981). Male sex-role conflicts, sexism, and masculinity: Implications for men, women, and the counseling psychologist. The Counseling Psychologist, 9, 61–80. doi: 10.1177/001100008100900213

O’Neil, J. M. (2008). Summarizing 25 years of research on men’s gender role conflict using the Gender Role Conflict Scale: New research paradigms and clinical implications. The Counseling Psychologist, 36, 358-445. doi: 10.1177/0011000008317057

O’Toole, M. E. (2000). The school shooter: A threat assessment perspective. Quantico, VA: FBI Academy, National Center for Analysis of Violent Crime. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/school-shooter

Patterson, G. R., Forgatch, M. S., & DeGarmo, D. S. (2010). Cascading effects following intervention. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 949–970. doi:10.1017/S0954579410000568

Payne, S., Swami, V., & Stanistreet, D. L. (2008). The social construction of gender and its influence on suicide: A review of the literature . Journal of Men's Health, 5 (1), 23–35.

Peak, K. (Ed.). (2013). Encyclopedia of community policing and problem solving. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Phillips, S., Matusko, J., & Tomasovic, E. (2007). Reconsidering the relationship between alcohol and lethal violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22 (1), 66–84. doi: 10.1177/0886260506294997

Plant, E. A., Goplen, J., & Kunstman, J. W. (2011). Selective responses to threat: The roles of race and gender in decisions to shoot. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37 (9), 1274–1281. doi: 10.1177/0146167211408617

Police Executive Research Forum. (2012). Critical issues in policing: Vol. 6. An integrated approach to de-escalation and minimizing use of force. Retrieved from http://policeforum.org/library/critical-issues-in-policing-series/De-Escalation_v6.pdf

Police Foundation. (2013). After Newtown: Policing and mental health experts meet to develop prevention model for mental health-related gun violence. Retrieved from http://www.policefoundation.org/content/after-newtown-policing-and-mental-health-experts-meet-develop-prevention-model-mental-health

Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 7901-7903 (2005). Retrieved from http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/s397

Roberts, S., Zhang, J., & Truman, J. (2012). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2011 (NCES 2012-002/NCJ 236021). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/iscs11.pdf

Roth, J. A., & Koper, C. S. (1997). Impact evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearm Use Protection Act of 1994 (Appendix A). Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/aw_final.pdf

Saylor, E. A., Vittes, K. A., & Sorenson, S. B. (2004). Firearm advertising: Product depiction in consumer gun magazines. Evaluation Review , 28 (5), 420–433. doi:10.1177/0193841X04267389

Sickmund, M., Sladky, T. J., Kang, W., & Puzzanchera, C. (2011). Easy access to the census of juveniles in residential placement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved from http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezacjrp/

Simon, T. R., Swann, A. C., Powell, K. E., Potter, L. B., Kresnow, M., & O’Carroll, P. W. (2001). Characteristics of impulsive suicide attempts and attempters. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 32 (Suppl. 1), 49–59.

Sirotich, F. (2008). Correlates of crime and violence among persons with mental disorder: An evidence-based review. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 8 (2), 171–194. doi: 10.1093/brief-treatment/mhn006

Snyder, H., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 National Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved from https://ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/nr2006/downloads/NR2006.pdf

Sorenson, S. B. (2006). Firearm use in intimate partner violence: A brief overview. Evaluation Review, 30 (3), 229–236. doi: 10.1177/0193841X06287220

Sorenson, S. B., & Cook, P. J. (2008). “We’ve got a gun?”: Comparing reports of adolescents and their parents about household firearms. Journal of Community Psychology, 36 (1), 1–19. doi: 10.1002/jcop.20213

Sorenson, S. B., & Vittes, K. A. (2003). Buying a handgun for someone else: Firearm dealer willingness to sell. Injury Prevention, 9 (2), 147–150. doi:10.1136/ip.9.2.147

Sorenson, S. B, & Vittes, K. A. (2008). Mental health and firearms in community-based surveys: Implications for suicide prevention. Evaluation Review, 32 (3), 239–256. doi:10.1177/0193841X08315871

Sorenson, S. B., & Wiebe, D. J. (2004). Weapons in the lives of battered women. American Journal of Public Health, 94 (8), 1412–1417. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.94.8.1412

Spano, R., Pridemore, W. A., & Bolland, J. (2012). Specifying the role of exposure to violence and violent behavior on initiation of gun carrying: A longitudinal test of three models of youth gun carrying. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 158–176. doi:10.1177/088620511416471

Steadman, H. J., Deane, M. W., Borum, R., & Morrissey, J. P. (2000). Comparing outcomes of major models of police responses to mental health emergencies. Psychiatric Services, 51 , 645–649. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.51.5.645

Stroud, A. (2012). Good guys with guns: Hegemonic masculinity and concealed handguns. Gender & Society, 26 (2), 216–238. doi: 10.1177/0891243211434612

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2012). Mental health, United States, 2010 (HHS Publication No. SMA 12-4681). Retrieved from http://www.samhsa.gov/data/2k12/MHUS2010/index.aspx

Swahn, M. H., Hamming, B. J., & Ikeda, R. M. (2002). Prevalence of youth access to alcohol or a gun in the home. Injury Prevention, 8, 227–230. doi:10.1136/ip.8.3.227

Swanson, J., Robertson, A., Frisman, L., Norko, M., Lin, H., Swartz, M., & Cook, P. (2013). Preventing gun violence involving people with serious mental illness. In D. Webster & J. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 33–52). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Swanson, J. W., Swartz, M. S., Wagner, H. R., Burns, B. J., Borum, R., & Hiday, VA. (2000). Involuntary out-patient commitment and reduction of violent behavior in persons with severe mental illness. British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 324–331. doi: 10.1192/bjp.176.4.324

Teller, J. L. S., Munetz, M. R., Gil, K. M., & Ritter, C. (2006). Crisis intervention team training for police officers responding to mental disturbance calls. Psychiatric Services, 57 , 232–237.

Teret, S. P., & Merritt, A. D. (2013). Personalized guns: Using technology to save lives. In D. W. Webster & J. S. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 172-182). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.

Teret, S. P., & Wintemute, G. J. (1993). Policies to prevent firearm injuries. Health Affairs , 12 (4), 96–108. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.12.4.96

Truman, J. L. (2011). National Crime Victimization Survey: Criminal victimization, 2010 . Retrieved from http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf

U.S. Department of Defense. (2010). Protecting the force: Lessons from Fort Hood. Retrieved from http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/dod-protectingtheforce-web_security_hr_13jan10.pdf

U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Guide for developing high-quality emergency operations plans for institutions of higher education. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oese/oshs/rems-k-12-guide.pdf

Van Dorn, R., Volavka, J., & Johnson, N. (2012). Mental disorder and violence: Is there a relationship beyond substance abuse? Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 47, 487–503. doi:10.1007/s00127-011-0356-x

Vaughn, M. G., Perron, B. E., Abdon, A., Olate, R., Groom, R., & Wu, L. T. (2012). Correlates of handgun carrying among adolescents in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 27 , 2003-2021. doi: 10.1177/0886260511432150

Verlinden, S., Hersen, M., & Thomas, J. (2000). Risk factors in school shootings. Clinical Psychology Review, 20 (1), 3–56.

Vernick, J. S., Teret, S. P., & Webster, D. W. (1997). Regulating firearm advertisements that promise home protection: A public health intervention. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 277 (17), 1391–1397. doi:10.1001/jama.1997.03540410069033

Vernick, J. S., Webster, D. W., & Bulzacchelli, M. T. (2006). Regulating firearm dealers in the United States: An analysis of state law and opportunities for improvement. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 34 (4), 765–775. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2006.00097.x

Vigdor, E. R., & Mercy, J. A. (2006). Do laws restricting access to firearms by domestic violence offenders prevent intimate partner homicide? Evaluation Review, 30 (3), 313–346. doi:10.1177/0193841X06287307

Violence Policy Center. (2011). The militarization of the U.S. civilian firearms market. Retrieved from http://www.vpc.org/studies/militarization.pdf

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C. § 1033 et seq. (1994).

Vittes, K. A., & Sorenson, S. B. (2006). Risk-taking among adolescents who say they can get a handgun. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39, 929–932. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.05.012

Vittes, K. A., Sorenson, S. B., & Gilbert, D. (2003). High school students’ attitudes about firearms policies. Journal of Adolescent Health, 33, 471–478. doi: 10.1016/S1054-139X(03)00142-3

Vittes, K. A., Vernick, J. S., & Webster, D. W. (2013). Legal status and source of offenders’ firearms in states with the least stringent criteria for gun ownership. Injury Prevention, 19 (1), 26–31. doi:10.1136/injuryprev-2011-040290

Vossekuil, B., Fein, R., Reddy, M., Borum, R., & Modzelski, W. (2002). The final report and findings of the Safe School Initiative: Implications for the prevention of school attacks in the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.secretservice.gov/ntac/ssi_final_report.pdf

Wachs, T. D. (2006). The nature, etiology, and consequences of individual differences in temperament. In L. Balter & C. S. Tamis-LeMonda (Eds.), Child psychology (2nd ed., pp. 27–52). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Webster, D. W., Bulzacchelli, M. T., Zeoli, A. M., & Vernick, J. S. (2006). Effects of undercover police stings of gun dealers on the supply of new guns to criminals. Injury Prevention, 12, 225–230.

Webster, D. W., & Starnes, M. (2000). Reexamining the association between child access prevention gun laws and unintentional shooting deaths of children. Pediatrics, 106 (6), 1466–1469. doi:10.1542/peds.106.6.1466

Webster, D. W., & Vernick, J. S. (Eds.). (2013a). Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved from http://jhupress.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/1421411113_updf.pdf

Webster, D. W., & Vernick, J. S. (2013b). Spurring responsible firearms sales practices through litigation: The impact of New York City’s lawsuits against gun dealers on interstate gun trafficking. In D. W. Webster & J. S. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 123–132) . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Webster, D. W., Vernick, J. S., & Bulzacchelli, M. T. (2009). Effects of state-level firearm seller accountability policies on firearm trafficking. Journal of Urban Health, 86 (4), 525–537. doi:10.1007/s11524-009-9351-x

Webster, D. W., Vernick, J. S., McGinty, E. E., & Alcorn, T. (2013). Preventing the diversion of guns to criminals through effective firearm sales laws. In D. W. Webster & J. S. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 109–122) . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Webster, D. W., Vernick, J. S., Zeoli, A. M., & Manganello, J. A. (2004). Association between youth-focused firearm laws and youth suicides. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 292 (5), 594–601. doi:10.1001/jama.292.5.594

Webster, D. W., Whitehill, J. M., Vernick, J. S., & Curriero, F. C. (2012). Effects of Baltimore’s Safe Streets Program on gun violence: A replication of Chicago’s CeaseFire Program. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 90 (1), 27–40. doi:10.1007/s11524-012-9731-5

Weil, D. S., & Knox, R. C. (1996). Effects of limiting handgun purchases on interstate transfer of firearms. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 275 (22), 1759–1761.

Wellford, C. F., Pepper, J. V., & Petrie, C. V. (Eds.). (2004). Firearms and violence: A critical review. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

White House. (2013). Now is the time. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/preventing-gun-violence

Wiebe, D. J. (2003). Sex differences in the perpetrator-victim relationship among emergency department patients presenting with nonfatal firearm-related injuries. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 42 (3), 405–412. doi:10.1016/S0196-0644(03)00509-2

Williams, K. R., Tuthill, L., & Lio, S. (2008). A portrait of juvenile offending in the United States. In R. D. Hoge, N. G. Guerra, & P. Boxer (Eds.), Treating the juvenile offender  (pp. 15–32). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Wintemute, G. J. (1996). The relationship between firearm design and firearm violence: Handguns in the 1990s. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 275 (22), 1749-1753. doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03530460053031

Wintemute, G. J. (2010). Firearm retailers’ willingness to participate in an illegal gun purchase. Journal of Urban Health, 87, 865–878.

Wintemute, G. J. (2011). Association between firearm ownership, firearm-related risk and risk-reduction behaviors, and alcohol-related risk behaviours. Injury Prevention, 17,  422–427. doi: 10.1136/ip.2010.031443

Wintemute, G. J. (2013a, January 14–15). Broadening denial criteria for the purchase and possession of firearms: Need, feasibility, and effectiveness. Paper presented at the Gun Violence Policy Summit, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.

Wintemute, G. J. (2013b). Frequency of and response to illegal activity related to commerce in firearms: Findings from the Firearms Licensee Survey . Injury Prevention. Advance online publication. doi:10.1136/injuryprev-2012-040715

Wintemute, G. J., Drake, C. M., Beaumont, J. J., & Wright, M. A. (1998). Prior misdemeanor convictions as a risk factor for later violent and firearm-related criminal activity among authorized purchasers of handguns. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 280, 2083–2087.

Wintemute, G. J., Parham, C. A., Beaumont, J. J., Wright, M., & Drake, C. (1999). Mortality among recent purchasers of handguns. New England Journal of Medicine, 341 (21), 1583–1589. doi:10.1056/NEJM199911183412106

Wintemute, G. J., Wright, M. A., Drake, C. M., & Beaumont, J. J. (2001). Subsequent criminal activity among violent misdemeanants who seek to purchase handguns: Risk factors and effectiveness of denying handgun purchase . JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 1019–1026.

Wright, M. A., Wintemute, G. J., & Claire, B. E. (2008). Gun suicide by young people in California: Descriptive epidemiology and gun ownership. Journal of Adolescent Health, 43 (6), 619–622. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.04.009

Wright, M. A., Wintemute, G. J., & Webster, D. W. (2010). Factors affecting a recently purchased handgun’s risk for use in crime under circumstances that suggest gun trafficking. Journal of Urban Health, 87 (3), 352–364. doi:10.1007/s11524-010-9437-5

Yan, F. A., Howard, D. E., Beck, K. H., Shattuck, T., & Hallmark-Kerr, M. (2010). Psychosocial correlates of physical dating violence victimization among Latino early adolescents. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25 (5), 808–831. doi: 10.1177/0886260509336958

Zeoli, A. M., & Webster, D. W. (2010). Effects of domestic violence policies, alcohol taxes and police staffing levels on intimate partner homicide in large U.S. cities. Injury Prevention, 16, 90–95.

APA Panel of Experts

Dewey Cornell, PhD Clinical Psychologist and Professor of Education Curry School of Education University of Virginia

Arthur C. Evans Jr., PhD Commissioner Department of Behavioral Health and Intellectual disAbility Services Philadelphia, Pa.   Nancy G. Guerra, EdD (Coordinating Editor) Professor of Psychology Associate Provost for International Programs Director, Institute for Global Studies University of Delaware   Robert Kinscherff, PhD, JD Associate Vice President for Community Engagement Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology Senior Associate National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice   Eric Mankowski, PhD Professor of Psychology Department of Psychology Portland State University

Marisa R. Randazzo, PhD Managing Partner SIGMA Threat Management Associates Alexandria, Va.   Ellen Scrivner, PhD, ABPP Executive Fellow Police Foundation Washington, D.C.   Susan B. Sorenson, PhD Professor of Social Policy / Health & Societies Senior Fellow in Public Health University of Pennsylvania

W. Douglas Tynan, PhD, ABPP Professor of Pediatrics Jefferson Medical College Thomas Jefferson University   Daniel W. Webster, ScD, MPH Professor and Director Center for Gun Policy and Research Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

We are grateful to the following individuals for their thoughtful reviews and comments on drafts of this report:   Louise A. Douce, PhD Special Assistant, Office of Student Life Adjunct Faculty, Department of Psychology The Ohio State University   Joel A. Dvoskin, PhD, ABPP Department of Psychiatry University of Arizona   Ellen G. Garrison, PhD Senior Policy Advisor American Psychological Association   Melissa Strompolis, MA Doctoral Candidate University of North Carolina at Charlotte   Mathilde Pelaprat, PsyD , provided writing and research assistance on Chapter 2.

Rhea Farberman, APR Executive Director Public and Member Communications American Psychological Association

Editorial and Design Services Deborah C. Farrell, Editor │ Elizabeth F. Woodcock, Designer

• Download the Full Report (PDF, 1.4MB)

Related reading

Resolution on Firearm Violence Research and Prevention

• Psychology Topics: Gun Violence and Crime  

Violence Prevention

Warning signs of youth violence

Managing your distress in the aftermath of a shooting  

Helping your children manage distress in the aftermath of a shooting

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Domestic violence against women in India: A systematic review of a decade of quantitative studies

Ameeta kalokhe.

a Division of Infectious Diseases, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA

b Hubert Department of Global Health, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA

Carlos del Rio

Kristin dunkle.

c Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Emory University Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, GA, USA

Rob Stephenson

d Center for Sexuality and Health Disparities, University of Michigan School of Public Health and School of Nursing, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Nicholas Metheny

Anuradha paranjape.

e General Internal Medicine, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Seema Sahay

f Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, National AIDS Research Institute, Pune, India

Associated Data

Domestic violence (DV) is prevalent among women in India and has been associated with poor mental and physical health. We performed a systematic review of 137 quantitative studies published in the prior decade that directly evaluated the DV experiences of Indian women to summarise the breadth of recent work and identify gaps in the literature. Among studies surveying at least two forms of abuse, a median 41% of women reported experiencing DV during their lifetime and 30% in the past year. We noted substantial inter-study variance in DV prevalence estimates, attributable in part to different study populations and settings, but also to a lack of standardisation, validation, and cultural adaptation of DV survey instruments. There was paucity of studies evaluating the DV experiences of women over age 50, residing in live-in relationships, same-sex relationships, tribal villages, and of women from the northern regions of India. Additionally, our review highlighted a gap in research evaluating the impact of DV on physical health. We conclude with a research agenda calling for additional qualitative and longitudinal quantitative studies to explore the DV correlates proposed by this quantitative literature to inform the development of a culturally tailored DV scale and prevention strategies.

Introduction

Domestic violence (DV), defined by the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 as physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, and economic abuse against women by a partner or family member residing in a joint family, plagues the lives of many women in India. National statistics that utilise a modified version of the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) to measure the prevalence of lifetime physical, sexual, and/or emotional DV estimate that 40% of women experience abuse at the hands of a partner ( Yoshikawa, Agrawal, Poudel, & Jimba, 2012 ). Data from a recent systematic review by the World Health Organization (WHO) provides similar regional estimates and suggests that women in South-East Asia (defined as India, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Bangladesh, and Timor-Leste) are at a higher likelihood for experiencing partner abuse during their lifetime than women from Europe, the Western Pacific, and potentially the Americas ( WHO, 2013 ).

Among the different proposed causes for the high DV frequency in India are deep-rooted male patriarchal roles ( Visaria, 2000 ) and long-standing cultural norms that propagate the view of women as subordinates throughout their lifespan ( Fernandez, 1997 ; Gundappa & Rathod, 2012 ). Even before a child is born, many families have a clear preference for male children, which may result in their preferential care, and worse, sex-selective abortions, female infanticide and abandonment of the girl-child ( Gundappa & Rathod, 2012 ). During childhood, less importance is given to the education of female children; further, early marriage as occurs in 45% of young, married women, according to 2005–2006 National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3) data ( Raj, Saggurti, Balaiah, & Silverman, 2009 ), may also heighten susceptibility to DV ( Ackerson, Kawachi, Barbeau, & Subramanian, 2008 ; Raj, Saggurti, Lawrence, Balaiah, & Silverman, 2010 ; Santhya et al., 2010 ; Speizer & Pearson, 2011 ). In reproductive years, mothers pregnant with and/or those who give birth to only female children may be more susceptible to abuse ( Mahapatro, Gupta, Gupta, & Kundu, 2011 ) and financial, medical, and nutritional neglect. Later in life, culturally bred views of dishonour associated with widowhood may also influence susceptibility to DV by other family members ( Saravanan, 2000 ).

In addition to being prevalent in India, DV has also been linked to numerous deleterious health behaviours and poor mental and physical health. These includes tobacco use ( Ackerson, Kawachi, Barbeau, & Subramanian, 2007 ), lack of contraceptive and condom use ( Stephenson, Koenig, Acharya, & Roy, 2008 ), diminished utilisation of health care ( Sudha & Morrison, 2011 ; Sudha, Morrison, & Zhu, 2007 ), higher frequencies of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and attempted suicide ( Chandra, Satyanarayana, & Carey, 2009 ; Chowdhury, Brahma, Banerjee, & Biswas, 2009 ; Maselko & Patel, 2008 ; Shahmanesh, Wayal, Cowan, et al., 2009 ; Shidhaye & Patel, 2010 ; Verma et al., 2006 ), sexually transmitted infections (STI) ( Chowdhary & Patel, 2008 ; Sudha & Morrison, 2011 ; Weiss et al., 2008 ), HIV( Gupta et al., 2008 ; Silverman, Decker, Saggurti, Balaiah, & Raj, 2008 ), asthma ( Subramanian, Ackerson, Subramanyam, & Wright, 2007 ), anaemia ( Ackerson & Subramanian, 2008 ), and chronic fatigue ( Patel et al., 2005 ). Furthermore, maternal intimate partner violence (IPV) experiences have been associated with more terminated, unintended pregnancies ( Begum, Dwivedi, Pandey, & Mittal, 2010 ; Yoshikawa et al., 2012 ), less breastfeeding ( Shroff et al., 2011 ), perinatal care ( Koski, Stephenson, & Koenig, 2011 ), and poor child outcomes ( Ackerson & Subramanian, 2009 ). These negative health repercussions and high DV frequency speak to the need for the development of effective DV prevention and management strategies. And, the development of effective DV interventions first requires valid measures of occurrence and an in-depth understanding of its epidemiology.

While many aspects of DV are similar across cultures, recent qualitative studies describe how some aspects of the DV experienced by women in India may be unique. These studies highlight the role of non-partner DV perpetrators for those living in both nuclear and joint-families ( Fernandez, 1997 ; Kaur & Garg, 2010 ; Raj et al., 2011 ). (These families are patrilineal where male descendants live with their wives, offspring, parents, and unmarried sisters.) They discuss the high frequency and near normalisation of control, psychological abuse, neglect, and isolation, the occurrence of DV to women at both extremes of age (young and old), dowry harassments, control over reproductive choices and family planning, and demonstrate the use of different tools to inflict abuse (i.e. kerosene burning, stones, and broomsticks as opposed to gun and knife violence more commonly seen in industrialised nations) ( Bunting, 2005 ; Go et al., 2003 ; Hampton, 2010 ; Jutla & Heimbach, 2004 ; Kaur & Garg, 2010 ; Kermode et al., 2007 ; Kumar & Kanth, 2004 ; Peck, 2012 ; Rastogi & Therly, 2006 ; Sharma, Harish, Gupta, & Singh, 2005 ; Stephenson et al., 2008 ; Wilson-Williams, Stephenson, Juvekar, & Andes, 2008 ).

This paper presents a systematic review of the quantitative studies conducted over the past decade that estimate and assess DV experienced by women in India, and evaluates their scope and capacity to measure the DV themes highlighted by recent qualitative studies. It aims to examine the distribution of the prevalence estimates provided by the recent literature of DV occurrence in India, improve understanding of the factors that may affect these prevalence estimates, and identify gaps in current studies. This enhanced knowledge will help inform future research including new interventions for the prevention and management of DV in India.

We utilised PubMed, OVID, Cochrane Reviews, PsycINFO, and CINAHL as search engines to identify articles published between 1 April 2004 and 1 January 2015 that focused on the DV experiences of women in India ( Figure 1 ). Our specific search terms included ‘domestic violence’, ‘intimate partner violence’, ‘spouse abuse’, ‘partner violence’, ‘gender-based violence’, ‘sexual violence’, ‘physical violence’, ‘wife battering’, ‘wife beating’, ‘domestic abuse’, ‘violence’, and ‘India’. We first removed duplicate articles and then filtered the articles based on our inclusion criteria: quantitative studies evaluating original data that had been published in English and directly surveyed the DV experiences of women. While we recognise that in cultures where DV is commonplace the reporting of DV perpetration by men may be as high as the frequency of experiencing DV reported by women ( Koenig, Stephenson, Ahmed, Jejeebhoy, & Campbell, 2006 ), we restricted our eligibility criteria to studies directly surveying women about their DV experiences to reduce further inter-study variation and allow for more accurate cross-study comparisons. We excluded reviews, case reports, meta-analyses, and qualitative studies. A single author (ASK or NM) reviewed each individual article to determine whether it met inclusion criteria. If questions arose regarding its inclusion into the review, they were discussed with a second author (SS) until concordance was reached regarding whether or not the paper was to be included.

Adapted PRISMA Flow Diagram demonstrating study selection methodologies and filter results.

Note: An initial PubMed search of articles published between 1 April 2004 and 1 January 2015 focusing on the DV experiences of women in India is depicted. This figure illustrates the search terms, search engines, applied inclusion and exclusion filters, the process by which articles were chosen to be included in the study, and the results of the selection process.

We collected data from each study regarding study population; study setting; use of a validated scale; forms of, perpetrators of, and time frame during which DV was measured; whether an attempt was made to measure severity of DV; whether potential DV correlates were evaluated; and whether DV prevalence was estimated. We subcategorised the forms of violence into physical, sexual, psychological, control, and neglect based on descriptions of questions provided in the studies. Emotional and verbal forms of abuse were classified as psychological abuse and deprivation was classified as neglect. If the study asked participants about agency or autonomy, this was noted in the summary tables. In publications where information about the DV assessment tool and its validation was not provided, we contacted the authors for more information. If authors reported having conducted formative fieldwork to generate questions, pre-tested the items, and/or conducted some assessment of the measurement tool’s expert or face validity, we reported the validation as ‘limited’. If we did not hear back from the authors, we stated the data were ‘not reported’.

Article yield of systematic search

Our initial search of DV articles published in PubMed, OVID, Cochrane Reviews, PsycINFO, and CINAHL between 1 April 2004 and 1 January 2015 yielded 3843 articles ( Figure 1 ). We identified 628 articles using search terms ‘domestic violence’ and ‘India’, 283 articles using ‘intimate partner violence’ and ‘India’, 98 articles using ‘spouse abuse’ and ‘India’, 221 articles using ‘partner violence and India’, 54 articles using ‘gender-based violence’ and ‘India’, 199 articles using ‘sexual violence’ and ‘India’, 120 articles using ‘physical violence’ and ‘India’, 1 article using ‘wife battering’ and ‘India’, 51 articles using ‘wife beating’ and ‘India’, 10 articles using ‘domestic abuse’ and ‘India’, and 2022 articles using ‘violence’ and ‘India’. Of the 3843 articles, 3705 articles were removed because they (1) were duplicated in the search, (2) focused on extraneous topics, (3) lacked Indian context, (4) were not based on original quantitative data, or (5) were based on study data that were not directly obtained through surveying women about their personal DV experiences. Thus, the selection criteria yielded a total of 137 studies examining the DV experiences of women in India: 14 international studies (see Table 1 in supplementary material ), 50 multi-state India studies (see Table 2 in supplementary material ), and 73 single-state India studies (see Table 3 in supplementary material ).

The scope and breadth of recent studies: study populations

Collectively, the reviewed studies provide information on the DV experienced by young and middle-aged women in traditional heterosexual marriages from both urban and rural environments, joint and nuclear families, across Indian states ( Figure 2 ). Among the studies specifying age limits, the vast majority (88% or 92/104) evaluated DV experienced by women age 15–50, with only 11% (11/104) of studies surveying DV suffered by women above age 50 and 1% (1/104) evaluating DV experienced by young adolescents (wed before age 15). Only one study assessed DV experienced by women in HIV discordant. No studies surveyed DV in non-traditional relationships, such as same-sex relationships or live-in relationships. Less than one-third (29% or 40/137) collected data differentiating DV experienced by women in joint versus nuclear families. Thirty-seven per cent (51/137) evaluated domestic abuse suffered by women living in urban settings, 18% (24/137) in rural, and the remainder (44% or 60/137) in both rural and urban environments. Only one examined DV experienced by women residing in tribes. Twenty-three per cent (32/137) and 3% (4/137) utilised a nationally representative and sub-nationally representative study population, respectively. Southern Indian states were by far the most surveyed in the literature (Maharashtra 66 studies, Tamil Nadu 59 studies, and Karnataka 51 studies) and Northern Indian states the least (Uttaranchal, Sikkim, Punjab, Haryana, Chhattisgarh, and Assam each with 33 studies).

A summary of the distribution of recent Indian DV literature by region, state, surveyed perpetrator, and family type.

Note: (a) demonstrates the distribution of studies by rural versus urban region, (b) by state, (c) by the perpetrator surveyed, and (d) whether the survey collected data differentiating DV in joint versus nuclear family households.

Prevalence of DV in India

Collectively, the reviewed studies demonstrate that DV occurs among Indian women with high frequency but there is substantial variation in the reported prevalence estimates across all forms of DV ( Figure 3 ). For example, the median and range of lifetime estimates of psychological abuse was 22% (range 2–99%), physical abuse was 29% (2–99%), sexual abuse was 12% (0–75%), and multiple forms of DV was 41% (18–75%). The outliers at the upper extremes were contributed by a study of in low-income slum communities with high prevalence of substance abuse( Solomon et al., 2009 ) and a second study conducted in a tertiary care centre where surveys were self-administered and thus participants may have felt increased comfort in reporting DV( Sharma & Vatsa, 2011 ). The median and range of past-year estimates of psychological abuse was 22% (11–48%), physical abuse was 22% (9–90%), sexual abuse was 7% (0–50%), and multiple forms of DV was 30% (4–56%). The outlier of 90% for physical abuse was contributed by a study of women whose husbands were alcoholics in treatment ( Stanley, 2012 ). As expected, higher DV prevalence was noted when multiple forms of DV were assessed. Of all forms of DV, physical abuse was measured most frequently, with psychological abuse, sexual abuse, and control or neglect receiving substantially less attention. Further statistical analysis beyond these descriptive statistics was not conducted due to the large inter-study heterogeneity of designs and populations limiting comparability across studies.

A summary of the lifetime and past 12-month prevalence estimates of the various forms of DV as documented by each individual study.

Note: Circles, squares, upright triangles, and inverted triangles represent prevalence estimates of psychological, physical, sexual, and multiple forms of DV, respectively, as provided by each individual study. While medians and ranges are provided, further analysis was not carried out due to the limited homogeneity between studies impeding accurate comparison.

The scope and breadth of recent studies: study design

The past decade of quantitative India DV research has included a breadth of large regional and international studies as well as smaller scale, single-state studies. However, the capacity to draw causal inferences from this literature has been limited by the nearly exclusive use of cross-sectional design. The country and regional-level studies utilised larger, often nationally or sub-nationally representative samples (average sample size: 25,857 women, range: 111–124,385), to provide inter-country or regional epidemiologic comparisons. The single-state studies tended to use smaller sample sizes (average: 1109 women, range: 30–9639) to provide a more in-depth evaluation of DV experienced in a particular population of women.

The vast majority of all reviewed studies utilised cross-sectional design, with only 12% (17/137) using a prospective design to draw causal inferences. Six of these 13 utilised the NFHS-2 and four-year follow-up data from the rural regions of four states to evaluate the effect of DV on mental health disorders ( Shidhaye & Patel, 2010 ), a woman’s adoption of contraception, occurrence of unwanted pregnancy ( Stephenson et al., 2008 ), uptake of prenatal care ( Koski et al., 2011 ), early childhood mortality ( Koenig et al., 2010 ), functional autonomy and reproduction ( Bourey, Stephenson, & Hindin, 2013 ), and contraceptive adoption ( Stephenson, Jadhav, & Hindin, 2013 ), while one used the data to evaluate the effect of autonomy on experience of physical violence ( Nongrum, Thomas, Lionel, & Jacob, 2014 ; Sabarwal, Santhya, & Jejeebhoy, 2014 ). Only one study employed a case-control study to evaluate the link between DV and child mortality ( Varghese, Prasad, & Jacob, 2013 ) and another utilised a randomised control design to evaluate the effect of a mixed individual and group women’s behavioural intervention in reducing DV and marital conflict over time ( Saggurti et al., 2014 ). The remainder of prospective studies evaluated the causal association between DV and incident STIs and/or attempted suicide ( Chowdhary & Patel, 2008 ; Maselko & Patel, 2008 ; Weiss et al., 2008 ), DV and maternal and neonatal health outcomes ( Nongrum et al., 2014 ), the effect of the type of interviewing (face-to-face versus audio computer-assisted self-interviews) on DV reporting ( Rathod, Minnis, Subbiah, & Krishnan, 2011 ), trends in DV occurrence over time ( Simister & Mehta, 2010 ), and the effect of change in a woman or her spouse’s employment status on her experience of DV ( Krishnan et al., 2010 ).

The scope and breadth of recent studies: DV measures

Only 61% (84/137) of studies reported use of a validated scale or made attempts to validate the instrument they ultimately used. When use of a validated instrument was reported, most (82% or 69/84) had been developed for the cultural context of North America and Europe (i.e. modified CTS, Abuse Assessment Screen, Index of Spouse Abuse, Woman Abuse Screening Tool, Partner Violence Screen, Composite Abuse Scale, and Sexual Experience Scale). In fact, only 15 of the studies reporting use of a validated questionnaire adapted or developed their instrument to the Indian context by surveying themes raised by the prior qualitative literature (i.e. use of belts, sticks, and burning to inflict physical abuse, restricting return to natal family home, not allowing natal family to visit marital home). As expected, these studies reported higher frequencies of DV. In personal communication, some authors who chose not to use validated, widely used DV scales (i.e. CTS) stated they did so because of space limitations and inadequacy of existing tools for measuring DV in the Indian cultural context.

Two-thirds of studies (64% or 87/137) assessed two or fewer forms of DV. Of all forms of DV, physical abuse was evaluated most frequently (96% or 131/137), followed by sexual abuse (58% or 79/137), psychological abuse (44% or 60/137), neglect and control (4% or 7/137). Only 11% (15/137) of studies evaluated DV perpetrated by non-partner family members. For these studies evaluating DV perpetrated by partners and non-partner family members, available estimates of lifetime sexual and psychological abuse were always higher than the median prevalence estimates of reviewed studies; available estimates of lifetime physical abuse were often, but not universally, higher. Only 20% (109/137) attempted to evaluate different levels of DV severity. While many (43% or 59/137) studies evaluated lifetime violence, a considerable number assessed recent DV (42% or 58/137 past-12 month DV, 5% or 7/137 past-6 month DV, 4% or 5/137 past-3 month DV, and 4% or 6/137 the time period of current or research partnerships). Additionally, 10% (14/137) evaluated DV occurrence during pregnancy or the peri-partum period.

The scope and breadth of recent studies: measured outcomes

Figure 4 provides a framework for synthesising the potential DV correlates measured to date. It demonstrates that the focus of the quantitative literature has largely been on the mental health and gynecologic consequences of DV but has only begun to evaluate repercussions on physical health and health behaviour. Twelve per cent (16/137) of the studies evaluated one or multiple mental health disorder as outcomes of DV, including PTSD, depression, and suicide, but not anxiety. The literature provided a comprehensive evaluation of the association between DV and gynaecologic health including sexual (15% or 21/137) and maternal health (8% or 11/137). However, only six studies were dedicated to evaluating physical health outcomes (oral health, nutrition, chronic fatigue, asthma, direct injury, and blindness during pregnancy). And while 17 studies were dedicated to evaluating the association between DV and uptake of health behaviours, 11 of the 15 were focused on behaviours related to sexual and maternal health. Thus, the association between health behaviours like the woman’s substance abuse and adherence to medical and clinical care remains largely understudied, as does the link between DV and physical health outcomes such as cardiovascular and gastrointestinal disease, chronic pain syndromes (including migraines), and urinary tract infections.

A framework for conceptualising the reviewed studies.

Note: The proposed framework provides structure for interpreting and synthesising the prior decade’s quantitative research evaluating the domestic violence experienced by women in India.

The past 10 years have been an incredible period of growth in DV research in India and South Asia. Our systematic review contributes to the growing body of evidence by providing an important summary of the epidemiologic studies during this critical period and draws attention to the magnitude and severity of the ongoing epidemic in India. Comprehensively, the reviewed literature estimates that 4 in 10 Indian women (when surveyed about multiple forms of abuse) report experiencing DV in their lifetime and 3 in 10 report experiencing DV in the past year. This is concordant with the WHO lifetime estimate of 37.7% (95% CI: 30.9%43.1%) in South-East Asia (defined as India, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Bangladesh, and Timor-Leste) and is higher than the regional estimates provided by the WHO for the Europe, the Western Pacific, and potentially the Americas. In addition to highlighting the high frequency of occurrence, the studies in this review emphasise the toll DV takes on the lives of many Indian women through its impact on mental, physical, sexual, and reproductive health.

Perhaps the most striking finding of our review was the large inter-study variance in DV prevalence estimates ( Figure 3 ). While this variability speaks to the capacity of the India literature to capture the breadth of DV experiences in different populations and settings, it also underscores the need for standardising aspects of study design in the investigator’s control to make effective inter-study and cross-population comparisons. Standardisation of the instruments used to measure DV should be a priority. To optimise the yield of such an instrument in capturing the DV experiences of Indian women, it should build upon currently available, well-validated instruments, but also be culturally tailored. Thus, it should account for the culturally prominent forms of DV identified by the Indian qualitative literature and social media, survey abuse inflicted by non-partner perpetrators, survey multiple forms abuse (i.e. physical, sexual, psychological, and control), and ideally, include a measure of DV severity (i.e. based on frequency of affirmative responses, frequency of abuse, or resultant injury). Our review demonstrates that current studies fall short, with only 61% reporting use of validated questions (rarely developed or adapted to Indian culture), 11% surveying DV perpetrated by non-partner family members, 64% assessing more than two different forms of abuse, and 20% evaluating level of DV severity. Our review also suggests that when questions assessing DV are culturally adapted and validated, evaluate multiple forms of abuse, and survey abusive behaviours by non-partner family members in addition to partners, reporting of DV increases.

While our search yielded many well-designed cross-sectional studies providing insight into the epidemiology of DV in India (i.e. patterns of occurrence, socio-demographic, and health correlates), it also revealed many gaps and thus, a potential research agenda. Future qualitative studies are needed to examine the link between DV and correlates identified by the cross-sectional literature, to inform the development of future prevention strategies, and to enhance delivery of DV supportive services by examining survivor preferences and needs. Additional longitudinal quantitative studies are also needed to better understand predictors of DV and to explore the direction of causality between DV and the physical health associations identified in the reviewed studies. They are also needed to assess the link between DV and other physical health outcomes like injury, cardiovascular disease, irritable bowel syndrome, immune effects, and psychosomatic syndromes as well as non-sexual health behaviours such as substance abuse and medication adherence. This is particularly paramount in India, where physical injury and cardiovascular disease together account for over a quarter of disability-adjusted life years lost ( National Commission on Macroeconomics and Health, 2005 ).

Additionally, our review also exposed gaps in the current understanding of DV in some populations and regions of India. For example, most studies focused on women of age 15–50. Only 11 reported on the DV experiences of women over 50, a stage where frailty, financial and physical dependence, and culturally engendered shame and disgrace associated with widowhood may heighten their risk of experiencing DV, neglect, and control by various family members ( Solotaroff & Pande, 2014 ). And, while 43% of Indian women aged 20–24 marry before the age of 18, we encountered few studies evaluating DV experienced by pre-adolescents or young adolescents married as children ( UNICEF, 2014 ). An additional gap is in evaluating the DV experiences of women engaging in live-in relationships as opposed to marital relationships, divorced or widowed women, women involved in same-sex relationships, and in HIV serodiscordant and concordant relationships, settings in which social and family support systems are already weakened ( Kohli et al., 2012 ). Next, beyond the national and multi-state data sets, there is little representation of the northern states of India (i.e. Uttaranchal, Sikkim, Punjab, Haryana, Chhattisgarh, and Assam) and of women residing in tribal villages ( Sethuraman, Lansdown, & Sullivan, 2006 ). The vast cultural, religious, and socio-economic inter-regional differences in India highlight the need for more in-depth study of the DV experiences of women in these areas.

The high prevalence of DV and its association with deleterious behaviours and poor health outcomes further speak to the need for multi-faceted, culturally tailored preventive strategies that target potential victims and perpetrators of violence. The recent Five Year Strategic Plan (2011–2016) released by the Ministry of Women and Child Development discusses a plan to pilot ‘one-stop crisis centres for women’ survivors of violence, which would include medical, legal, law enforcement, counselling, and shelter support for themselves and their children. The significant differences in women’s empowerment and DV experience by region and population within India ( Kishor & Gupta, 2004 ) underscore the need to culturally- and regionally tailor the screening and support services provided at such centres. For example, in resource-limited states where sexual forms of DV predominate, priority should be given to the allocation of health-care providers to evaluate, document, and treat associated injuries and/or transmitted diseases. In settings where financial control and neglect are common, legal, financial, and educational empowerment may need to be given precedence.

Our review is not without limitations. First, our analysis relied solely on data directly provided in the publications. We did not further contact the authors if information was not provided. Second, a single author (ASK or NM) reviewed the individual papers for inclusion into the review, which may have introduced a selection bias. We tried to limit this bias through discussion of the papers in which eligibility was not clear-cut with a second author (SS) until agreement about the inclusion status was reached. Next, we included studies whose main intent was to evaluate the DV experiences of Indian women as well as studies whose main aim may not have been related to DV at all, but included DV as a covariate in the analysis. Thus, many of the studies that solely included DV as a covariate may not have had the intent or resources to fully examine the DV experience. While this may be viewed as a limitation, our goal was not to critically evaluate each individual study, but to comprehensively review the information currently provided in the Indian DV literature. Lastly, inclusion of multiple studies that utilise the same data set (e.g. NFHS) may have skewed the overall median estimate of DV prevalence and the remainder of our analysis. We felt, however, that the substantial differences in DV assessment (e.g. measurement time frames, forms of DV assessed, whether DV severity was assessed, and measured health correlates) between these studies legitimised their need to be included as separate entities in the review.

In conclusion, our literature review underscores the need for further studies within India evaluating the DV experiences of older women, women in same-sex relationships, and live-in relationships, extending the assessment of DV perpetrated by individuals besides intimate partners and spouses, and assessing the multiple forms and levels of abuse. It further stresses the necessity for the development and validation (in multiple regions and study populations within India) of a culturally tailored DV scale and interventions geared towards the prevention and management of DV.

Supplementary Material

Tables and table references, acknowledgments.

This work was supported by the US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, Fogarty International Center [grant number 1 R25 TW009337-01 K01 TW009664].

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2015.1119293

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Ameeta Kalokhe , http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3556-1786

Seema Sahay , http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6064-827X

• Ackerson LK, Kawachi I, Barbeau EM, Subramanian SV. Exposure to domestic violence associated with adult smoking in India: A population based study. Tobacco Control. 2007; 16 (6):378–383. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ackerson LK, Kawachi I, Barbeau EM, Subramanian SV. Effects of individual and proximate educational context on intimate partner violence: A population-based study of women in India. American Journal of Public Health. 2008; 98 (3):507–514. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ackerson LK, Subramanian SV. Domestic violence and chronic malnutrition among women and children in India. American Journal of Epidemiology. 2008; 167 (10):1188–1196. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ackerson LK, Subramanian SV. Intimate partner violence and death among infants and children in India. Pediatrics. 2009; 124 (5):e878–889. doi: 10.1542/peds.2009-0524. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Begum S, Dwivedi SN, Pandey A, Mittal S. Association between domestic violence and unintended pregnancies in India: Findings from the National Family Health Survey-2 data. National Medical Journal of India. 2010; 23 (4):198–200. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bourey C, Stephenson R, Hindin MJ. Reproduction, functional autonomy and changing experiences of intimate partner violence within marriage in rural India. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. 2013; 39 (4):215–226. doi: 10.1363/39215133921513. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bunting A. Stages of development: Marriage of girls and teens as an international human rights issue. Social & Legal Studies. 2005; 14 (1):17–38. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chandra PS, Satyanarayana VA, Carey MP. Women reporting intimate partner violence in India: Associations with PTSD and depressive symptoms. Archives of Women’s Mental Health. 2009; 12 (4):203–209. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chowdhary N, Patel V. The effect of spousal violence on women’s health: Findings from the Stree Arogya Shodh in Goa, India. Journal of Postgraduate Medicine. 2008; 54 (4):306–312. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chowdhury AN, Brahma A, Banerjee S, Biswas MK. Pattern of domestic violence amongst non-fatal deliberate self-harm attempters: A study from primary care of West Bengal. Indian Journal of Psychiatry. 2009; 51 (2):96–100. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fernandez M. Domestic violence by extended family members in India: Interplay of gender and generation. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 1997; 12 (3):433–455. [ Google Scholar ]
• Go VF, Sethulakshmi CJ, Bentley ME, Sivaram S, Srikrishnan AK, Solomon S, Celentano DD. When HIV-prevention messages and gender norms clash: The impact of domestic violence on women’s HIV risk in slums of Chennai, India. AIDS and Behavior. 2003; 7 (3):263–272. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gundappa A, Rathod PB. Violence against Women in India: Preventive measures. Indian Streams Research Journal. 2012; 2 (4):1–4. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gupta RN, Wyatt GE, Swaminathan S, Rewari BB, Locke TF, Ranganath V, … Liu H. Correlates of relationship, psychological, and sexual behavioral factors for HIV risk among Indian women. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2008; 14 (3):256–265. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hampton T. Child marriage threatens girls’ health. JAMA. 2010; 304 (5):509–510. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jutla RK, Heimbach D. Love burns: An essay about bride burning in India. Journal of Burn Care & Rehabilitation. 2004; 25 (2):165–170. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaur R, Garg S. Domestic violence against women: A qualitative study in a rural community. Asia-Pacific Journal of Public Health. 2010; 22 (2):242–251. doi: 10.1177/1010539509343949. 1010539509343949 [pii] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kermode M, Herrman H, Arole R, White J, Premkumar R, Patel V. Empowerment of women and mental health promotion: A qualitative study in rural Maharashtra, India. BMC Public Health. 2007; 7 :225. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kishor S, Gupta K. Women’s empowerment in India and its States. Economic and Political Weekly. 2004; 39 (7):694–712. [ Google Scholar ]
• Koenig MA, Stephenson R, Acharya R, Barrick L, Ahmed S, Hindin M. Domestic violence and early childhood mortality in rural India: Evidence from prospective data. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2010; 39 (3):825–833. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Koenig MA, Stephenson R, Ahmed S, Jejeebhoy SJ, Campbell J. Individual and contextual determinants of domestic violence in North India. American Journal of Public Health. 2006; 96 (1):132–138. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.050872. AJPH.2004.050872 [pii] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kohli R, Purohit V, Karve L, Bhalerao V, Karvande S, Rangan S, Sahay S. Caring for caregivers of people living with HIV in the family: A response to the HIV pandemic from two urban slum communities in Pune, India. PLoS One. 2012; 7 (9):e44989. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Koski AD, Stephenson R, Koenig MR. Physical violence by partner during pregnancy and use of prenatal care in rural India. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition. 2011; 29 (3):245–254. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krishnan S, Rocca CH, Hubbard AE, Subbiah K, Edmeades J, Padian NS. Do changes in spousal employment status lead to domestic violence? Insights from a prospective study in Bangalore, India. Social Science & Medicine. 2010; 70 (1):136–143. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.09.026. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kumar V, Kanth S. Bride burning. Lancet. 2004; 364 (Suppl 1):s18–s19. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17625-3. S0140-6736(04) 17625-3 [pii] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mahapatro M, Gupta RN, Gupta V, Kundu AS. Domestic violence during pregnancy in India. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2011; 26 (15):2973–2990. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Maselko J, Patel V. Why women attempt suicide: The role of mental illness and social disadvantage in a community cohort study in India. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health. 2008; 62 (9):817–822. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Commission on Macroeconomics and Health. NCMH background papers: Burden of disease in India. 2005 Retrieved from http://www.who.int/macrohealth/en/
• Nongrum R, Thomas E, Lionel J, Jacob KS. Domestic violence as a risk factor for maternal depression and neonatal outcomes: A hospital-based cohort study. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine. 2014; 36 (2):179–181. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Patel V, Kirkwood BR, Weiss H, Pednekar S, Fernandes J, Pereira B, … Mabey D. Chronic fatigue in developing countries: Population based survey of women in India. British Medical Journal. 2005; 330 (7501):1190. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Peck MD. Epidemiology of burns throughout the World. Part II: Intentional burns in adults. Burns. 2012; 38 (5):630–637. doi: 10.1016/j.burns.2011.12.028. S0305-4179(12)00022-8 [pii] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Raj A, Sabarwal S, Decker MR, Nair S, Jethva M, Krishnan S, … Silverman JG. Abuse from in-laws during pregnancy and post-partum: Qualitative and quantitative findings from low-income mothers of infants in Mumbai, India. Maternal and Child Health Journal. 2011; 15 (6):700–712. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Raj A, Saggurti N, Balaiah D, Silverman JG. Prevalence of child marriage and its effect on fertility and fertility-control outcomes of young women in India: A cross-sectional, observational study. Lancet. 2009; 373 (9678):1883–1889. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60246-4. S0140-6736(09)60246-4 [pii] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Raj A, Saggurti N, Lawrence D, Balaiah D, Silverman JG. Association between adolescent marriage and marital violence among young adult women in India. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics. 2010; 110 (1):35–39. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2010.01.022. S0020-7292(10)00093-7 [pii] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rastogi M, Therly P. Dowry and its link to violence against women in India: Feminist psychological perspectives. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2006; 7 (1):66–77. doi: 10.1177/1524838005283927. 7/1/66 [pii] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rathod SD, Minnis AM, Subbiah K, Krishnan S. ACASI and face-to-face interviews yield inconsistent estimates of domestic violence among women in India: The Samata health study 2005–2009. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2011; 26 (12):2437–2456. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sabarwal S, Santhya KG, Jejeebhoy SJ. Women’s autonomy and experience of physical violence within marriage in rural India: Evidence from a prospective study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2014; 29 (2):332–347. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saggurti N, Nair S, Silverman JG, Naik DD, Battala M, Dasgupta A, … Raj A. Impact of the RHANI Wives intervention on marital conflict and sexual coercion. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2014 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Santhya KG, Ram U, Acharya R, Jejeebhoy SJ, Ram F, Singh A. Associations between early marriage and young women’s marital and reproductive health outcomes: Evidence from India. International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. 2010; 36 (3):132–139. doi: 10.1363/ipsrh.36.132.10. 3613210 [pii] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saravanan S. Violence against women in India. 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sethuraman K, Lansdown R, Sullivan K. Women’s empowerment and domestic violence: The role of sociocultural determinants in maternal and child undernutrition in tribal and rural communities in South India. Food and Nutrition Bulletin 2006 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shahmanesh M, Wayal S, Cowan F, Mabey D, Copas A, Patel V. Suicidal behavior among female sex workers in Goa, India: The silent epidemic. American Journal of Public Health. 2009; 99 (7):1239–1246. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharma BR, Harish D, Gupta M, Singh VP. Dowry – a deep-rooted cause of violence against women in India. Medicine, Science and the Law. 2005; 45 (2):161–168. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharma KK, Vatsa M. Domestic violence against nurses by their marital partners: A facility-based study at a tertiary care hospital. Indian Journal of Community Medicine. 2011; 36 (3):222–227. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shidhaye R, Patel V. Association of socio-economic, gender and health factors with common mental disorders in women: A population-based study of 5703 married rural women in India. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2010; 39 (6):1510–1521. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyq179. dyq179 [pii] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shroff MR, Griffiths PL, Suchindran C, Nagalla B, Vazir S, Bentley ME. Does maternal autonomy influence feeding practices and infant growth in rural India? Social Science & Medicine. 2011; 73 (3):447–455. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.05.040. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Silverman JG, Decker MR, Saggurti N, Balaiah D, Raj A. Intimate partner violence and HIV infection among married Indian women. JAMA. 2008; 300 (6):703–710. doi: 10.1001/jama.300.6.703. 300/6/703 [pii] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Simister J, Mehta PS. Gender-based violence in India: Long-term trends. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2010; 25 (9):1594–1611. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Solomon S, Subbaraman R, Solomon SS, Srikrishnan AK, Johnson SC, Vasudevan CK, … Celentano DD. Domestic violence and forced sex among the urban poor in South India: Implications for HIV prevention. Violence Against Women. 2009; 15 (7):753–773. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Solotaroff JL, Pande RP. Violence against women and girls: Lessons from South Asia. Washington DC: World Bank., World Bank Group; 2014. [ Google Scholar ]
• Speizer IS, Pearson E. Association between early marriage and intimate partner violence in India: A focus on youth from Bihar and Rajasthan. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2011; 26 (10):1963–1981. doi: 10.1177/08862605103729470886260510372947. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stanley S. Intimate partner violence and domestic violence myths: A comparison of women with and without alcoholic husbands (a study from India) Journal of Comparative Family Studies. 2012; 43 (5):647–672. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stephenson R, Jadhav A, Hindin M. Physical domestic violence and subsequent contraceptive adoption among women in rural India. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2013; 28 (5):1020–1039. doi: 10.1177/08862605124593790886260512459379. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stephenson R, Koenig MA, Acharya R, Roy TK. Domestic violence, contraceptive use, and unwanted pregnancy in rural India. Studies in Family Planning. 2008; 39 (3):177–186. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Subramanian SV, Ackerson LK, Subramanyam MA, Wright RJ. Domestic violence is associated with adult and childhood asthma prevalence in India. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2007; 36 (3):569–579. doi: 10.1093/ije/dym007. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sudha S, Morrison S. Marital violence and women’s reproductive health care in Uttar Pradesh, India. Womens Health Issues. 2011; 21 (3):214–221. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sudha S, Morrison S, Zhu L. Violence against women, symptom reporting, and treatment for reproductive tract infections in Kerala state, Southern India. Health Care for Women International. 2007; 28 (3):268–284. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• UNICEF. Improving children’s lives, transforming the future: 25 years of child rights in South Asia. 2014 Author. Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/publications/index_75712.html .
• Varghese S, Prasad JH, Jacob KS. Domestic violence as a risk factor for infant and child mortality: A community-based case-control study from southern India. National Medical Journal of India. 2013; 26 (3):142–146. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Verma RK, Pulerwitz J, Mahendra V, Khandekar S, Barker G, Fulpagare P, Singh SK. Challenging and changing gender attitudes among young men in Mumbai, India. Reproductive Health Matters. 2006; 14 (28):135–143. doi: 10.1016/S0968-8080(06)28261-2. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Visaria L. Violence against women: A field study. Economic & Political Weekly. 2000; 35 (20):1742–1751. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weiss HA, Patel V, West B, Peeling RW, Kirkwood BR, Mabey D. Spousal sexual violence and poverty are risk factors for sexually transmitted infections in women: A longitudinal study of women in Goa, India. Sexually Transmitted Infections. 2008; 84 (2):133–139. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• WHO. Global and regional estimates of violence against women: Prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. Author; 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson-Williams L, Stephenson R, Juvekar S, Andes K. Domestic violence and contraceptive use in a rural Indian village. Violence Against Women. 2008; 14 (10):1181–1198. doi: 10.1177/1077801208323793. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yoshikawa K, Agrawal NR, Poudel KC, Jimba M. A lifetime experience of violence and adverse reproductive outcomes: Findings from population surveys in India. BioScience Trends. 2012; 6 (3):115–121. 553 [pii] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]