WOMEN'S VIOLENCE TO MEN IN INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS

By R. Dobash, R. Dobash. 2004

583 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Health, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bcaf03ac1a46de3220edfaccaa598f62b05d6e15

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Gender Studies

In Health

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Partner violence against heterosexual and gay men: Prevalence and correlates (2012, methodology): “…of IPV reviewed above (Harwell et al., 2003; Pournaghash-Tehrani & Feizabadi, 2007; Seow& Foo, 2006) used some form of the Conflict Tactics Scale (Straus et al., 1996), consequently, criticisms regarding the lack of information pertaining to meaning and context apply (Dobash & Dobash, 2004).”
Motivations for Men and Women’s Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration: A Comprehensive Review (2012, methodology): “…motivations (Babcock et al., 2004, Study 2; Rosen et al., 2005; Ross & Babcock, 2009) and the final couple study included qualitative interviews of both members of the dyad; direct comparisons of motives between genders was not possible on the basis of the presented data (Dobash & Dobash, 2004).”
THEORETICAL AND RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR THE DULUTH MODEL: A REPLY TO DUTTON AND CORVO (2007, background): “3 A series of research reviews discuss these and other shortcomings, and their potential impact on domestic violence data (e.g., DeKeseredy, 2000; Dobash & Dobash, 2004; Dobash, Dobash, Wilson, & Daly, 1992; for a full summary of the issues, see Belknap & Melton, 2005).”
Victim Help Seeking: Differences Between Intimate Terrorism and Situational Couple Violence (2007, background): “…decrease in intimate partner homicides in the United States, particularly the killing of African American men by their female partners, is a notable example of how improved social programs can drastically influence partner violence outcomes for both victims and offenders (Dobash & Dobash, 2004).”
The Duluth model: A data-impervious paradigm and a failed strategy (2007, background): “Dobash and Dobash (2004) still refer to the “context of violence,” avoid citing papers such as Simon’s (Simon et al., 2001) demonstration of no normative support for male IPV, and publish results AC C EP TE D M AN U SC R IP T the selection factors this sample poses (of differential calling of…”
Intimate Femicide: The Role of Coercive Control (2019, background): “An additional potential threat to the reliability of the dependent variable entails concerns about the tendency of violent men to deny, minimize and justify their actions and their reluctance to discuss motivations (Dobash & Dobash, 2004, 2011; Hearn, 1998; Kelly & Westmarland, 2016).”
A literature review of intimate partner violence and its classifications (2016, background): “However, feminist researchers believe that women use violence as a mean of self-defense, and in response to the abuse, protection of children and retaliation (Dasgupta, 2002; Dobash & Dobash, 2004; Swan & Snow, 2006).”
Violence (2012, background): “It has been argued that women commit violence in partner relationships to the same extent as men, but these assertions are often based on studies that primarily capture situational violence rather than the kind of violence aimed at dominating or breaking down one’s partner [36].”
Gender differences in self-reports of intimate partner violence: A review (2011, background): “Also consistent with Dobash and Dobash (2004), women were less likely than men to report minor men-to-women IPV.”