Vilification of the “batterer”: How blame shapes domestic violence policy and interventions

By K. Corvo, P. Johnson. 2003

96 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Health, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e3f1f60ff5225f51794d33bf8bdd62051edd8d12

How researchers see this paper

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

In General Health Professions

1. E. Gondolf
2. D. Dutton
3. Michelle Carney
4. John R. Barner
5. Tonia L. Nicholls
6. K. Corvo

In Health

1. K. Corvo
2. E. Gondolf
3. D. Dutton
4. Michelle Carney
5. John R. Barner
6. Tonia L. Nicholls
7. Murray A. Straus
8. Jennifer Lawson

In Sociology and Political Science

1. E. Gondolf
2. D. Dutton
3. K. Corvo
4. John R. Barner
5. Michelle Carney
6. Tonia L. Nicholls

Citations in the corpus

• THEORETICAL AND RESEARCH SUPPORT FOR THE DULUTH MODEL: A REPLY TO DUTTON AND CORVO (2007, methodology): “It describes the Duluth counseling approach using excerpts from a 1993 manual, and documents the political assertions with quotes of Duluth-related presentations based on a previous article by the second author (Corvo & Johnson, 2003).”
• Interventions for Intimate Partner Violence: A Historical Review (2011, background): “Despite significant support from federal and state law enforcement, evaluations by Mills (1998)) and Corvo and Johnson (2003) have suggested that current policies that embolden the subpoena process to compel victim testimony or sequester victims completely from the process of adjudication may need…”
• The gender paradigm in domestic violence research and theory: Part 1—The conflict of theory and data (2005, background): “Corvo and Johnson (2003) outlined the bedrock view of feminist thought bthat battering (by males) is NEVER. . . provoked, hereditary, out of control, accidental, an isolated incident.”
• The Duluth model: A data-impervious paradigm and a failed strategy (2007, background): “For a review of the bedrock fundamentalist ideology of radical feminism, see Corvo and Johnson (2003).”
• Transforming a flawed policy: A call to revive psychology and science in domestic violence research and practice (2006, methodology): “Corvo and Johnson (2003) identified a “historical precedent for such sociopolitical sleight of hand, for the substitution of regressive social control measures for progressive policy in the guise of social enlightenment, particularly where the welfare of women and children is putatively concerned”…”