Controversies Involving Gender and Intimate Partner Violence in the United States

By Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling. 2010

313 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Health, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fd281fb9490e8e963d5d165db62b270b4ca9a7ed

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

Rates of Bidirectional Versus Unidirectional Intimate Partner Violence Across Samples, Sexual Orientations, and Race/Ethnicities: A Comprehensive Review (2012, background): “Unfortunately, as was noted by Langhinrichsen-Rohling (2010), estimates of the bidirectionality of IPV are notably absent from many types of research articles and are also not included in federally funded crime surveys such as National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and the National Violence Agai”
Motivations for Men and Women’s Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration: A Comprehensive Review (2012, background): “…engage in violence because of problems with emotional regulation or the expression of anger; a different type of perpetrator may be motivated to aggress against their partner to dominate or control them or aggress in self-defense in response to a dangerous partner (Langhinrichsen-Rohling, 2010).”
Prevalence of Physical Violence in Intimate Relationships, Part 2: Rates of Male and Female Perpetration (2012, methodology): “The WHO multi-country study and the international study of dating violence conducted by Straus and colleagues represent important attempts to collect internationally comparable data through the use of standardized methods; however, there remains considerable debate in the field regarding which instr”
Internalized Sexual Minority Stressors and Same-Sex Intimate Partner Violence (2011, result): “These findings are consistent with the literature on the bi-directional nature of relationship violence (see review by Langhinrichsen-Rohling 2010 ).”
Current Controversies within Intimate Partner Violence: Overlooking Bidirectional Violence (2016, unknown): “Langhinrichsen-Rohling (2010), in discussing the heterogeneity of bidirectional IPV, posits a model that encompasses both partners’ individual and contextual factors (e.g. attachment issues, experience of conflict) and that this is important in understanding the violent dynamic.”
Size Does Matter: The Effects of Gender on Perceptions of Dating Violence (2010, background): “Nonetheless, some authors consider any differential perceptions as evidence of gender bias and have argued for acknowledging that female-perpetrated IPV is a much more significant social problem than has generally been acknowledged (Cormier and Woodworth 2008; Hamel 2007; Hamel et al. 2007; Langhin”
Do Violent Acts Equal Abuse? Resolving the Gender Parity/Asymmetry Dilemma (2010, methodology): “Langhinrichsen-Rohling (2010) cited evidence from couples in counseling to support her emphasis on bi-directional violence, including work based on the couples ’ clinic at SUNY-Stony-Brook.”
A literature review of intimate partner violence and its classifications (2016, background): “…motivation behind the violence, type of violence, physiological responses of perpetrators to different stimuli, and presence of psychopathological factors (Boxall et al., 2015; Capaldi & Kim, 2007; Langhinrichsen-Rohling, 2010a; Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Huss, & Ramsey, 2000b; Wangmann, 2011).”