Dyadic Analysis of “Intimate Terrorism” and the Theoretical, Methodological, and Empirical Adequacy of Johnson’s Typology

• In Event: Intimate Partner Violence Theory and Typologies

Abstract

A couple-level re-analysis of Intimate Terrorists in the dating relationships of a multi-nation sample of university students (N=13,877). The couple-level classification was three Dyadic Types: Male-Partner Only, Female-Partner Only, and Both Intimate Terrorists. Half were in the Both Intimate Terrorist category according to both male and female participants. Only 14% were Male-Only according to men, and only 30% according to women. These and similar results from other studies, led to a review of Johnson’s criteria for intimate terrorists and their conceptual basis. It was concluded that the evidence (1) does not support Johnson’s assertion that intimate terrorists are almost exclusively men; (2) Johnson’s procedure does not identify cases corresponding to the image evoked by the label Intimate Terrorists; and (3) the results are consistent with the view of an increasing number of scholars who have concluded that “patriarchy” is just one of many cause of partner abuse and that effective prevention and treatment requires attending to perpetration by women as well as men. The methodological implication is that identifying the Dyadic Types for the mode of abusive behavior that is the focus of an intervention or research should be the default starting point for research, prevention, and treatment of partner abuse.

Authors

• Murray A. Straus, University of New Hampshire

• Gozjolko L. Kristi, University of New Hampshire