Methodological Contributions to the Gender Symmetry Debate and its Resolution

L. Kevin Hamberger, Sadie Larsen, Jacquelyn C Campbell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The concept of gender symmetry in intimate partner violence (IPV) may be an artifact of three factors. 1) Methodology: Subject recruitment frequently excludes clinical samples. Cross-sectional designs negate the ability to evaluate recidivism and do not account for women’s greater likelihood of leaving violent relationships. 2) Narrow Focus: Researchers focus on frequency of physical aggression, while excluding other types of aggression (e.g., sexual IPV, life-threatening violence, use of firearms), or the impact of such aggression (e.g., fear, depression, injury). 3) Measurement: Surveys are hindered by varying interpretations of seemingly face-valid items, effects of item instructions, and lack of multi-method assessment approaches. Strategies for addressing these problems and resolving the gender symmetry controversy are outlined.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)989-993
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Family Violence
Volume31
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2016

Keywords

  • Gender symmetry
  • Intimate partner violence
  • Measurement
  • Methodology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Law

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Methodological Contributions to the Gender Symmetry Debate and its Resolution'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this