Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Author(s): Debra Umberson, Kristin Anderson, Jennifer Glick and Adam Shapiro
Source: Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 60, No. 2 (May, 1998), pp. 442-452
Published by: National Council on Family Relations
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/353860
Accessed: 30-03-2015 21:29 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
National Council on Family Relations is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Marriage and Family.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Brown Universitvy**
442
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
443
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
444
predict whether their behavior will soothe or enrage their male partners. The women studied by
Walker clearly suffered a reduced sense of control over their own physical safety.
This loss of personal control has severe psychological and emotional consequences. Some studies
document the presence of flashbacks and dissociative experiences among women victimized by
domestic violence (Walker, 1984). Other studies
suggest that domestic violence is associated with
depression, substance abuse, suicide, and a loss of
self-esteem among female victims (Kirkwood,
1993; Stark & Flitcraft, 1991; Stark, Flitcraft, &
Frazier, 1979). These findings are consistent with
the epidemiologic literature documenting associations among the social environment, personal
control, and psychological distress. The negative
psychological effects of domestic violence documented in past research may be due, in part, to
victims' lack of personal control over the violence
in their environments. However, previous survey
research has not examined whether exposure to
violence within the social environment leads to a
reduced sense of personal control.
Personal Control and Perpetrators
of Domestic Violence
Much theory and research on batterers and some
intervention programs designed for batterers emphasize some aspect of "control" as playing a role
in domestic violence (e.g., Gondolf, 1985; Stets,
1988). For example, many studies suggest that
domestic violence occurs in response to a perceived lack of control over the environment and
in order to obtain control over the primary individual in one's social environment (Campbell,
1993; Dobash & Dobash, 1979; Sonkin, Martin,
& Walker, 1985; Stets, 1988). Furthermore, this
violent attempt to control others is most likely to
occur when the perpetratorperceives some threat
or challenge to his control over others (e.g.,
Campbell, 1993; Dutton, 1988; Stark & Flitcraft,
1991). This may explain why physical aggression
toward women escalates when women attempt to
leave their male partners and when women are
pregnant (Reiss & Roth, 1993). These situations
may threaten men's actual or perceived control
over women and their own lives. Previous studies
imply that a perceived lack of control over one's
partner or perceived threats to control by one's
partner cause emotional distress for some men
(Umberson & Williams, 1993), especially those
with a high need for control (Gondolf, 1985). In
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
445
of the family income, he or she can use this to
enactfurthercontrol,such as economicdeprivation. The hierarchiesof Westernculture,which
affordmen greaterresourcesin termsof money,
culturalstatus,andthe historicallegacy of men's
right to "punish"their wives, support men's
abuseof women.(p. 64)
Certainly the significance of violent acts generally
differs for women and men. Men are, on average,
larger and stronger than women so that the same
acts perpetrated by men are likely to be more
damaging than those perpetrated by women.
Compared with men, women are more likely to
be injured during domestic disputes and to report
engaging in violence in self-defense (Gelles &
Straus, 1988; Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al.,
1995). Johnson (1995) suggests that there may be
gender differences in "(a) motivation to control,
(b) normative acceptability of control, (c) inclination to use violence for control, [and] (d) physical
strength differences that make violence effective
..." (p. 292). The clinical work on domestic violence and control-along with the different nature
of men's and women's violent acts in terms of
severity, injuriousness, and self-defense-suggest
that the link between personal control and violence may reflect different social-psychological
processes in men and women.
STUDY QUESTIONS
The data analyzed for this study are from the second wave of the National Survey of Families and
Households (NSFH2, Sweet, Bumpass, & Call,
1988). The NSFH2 is a nationally representative
sample of the contiguous United States designed
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
446
Variable
Sex (0 = female)
Race or ethnicity (0 = White)
AfricanAmerican
Hispanic
Other
Age
Personalemploymentincome
(annual/$1,000)
Missing income (0 = not missing)
Education
Relationshipstatus (0 = married)
Personalcontrol
Respondent'sviolent acts
Partner'sviolent acts
n
SD
.45
.50
.11
.06
.01
44.51
21.84
.31
.24
.12
13.84
29.51
.07
13.11
.08
10.44
.05
.06
.25
2.88
.27
2.56
.22
.23
5,939
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
447
Comparability of survey data with clinical and
shelter data. The literatureon victims and perpetrators of domestic violence relies more heavily on
clinical and shelter data than on survey data. Some
controversy arises because it may not be appropriate to base survey analyses on insights from clinical and shelter studies. Johnson (1995) argues that
clinical and shelter data provide information
about only the most severe cases of domestic violence, which he terms "patriarchalviolence" and
which he defines as a "a form of terroristiccontrol
of wives by their husbands" (p. 284). He differentiates these most severe cases of domestic violence
from common couple violence that tends to be less
injurious and to involve aggression by both partners. Of course, in some cases domestic violence is
perpetratedby women against their male partners
without a violent response from the male partner.
Johnson does not elaborate on such cases, although
the NSFH data suggest that the same percentage
of men and women report that only they-and not
their partner-perpetrated acts of domestic violence
within the previous year. In the following analysis,
we consider all three types of domestic violence:
male-only violence, female-only violence, and
common couple violence.
Johnson contends that common couple violence is more likely than patriarchal violence to
be reported in national surveys. In this sense, survey data might not represent the most significant
cases of domestic violence and could produce
misleading results about the consequences of domestic violence. In fact, national surveys do reveal that the majority of individuals involved in
domestic violence are perpetrators,as well as targets, of domestic violence. This is true in survey
reports from men and women. Issues of control
are central to the research drawn from clinical and
shelter data. However, issues of control have not
been explored with survey data. We argue that an
extensive epidemiologic literature on personal
control, based largely on survey research, combined with theoretical and research insights on
control found in studies of clinical and shelter
data can provide a sound foundation for exploring
how personal control is associated with domestic
violence in a large national survey that includes
both victims and perpetrators of domestic violence. If we find evidence of a link between personal control and domestic violence in a national
survey population, this lends greater support to
theoretical insights from clinical and shelter data.
If we find no link, it does not refute theoretical insights from clinical and shelter data but suggests
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
448
men and women. We are unable to conduct a longitudinal analysis using both waves of NSFH data
because personal control was not measured in
Wave 1. We analyze domestic violence as the independent variable and personal control as the dependent variable for two reasons. First, the theoretical
and clinical work on victims and perpetratorssuggests that domestic violence will affect levels of
personal control of both victim and perpetrator.
Second, the structure of the NSFH2 data is best
suited to this assumed causal model. The NSFH2
measure of violence is based on violence that occurred during the previous year. The measure of
personal control pertains to current feelings of
control.
Our inability to examine the causal order of a
sense of control and domestic violence is an inherent limitation of this study. We are able to
evaluate only whether or not there is a statistical
association between personal control and domestic violence. We emphasize that our data do not
provide a definitive answer to the casual ordering
of personal control and domestic violence and that
there may be reciprocity between the two variables. However, we also emphasize that our analysis provides the first empirical assessment of a
statistical link between personal control and domestic violence in a general population survey.
RESULTS
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
449
TABLE2. UNSTANDARDIZED
OLS COEFFICIENTS
FOR
THE EFFECTS OF SOCIODEMOGRAPHICCHARACTERISTICS
AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ON PERSONAL CONTROL
Variable
Model 1
Model 2
Sex (0 = female)
.260***
(.069)
.229***
(.070)
-.242*
(.106)
-.088
Hispanic
(.140)
Other
-.446
(.279)
-.015***
Age
(.002)
Personalemploymentincome
.003**
(.001)
Missing income (0 = not missing) -.004
(.129)
Education
.169***
(.012)
Relationshipstatus (0 = married) -.404***
(.120)
Respondent'sviolent acts
8.78***
(.208)
-.206*
(.106)
-.089
(.140)
-.370
(.278)
-.017***
(.002)
.003**
(.001)
-.004
(.129)
.166***
(.012)
-.339**
(.120)
-.045
(.299)
-1.05**
(.285)
-.292
(.449)
.918*
(.437)
8.96***
(.210)
.062
5,939
.068
5,939
Partner'sviolent acts
Sex x respondent'sviolent acts
Sex x partner'sviolent acts
Intercept
R2
n
Previous theoretical and empirical work in psychosocial epidemiology and in domestic violence
suggests that domestic violence should be associated with personal control and that this association might differ for men and women. Our results,
based on data from a national survey, indicate
that perpetrating acts of domestic violence is not
associated with personal control for either men or
women. However, being the victim of domestic
violence is associated with a reduced sense of
personal control, but only for women. This gender difference is not surprising in light of research
and theory on domestic violence. Research and
theory suggest that domestic violence-even
when both the man and woman participate in violence-is a qualitatively different experience for
women and men. Thus, although men and women
who report domestic violence may be inclined to
respond to survey questions in a way that suggests
that both partnersperpetrate violence, such a conclusion does not take into account the substantially
different situations of men and women. If women
are more likely than men to be victims of domestic
violence-in the sense of physical injury and psychological fear-then a unique social-psychological
process may occur for women. Domestic violence
may result in a reduced sense of personal control
for women in a way that it does not for men. In
turn, a sense of low personal control may make it
more difficult for women to leave abusive partners (Walker, 1984). The social-psychological
process for men may be different. The literature
on male control and domestic violence is generally
vague when it comes to defining control. However,
this literature suggests that men who perpetrate
domestic violence often do so in response to feelings of having no control over their partner or
other aspects of life. In turn, engaging in domestic
violence may enhance the perpetrator's sense of
personal control. The results presented here do
not support the hypothesis that engaging in domestic violence enhances personal control. It may
be that, even if violence represents an attempt to
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
450
increase personal control, violence is simply ineffective in this endeavor. On the other hand, committing violence is not associated with a reduction
in personal control. Violence may at least serve to
maintain the individual's sense of personal control,
or any enhanced sense of control may be only
temporary. Future research should explore these
and other connections between acts of domestic
violence and personal control. For example, personal control may be associated with domestic violence perpetratedby men but only under certain
conditions, such as perceived threats to masculinity or for individuals who have little self-control.
Personal control, as we defined it in this study,
may be too general. Personal control in the domain of family and gender relations may be the
more critical issue for men who become violent.
Johnson (1995) argues that the most severe cases
of domestic violence will not be revealed in surveys. These severe cases are the ones that are most
likely to be characterizedby men's extreme need to
controlwomen. Futureresearchshould considerhow
the link between personal control and domestic violence differs for men and women involved in
common couple violence, as well as the most severe and one-sided cases of domestic violence.
Qualitative research could be used to begin to explore possible gender differences in these processes.
Studying Domestic Violence
with National Surveys
Survey researchon domestic violence has produced
controversy over why men and women report
similar rates of domestic violence-both as victims
and as perpetrators. Feminist researchers argue
that violence perpetratedagainst and by women is
different from violence perpetratedagainst and by
men (Dobash et al., 1992). Johnson (1995) has attempted to address the survey research controversy
by suggesting that common couple violencewhere both men and women participate in the violence-represents less severe cases of domestic
violence and is more likely to be reported in surveys than are the most severe cases. We suggest
that, even in common couple violence, the experience and effects of violence differ for men and
women. Our findings are consistent with the argument that violence, even when both the man and
woman participate, is more frightening and undermining of female well-being than male wellbeing. We contend that national survey data can
provide insights about gender, victimization, and
perpetration of domestic violence, and this may
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
451
canfamily.New York:SimonandSchuster.
FL:LearningPublications.
correlatesof men who abusetheirpartners:A crossvalidation study. Journal of Family Violence, 1, 323346.
5, 257-273.
Sonkin,D. J., Martin,D., & Walker,L. E. A. (1985).
The male batterer: A treatment approach. New York:
Springer.
Stark,E., & Flitcraft,A. H. (1991). Spouse abuse. In M. L.
Rosenberg & M. A. Fenley (Eds.), Violence in America:
A public health approach (pp. 123-157). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Stark, E., Flitcraft, A. H., & Frazier, W. (1979).
Medicine and patriarchal violence: The social construction of a "private" event. International Journal
of Health Services, 9, 461-493.
Stets, J. E. (1988). Domestic violence and control. New
York: Springer-Verlag.
Stets, J. E. (1991). Cohabiting and marital aggression:
The role of social isolation. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 53, 669-689.
Stets, J. E. (1992). Interactive processes in dating aggression: A national study. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 54, 165-177.
GardenCity,NY: Anchor.
A
Kohn,M. L. (1972). Class,family,andschizophrenia:
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
452
___
UnderstandingPartner Violence:
Prevalence, Causes, Consequences, and Solutions
Volume 2
Sandra M. Stith and Murray A. Straus, Editors
Jay A. Mancini, Senior Editor
An excellent resourcefor advancedstudents,researchers,and practitioners.Additionalresearchby commissioned authorsexamines
the incidence of partnerviolence-an individual,family, and societal issue. This volume also elaborateson the "why"of partner
violence, its outcomes, and a range of interventions.Tables, charts,and referencelists. 306 pages. ISBN: 0-916174-50-6.
NCFR Member
U.S. $31.95
Non-Member
U.S. $36.95
Volume 3
David H. Demo and Anne-Marie Ambert, Editors
Jay A. Mancini, Senior Editor
This volume addressesmattersof vital importanceto families; to family professionalswho work in the areasof teaching,research,
intervention,and policy; and to those interestedin adolescents.It drawson researchand theoreticalthinkingof the authorsof 23 select
articlesto createa valuableresourceand an exciting text. The authorsexamine the intersectionof adolescentdevelopmentand the
family system. Tables, charts,and detailedreferencelists. 280 pages. ISBN: 0-916174-51-4.
NCFR Member
U.S. $31.95
Non-Member
U.S. $36.95
Families in Focus Series:
Provides indepth research information for the preparation of grants and proposals.
Supplements classroom texts.
Helps professionals keep up-to-date.
All prices include shipping and handling. Volume discounts available.Call or write for more information.
Canadianresidents add 7%GST(123-830-465).
National Council on Family Relations
3989 Central Ave. N.E., Suite 550 * Minneapolis, MN 55421
(612) 781-9331 * FAX (612) 781-9348 * Toll Free (888) 781-9331
NCFR
E-mail:ncfr3989@ncfr.com* Web: www.ncfr.com
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Mon, 30 Mar 2015 21:29:55 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
OP9508
JMF 598