1. Dyadic Concordance In Intimate Terrorism:
Implications For The Theoretical, Methodological, And Empirical Adequacy of Johnson’s Typology
Murray A. Straus and Kristi Gozjolko
Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire
Durham, NH
Website:
Presented at the annual meeting of the American Society Of Criminology, San
Francisco, 19 November 2014
Other publications on this and related issues can be downloaded from http//:
Current work was supported by the University of New Hampshire and previous work by National Institute of Mental Health grant T32MH15161
Your are welcome to download these slides from
  .

2. Questions Addressed
What identifies an individual as “Intimate Terrorist” (IT) and what has research found about Johnson’s assertion that IT’s are almost all men?
What are Dyadic Concordance Types and what percent of couples are in each of IT (Male-Only, Female-Only, and Both IT)?
What are the implications of the results for:
Conceptualization and Measurement Of Intimate Terrorism and Johnson’s typology
Theories explaining partner violence (PV)
Prevention and Treatment of partner violence

3. Intimate Terrorism, One Of Four Types
Intimate Terrorism (IT) enacts violence to take general control over one’s partner
Situational Couple Violence (SCV) is violence that arises in the context of specific conflicts and does not involve coercive control
Mutual Violent Control involves both partners engaging in Intimate Terrorist violence
Violent Resistance uses violence to resist IT
Professional interest has been mainly on IT and SCV
These are the focus of this paper
Johnson, Michael P. (2006). Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. Violence against Women, 12(11), )

4. Canada Viol Against Women Survey IT SCV 34% 66% No signf gender diff
Table 1. Gender Differences In Intimate Terrorism and Situational Couple Violence
Study
Sample
Measure of
Coercive Control
Perp Rate For
F/M%
IT or SCV
Men
Women
[Frye, 2006 #11416]
749 women, 331 physically
abused
Canada Viol Against Women Survey IT
SCV
34%
66%
No signf gender diff
100%
[Graham-Kevan, 2003 #9562]
Shelter 43. Male prisoners 97. Students 104 male, 239 female
Controlling Behaviours Scale (DAIP)
38%
53% 6%
64%
16%
121%
[Graham-Kevan, 2004 #10748]
University Staff and Students
N=1339
Controlling Behaviours Scale (Duluth Domestic Abuse Intervention Proj) 9%
74%
13%
 144%
[Johnson, 2005 #10691]
4,967 wives.
246 violent & 4,721 non-violent husbs
Psychological Maltreatment Of Women [Tolman, 1989 #1420]
35%
55%
Data for female sample not analyzed 
[Laroche, 2005 #8553]
Canada Genal Social Survey
Controlling Behaviours Scale (Canada GSS)
SCV 
19%
81%
26%
74% 
137%
91%
[Prospero, 2006 #10746]
Students
Male=248
Female=361
Controlling Behaviours [Graham-Kevan, 2003 #9562] 7%
68%

5. Summary Of Results Of Six Studies
Only one found a higher percent of men IT than women
Two found no difference, and reported only percent for combined sample
Two found a larger percent of women than men IT
One did not analyze the data for women
Overall: These six studies suggest that IT by women occurs as often as by men.
More studies being added to table. Pattern seems to be the same
Related problem: Johnson’s four types do not include a separate category for female terrorists
Dyadic Concordance Types (discussed next) provide that

6. Dyadic Concordance Types (DCTs)
A Method of Identifying A Crucial Characteristic Of Couples
Can Increase Understanding Of Intimate Terrorism And All Other Relationship Problems
DCTs classify couples into three categories
~Male-Only, ~Female-Only ~Both engaged in the behavior of interest, such as assault or IT
DCTs go beyond comparing men and women:
Provide a couple-level measure that is also gender-specific
DCTs are easy to determine if there is “dyadic data” on the behavior of interest, i.e., behavior measured for both partners
If IT is measured for both:
Cross-classify the IT measure for each partner
Resulting four cells identify the three DCTs & reference Neither
Examples of DCTs for couple concordance in assault (not IT) next slides

7. % Dyadic Concordance In Assault Perpetration
U.S. National Comorbidity Study (N=8,098)
Male Respondents
Female Respondents
Couple Prevalence
According to Men 21%
Women 23% %
Dyadic Concordance Type
Kessler, R. C., Molnar, B. E., Feurer, I. D., & Appelbaum, M. (2001). Patterns and mental health predictors of domestic violence in the United States: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey. International Journal Of Law And Psychiatry, 24(4-5),

8. % Figure 1. Concordance In Assault Perpetration
By 3,642 Men And Women In The World Mental Health Study
Couple Prevalence according to:
Males: 22%
Females 22% %
Dyadic Concordance Type
Miller, E., Breslau, J., Petukhova, M., Fayyad, J., Green, J. G., Kola, L., Kessler, R. C. (2011). Premarital mental disorders and physical violence in marriage: cross-national study of married couples. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 199(4), doi: /bjp.bp

9. 48 Studies Found Similar Distribution of DCTs,
Especially That Both Assaulted Was Predominant
Dyadic Concordance Type
Above suggests hypothesis that Both might also be typical of Intimate Terrorism
Adapted from Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Selwyn, C., & Rohling, M. L. (2012). Rates of Bidirectional Versus Unidirectional Intimate Partner Violence Across Samples, Sexual Orientations, and Race/Ethnicities: A Comprehensive Review. Partner Abuse, 3(2), doi: /

10. DATA FROM THE INTERNATIONAL DATING VIOLENCE STUDY
14,252 Students At 68 Universities
In 32 Nations
All Major World Regions
Convenience Samples
Questionnaire Completed In Class
Analyses Control For And/Or Examine Interactions With:
* Gender and Age
* Score on Social Desirability Response set scale
* Other controls as needed
VALIDITY OF THE DATA
Concurrent validity: correlated with recognized international statistics
Construct Validity: Shown in many published papers

11. Measures
Partner violence: Revised Conflict Tactics Physical Assault Scale: Any perpetration
High Coercive Control: Cases at 90th percentile of Psychological Aggression scale of the Conflict Tactics Scales
Based on frequent statement that psychological aggression is a key element in coercive control
For this sample: Correlation with Hamby Dominance Scale: ?
Intimate Terrorism: Assaulted and high coercive control
Dyadic Concordance Types of Intimate Terrorist
Cross classification of partner measures of Intimate Terrorist results in
Four cells ~Male-Only, ~Female-Only, ~Both IT, Reference category Neither

12. Table 3. Gender Differences In Dominance, Assault, and Intimate Terrorist
Gender of Student
Chi Sqr
p=>
Variable
Men
Women
Any assault
24%
31%
.001
High coercive control 8%
11%
Situational Couple Violence (assaulted, not high coercive control
19%
22%%
Intimate Terrorist (assaulted and high coercive control) 5% 9%

13. Dyadic Concordance In Intimate Terrorism
Dating Relationships Of University Students in 32 Nations
Intimate Terrorist Prevalence
Men 8%
Women 10%
Couples 10%
Gender Of Participant:
Stats by gender used data provided by participants of that gender
Stats in chart based on combined sample because no significant difference between estimates of Male-Only, Female-Only, Both using data from men and women.
% of the 10% of Couples With Either
Or Both
Intimate Terrorist
Male Only Female Only Both IT
Dyadic Concordance Types
Straus, Murray A., & Gozjolko, Kristi L. (2013). Dyadic Analysis Of “Intimate Terrorism” and the Theoretical, Methodological, And Empirical Adequacy Of Johnson’s Typology. Paper presented at the American Society Of Criminology, 19 November 2014, San Francisco.

14. Summary Of Results On The 3 Questions
What percent of partners are “Intimate Terrorists” as measured by Johnson’s methods?
* 5% of men and 9% of women (as reported by each gender)
* More women than men are IT in this study and most other studies
2. What Is the level of Concordance Between partners in Intimate Terrorism?
* High: When there was IT in a relationship, in 51% of those couples both were IT
* Sole-perpetrators were: Male-Only 16%, Female-Only 33%
* Above percentages hold regardless of whether men or women provided the data
3. What are the implications? Next slides

15. Implications For Validity Of Widely Accepted Distinction Between Intimate Terrorist And Situational Couple Violence
One reason widely accepted: Seems to resolve 35 year controversy over gender symmetry in perpetration and whether the predominant cause is “patriarchy”
But does not because:
Studies found symmetry in IT, not just in SCV
Permits holding on to belief that PV is predominantly a male crime caused by patriarchy because, according to Johnson (2006), IT is perpetrated almost exclusively by men

16. Other Problems With Conceptualization and Measurement
Of Intimate Terrorism
Insufficiently multidimensional because does not take into account dimensions such as chronicity and severity of assault and injury
(Perhaps reflecting Johnson belief the crucial issue is coercion and that “…the frequency and severity of the violence has no bearing whatsoever on whether the violence is classified as IT” (Johnson, 008 p. 94).)
Label “terrorist” implies chronic assaults, severe assaults, and injury, but not measured to identify IT. Therefore
low “sensitivity” i.e., ability to identify cases that fit the image
Low “specificity” i.e., false positives
Inadequate specification of coercion. Johnson argues that a key characteristic of IT is generalized coercion not situational coercion to get the partner to do or to stop a specific behavior (Johnson, 1995). The measures used by Johnson and others do not adequately distinguishes generalized coercion from situational coercion.
Although Johnson’s method of measuring IT can be applied to women
The four types do not include a separate category for female terrorists
Categorizes most cases as Common Couple Violence, which is implied to not be serious problem

17. The Reality Behind The Miracle Cure
Does not end the controversy because most studies that empirically compared men and women find similar percentages of male and female IT
Downplays the importance of SCV. But from a public health perspective, SCV is extremely important because
Affects many more couples
Produces the most injuries, physical and psychological because it exposes the most people to risk of injury
Is a contagious disease and infects the next generation
Diverts attention from the need to protect women by attending to violence by reducing violence by women and their social and psychological problems
Has not improved treatment. In current Batterer Intervention Programs, all offenders get the same intervention
Although Johnson typology identifies important variations in PV, it contuse the controversy over whether the most important cause is “patriarchy” because the typology assumes that only men are terrorists

18. Steps To More Adequately Measure Intimate Terrorism
Improved measure of IT. A major part of the explanation for the repeated finding of symmetry in IT is because Johnson identifies IT solely by whether there was both an assault and coercive control.
However, to correspond with the image evoked by “intimate terrorism” the threshold for violence needs to be higher than any instance of assault
Chronicity of assault and severity of assault
Chronicity of injury inflicted
Poly-perpetration (number of other types abuse) CTS (Sabina & Straus,
Fear, for example as measured scale by O'Leary et al., 2013)
Whether partner was actually subjugated, which is not the same as coerced
~ Subjugation is a possible outcome of the behaviors listed such as coercive ~ Needs to be measured as a behavior of the victim, not the perpetrator
To classify couples Use Dyadic Concordance Types rather than Johnson’s four types because those types do not include a separate category for female terrorists

19. THEORETICAL IMPLICATION IMPLICATIONS FOR PREVENTION AND TREATMENT
Revise theories of PV to recognizes that dyadic nature of PV, including:
About the same percent of women as men physically assault a partner
Most cases are bi-directional and involve an escalation pattern and a relationship problem, not just a male problem
17 studies found only a small percent of acts in self-defense, and no study found a higher percent than men (Straus, 2012)
IMPLICATIONS FOR PREVENTION AND TREATMENT
Prevention programs: Replace programs directed to men and boys with programs explicitly addressed explicitly to both genders
Treatment of partner violence: Replace the assumption that it is violent men who need treatment with:
Initial screening to determine whether it is unilateral or mutual,
Base treatment on that evidence, not male-only perpetrator assumption
Provide treatment for both where both perpetrated (half of couples)
Victim services: Continue to give priority to women victims because women are injured more, physically, psychologically, & economically
Straus, Murray A. (2012). Blaming the messenger for the bad news about partner violence by women: the Methodological, theoretical, and value basis of the purported invalidity of the Conflict Tactics Scales. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 30(5), doi: /bsl.2023

20. Downloadable Papers On Dyadic Concordance Types - General
 Straus, M. A. (2014). A Gallery Of Dyadic Concordance Type (DCT) Graphics. Unpublished Manuscript. Durham, NH: Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire.
Straus. M.A. (in press) Dyadic Concordance and Discordance in Family Violence: A Powerful and Practical Approach to Research and Practice.  Aggression and Violent Behavior.
Straus, M. A. (2014). Bringing couple-level measures and family contradictions into research through dyadic concordance types. Unpublished Manuscript. Durham, NH: Family Research Laboratory.
Specific Empirical Studies
Straus, M. A. (2014). Practical ways to conduct international partner violence research using Dyadic analysis. NCFR Report Magazine: Family Focus on International Intimate Partner Violence, Fall, 1-4. Straus, M. A., & Michel-Smith, Y. (2014). Dyadic Concordance In Psychological Aggression And Its Relation to Physical Assault Of Dating Partners By Male And Female University Students In 32 Nations. Paper presented at the European Society of Criminology, Prague.
Michel-Smith, Yahayra, & Straus, Murray (2014). Dyadic Patterns of Perpetration of Physical Assault and Injury of Dating Partners By Male and Female University Students in 32 Nations. Paper presented at the Stockholm Criminology Symposium, Stockholm, Sweden.
Straus, M. A., & Michel-Smith, Y. (2013). Mutuality, Severity, And Chronicity Of Violence By Father-only, Mother-only, And Mutually Violent Parents As Reported By University Students In 15 Nations. Child Abuse Negl, 38(4), Doi: /J.Chiabu
Straus, Murray A. (2013, November). Relation of Corporal Punishment By Father-Only, Mother-Only, And Both Parents To Crime by University Students In 15 Nations. Paper presented at the American Society Of Criminology, Atlanta.
Straus, Murray A, & Michel-Smith, Yahayra (2012). Relation Of Violence Between Parents Of University Students In 15 Nations To Student Criminogenic Beliefs And Crime: A comparison of father-only, mother-only, and mutual parental violence Paper presented at the American Society Of Criminology annual meeting, Chicago, 15 November, 2012.
Straus, M. A., & Winstok, Z.. (2013). Relation of Dyadic Concordance-Discordance Types of Partner Violence to Depression of Male and Female University Students in 15 Nations. Paper presented at the Society for the Study of Social Problems, New York.
Winstok, Z. & Straus, M. A. (2014). Gender Differences in the Link between Intimate Partner Physical Violence and Depression. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19, doi: /j.avb

21. The Both category may be misleading
Both can assault, but he more frequently and/or more severely. also
Run and plot ancova: IV = DCT. DV chronicity and gender. LDT SES
plot means but convert to bars

22. Does not end the controversy because studies of clinical samples show high rates of female assault (e.g. Gondolf 60%, Giles Sims etc.. See my article, And contrary to his claim, high freq of severe assault in general population.
Minimizes symmetrical perpetration of most partner violence by giving them a more socially acceptable label ”Situational Couple Violence”
Asserts the important problem is Intimate Terrorism, not Situational Couple Violence.
Cite my previous estimate of equivalent of IT and compare %s
Strgthen case for DCT: make case for analyzing couples

23. Messinger, A. M. , Fry, D. A. , Rickert, V. I. , Catallozzi, M
Messinger, A. M., Fry, D. A., Rickert, V. I., Catallozzi, M., & Davidson, L. L. (2014). Extending Johnson's Intimate Partner Violence Typology: Lessons From an Adolescent Sample. Violence against Women, 20(8), doi: /
Offers an extension of Johnson types, but still no category in which a female partner can be the sole IT

24. Are The Results “Spurious” Because Of Methodological Problems?
Samples – world wide, general pop, clinical pop
Measurement – Gender, instrument (Capaldi)
Confounding with SES, LD, SES etc.

25. MISCELEANEOUS
The data and a detailed description of the study, including the questionnaire and all other key documents can be downloaded from the Interuniversity Consortium For Political And Social Research (
AUS Australia; BEL Belgium; BRA Brazil; CAN Canada; CHE Switzerland; CHN China; DEU Germany; GBR Great Britain; GRC Greece; GTM Guatemala; HKG ong Kong; HUN Hungary; IND India; IRN Iran; ISR Israel; JPN Japan; KOR South Korea; LTU Lithuania; MEX Mexico; MLT Malta; NLD Netherlands; NZL New Zealand; PRT Portugal; ROU Romania; RUS Russia; SGP Singapore; SWE Sweden; TWN Taiwan; TZA Tanzania; USA United States; VEN Venezuela; ZAF S Africa
17,404 university students. International Dating Violence Study. ANCOVA controlling for age, SES, and Limited Disclosure scale score.
14,252 university students. International Dating Violence Study. ANCOVA controlling for age, SES, and Limited Disclosure scale score.

26. ANALYSES CONTROLLED FOR
Education of father
Education of mother (are the results just a reflection of SES?
Misbehavior as a child (are results just a continuation of a long –standing pattern)
Corporal punishment by father As above
Corporal punishment by mother As above
Age of student at time of study (because older persons have lower crime rates
Limited Disclosure scale (do the results just reflect that willingness to disclose one type of socially undesirable behavior is associated with willingness to disclose other types)
Nation in which data was collected There are important differences between nations in the prevalence of crime. National differences in crime, include DCT are analyzed elsewhere (cite??). The focus of this study is whether there are effects of DCT that are in addition to the national context effects.

27. Objectives
The objectives of this study are to: (1) Describe the use of “Dyadic Concordance Types” (DCTs) as a means of better understanding the concept of “Intimate Terrorist” and identification of cases. (2) Provide empirical estimates for a large sample of dating relationships among university students, of the percent of cases in each of the three DCTs: Male-Only, Female-Only, and Both-Intimate Terrorists. (3) Examine the degree to which each type is associated with physical injury, and gender differences in injury. (4) Evaluate the theoretical basis and empirical adequacy of Johnson's assertion that IT is perpetrated almost entirely by men.

28. bidirectional
or mutual partner abuse. These results on how prevalent it is for both partners
in a relationship to assault, important as that is, fails to deal with the half of
aggressive relationships in which the aggression is unidirectional. For that half, as
shown in this article, many studies have found similar percentages in which only the
male partner aggresses and only the female partner aggresses. It is crucial that this
be taken into account in research, theory, and practice about PA. Identifying bidirectional
cases does not do that. Thus, even when results on bidirectional abuse are
reported, a serious gap persists because information on these two DCTs is crucial for
theories of partner abuse and for prevention and treatment, including efforts to end
violence against women
Provide example showing difference between same rate for men and women and Both. It is in IPS descriptive article and I think in the PASK article.

29. Just how easy it is to obtain data on DCTs
is illustrated by an analysis of the National Family Violence Survey. In this study, as in most other studies on partner abuse, only one partner was interviewed. Nevertheless, the DCTs could be determined
because the partner interviewed was asked about both their own behavior and that
their partner. It required only a cross tabulation of assault by the male partner by
the assault by the female partner. The percentages in the resulting four cells were
the three DCTs and the no-assault group. Among the relationships in which there was
an assault, the percentages were 25% Male-Only, 27% Female-Only, and 48% Both-
Assaulted (Straus, 1980; Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 2006). I did not name this as
DCTs or give the typology any name at all.

30. Increasingly popular – A search u sing Google Scholar located 204 articles published in Few empirical studies.
More popular as a citation and a defense of the idea that PV is male than it is as an empirical method? Try to count

31. DCTs and APIM

32. DCTs For Positive Behaviors
Essential For Prevention Of Child Abuse And Partner Abuse
Empathy
Support
Trust
Aggressive attribution – out to get me
Negotiation
Communication
See list of skills for prevention programs

33. Table 1 IDVS-Dyadic Concordance Type by Gender of Respondent
Dyadic Type 
Gender of Respondent
% Male Only
% Female Only
% Both N
Any Assault
Male 11 16 73
1184
Female
8.5
24.6
66.8
3481
Severe Assault
14.3
25.9
59.9
441
15.6
31.0
53.4
1368
Any Injury-Perpetrated
10.7
17.4
72.0
328
21.1
13.8
65.1
896
Severe Injury-Perp
11.6
28.4 60 95
39.2
9.9
50.9
171
Any Psych Aggression
9.8
19.7
70.5
1623
9.3
17.2
73.5
4682
Severe Psych Aggression
19.0
16.8
64.2
1022
13.9
30.9
55.2
2989
Any Sexual Coercion
21.4
10.6
68.0
1335
33.2
9.5
57.3
3252
Physical Sexual Coercion
26.9
18.5
54.6
119
42.8
14.5
318
Verbal Sexual Coercion
21.2
61.9
113
44.0
8.9
47.1
293
Intransigent
12.6
78.5
984
12.5
9.4
78.0
2118

34. DCTs Are Remarkably Consistent
* Both Assault is almost always the predominant type
* Sole-perpetrator type is about evenly split between Male-Only and Female-Only
Across sources source of the data
Men and women
Self report, partner report, and observer
Children reporting on parents or parents reporting
Student and general population samples
Across levels of severity of assault
Minor versus severe assaults
General population versus clinical samples
Across cultural groups
Nations and ethnic and class groups within nations
Across relationship stages
Dating and married, except that dating always have a higher percent Across sexual orientation
Heterosexual and same relationships

35. Recognizing that female partners also assault and that about the same percent of women as men assault was a major advance, with extensive research, but one not yet the basis for theory and practice.
Recognizing mutual violence is a further major advance with small but growing amount of research, and also not yet the basis for theory and practice. It has been consistently found that mutually violent relationships experience more violence, more severe violence, and higher rates of injury (Gray and Foshee 1997; Swahn et al ). Whitaker, Straus and Gozjolko
Recognizing DCTs has just begun.

36. DCTs and APIM
Cousins share some of the same genes
Need to spend more time together
Dyadic analysis is a much broader concept than Dyadic Concordance Types. DCTs are only one specific tool to aid dyadic analysis. The fact that DCTs deal with only a small part of what is implied by dyadic analysis is not only a limitation but also an advantage. The advantage is that it gives scholars and practitioners a specific and easily applied tool to aid making the dyadic nature of partner abuse part of their research, theorizing, or prevention and treatment work.
use of DCTs as an aid to investigating and theorizing about partner abuse and in preventing and treating partner abuse.

37. References On the Conflict Tactics Scales
Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17(3), doi: /
Straus, M. A., & Douglas, E. M. (2004). A short form of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales, and typologies for seventy and mutuality. Violence and Victims, 19,
Straus, M. A. (2004). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of the revised conflict tactics scales: A study of university student dating couples in 17 nations. Cross-Cultural Research, 38(4),
Straus, M. A. (2012). Blaming the messenger for the bad news about partner violence by women: the Methodological, theoretical, and value basis of the purported invalidity of the Conflict Tactics Scales. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 30(5), doi: /bsl.2023
Straus, M. A., & Mickey, E. L. (2012). Reliability, validity, and prevalence of partner violence measured by the conflict tactics scales in male-dominant nations. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, doi: /j.avb

38. Some References On The International Dating Violence Study
Straus, M. A. (2009). The National context effect: An Empirical test of the validity of Cross-National research using unrepresentative samples. Cross-Cultural Research, 43(3), doi: /