Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
3.2
1.7
Journals
Social Sciences
Special Issues
New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence
share announcement

New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence

A special issue of Social Sciences (ISSN 2076-0760).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 August 2023) | Viewed by 12424

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Ladan Hashemi

E-Mail Website
Leading Guest Editor
School of Policy & Global Affairs Violence and Society Centre, City University of London, London EC1V 0HB, UK
Interests: interpersonal violence; gender based domestic violence and abuse; family violence; adverse childhood experiences; child abuse; intimate partner violence; quantitative methods in social science; measurement
Dr. Ruth Weir

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Policy & Global Affairs Violence and Society Centre, City University of London, London EC1V 0HB, UK
Interests: gender based violence and abuse; geographical information systems, evaluation; quantitative methods

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Interpersonal violence (IV) is widespread worldwide, particularly against women and girls. Globally, 33% of women experience physical or sexual violence in their lifetime, with half of it classified as domestic-abuse-related violence. IV is recognized as a public health issue by the World Health Organization, and it is estimated that effective violence and abuse prevention could reduce mental health problems by a quarter in the general population.

However, the harm from violence is disproportionately distributed across genders. Violence against women and girls is a major cause and consequence of gender and health inequalities. However, the gendered nature of violence is not visible in most violence statistics (administrative or surveys), mostly due to the ways data are collected or analyzed. Addressing violence through impactful prevention and intervention requires a robust measurement of violence, mainstreaming gender and other intersecting dimensions of social relations (such as the relationship between victim and perpetrator, race, ethnicity, age, socioeconomic status/class) into analyses.

The identification and measurement of violence has proved to be challenging, though, particularly around definitions, thresholds, and measures of the extent and nature of violence such as its seriousness, duration, frequency, units of measurement, and other technical and counting issues. For example, capturing some types/forms of intimate partner violence such as economic abuse, emotional or psychological abuse, and even reproductive abuse and coercive control are harder than the generally well measured physical and sexual types and are often missed. When they are included in the surveys, the reliability and validity of these measures are contested.

In some administrative data collected by official bodies (such as health records), violence is not visible or even quantified. When it is visible, it might not be consistently recorded or contain enough details. For example, information on the severity and frequency is usually missed. This is further complicated when different agencies use different ways of measuring violence. Police, general practices, and hospitals count episodes and consultations, while specialised services count victims/survivors. The justice system has concepts based on crime, but the crime surveys and other population-based surveys use a different scaling of seriousness.

This Special Issue will bring together researchers and academics in the field of violence to share their insights about challenges in and solutions to measuring gender-related violence. 

Dr. Ladan Hashemi
Dr. Ruth Weir
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Social Sciences is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1800 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • gender-based violence
  • intimate partner violence
  • gender
  • intersectionality
  • violence measurement
  • interpersonal violence
  • domestic abuse/violence
  • crime surveys
  • population-based surveys
  • violence against women
  • child abuse

Published Papers (8 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

17 pages, 288 KiB  
Article
Using Primary Care and Emergency Department Datasets for Researching Violence Victimisation in the UK: A Methodological Review of Four Sources
by Anastasia Fadeeva, Estela Capelas Barbosa, Alex Walker and Sally McManus
Soc. Sci. 2024, 13(3), 147; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13030147 - 05 Mar 2024
Viewed by 1019
Abstract
Violence is recognised as a cause of health harm, but it is not consistently or adequately captured in healthcare data systems. While administrative health records could be valuable sources of information for measuring violence, they remain underutilised in violence-related research. The present research [...] Read more.
Violence is recognised as a cause of health harm, but it is not consistently or adequately captured in healthcare data systems. While administrative health records could be valuable sources of information for measuring violence, they remain underutilised in violence-related research. The present research aims to examine the suitability of violence indicators in emergency care, primary care, and linked healthcare datasets. Descriptive analyses were conducted with the 2015/16 Hospital Episode Statistics Accident and Emergency (HES A&E) and the 2021/22 Emergency Care Data Set (ECDS). The potential of the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) and the South Wales Violence Surveillance dataset (a police and emergency department (ED) dataset linked by Public Health Wales) were shown using available evidence. Among the discussed datasets, the South Wales Violence Surveillance dataset has the most detail about violent acts and their contexts, while the CPRD includes a more extensive range of socioeconomic factors about patients and extensive linkage with other datasets. Currently, detailed safeguarding information is routinely removed from the ECDS extracts provided to researchers, limiting its utility for violence research. In the HES A&E, only physical violence was consistently recorded. Addressing these issues has the potential to improve the use of health administrative data in research on violence. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence)
35 pages, 359 KiB  
Article
Developing and Testing New Domestic Abuse Questions and Approach for the Crime Survey for England and Wales
by Marianne Hester, Sarah-Jane Walker, Eldin Fahmy and Andy Myhill
Soc. Sci. 2024, 13(1), 10; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci13010010 - 22 Dec 2023
Viewed by 1095
Abstract
Previous research highlighted that a fundamental rethink of the measurement of domestic abuse was needed in the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW). The research reported here aimed to develop and test new questions on domestic abuse for the CSEW to improve [...] Read more.
Previous research highlighted that a fundamental rethink of the measurement of domestic abuse was needed in the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW). The research reported here aimed to develop and test new questions on domestic abuse for the CSEW to improve the headline prevalence measure, including frequency of abuse, to develop a way of measuring controlling or coercive behavior within the overall prevalence measure, and to develop a measure of the impact of abuse. The research included focus groups and interviews with victims (n = 27) to assess a set of draft questions and cognitive testing of revised questions with victims and the general public (n = 42). A final set of 24 questions was developed for use with victims of both intimate partner and family abuse, with an additional question for family abuse. The new questions were found to echo victim experiences and were deemed acceptable and reliable measures by victims and the general public for domestic abuse, including controlling and/or coercive behavior and impact. An analytical approach was recommended to improve the headline prevalence measure of domestic abuse by establishing ‘high’ and ‘low’ abuse profiles using measures of both behavior and impact. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence)
17 pages, 2534 KiB  
Article
Measures of Violence within the United Kingdom Household Longitudinal Survey and the Crime Survey for England and Wales: An Empirical Assessment
by Niels Blom and Vanessa Gash
Soc. Sci. 2023, 12(12), 649; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12120649 - 22 Nov 2023
Viewed by 1132
Abstract
Criminology has been hampered by a lack of longitudinal data to examine the consequences of victimisation. However, recently, ‘Understanding Society’, the United Kingdom Household Panel Survey (UKHLS), began fielding a small battery of questions relating to violence experience. Here, we examined the strengths [...] Read more.
Criminology has been hampered by a lack of longitudinal data to examine the consequences of victimisation. However, recently, ‘Understanding Society’, the United Kingdom Household Panel Survey (UKHLS), began fielding a small battery of questions relating to violence experience. Here, we examined the strengths and weaknesses of these UKHLS measures with similar indices from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), a widely used and regarded but cross-sectional survey. We empirically assessed the extent to which the UKHLS variables are comparable with those in the CSEW to determine the viability of the UKHLS for the longitudinal study of (fear of) violence and its consequences. Overall, we regarded the UKHLS to provide an important resource for future panel research on the consequences of victimisation. We found the indicators measuring physical assault to be similar in both sets of data, but also noted differences in prevalence and/or different distributions by socioeconomic group for the indices relating to being threatened and of feeling unsafe. Nonetheless, we maintain their utility for researchers in this field, allowing researchers to uncover new inequalities in violence exposure. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 2048 KiB  
Article
Measuring the Outcome of Perpetrator Programmes through a Contextualised and Victim-Centred Approach: The Impact Project
by Berta Vall, Jaume Grané Morcillo, Alessandra Pauncz and Marianne Hester
Soc. Sci. 2023, 12(11), 613; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12110613 - 02 Nov 2023
Viewed by 1159
Abstract
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health and widespread problem, and perpetrator programmes are in a unique position to prevent it. Research on the outcomes of perpetrator programmes has advanced in recent years, but still some challenges remain. These challenges include the [...] Read more.
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health and widespread problem, and perpetrator programmes are in a unique position to prevent it. Research on the outcomes of perpetrator programmes has advanced in recent years, but still some challenges remain. These challenges include the absence of measures related to survivor safety and wellbeing as well as the impact on the victim. Additionally, other contextual measures, such as motivation to change or taking responsibility, are typically not included in outcome studies. The Impact Outcome Monitoring Toolkit was developed to help overcome these challenges. The participants were 444 men enrolled in a perpetrator programme and their (ex-)partners (n = 272). The results showed that all types of violence were reduced significantly in terms of both frequency and presence, as reported by both the men enrolled in the programme and their (ex-)partners. The impact of violence had been reduced for (ex-)partners, but some still suffered impacts and felt afraid. The results on the impact of violence on children and improved parenting were quite concerning. The Impact Toolkit makes it possible to measure the outcomes of perpetrator programmes in a contextualised manner and has shown promising results, supporting the inclusion of survivor-centric outcome measures. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 684 KiB  
Article
Surveying ‘Dating Violence’ and Stalking Victimisation among Students at an English University: Findings and Methodological Reflections on Using a US Survey Instrument
by Anna Bull and Alexander Bradley
Soc. Sci. 2023, 12(10), 561; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12100561 - 09 Oct 2023
Viewed by 1350
Abstract
Domestic abuse and stalking in higher education (HE) have been overlooked in research in comparison to sexual harassment and sexual violence. This article reports on survey data from 725 students at an English university using measures of stalking and ‘dating violence’—physical and psychological [...] Read more.
Domestic abuse and stalking in higher education (HE) have been overlooked in research in comparison to sexual harassment and sexual violence. This article reports on survey data from 725 students at an English university using measures of stalking and ‘dating violence’—physical and psychological violence from an intimate partner—from a US survey instrument (the Administrator Researcher Campus Climate Collaborative (ARC3) survey). According to this measure, 26% of respondents had been subjected to ‘dating violence’ and 16% to stalking behaviours. However, these findings need to be contextualised within a critical discussion about the use of the ARC3 survey tool in the English context. The ARC3 questions on ‘dating violence’ focus on physical and ‘psychological violence’; the questions therefore omit further types of domestic abuse under UK definitions. In relation to stalking, US definitions—as captured in the ARC3 survey instrument—define specific behaviours. By contrast, in England and Wales, stalking involves behaviours that engender fear or distress in a pattern of behaviour over time. These differences mean that the ARC3 modules on stalking and ‘dating violence’ would need to be significantly adapted to be suitable for use in England and Wales. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 327 KiB  
Article
Migration, Vulnerability, and Experiences of Insecurity: Conceptualising Insecure Migration Status
by Alexandria Innes
Soc. Sci. 2023, 12(10), 540; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12100540 - 25 Sep 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1776
Abstract
This research examines the insecurities that are embedded within immigration status or lack thereof. I argue that, to improve our understanding of the relationship between immigration-related insecurity and violence, we need to reconceptualise how we think about, measure, and analyse immigration-based characteristics. This [...] Read more.
This research examines the insecurities that are embedded within immigration status or lack thereof. I argue that, to improve our understanding of the relationship between immigration-related insecurity and violence, we need to reconceptualise how we think about, measure, and analyse immigration-based characteristics. This research proposes building an analytical category that can conceptualise insecure migration status to include forms of immigration status that internalise insecurity in addition to being without status, or with an irregular status. These insecurities often incorporate gendered dynamics. Grouping these different categories around a commonly shared experience of insecurity allows us to prioritise experiences of insecurity that are persistent even as people move, cross borders, and change status. I propose that this will permit a more comprehensive picture of migration-related harms that exist across states, status types, and borders while allowing researchers and data gatherers to be attentive to intersectional vulnerabilities that enhance insecurity for particular categories, subgroups, and populations. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence)
15 pages, 989 KiB  
Article
The Concept and Measurement of Violence and Abuse in Health and Justice Fields: Toward a Framework Aligned with the UN Sustainable Development Goals
by Niels Blom, Anastasia Fadeeva and Estela Capelas Barbosa
Soc. Sci. 2023, 12(6), 316; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12060316 - 24 May 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1929
Abstract
Violence reduction is a United Nations (UN) sustainable development goal (SDG) and is key to both public health and criminology. The collaboration between these fields has the potential to create and improve prevention strategies but has been hampered by the usage of different [...] Read more.
Violence reduction is a United Nations (UN) sustainable development goal (SDG) and is key to both public health and criminology. The collaboration between these fields has the potential to create and improve prevention strategies but has been hampered by the usage of different definitions and measurements. This paper explores the definitions and measurements of violence by the World Health Organization, UN, and Council of Europe to arrive at a harmonized framework aligned with the SDGs. Violence and abuse are defined by these organizations as intentional actions that (are likely to) lead to harm, irrespective of physicality or legality. When recording violence and abuse, health- and justice-based administrative systems use different codes which cannot directly be translated without resorting to broad overarching categories. Additionally, the identification of the number of victims, perpetrators, and events is challenging in these systems due to repeat victimization/offending, multiple victims/perpetrators, and multiple engagements with services associated with a single event. Furthermore, additional information on the victims (e.g., ethnicity) and events needs to be registered to evaluate progress toward the SDGs. We propose a framework to record violence that includes individual and event identifiers, forms of violence and abuse (including physical, sexual, and psychological), harm, and individual and event characteristics. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

15 pages, 330 KiB  
Review
The Concept and Measurement of Interpersonal Violence in Specialist Services Data: Inconsistencies, Outcomes and the Challenges of Synthesising Evidence
by Annie Bunce, Sophie Carlisle and Estela Capelas Barbosa
Soc. Sci. 2023, 12(7), 366; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12070366 - 23 Jun 2023
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1665
Abstract
Interpersonal violence comprises a variety of different types of violence that occur between individuals, including violence perpetrated by strangers and acquaintances, intimate partners and family members. Interpersonal violence is a leading cause of death, particularly among young adults. Inconsistencies in definitions and approaches [...] Read more.
Interpersonal violence comprises a variety of different types of violence that occur between individuals, including violence perpetrated by strangers and acquaintances, intimate partners and family members. Interpersonal violence is a leading cause of death, particularly among young adults. Inconsistencies in definitions and approaches to the measurement of interpersonal violence mean it is difficult to clearly understand its prevalence and the differences and similarities between its different subcategories and contexts. In the UK, specialist services provide support for victim-survivors and also perpetrators of violence. As well as delivering frontline services, specialist services collect data on interpersonal violence, both routinely and for the purpose of research and evaluation. This data has the potential to greatly improve understanding of violence in the UK; however, several issues make this challenging. This review describes and discusses some of the key challenges facing the two types of data collected by specialist services. Key inconsistencies regarding conceptualisation and measurement are identified, along with the implications of these for the synthesis of data, including implications for researchers, service providers, funders and commissioners. Recommendations are proposed to improve practice, the quality of data and, therefore, the understanding of interpersonal violence in the UK. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Perspectives on Measuring Interpersonal Violence)
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-8
Back to TopTop