intimate partner violence intimate partner violence intimate partner violence (ipv) is domestic violence by a current or former spouse or partner in an intimate relationship against the other spouse or partner. ipv can take a number of forms, including physical, verbal, emotional, economic and sexual abuse. the world health organization (who) defines ipv as "any behavior within an intimate relationship that causes physical, psychological or sexual harm to those in the relationship, including acts of physical aggression, sexual coercion, psychological abuse and controlling behaviors.": page 89 ipv is sometimes referred to simply as battery, or as spouse or partner abuse. the most extreme form of ipv is termed intimate terrorism, coercive controlling violence, or simply coercive control. in such situations, one partner is systematically violent and controlling. this is generally perpetrated by men against women, and is the most likely of the types to require medical services and the use of a women's shelter. resistance to intimate terrorism, which is a form of self-defense, and is termed violent resistance, is usually conducted by women. studies on domestic violence against men suggest that men are less likely to report domestic violence perpetrated by their female intimate partners. conversely, men are more likely to commit acts of severe domestic battery, and women are more likely to suffer serious injury as a result. the most common but less injurious form of intimate partner violence is situational couple violence (also known as situational violence), which is conducted by men and women nearly equally, and is more likely to occur among younger couples, including adolescents (see teen dating violence) and those of college age. background physical violence against a woman in benin. percentage of women who experienced violence by an intimate partner, 2016 intimate partner violence occurs between two people in an intimate relationship. it may occur between heterosexual or homosexual couples and victims can be male or female. couples may be dating, cohabiting or married and violence can occur in or outside of the home. studies in the 1990s showed that both men and women could be abusers or victims of domestic violence. women are more likely to act violently in retaliation or self-defense and tend to engage in less severe forms of violence than men whereas men are more likely to commit long-term cycles of abuse than women. the world health organization (who) defines intimate partner violence as "any behavior within an intimate relationship that causes physical, psychological or sexual harm to those in the relationship". the who also adds controlling behaviors as a form of abuse. according to a study conducted in 2010, 30% of women globally aged 15 and older have experienced physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence. global estimates by who calculated that the incidence of women who had experienced physical or sexual abuse from an intimate partner in their lifetime was 1 in 3. regionpercent global30% africa36.6% eastern mediterranean37% european25.4% south-east asia37.7% the americas29.8% east asia24.6% assessment screening tools the u.s. preventive services task force (uspstf) as of 2018 recommends screening women of reproductive age. some of the most studied ipv screening tools were the hurt, insult, threaten, and scream (hits), the woman abuse screening tool/woman abuse screening tool-short form (wast/wast-sf), the partner violence screen (pvs), and the abuse assessment screen (aas). the hits is a four-item scale rated on a 5-point likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (frequently). this tool was initially developed and tested among family physicians and family practice offices, and since then has been evaluated in diverse outpatient settings. internal reliability and concurrent validity are acceptable. generally, sensitivity of this measure has found to be lower among men than among women. the wast is an eight-item measure (there is a short form of the wast that consists of the first two items only). it was originally developed for family physicians, but subsequently has been tested in the emergency department. it has been found to have good internal reliability and acceptable concurrent validity. the pvs is a three-item measure scored on a yes/no scale, with positive responses to any question denoting abuse. it was developed as a brief instrument for the emergency department. the aas is a five-item measure scored on a yes/no scale, with positive responses to any question denoting abuse. it was created to detect abuse perpetrated against pregnant women. the screening tool has been tested predominantly with young, poor women. it has acceptable test retest reliability. research instruments one instrument used in research on family violence is the conflict tactics scale (cts). two versions have been developed from the original cts: the cts2 (an expanded and modified version of the original cts) and the ctspc (cts parent-child). the cts is one of the most widely criticized domestic violence measurement instruments due to its exclusion of context variables and motivational factors in understanding acts of violence. the national institute of justice cautions that the cts may not be appropriate for ipv research "because it does not measure control, coercion, or the motives for conflict tactics." the index of spousal abuse, popular in medical settings, is a 30-item self-report scale created from the cts. another assessment used in research to measure ipv is the severity of violence against women scales (svaws). this scale measures how often a woman experiences violent behaviors by her partner. "femme battant son mari"; albrecht dürer causes attitudes research based on the ambivalent sexism theory found that individuals who endorse sexist attitudes show a higher acceptance of myths that justify intimate partner violence compared to those who do not. both students and adults with a more traditional perception of gender roles are more likely to blame the victim for the abuse than those who hold more non-traditional conceptions. researchers rollero and tartaglia found that two dimensions of ambivalent sexism are particularly predictive of violence myth: hostility toward women and benevolence toward men. they both contribute to legitimizing partner violence and this, in turn, leads to undervaluing the seriousness of the abuse. various studies have been conducted that link beliefs in myths of romantic love to greater probability of cyber-control perpetration toward the partner in youths aged 18 to 30, and a higher degree of justifying intimate partner violence in adults. myths of romantic love include beliefs in the power of love to cope all kind of difficulties, the need of having a romantic relationship to be happy, the belief in jealousy as a sign of love, the perception of love as suffering, and the existence of our soul mate who is our only one true love. demographics a notice from the national institute of justice noted that women who were more likely to experience intimate partner violence had some common demographic factors. women who had children by age 21 were twice as likely to be victims of intimate partner violence as women who were not mothers at that age. men who had children by age 21 were more than three times as likely to be people who abuse compared to men who were not fathers at that age. many male abusers are also substance abusers. more than two-thirds of males who commit or attempt homicide against a partner used alcohol, drugs, or both during the incident; less than one-fourth of the victims did. the lower the household income, the higher the reported intimate partner violence rates. intimate partner violence impairs a woman's capacity to find employment. a study of women who received afdc benefits found that domestic violence was associated with a general pattern of reduced stability of employment finally, many victims had mental health troubles. almost half of the women reporting serious domestic violence also meet the criteria for major depression; 24 percent suffer from posttraumatic stress disorder, and 31 percent from anxiety. types michael p. johnson argues for four major types of intimate partner violence (also known as "johnson's typology"), which is supported by subsequent research and evaluation, as well as independent researchers. distinctions are made among the types of violence, motives of perpetrators, and the social and cultural context based upon patterns across numerous incidents and motives of the perpetrator. the united states centers for disease control (cdc) also divides domestic violence into types. elaine storkey in her comprehensive analysis, scars across humanity ivp academic 2018, argues that intimate partner violence is one aspect of a global manifestation of violence against women. other examples she cites are selective abortion, female genital mutilation, early, enforced marriage, honour killings, rape, trafficking, prostitution and sexual violence in war. intimate terrorism intimate terrorism, or coercive controlling violence (ccv), occurs when one partner in a relationship, typically a man, uses coercive control and power over the other partner, using threats, intimidation, and isolation. ccv relies on severe psychological abuse for controlling purposes; when physical abuse occurs it too is severe. in such cases, "ne partner, usually a man, controls virtually every aspect of the victim's, usually a woman's, life." johnson reported in 2001 that 97% of the perpetrators of intimate terrorism were men. intimate partner violence may involve sexual, sadistic control, economic, physical, emotional and psychological abuse. intimate terrorism is more likely to escalate over time, not as likely to be mutual, and more likely to involve serious injury. the victims of one type of abuse are often the victims of other types of abuse. severity tends to increase with multiple incidents, especially if the abuse comes in many forms. if the abuse is more severe, it is more likely to have chronic effects on victims because the long-term effects of abuse tend to be cumulative. because this type of violence is most likely to be extreme, survivors of intimate terrorism are most likely to require medical services and the safety of shelters. consequences of physical or sexual intimate terrorism include chronic pain, gastrointestinal and gynecological problems, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and death. other mental health consequences are anxiety, substance abuse, and low-self esteem. abusers are more likely to have witnessed abuse as children than those who engage in situational couple violence. intimate terrorism batterers include two types: "generally-violent-antisocial" and "dysphoric-borderline". the first type includes people with general psychopathic and violent tendencies. the second type includes people who are emotionally dependent on the relationship. violence by an individual against their intimate partner is often done as a way for controlling the partner, even if this kind of violence is not the most frequent. violent resistance violent resistance (vr), a form of self-defense, is violence perpetrated by victims against their partners who have exerted intimate terrorism against them. within relationships of intimate terrorism and violent resistance, 96% of the violent resisters are women. vr can occur as an instinctive reaction in response to an initial attack or a defense mechanism after prolonged instances of violence. this form of resistance can sometimes become fatal if the victim feels as though their only way out is to kill their partner. situational couple violence situational couple violence, also called common couple violence, is not connected to general control behavior, but arises in a single argument where one or both partners physically lash out at the other. this is the most common form of intimate partner violence, particularly in the western world and among young couples, and involves women and men nearly equally. among college students, johnson found it to be perpetrated about 44% of the time by women and 56% of the time by men. johnson states that situational couple violence involves a relationship dynamic "in which conflict occasionally gets 'out of hand,' leading usually to 'minor' forms of violence, and rarely escalating into serious or life-threatening forms of violence." in situational couple violence, acts of violence by men and women occur at fairly equal rates, with rare occurrences of injury, and are not committed in an attempt to control a partner. it is estimated that approximately 50% of couples experience situational couple violence in their relationships. situational couple violence involves: mode: mildly aggressive behavior such as throwing objects, ranging to more aggressive behaviors such as pushing, slapping, biting, hitting, scratching, or hair pulling. frequency: less frequent than partner terrorism, occurring once in a while during an argument or disagreement. severity: milder than intimate terrorism, very rarely escalates to more severe abuse, generally does not include injuries that were serious or that caused one partner to be admitted to a hospital. mutuality: violence may