The Nonlinear Effect of Informal Social Control on Repeat Intimate Partner Violence Victimization

Abstract

Prior research has examined the effects of neighborhood context on intimate partner violence (IPV) with mixed results. While most studies find that neighborhood disadvantage is positively associated with risk of IPV, the effects are less consistent for characteristics such as social ties and informal social control. One possible explanation for these mixed findings draws from theoretical and empirical literature arguing that a high level of collective efficacy can aid in the control of criminal behavior, but it can also deter residents from acting against crime committed by neighbors. This suggests the possibility of a nonlinear effect of collective efficacy where the risk of IPV may be high in areas with very low levels of collective efficacy because of the inability of neighborhoods to collectively control residents, but it may also be high in areas with very high levels of collective efficacy where residents are less willing to report on the criminal behavior of fellow residents. We test this possibility using survey data for female victims of IPV in Chicago merged with neighborhood characteristics. Findings suggest that the risk of repeat victimization is highest in areas with either very high or very low levels of informal social control.

Increasing Screening for Intimate Partner Violence and Reproductive Coercion: Understanding Provider Motivations

“…This also acted as a motivation for screening and intervention in that the providers recognized the potential for prevention of both IPV and/or reproductive coercion, as well as for long-term impact on the lives of their clients through empowerment and restoration of personal agency. The potential for such impact has been suggested in previous studies that document the increase in risk for further abuse after an initial abusive experience (Valentine et al, 2016), and in those that suggest long-term mental and physiological effects of IPV and/or reproductive coercion (Burton et al, 2016; Humphreys et al, 2012; Park et al, 2016).…”

Investing in Neighborhoods: The Mitigating Role of Home Mortgage Loans on Intimate Partner Violence

“…Women may hide in their own homes becoming increasingly isolated, and the financial commitments associated with homeownership may make it more challenging to leave abusive situations. Indeed, Valentine et al (2019) found an increased likelihood of repeat victimization in neighborhoods with high homeownership rates, suggesting women may be trapped with an abuser or an unwillingness of longer-term homeowners to get involved in domestic matters.…”

Factors Associated with Revictimization in Intimate Partner Violence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Thus, in the case of Stein et al [14], they used the word re-engagement, as Cattaneo and Goodman [6] had previously used. Frisch and MacKenzie [15] preferred to use the term chronic victimization, and Valentine, Stults, and Hasbrouck [16] opted for repeat abuse. Regardless of the term used, only one study provided an explicit definition of revictimization [14] (see Appendix B).…”