Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant public health concern. To date, risk factor research has not differentiated physical violence that leads to injury and/or fear (i.e., clinically significant IPV; CS-IPV) from general physical IPV. Isolating risk relations is necessary to best inform prevention and treatment efforts. The current study used an ecological framework and evaluated relations of likely risk factors within individual, family, workplace, and community levels with both CS-IPV and general IPV to determine whether they were related to one type of IPV, both, or neither for both men and women. Probable risk and promotive factors from multiple ecological levels of influence were selected from the literature and assessed, along with CS-IPV and general IPV, via an anonymous, web-based survey. The sample comprised US Air Force (AF) active duty members and civilian spouses (total N = 36,861 men; 24,331 women) from 82 sites worldwide. Relationship satisfaction, age, and alcohol problems were identified as unique risk factors (in the context of the 23 other risk factors examined) across IPV and CS-IPV for men and women. Other unique risk factors were identified that differed in prediction of IPV and CS-IPV. The results suggest a variety of both established and novel potential foci for indirectly targeting partner aggression and clinically-significant IPV by improving people's risk profiles at the individual, family, workplace, and community levels. Aggr. Behav. 41:227–241, 2015.
- ecological model
- intimate partner violence
- partner abuse
- risk factor
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)