The Significant Frequency and Impact of Stealth (Nonviolent) Gender-Based Abuse Among College Women

The prevalence, incidence, and impact of the gender-based abuse (GBA) of college women have been increasingly documented since the 1980s, with growing precision in the measurements and expanding identification of tactics. Although there is an obvious class bias in focusing on college women (compared to women of similar ages not attending college), it is important to address GBA among this population as they are at serious risk of sexual abuse (particularly incapacitated rape), intimate partner abuse (IPA), and stalking. This article addresses the stealth nature of the nonviolent GBAs of college women and how these abuses frequently operate under the radar of acknowledgment by society, the abusers, campus officials, the criminal legal system, and sometimes, the survivors.

The influence of spirituality on service utilization and satisfaction for women residing in a domestic violence shelter

Little is known about the influence of spirituality on service utilization and satisfaction among women survivors of intimate partner abuse (IPA). The purpose of this study was to examine differences between shelter and faith-based service utilization and satisfaction in a shelter sample (N = 73). Multiple regression techniques were used. The findings suggest that survivors with higher spirituality were more likely to utilize faith-based resources than shelters. Those who experienced greater IPA reported dissatisfaction with faith-based resources. These results suggest that spirituality should be incorporated into shelter services to meet survivors' spiritual needs, and faith-based services should adequately address IPA.

Power relations in qualitative research

This article focuses on the tensions between the commitment to power redistribution of the qualitative paradigm and the ethical and methodological complexity inherent in clinical research. Qualitative inquiry, in general, though there are significant variations between its different paradigms and traditions, proposes to reduce power differences and encourages disclosure and authenticity between researchers and participants. It clearly departs from the traditional conception of quantitative research, whereby the researcher is the ultimate source of authority and promotes the participants' equal participation in the research process. But it is precisely this admirable desire to democratize the research process, and the tendency to question traditional role boundaries, that raises multiple ethical dilemmas and serious methodological challenges. In this article, we offer a conceptual frame for addressing questions of power distribution in qualitative research through a developmental analysis of power relations across the different stages of the research process. We discuss ethical and methodological issues.

Improving services to African American survivors of IPV: from the voices of recipients of culturally specific services

Researchers have found that many services designed to assist survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) take a mainstream, color-blind approach to their interventions. Several authors have indicated a need for culturally specific IPV interventions to adequately address the issue of IPV within the African American community. This exploratory study was designed to ascertain, from African American survivors, what their experiences were with mainstream IPV interventions and how their experience with a culturally specific domestic violence agency was different from those experiences. Overall, women described mostly problematic experiences with mainstream services and positive experiences with the culturally specific agency.

A qualitative investigation of Johnson's typology

The couple typology described by Johnson and Ferraro (2000) provided the framework for this analysis of narrative accounts of couples in violent heterosexual relationships. Participants were 15 bidirectionally violent couples who were interviewed separately for about 1 hour each. Modified analytic induction guided the analyses. We categorized the violence in the relationships of these 15 couples in the following ways: 11 were categorized as "common couple" violence; two as "violent resistance"; one as "mutual violent control"; and one couple was categorized as what we named "pseudo-intimate terrorism." We present rich descriptions of each category and motivations for and impacts of aggressive behavior as well as our rationale for classifying couples the way we did. Implications for intervention and future research are discussed.