INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE (IPV) IN THE COLLEGE POPULATION:
DYNAMICS AND IMPLICATIONS
A Thesis
Presented to the faculty of the Division of Social Work
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements of the degree of
MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK
by
Amelia Louise Stults
SPRING
2013
INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE (IPV) IN THE COLLEGE POPULATION:
DYNAMICS AND IMPLICATIONS
A Thesis
by
Amelia Louise Stults
Approved by:
___________________________________, Committee Chair
Dr. Jude Antonyappan
___________________________________, Second Reader
Dr. David Nylund
___________________________________
Date
ii
Student: Amelia Louise Stults
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University
format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to
be awarded for the thesis.
___________________________________, Graduate Coordinator ____________
Dale Russell, Ed.D., LCSW
Date
Division of Social Work
iii
Abstract
of
INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE (IPV) IN THE COLLEGE POPULATION:
DYNAMICS AND IMPLICATIONS
by
Amelia Louise Stults
This study examined the perspectives of Victim’s Advocates who work with
victims/survivors of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) to understand the impacts that IPV
has on the academic progress and health of the victims/survivors. Professionals (N=35)
working in the California State University and University of California systems who
provide direct advocacy to students experiencing IPV and/or sexual violence were
surveyed using a non probability purposive sampling method. Study findings indicate
that IPV is a public health issue that has the potential to negatively impact academic
performance with concurrent mental and physical health issues for victims/survivors.
The study findings also lend evidence to the fact that despite the college population’s
access to victim advocacy, there are limited and inconsistent education and services. The
outcomes of this study evidence the need for programs targeted at improving the
academic progress of students who experience IPV while increasing the resources and
targeted service delivery through education and early identification.
___________________________________, Committee Chair
Jude Antonyappan, Ph.D.
___________________________________
Date
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to acknowledge and thank the Sacramento State Division
of Social Work, especially, Dr. Jude Antonyappan for her undying support, motivation
and commitment to this topic. Also, the author would like to thank Dr. David Nylund for
his generous support and second reading. In addition, the author would like to thank
Jessica Heskin, M.A. for her time, support and commitment to advocacy, research and
victims’ rights. The author would also like to thank the staff of the Sacramento State
Student Health & Counseling Services Health & Wellness Promotion Department for
their dedication to the health and safety of Sacramento State students.
The author would like to personally thank her family and friends for their
continued support and patience through this process.
Most importantly, the author would like to dedicate this research to
victims/survivors of IPV. The author is in awe of their courage and bravery as they fight
toward lives of safety and security.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………………………v
List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………..ix
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………..x
Chapter
1. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM…………….……………………………………. 1
Background of the Problem…………………………………………………….....2
Definition of Terms……………………………………………………….……….8
Theoretical Framework…………………………………………………………..11
Assumptions……………………………………………………………………...17
Limitations……………………………………………………………………….18
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE…………………………………………………………20
Introduction………………………………………………………………………20
Prevalence and Incidence of IPV Among the College Population in the United
States …………………………………………………………………………….20
Impact of IPV: Mental and Physical Health………………………….………….23
Inadequacy of the Level of Preparedness in the Medical and Criminal Justice
Communities: Short and Long-Term Consequences of IPV…………… 26
vi
Risk Factors of IPV in the College Population…………………………………..30
Service Provision and Advocacy………….……………………………………..34
Gaps in the Literature…………………………………………………………….37
3. METHODS………...………………………………………………………………….39
Study Design…………………………………………………………………......39
Study Population………………………………………………………………....40
Study Sample…………………………………………………………………….41
Study Questions………………………………………………………………….41
Human Subjects Protocol………………………………………………………...42
Data Collection Process……………………..…………………………………...43
Data Analysis Plan……………………………………………………………….44
4. STUDY FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION..…………………………………………..46
Misogynistic Cultural Factors…….……………………………………………...46
Teen Dating Violence…………………………………………………………....48
Frequently Reported Types of IPV Abuse in the College Population……….......50
Barriers to Academic Success in Higher Education……………………………..53
Level of Preparedness of College Campuses in Combatting IPV………….……57
Education as a Measure of Prevention…………………………………………...63
Service Provision Challenges……………………………………………………66
vii
5. CONCLUSION, SUMMARY, AND RECOMMENDATIONS……………………...72
Study Conclusions……………………………………………………………….72
Recommendations……………………………………………………………..…76
Implications for Social Work…………………………………………………….80
Appendix A. Human Subjects Approval Letter………………………………………….82
References………………………………………………………………………………..83
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Tables
Page
1.
Frequencies of specified types of IPV.……………………………........………..51
2.
Focus of prevention services on college campuses………..……………………..60
3.
Professionals’ perspectives on campus educational focus…………………….....68
4.
Was the trained victim’s advocate the first point of contact?................................69
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures
Page
1.
Perception of influence on academic performance ……………………………...54
2.
Perception of campus efforts to combat IPV…………...………...……………...63
3.
Areas for improvement…………………………………………………………..65
4.
Professionals’ perspectives on campus educational focus……………………….68
5.
First point of contact…………………………………………………………..…70
6.
Duration of abusive relationship upon service request…………………………..71
x
1
Chapter 1
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
College is an important transitional period in which students may experience
academic barriers or distractions such as employment, extracurricular club memberships,
family and parenting commitments and financial adjustments. In addition to the expected
college stressors or barriers to academic success, some students unfortunately also
experience intimate partner violence (IPV). Although the writer has a great deal of
experience within the field of college victim advocacy for those experiencing IPV, there
is limited literature available about this topic.
Intimate partner violence has the potential to create serious psychological,
physical and sexual violence and therefore is an urgent public health issue. The Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that one in four women have been
the victims of severe physical IPV while one in seven men have experienced severe
physical IPV (2010). Intimate partner violence is without a doubt a serious and urgent
public health issue which has the potential to create barriers to the academic success of
college students. This chapter will focus on the background of the problem, the
theoretical framework, assumptions, limitations and definitions of the terms that will be
utilized in this thesis.
The purpose of this study is to understand the extent to which IPV acts as an
obstacle in college students’ academic success. Although there is limited information in
the body of literature related to IPV in the college population, there are published studies
which examine IPV in more general terms. These studies will be reviewed and
2
considered in the next chapter in order to have a better understanding of the prevalence
and incidence of IPV in the United States, the impact of IPV in terms of physical and
mental health changes, the inadequacy of the level of preparedness in the medical and
criminal justice communities, the risk factors of IPV for college students, service
provisions and advocacy efforts and the gaps in the existing literature.
Additionally, this study is being conducted in an effort to document the issue of
IPV in the college population. Anecdotal evidence collected by the writer also shows
that IPV is not correlated directly with an experience that the general population would
connect to college students. Through college students having access to victim advocacy
services and proper medical and criminal justice resources, there is the potential to
increase the level of health and safety. By providing a safer and more victim supportive
college environment, it is possible that the findings of this study may assist in the
retention rate of future college students who are experiencing IPV during their higher
education academic endeavors. The researcher will explore the role of victim advocacy
in assisting students in reaching their academic goals.
Background of Problem
According to the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS)
conducted by the CDC, it is estimated that IPV affects more than 12 million Americans
each year. Although IPV is perpetrated on both men and women, women are
disproportionately impacted by IPV. Not only do women experience higher rates of IPV,
they also experience higher rates of sexual violence and stalking. This report estimates
that one in five women had been raped in her lifetime while one in 71 men have been
3
raped in his lifetime. Additionally, one in six women had been stalked in her lifetime
while one in 19 men had been stalked in his lifetime. In terms of IPV, one in four women
had been the victim of severe physical violence at the hands of an intimate partner in her
lifetime and in contrast one in seven men had experienced severe physical violence by an
intimate partner in his lifetime (2010).
The NISVS document titled Highlights of 2010 Findings also found that,
81% of women who experienced rape, stalking or physical violence by an
intimate partner reported significant short or long term impacts related to the
violence experienced in this relationship such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD) symptoms and injury while 35% of men report such impacts of their
experiences (NISVS, 2010, p. 1).
Additionally, this study found that women who suffered in her lifetime from sexual
violence or stalking by any perpetrator (even if not intimate) or experienced physical
violence by an intimate partner were more likely than women whom did not experience
violence to be diagnosed with asthma, diabetes and irritable bowel syndrome. Both men
and women who experienced IPV were more likely to self report frequent headaches,
chronic pain, trouble sleeping, activity limitations, poor overall physical health and
mental health in comparison to men and women who did not experience IPV (CDC,
2010).
This study also exhibited that women and men affected by IPV reported
experiencing different types of violent acts. The NISVS report showed that women
report the following types of violence: physical violence only (57%), physical violence
4
and stalking (14%), rape, physical violence and stalking (12%), rape and physical
violence (9%), rape only (4%) and stalking only (3%). Men reported the following types
of violence: physical violence only (92%) and physical violence and stalking (6%) (CDC,
2010).
Additionally, IPV is extremely complex, especially for victims who are female,
due to the early perpetration of violence. The NISVS report showed that approximately
80% of women experienced their first rape before age 25, 30% between the ages of 11-17
years and 12% before the age of 10. Additionally, approximately 35% of women who
were raped before the age of 18 were also raped as adults as compared to 14% of women
who did not experience rape as minors. In contrast, 28% of men who were victims of
rape were first raped when they were 10 years or younger (CDC, 2010). It is important to
note that anecdotal evidence of western society dictates that men may report IPV and
rape with less frequency due to rigid gender expectations, masculinity standards and fear
of reporting. Even with the aforementioned factors, women continue to be
disproportionately affected by IPV and violence in general.
Another factor to consider when isolating for the gender of the perpetrator of the
IPV is the level of injury associated with the injurious behavior. In a review of 62
empirical studies conducted from 1996-2006 with the focus of IPV in heterosexual
adolescents, college students and adults, research found that male perpetrated violence
statistically speaking is more injurious for women. Additionally, when considering levels
of lethality, it was found that women are more likely to be killed as a result of IPV when
their perpetrator is male (Williams et al., 2008).
5
When considering gender of the IPV perpetrator, it is important to consider levels
of reporting of violence. Research indicates that women commit the same amount or
more IPV as men although data suggests that women who perpetrate IPV against men
experience more violent or frequent IPV victimization than those who do not perpetrate
violence against a male partner (Williams et al., 2008).
The available body of literature exhibits that IPV in the college population is an
area that has not been sufficiently researched. One of the most prominent and respected
national college health surveys, the American College Health Association’s (ACHA)
National College Health Assessment (NCHA) surveys college students about unhealthy
relationships, but does not explicitly ask about domestic violence or IPV. This survey
asks college students nationally about factors which create academic impacts which is
defined in the NCHA Spring 2010 Executive Summary as, “received a lower grade on an
exam, or an important project; received a lower grade in a course; received an incomplete
or dropped the course; or experienced a significant disruption in thesis, dissertation,
research or practicum work;” (ACHA-NCHA, p. 5). This list includes a variety of factors
ranging from allergies to internet use/computer games, but does not list IPV. This list
includes “relationship difficulties,” but does not differentiate for violence in the
relationship. The Spring 2010 Executive Summary reports that 11% of college students
nationwide
As we live in a heteronormative society, heterosexual females are more often
targeted in the medical community for IPV screenings and interventions. Although it is
important to serve the heterosexual female population, it is also vital that other
6
populations receive focused and researched attention and care. The lesbian, gay, bisexual
and transgender (LGBT) population experiences similar prevalence rates of IPV, yet
receives less recognition of this victimization. In the National Violence Against Women
(NVAW) survey, it was found that 21.5% of men and 35.4% of women who reported
cohabitation with a same-sex partner had experienced physical abuse in his/her lifetime
while the same survey found that 7.1% of men and 20.4% women who reported
cohabitation with an opposite sex partner experienced physical abuse in their lifetime. In
addition, a survey conducted with 3000 self reported gay men found that over the course
of five years, 22% of survey participants experienced physical violence and 5.1% of
participants experienced sexual violence (Ard & Makadon, 2011).
Transgender individuals experienced even higher rates of IPV as compared to
lesbian and gay individuals. In a survey conducted with 1600 individuals in
Massachusetts it was found that 34.6% of transgender individuals surveyed experienced
physical abuse by a partner as compared to 14% for lesbian and gay individuals. This
study exhibits that IPV is not siloed in the experience of heterosexual women in the
United States, but rather is a common experience which does not discriminate based on
gender or sexuality (Ard & Makadon, 2011).
Although IPV acts appear to be similar between the LGBT population and the
heterosexual population, there are key differences and aspects which should receive
special attention and training by social service providers. One of the most significant acts
of IPV by an abusive partner which is unique to the LGBT population is the act of
“outing” his/her partner. Research indicates that by “outing” a partner, the perpetrator
7
has the potential to be abusive in and of itself, but also may act as a barrier to the victim
receiving important services. Additionally, an abusive partner may threaten “outing”
his/her LGBT partner in an effort to put grave fear of judgment, discrimination or
family/social support (Ard & Makadon, 2011).
In addition, many LGBT individuals have unfortunately experienced past
psychological or physical trauma through family interactions, hate crimes or bullying and
this past trauma has the potential to leave individuals vulnerable and less likely to seek
formal help within their communities. In the case that LGBT victims do access services,
the services may not be available or may not be culturally sensitive or appropriate.
Additionally, as IPV is commonly understood to be a crime perpetrated by male partners,
victims who experienced violence at the hands of a female perpetrator may be retraumatized by social services providers (Ard & Makadon, 2011).
Also, IPV is not isolated to the adult population. Research indicates that IPV is
common in adolescent and young girls and that the age of first perpetration continues to
lower. The CDC estimates that between 12-20% of middle and high school aged students
have experienced physical or psychological abuse in dating relationships. The most at
risk group for teen dating violence is African American female adolescents. Research
shows that the experience of teen dating violence, “has been associated with increased
participation in health risk behaviors, including sexual intercourse, attempted suicide,
episodic heavy drinking, and physical fighting” (Williams et al., 2008, p. 228).
8
Intimate partner violence is a complex and potentially lethal experience for
heterosexual women and men, lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgendered individuals of
diverse ethnic cultures, socioeconomic levels and age ranges. The complexity of this
issue may be heightened as individuals enter institutions of higher education, which may
threaten the perpetrators’ feelings of power and control. Colleges and universities have
certain structures in place to increase the academic success and retention of students and
as IPV is a severe public health issue which can have debilitating and fatal consequences,
it is of the utmost importance that these institutes of higher education also provide
support to students who are victims/survivors of IPV.
Definition of Terms
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV): According to the CDC’s Intimate Partner Violence:
Definitions, “IPV can vary in frequency and severity. It occurs on a continuum, ranging
from one hit that may or may not impact the victim to chronic, severe battering” (2010).
There are four main types of IPV: physical violence, sexual violence, threats of physical
or sexual violence and psychological/emotional violence (CDC, 2010). This term is used
instead of domestic violence as it is more encompassing as it includes both violent acts
and threats of violent acts.
Physical Violence: According to the CDC’s Intimate Partner Violence: Definitions:
physical violence is the intentional use of physical force with the potential for
causing death, disability, injury, or harm. Physical violence includes, but is not
9
limited to, scratching; pushing; shoving; throwing; grabbing; biting; choking;
shaking; slapping; punching; burning; use of a weapon; and use of restraints or
one's body, size, or strength against another person (2010).
Sexual Violence: According to the CDC’s Intimate Partner Violence: Definitions:
sexual violence is divided into three categories: 1) use of physical force to compel
a person to engage in a sexual act against his or her will, whether or not the act is
completed; 2) attempted or completed sex act involving a person who is unable to
understand the nature or condition of the act, to decline participation, or to
communicate unwillingness to engage in the sexual act, e.g., because of illness,
disability, or the influence of alcohol or other drugs, or because of intimidation or
pressure; and 3) abusive sexual contact (2010).
Threats of physical or sexual violence: According to the CDC’s Intimate Partner
Violence: Definitions, “threats of physical or sexual violence use words, gestures,
or weapons to communicate the intent to cause death, disability, injury, or
physical harm” (2010).
Psychological/emotional violence: According to the CDC’s Intimate Partner Violence:
Definitions, psychological/emotional violence involves threats and can include a
perpetrator humiliating, controlling, withholding information and purposefully
embarrassing the victim. These acts have the potential to cause the victim to
become isolated from his/her family and/or friends. This type of violence also
10
includes the perpetrator denying the victim access to money and basic resources.
Psychological/emotional violence occurs when there has been previous physical
or sexual violence or threats of physical or sexual violence (2010).
Perpetrator: According to the NVIS Survey of the CDC perpetrator is defined as a,
“person who inflicts the violence or abuse or causes the violence or about to be
inflicted on the victim” (2010).
Victim/Survivor: The person who is intimately involved with the perpetrator and is
affected by the perpetrator through abusive acts. This person would currently be
intimately involved with the perpetrator or could no longer be involved with the
perpetrator. The definition of victim/survivor is based on the definition of
“intimate partners” as defined by the NVIS Survey of the CDC. This includes:
current spouses (including common-law spouses), current non-marital partners,
dating partners, including first date (heterosexual or same-sex),
boyfriends/girlfriends (heterosexual or same sex), former marital partners,
divorced spouses, former common-law spouses, separated spouses, former nonmarital partners, former dates (heterosexual or same-sex) or former
boyfriends/girlfriends (heterosexual or same-sex) (2010).
It is important to note that a victim/survivor may be living with the perpetrator or may not
be living with the perpetrator.
Victim advocate: A trained individual who maintains confidentiality and works with
victims/survivors of IPV.
11
Teen dating violence: According to the CDC’s Teen Dating Violence Information,
teen dating violence is defined as the physical, sexual, or psychological/emotional
violence within a dating relationship, as well as stalking. It can occur in person or
electronically and may occur between a current or former dating partner. You
may have heard several different words used to describe teen dating violence
(2012).
Theoretical Framework
Bandura’s Self Efficacy Theory:
Theoretical assumptions: Bandura’s Self Efficacy Theory was developed through
his work of self-regulation of behavior and the motivation, affect, cognitions and
performance surrounding these behaviors. Bandura considered self-efficacy in the
context of many different situations and considered how self-efficacy can be further
strengthened and developed depending on the situation (Washington & Moxley, 2013).
Application of theory to IPV: With a focus on self efficacy, it is possible for an
individual to reframe and therefore better understand the trauma or life circumstance in
order to utilize one’s internal strengths and abilities. In the context of IPV, self efficacy
has the potential to assist victims/survivors in being able to move towards safety and
other positive outcomes. This theory has the potential to assist the client in harnessing
his/her own power and control in order to begin to escape a violent relationship and
environment.
12
Classical Strain Theory:
Theoretical assumptions: Merton’s Classical Strain Theory of 1938, “proposes that
a person unable to meet cultural expectations due to forces outside of his or her control
will be more likely to commit a crime that someone who could meet cultural expectations
within normal bounds” (Mason & Smithey, p. 976, 2012). It is expected that individuals
will experience strain fairly regularly while attempting to meet cultural expectations and
therefore this theory considers adaptation to strain as an innovative strategy to meet
cultural expectations. Arguably, one may consider IPV to be a form of innovative
adaptation (Mason & Smithey, 2012).
Application of theory to IPV: College students may experience inherent strain while
pursing a college degree simply through academic rigors, but it is important to consider
that in addition to this strain, students may also experience strain outside school.
Through utilizing this theory, it is also important to consider students’ employment,
extracurricular activities and intimate partnerships. This theory can be utilized in the
context of IPV through simply considering the strain present when one partner is placing
focus on activities and goals outside of the intimate partnership. In a study conducted by
Mason & Smithey, the effects of academic and interpersonal stress on intimate
relationships was examined by interviewing 142 college students. Results of this study
indicated that there is support for strain theory in predicting IPV among college students
and that more research may be able to eventually utilize strain as a causation factor
(2012).
13
Radical Feminist Theory:
Theoretical assumptions: The initial focus of feminism was primarily focused in
bringing an equitable system between men and women. Equality was considered to be an
important issue because initial movement and theoretical assumptions centered around
the idea that men and women were the same and therefore deserved to be treated the
same. The feminist movement then shifted in the 1970s to highlight the differences
between men and women and the movement divided into different interest areas. Radical
feminism focused on the concept that men are able to, “maintain their domination of
women through violence” (Featherstone & Trinder, p. 149, 1997). This theory assumes
that this male violence is a method for men to maintain power and control over the
victim/survivor (Featherstone & Trinder, 1997).
Application of theory to IPV: The roots of radical feminism are in second wave
feminism. As feminist theories developed and expanded, so did the view and role of IPV
within these theoretical subgroups. Feminist theory views the coercive control of men in
violent relationships as not a matter of individual acts, but a pattern of ongoing abuse.
Feminist theory as a whole considers the social injustices that arise from the abusive
partner utilizing his/her power through IPV acts in maintaining control over the
victim/survivor (Keeling & Fisher, 2012).
Akers’ Social Learning Theory:
Theoretical assumptions: The major theoretical elements of Akers’ Social Learning
Theory are imitation, definitions, differential associations and differential reinforcement.
This theory defines imitation as, “the extent to which one emulates the behavior of role
14
models” (Cochran, Sellers, Wiesbrock, & Palacios, 2011, p. 794). Further, the theory
defines role models as one that another person admires and has observed behavior from
the role model. The theory defines definitions as the attitudes and values that one holds
in terms of morals of the law and the level or degree of wrong in certain deviant/criminal
acts. The theory defines differential association as the influence of the attitudes and
behaviors of the individual’s romantic partner. Differential association applies to IPV in
that this part of the theory assumes that repetitive victimization of IPV is more likely at
the hands of those close to the victim/survivor. The theory defines differential
reinforcement as an individual finding the balance between cost and rewards associated
with certain behaviors. The theory assumes that individuals will more often continue
behaviors if the rewards of that behavior are greater than the costs associated with that
behavior (Cochran et al., 2011).
Application of theory to IPV: This theory applies to IPV in that the theory assumes
that those in intimate relationships who experience regular acts of violence by an intimate
partner are more likely to stay in their relationship if he/she views the relationship to be
more important than alternatives to the relationship, in example, leaving the relationship.
Although this concept may be difficult for some to understand, the victim or survivor
may feel that he/she is experiencing rewards of staying in the relationship such as,
“maintaining the relationship, place to live, and continued financial support for one’s self
and children and feeling loved by, wanted, and important to one’s partner” (Cochran et
al., 2011, p. 795). Additionally, a victim/survivor of IPV may experience less self
15
confidence and self worth after patterns of abuse and therefore may fear losing the
relationship due to, “diminished self-worth, shame and embarrassment, social
approbation, physical injury, and so on” (Cochran et al., 2011, p. 795).
In the context of repetitive IPV, this theory assumes that IPV victimization will be
more prevalent and frequent with victims/survivors who:
Have witnessed others they admire using aggression against a partner or tolerating
their partner’s use of aggression against them; Hold definitions that approve,
tolerate, only weakly disapprove, or are situationally neutralized with regard to
the use of partner violence; Associate with significant others who hold definitions
consistent with the use of partner violence and/or engage in partner violence
themselves; and Anticipate a greater balance of social and non-social rewards
than costs from tolerating partner violence (Cochran et al., 2011, p. 796).
Social Role Theory:
Theoretical assumptions: Social Role Theory evolved through the ideas and
preconceptions that individuals have about women and men and the scientifically derived
and documented data regarding sex differences in terms of social behavior and
personality. The social role theory, “argues that the beliefs that people hold about the
sexes are derived from observations of the role performances of men and women and thus
reflect the sexual division of labor and gender hierarchy of the society” (Eckes &
Trautner, 2000, p. 124). This theory assumes that the differences in the behavior of
women and men stem from the social roles that are culturally structured for women and
men through gender roles.
16
Application of theory to IPV: Understanding gender roles and the cultural context
surrounding gender roles is extremely important in better understanding the power and
control involved in an individual subscribing to a specific gender role. When considering
gender roles in heterosexual relationships, it is important to consider the role of
patriarchy. In patriarchal cultures, men may feel a sense of entitlement to control their
partner(s). An imbalance of power and control can lead a female partner to become
dependent upon the male partner and submissive. This dependence and submission may
place the female at risk for IPV (Karakurt, & Cumbie, 2012).
Transtheoretical/Stages of Change Model:
Theoretical assumptions: The transtheoretical/stage of change model was originally
created by Prochaska, DiClemente & Norcross in 1992 and assumes that, “individuals
pass through several stages of change when they are trying to modify their behavior:
precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance, termination, and
relapse" (Cismaru, & Lavack, 2011). This process of change can be utilized in the
context of both the victim and the perpetrator.
Application of theory to IPV: The application of the transtheoretical/stage of change
model can be applicable at all stages to both perpetrators and victims/survivors. In the
precontemplation stage, the individual (either perpetrator or victim/survivor) may begin
to notice public health violence prevention campaigns, but may not connect the
information in those campaigns directly to their lives. In the contemplation stage, both
parties may begin to see that their behavior or reaction to behaviors is problematic. This
is when the perpetrator or victim/survivor may begin the process of formal change.
17
During the preparation stage, the perpetrator or victim/survivor may begin to feel capable
of change and may even see that there are major benefits to the change (in example: the
perpetrator may begin mental health treatment or the victim/survivor may create a safety
plan in order to leave the relationship with the perpetrator). A longer duration of the
action stage for both the perpetrator and/or victim/survivor requires that each group sees
the benefits of their action (in example: batters’ treatment programs or minimal to no
contact with the perpetrator). In the case of violence occurring again, the perpetrator and
victim/survivor enter the relapse phase. The maintenance and termination phases can be
achieved when the relationship is violence free.
Assumptions
Assumptions which must be considered for this study include the fact that
professionals who work in the field of violence and sexual assault prevention,
intervention, education and advocacy generally have a deep and intimate understanding
of IPV, but may not be the only people who interface with the victim/survivor.
Therefore, it is possible to assume that those not trained in IPV may not be able to
effectively advocate for victims/survivors. The researcher assumes that there is stigma
associated with being a victim/survivor of IPV and therefore the researcher assumes that
not all victims/survivors are willing or able to report, find advocacy services and/or begin
to heal from their perpetration.
Another assumption of the study is that individuals experiencing IPV will
experience more barriers to academic success as compared to college students who do not
experience IPV. The researcher assumes that individuals come from diverse, complex
18
and unique cultural backgrounds and therefore experience college in a different ways.
The researcher does not assume that IPV is a heterosexual phenomenon that only occurs
between a male perpetrator and a female victim/survivor. The researcher considers
diversity in sexuality and gender expression.
Limitations
Limitations in the study center around the fact that the confidentiality of the
Human Subjects Protocol process allowed for only IPV advocates who work in the
college population to be surveyed. The researcher was unable to access survey
participants through this service provider definition as the researcher received feedback
from many individuals in the state of California who work with victims/survivors of IPV
in the college population that their job descriptions encompass sexual violence and not
IPV. After approval from the Research Advisor, the survey was distributed to all
California State University and University of California Women’s Resource/Gender
Equity Centers. This method provided the researcher with an appropriate level of survey
participation.
Other limitations are related to the small sample size and the fact that survey
respondents come from a non-random sample, limit the findings of this survey to be
generalized. Additionally, the term and definition of IPV is not widely understood and
utilized and therefore assumptions were made about what the terms IPV or domestic
violence mean. With continuing budget challenges, it is not possible for all campuses to
include IPV advocacy services and/or to maintain a women’s resource/gender equity
center. This study does not cover teen dating violence, although this topic is extremely
19
important. Teen dating violence needs to be covered in other studies as it is also a major
public health problem with negative implications for academic and social progress and is
highly related to IPV.
20
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Introduction
The purpose of this study is to understand the extent to which IPV acts as an
obstacle in achieving academic excellence and academic accomplishments for college
students. This study is being conducted in an effort to legitimize the issue of IPV in the
college population in order to increase the potential level of health and safety for college
students. It is possible that the data gathering in this study may assist in the retention rate
of future college students who are experiencing IPV during their academic endeavors.
This review of literature will explore major themes in the body of literature
pertaining to IPV in the college population. The major themes of this research study that
are presented in this chapter include the prevalence and incidence of IPV in the United
States, the prevalence and incidence of IPV in the College Population, the impact of IPV
on college students in terms of mental and physical health, inadequacy of level of
preparedness in the legal and medical community to understand short term and long term
consequences of IPV, potential risk factors of IPV for college students, the history of
victim advocacy in the college population and service provision & advocacy in the
college population. Finally, this review of literature will conclude with a description of
the gaps in the literature and an explanation of how this study will fill in those gaps.
Prevalence and Incidence of IPV Among the College Population in the United States
IPV is a serious yet preventable public health issue that pervades across cultures
(CDC, 2010). The college population is especially affected by IPV although there is
21
limited research of this population, especially in the context of the potential
challenges/barriers to academic success for students who are involved in IPV
relationships. In the United States, adolescent and college-aged women are especially
vulnerable to IPV through dating violence, acquaintance rape and date rape (Daley,
2001).
This literature review will mainly refer to women as the victims/survivors of IPV
as it is estimated that one in four women have been the victims of severe physical IPV
while one in seven men have experienced severe physical IPV (CDC, 2010). Therefore,
women are disproportionately affected by IPV and thus it is possible that additional
studies involving women as victims/survivors of IPV are necessary in working to solve
this serious public health disparity. Although there is some debate surrounding the gender
disparities and abuse, feminist research maintains that men compose a large majority of
the perpetrators of IPV and therefore women make up a majority of the victims of IPV.
A study conducted by Melton & Sillito found that 13% of reported IPV crimes involved a
female perpetrator while 87% involved male perpetrators (2012).
The American College Health Association’s (ACHA) Fall 2011 National College
Health Assessment (NCHA) surveyed both male and female college students about a
variety of health behavior. Of the male and female students surveyed, 9.7% reported
being in an emotionally abusive intimate relationship, 2.3% reported being in a physically
abusive intimate relationship and 1.7% reported being in a sexually abusive intimate
relationship within the 12 months preceding this survey. Additionally, 31% of male and
female students reported that within the last 12 months they experienced trauma in an
22
intimate relationship (2012). Intimate relationship issues and violence in intimate
relationships for college student nationwide created difficulty in individual academic
performance through, “receiving a lower grade on an exam, or an important project;
receiving a lower grade in the course; receiving an incomplete or dropped the course; or
experienced a significant disruption in thesis, dissertation, research, or practicum work”
(NCHA, 2012). It is significant to note that the NCHA Fall 2011 survey included both
male and female students and surveyed a total of 27, 774 students at 44 institutes of
higher education in the United States (2012).
The subject of this study is vital as IPV is a serious health issues for college
students who are involved in abusive relationships. A study conducted by Avant,
Swopes, Davis & Elhai suggests that IPV among college students has a strong association
with the development of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This study identified that
PTSD has not been studied in depth in the college population (2012). This will be an
important area of future research as IPV is a serious issue in the college population. In
relation to PTSD, a study was conducted to assess the functional health status of those
involved in IPV relationships investigated the severity of abuse, danger to the
victim/survivor and self-advocacy behaviors of victims/survivors. It was discovered that
with increased physical violence and psychological abuse there was a decrease in
physical health functioning and when the victim perceived danger in his/her relationship
both his/her physical and mental health functioning decreased. Victims who increased
their use of self-advocacy experienced lower mental health functioning, but did not
experience changes in their physical health functioning. This study concluded that IPV
23
creates more significant issues with mental health functioning for victims (Straus, et al.,
2009). It could be deduced from this study that a potential future intervention for
victims/survivors of IPV will be to increase in access to mental health treatment.
Impact of IPV: Mental and Physical Health
Physical and sexual violence can impact the physical and mental health and well
being of victims/survivors of IPV. Although violence can create physical and mental
health issues, limited research has been conducted about the psychological impact of IPV
on the victim/survivor. Research indicates that IPV creates significant negative impacts
for the mental and physical health of women and therefore IPV is considered to be a
worldwide public health problem (Pico-Alfonso, 2005). Additionally, IPV is considered
to be a, “complex and prevalent social problem associated with significant impairment in
the physical and psychological health of victims” (Loke, Wan & Hayter, p. 2336, 2012).
Research shows that women who are experiencing IPV often experience low selfesteem, depression and suicidal ideations (Loke, Wan & Hayter, 2012). Research also
indicates that current violence can be strongly associated with psychological issues and
also with the use of psychoactive pharmaceutical drugs by the victim/survivor in order to
cope with mental health issues. Additionally, research suggests that victims/survivors
experiencing only psychological abuse still experience health issues even in the absence
of sexual and physical violence. In a study conducted in Italy with a self-administered
questionnaire 444 women were asked to respond to a questionnaire while at their family
practice doctor. Results of this research shows that victims/survivors of IPV are six times
more likely to be depressed and to self-report that they are in poor health. Additionally,
24
victims/survivors of IPV also self reported that they are four times more likely to
consume psychoactive pharmaceutical drugs than women who are not experiencing IPV.
It should also be noted that through this study it was found that women who had in the
past experienced IPV and were no longer at risk for IPV still reported psychological
distress (Romito, Turan & De Marchi, 2005).
Although any form of trauma or violence has the potential to create physical and
mental health issues for victims of that particular trauma or violence, research indicates
that IPV increases the impact of physical and mental health issues. This increase can be
attributed to the fact that, “violence often involves a combination of abusive acts of
physical, psychological and/or sexual kind; it usually has a progressive and chronic
character; it occurs repeatedly and intermittent, within the home and the person whom
one lives with” (Rivas-Diez, p. 1478, 2012).
Research also indicates that there is a clear link between IPV and the risk for
developing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The Diagnostic Statistical Manual IVText Revision (DSM IV-TR) of the Associated Psychological Association (APA) states
that the criteria for PTSD includes a person being exposed to a traumatic event in which
the person experienced intense fear, helplessness or horror, that the traumatic event
occurred persistently and was reexperienced through thoughts of the traumatic event,
dreams of the event, feeling that the traumatic event is reoccurring, psychological
distress, avoidance of places or people associated with the traumatic event, avoidance of
thoughts and feelings and inability to remember details of the time that the trauma
occurred along with other specific criteria. Through a research study that compared
25
women who were experiencing IPV and those who were not experiencing IPV it was
found that women experiencing IPV had a highly elevated risk to developing PTSD. It
was found that this elevated risk could be attributed to a culmination of the multiple
traumatic events that generally occur while victims/survivors experience IPV (PicoAlfonso, 2005).
Research indicates that IPV creates serious physical health issues irrespective of
whether there was physical violence that directly created physical health issues or
psychological violence led to physical health issues. It is estimated that three to 17
percent of women in the Untied States experience some type of violence during
pregnancy creating serious, negative health outcomes for both the mother and unborn
child. Some of the major negative physical health outcomes for the fetus or infant
include the potential for premature birth, low infant birth weight and fetal injury or death.
For mothers, some of the major negative physical health outcomes may include poor
health, persistent kidney infections, high blood pressure, urinary-tract infections, sexually
transmitted infections, insufficient weight gain during pregnancy, death and placenta
abruptions. Also, it is important to note that women who are victims of IPV often begin
prenatal care later than those who are not experiencing IPV (McMahon & Armstrong,
2012).
In addition to mental and physical health symptoms, research also shows that
there is another form of IPV: interference by the perpetrator with the victim/survivor
receiving health care. In a study conducted at an outpatient medical clinic, it was found
that with women who reported past-year physical abuse women had increased rates of
26
poor health overall. This study suggests that partner interference is a significant issue for
women experiencing IPV and creates a barrier to overall physical health. The study
recommends that health care providers need to consider IPV in patients who are
noncompliant with medical advice and/or missed appointments (McCloskey, Williams,
Lichter, Gerber, Ganz, & Sage, 2007).
Although research shows that IPV has the potential to create serious physical and
mental health issues, a longitudinal study conducted with victims/survivors of IPV who
were free of physical violence for the three years prior to this particular study showed
that negative physical health symptoms had decreased over the three years. This study
showed that the victims/survivors were more likely to experience physical health
improvements through social support and lack of physical IPV. Factors that created
barriers to the well being of those included in this study were cohabitation wit the
batterer, negative feelings about past life events and continual psychological IPV
(Sanchez-Lorente, Blasco-Ros & Martinez, 2012).
Inadequacy of the Level of Preparedness in the Medical and Criminal Justice
Communities: Short and Long-Term Consequences of IPV
Women experiencing IPV may also experience barriers in accessing physical
healthcare due to the perception that their medical provider will not provide enough time
to discuss violence in their relationship, will provide a judgmental response and may not
maintain confidentiality in a family practice setting. Research indicates that IPV is a,
“complex and prevalent social problem associated with significant impairment in the
27
physical and psychological health of victims” (Loke, p. 2336, 2012). Although IPV has
been identified as a serious public health issue, research indicates that there is inadequacy
in the level of preparedness in the legal and medical communities.
In a study conducted in a United States family practice setting with women
experiencing IPV, it was found that the women were most concerned about having a
medical provider who would listen, follow up with them, provide validation and
advocacy when needed. This study deduced that to improve care to those experiencing
IPV family practice providers should discuss with each patient their role as a family
practice provider, provide a safe medical office environment in the case that patients want
to disclose that they are experiencing IPV and offer follow up services after the initial
disclosure. The authors of this study suggest that the system of care can be improved
through continuity of care, ease in appointment booking and availability and long term
follow up as the physical effects of IPV have the potential to last for long periods of time
(Narula, Agarwal, & McCarthy, 2012).
As victims may not feel comfortable discussing the issues of IPV with their
regular family medical providers for a variety of reasons, it is possible that many victims
utilize emergency rooms in order to obtain medical care after an incidence of violence.
Also, it is possible that victims utilize emergency rooms with the involvement of law
enforcement. In a study conducted in an emergency department through face to face
interviews it was found that victims are often too embarrassed to disclose IPV, were
reluctant to seek help and were fearful of being judged or ignored by medical providers.
Additionally, victims included in this study disclosed that the acts of violence which
28
resulted in an emergency room visit created low self-esteem, depression and suicidal
ideations. Although victims in this study entered the emergency room with injuries, they
were still unsure about staying in or leaving their abusive relationship. This study
suggests that health care professionals must be involved in continuing education about
IPV, especially about identifying/screening for IPV, assessment of physical and
emotional needs of victims, should show empathy, acceptance and assess for safety at
home prior to discharge from the emergency room (Loke, Wan, & Hayter, 2012).
Medical Social Workers play a vital role in assessing for IPV among all patients,
especially those who are pregnant. Research suggests that there are serious negative
physical health implications for the mother and unborn child and therefore Medical
Social Workers have a unique opportunity to provide special interventions to patients
experiencing IPV. Research indicates that it is vital for social workers and medical
providers to screen for IPV, especially in the medical setting. Additionally, research
suggests that effective interventions for pregnant women experiencing IPV include,
“assessing for health and safety, identifying support systems and examining the
contextual effects of IPV on work and employment (McMahon & Armstrong, p. 14,
2012).
Generally, the best practices in medical settings for social workers and medical
professionals includes screening, assessing and intervening with clients who may be
experiencing/are experiencing IPV. Specifically, social workers who are following best
practices should be trained to identify and assess for IPV in all practical settings, work
collaboratively with medical professionals, train medical professionals on how to
29
effectively screen for IPV, assess clients who meet IPV criteria through screening for
health and safety, connect those at risk with appropriate resources and support, maintain
confidentiality, work collaborative with community based organizations who specialize
in IPV, provide appropriate medical and legal referrals for clients experiencing IPV and
educate victims, family members and the community about IPV prevention and early
intervention (McMahon & Armstrong, 2012).
Although it is possible for victims/survivors of IPV to have positive interactions
with the criminal justice system, there is potential for additional trauma for the
victim/survivor of IPV if the interaction with the criminal justice system is negative. In a
study conducted with mothers who were affected by IPV, overall the study found that the
majority of participants had negative experiences with the criminal justice system. Many
of the participants reported a complicated and difficult to access bureaucratic system
which left them feeling re-victimized. Participants of this study also stated that portions
of the criminal justice system process made them feel comforted, validated and
sometimes empowered by their service providers within the system (Letourneau, Duffy,
& Duffett-Leger, 2012).
Recommendations for the criminal justice system include greater efficiency for
the victim/survivor’s case, mandatory IPV training for service providers, appropriate
support services for those who have left their providers and peer support/support from
those with shared IPV experiences (Letourneau, Duffy, & Duffett-Leger, 2012).
30
Risk Factors of IPV in the College Population
Research indicates that risk factors for IPV include, but are not limited to,
previous IPV, reproductive coercion, pregnancy, serious physical violence, use or
possession of weapons and perpetrator mental health/personality disorder issues. The
aforementioned risk factors should be taken seriously by service providers as they have
the potential to increase lethality.
The most serious risk factor of future IPV is previous IPV. In fact, research
shows that previous IPV is the strongest risk factor for intimate partner homicide.
Additionally, research shows that use of guns, estrangement of partners, having a
stepchild in the home, forced sex, threats to kill and strangulation are also serious risk
factors to future IPV (Campbell, Glass, Sharps, Laughon, & Bloom, 2007). Additionally,
a study found that of 456 American women who were either killed or nearly killed by a
current or past abusive partner women were likely to underestimate their risk prior to
being murdered or almost murdered. Additionally, women who were involved in this
study were less likely to see a domestic violence advocate, but were likely to see a
medical provider in the health care system. This study recommended innovated ways for
medical providers and other service providers to identify and assess levels of danger in
order to assist in safety planning (Campbell, 2004).
Those who are experiencing IPV may also experience reproductive coercion
which may include unwanted pregnancies, limited if any choice in contraceptive method,
sexually transmitted infections (including HIV/AIDS), miscarriages, frequent abortions,
high number of sexual partners and poor pregnancy outcomes. Reproductive coercion is
31
a serious risk factor for IPV and is an area which has not been studied at length. In a
study conducted through face to face interviews in a family planning clinic, an abortion
clinic and a domestic violence shelter in the United States, it was found that 74% of
respondents experienced male reproductive control. This reproductive control included
the male partner verbally threatening the female partner about getting pregnant,
unprotected forced sex and contraceptive sabotage (holes in condoms, control of visible
contraceptive methods, etc.). This study also identified that once the female was
pregnant, her abusive male partner threatened her if she did not choose to do what he
demanded. Additionally, this study found that reproductive control was found in
physically violent as well as non-physically violent relationships. Through a better
understanding of this risk factor, service providers may have a better understanding of
those experiencing reproductive coercion and may be able to provide education, care and
counseling in order to assist the victim/survivor in protecting her reproductive health and
safety (Moore, Frohwirth, & Miller, 2010).
Pregnancy can be a serious risk factor in IPV and can have serious physical and
mental health complications as well as negative academic implications for the pregnant
victim/survivor. IPV during pregnancy increases pregnancy complications and has a high
potential to create poor birth outcomes. In a study conducted with 2873 women in a
Northeastern city of the United States, it was found that women who reported IPV had a
higher chance of pregnancy trauma and placental abruption. The authors of this study
suggest that the results increase the need for improved screening of IPV and intervention
strategies (Leone, Lane, Koumans, DeMott, Wojtowycz, et al., 2010). Also, in a study
32
conducted in a Massachusetts hospital with pregnant participants throughout the
approximate 40 week gestation found that women were most at risk during their first
trimester of pregnancy for physical injury due to IPV. This study suggests that there is
serious importance in violence prevention as an integral part of women’s health care and
a need for preconception health care about the risks of IPV, especially during pregnancy
(Nannini, Lazar, Berg, Garger, Tomashek, et al., 2011).
Serious physical violence such as strangulation are significant risk factors for
those experiencing IPV. In a study conducted with 17 heterosexual couples in the United
States where the male partner was in jail or prison due to an IPV arrest, found that there
were specific triggers for serious violence to occur and certain chronic stressors that
created an environment in which violence was more likely. The research found that the
main trigger was accusations of infidelity while under the influence of alcohol and/or
other drugs and that chronic stressors included anxiety about infidelity, strict gender
roles, alcohol and drug use and mental health issues including suicidal ideation and
attempts. Through these triggers and chronic stressors serious violence occurred such as
severe head trauma which required hospitalization/surgery, bite wounds, strangulation
and loss of pregnancies. This study concluded that jealously was a serious risk factor for
homicidal behavior by the perpetrator and that infidelity concerns were instantaneous
triggers for acute violent episodes and resulted in serious injuries (Nemeth, Bonomi, Lee,
& Ludwin, 2012).
33
Another important risk factor to note is the use or possession of weapons by the
perpetrator, especially guns/firearms. Research indicates that in women who are
murdered by men are most often intimately involved with the men prior to being
murdered. Murder by a male intimate partner using a gun/firearm accounts for one third
of the murders of women in the United States. Also, a history of physical violence is
indicative of future murder with a gun/firearm by a male partner. In fact, research
indicates that women are twice as likely to be, “shot by a male intimate partner than to be
shot, stabbed, strangled, bludgeoned, or killed in any other way by a stranger” (Sorenson,
p. 232, 2004). Even with this, societal norms are for women to be more concerned with
potential violence from strangers. In addition, research indicates that stranger homicides
have decreased, but the number of intimate partner homicides with handguns has
increased (Sorenson, 2004).
Perpetrators with mental health/personality disorder issues create a higher risk
factor for their victims/survivors. In a study conducted in a batter’s treatment program in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania it was found that men with severe psychopathy were one third
more likely to reassault their female partner and twice as likely to repeatedly reassault
their female partner. Although research indicates that perpetrators often have diagnosed
mental health/personality disorder issues, there are few community resources that provide
coordinated service with batter’s treatment programs (Gondolf, 2009).
The aforementioned risk factors have serious implications for the future health
and safety of those in IPV relationships. Additional research is needed, especially in
regards to perpetrator mental health, level of lethality and serious physical injuries.
34
Service Provision and Advocacy
In terms of interventions, in a study conducted in conjunction with social workers
in the Centers of Prevention and Intervention for Domestic Violence and with social
workers in the private sector in Taiwan it was discovered through the results of
questionnaires administered to victims of domestic violence that issues of empowerment,
perception of the negative impacts of violence, level of professional contact with service
providers created an increased change in self esteem for the victims. Additionally, it was
discovered that life satisfaction increased as the aforementioned factors were
strengthened. The findings of this study suggested that through social support, coping
methods and a strong professional relationship with a service provider assisted in victims
feeling empowered (Song, 2012). Although the results of this study were not specific to
the United States or more specifically to the college population, these results could be
generalized to other populations.
Furthermore, it was discovered that social work interventions need to occur at
different levels (ontogenic, micro, exo and macro) in order to provide the most effective
outcomes for those involved in IPV relationships. Through interventions at a variety of
levels, it becomes possible for social workers to provide advocacy at the individual,
environmental and structural levels (Alaggia, 2012). Additionally, in research that
reviewed multiple studies of interventions for IPV through the context of evidencedbased practice it was discovered that the most common current interventions are not
evidence based. This review of identified studies stratified interventions into the
categories of primary treatment focus on the perpetrator, victim, couples, or child-
35
witness. This research review showed that the most effective interventions include
substance abuse and trauma treatments in concert. This research review also provided
that additional research needs to be done in order to establish more effective interventions
(2009).
When considering interventions, service providers must also consider that
victims/survivors may only disclose a portion or her abuse depending upon her
perception of the risks and benefits of disclosure (Alaggia, 2012). With this said, it will
be vital that service providers who do make contact with victims/survivors consider this
in their work and therefore provide a safe and nonjudgmental foundation to the service
provider and victim/survivor relationship.
In the context of IPV in the college population, DePrince, et al. discovered that
women who are involved in IPV relationships who seek services from community
outreach programs, similar to university professional victim’s advocates, have better
outcomes in their readiness to leave abusive relationships as compared to women who
receive traditional criminal justice assistance. The results of this study provide additional
support to university level community outreach for college students involved in IPV
relationships. As there is evidence that community level support services are effective in
creating safer and healthier environments, interventions at the community level can
continue to be further developed for specified populations like college women. The
DePrince et al. study suggests that, “community-based outreach by victim advocates
36
results in decreased distress levels, greater readiness to leave abusive relationships, and
greater perceived helpfulness of services relative to system-based referrals” (p. 211,
2012).
In addition to service providers, it is also important to consider the models that
other studies have utilized in studying IPV and IPV in the college population. As it is
vital that service providers meet the victim/survivor where she is at and allow for the
advocacy process to be extremely victim/survivor driven, it is also important that future
studies strongly consider the transtheoretical model in future studies and work with
victims/survivors. Edwards et al. studied college women who were in the process of
leaving abusive relationships. It was discovered through their study that interventions are
important along with prevention programming on college campuses. Additionally, it was
discovered that providing information to college health providers is of vital importance in
promoting the health, wellness and safety of college students who are involved in IPV
relationships (Edwards, 2012).
A key concept in the area of service provision is the potential for burnout in
professional victim’s advocates. A study conducted by Babin, Palazzolo & Rivera found
that due to the nature of the work of professional victim’s advocates there is increased
vulnerability for burnout. Through examining the relationships between communication
anxiety, communication competence, perception of social support and feelings of
burnout, it was discovered that there are issues related to emotional exhaustion and
reduced feelings of personal accomplishment professionally. This study suggests that
there is a need for developing scenario-based communication skills straining programs in
37
an effort to reduce communication anxiety and therefore potentially increase
communication competence, have regular agency debriefing meetings in an effort to
assist advocates in their processing of cases and therefore receive peer support and to
develop a mentoring program for new professional victim’s advocate (2012). Potential
challenges to the results of this study may involve agencies or organizations that only
have one victim’s advocate.
Gaps in the Literature
In future research it will be important to consider certain specific concepts. Two
of the major contributing factors that foster the growth of IPV in society are
objectification of women and gender inequity (Daley, 2001). Through this macro view of
these issues, interventions can be created including the perspectives of both
objectification of women and gender inequity. It will be vital that future research
considers the common forms of abuse of IPV in the college population, a general
understanding of the most common times that IPV occurs in the academic calendar,
innovative social work interventions for IPV in the college population.
Especially in difficult budget times, it will be vital that the health and safety of
college students involved in IPV relationships continue to have the option and availability
of service providers such as professional victim’s advocates. Without the services of a
victim’s advocate, it is possible that college students who are affected by IPV may be left
without any professional advocacy or assistance in linkage to other community providers.
Through a review of the current literature, it became apparent that as in other
areas of social work, it will be vital that this study considers multiple theories and
38
models. Additionally, through research it is apparent that the empowerment of
victims/survivors should be strongly considered in creating solutions for
victims/survivors. Through reviewing related literature to this topic, it has been
discovered that there is limited research in the area of IPV in the college population.
Additionally, through reviewing the available literature it quickly became
apparent that there were fewer articles on physical health in comparison to mental health
articles as they related to IPV. Although research clearly shows that the effects of mental
health issues attributed to IPV are serious and should be strongly considered during
interventions and in program planning, it is also of the utmost importance that we
continue to study the physical health implications of IPV.
As there is an extremely significant deficit in the body of literature about IPV in
the college population, this study topic is extremely important. This study will fill
existing knowledge gaps simply by beginning a discussion about IPV in the college
population and providing those who come in contact with college students experiencing
IPV with more knowledge which may have value in practical application. Many current
studies examine age groups or racial/ethnic groups, but there very few studies that
provide a view of IPV in the college population. As existing studies are providing the
field with general knowledge of IPV in the community, we have a general understanding
of IPV but this knowledge and the best practices provided in some studies are not
necessarily transferable into practical settings.
39
Chapter 3
METHODS
This chapter presents the methods used to conduct the study and includes the
following sections: Study design, study population, study sample, study questions, human
subjects protocol, data collection process and the data analysis plan.
Study Design
The design of the study is exploratory with both quantitative and qualitative
components. The rationale for choosing an exploratory design is that this design provides
the researcher to, “gain familiarity with a new or as yet unexplored phenomenon or to
achieve new insights into one with which there’s already some familiarity but not from
the angle you have in mind” (Steinberg, 2004, p. 40). Although there is a significant
body of research regarding IPV, limited studies have been conducted involving IPV in
the college population (see Chapter 2). There are three common approaches to
exploratory studies: reviewing available literature, surveying relevant people associated
with the topic and conducting case studies. This study surveyed relevant professionals
within the field of violence and sexual assault advocacy who work in institutes of higher
education as their collective experiences provide current insights and observations
directly from the field (Steinberg, 2004).
The survey results from this exploratory study will be both qualitative and
quantitative and will be analyzed through SPSS software and a content analysis. Both
quantitative and qualitative data were collected because both numeric and thematic
40
information were important to consider in researching this topic. Qualitative data refers
to data collected through words and quantitative data refers to data collected in numerical
form (Steinberg, 2004).
The study questionnaire included 12 questions which covered IPV in the college
population, service provision challenges, potential reasons of barriers to academic
success and campus preparedness perceptions. Respondents were not required to answer
each question and therefore survey responses were combined, analyzed either in
quantitatively or qualitatively and for the most part are presented as statistics or themes.
The results will include notable quotes from survey respondents although identifying
campus features will be removed.
Study Population
Participants of this study included professionals in CSU and UC Women’s
Resource Centers and Gender Equity Centers. These professionals were trained victim’s
advocates and university staff members who work closely with victims of IPV. The
researcher was not successful in collecting data from the national list serv in which those
in the field of IPV college victim advocacy share information and network as the
members of this list serv stated that they advocate only for sexual assault and not IPV.
The participants of this study were voluntary and were acquired through
electronic mail. There are 35 participants in this study and information was collected in
an anonymous and confidential format through SurveyMonkey.com. Participants were
not required to answer each question as it was possible that not all questions applied to
41
each participant. Incentives were not offered for participation in this study. The
researcher did not experience conflicts of interest in the process of interacting with
potential study participants and does not know who participated in this study.
Study Sample
The researcher was able to collect data from October 2012-February 2013. Due
to time constraints associated with completing a thesis and with difficulties in finding
participants for this study, the researcher was able to survey 35 participants. The study
sample consisted of CSU and UC system professionals who were either victim advocates
or professional staff members of the campus Women’s Resource Center/Gender Equity
Center. The fact that the national list serv members did not identify as victim advocates
of IPV, but rather identified as victim advocates of sexual violence presented the
researcher with challenges in collecting data, but did not prove to be fatal for the study.
Study Questions
The study questions are: What is the impact of being in an IPV relationship on
the academic performance of college students? and What is the impact of decision to
seek and receive services on the academic performance of the victims/survivors?
The purpose of this study is to understand the extent to which IPV acts as an
obstacle in achieving academic excellence/academic accomplishment for college
students. The findings of this study may assist in adding to the body of social work and
public health knowledge. This study is also being conducted in an effort to legitimize the
issue of IPV in the college population in order to increase the level of health and safety
42
for students. Additionally, this study may also assist in the retention rate of future
college students who are experiencing abusive relationships through their educational
careers.
Human Subjects Protocol
In compliance with the California State University, Sacramento Committee for
the Protection of Human Subjects Protocol, the researcher submitted a Request for
Review by the Sacramento State Institutional Review Board (IRB) through the Division
of Social Work (Appendix A). The Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects
through the Division of Social Work approved this Human Subject Application on
9/25/12 with the approval number 12-13-008 (Appendix D). The committee approved
this study as “exempt” to participants being that the participants are all professionals
within the field of victim advocacy and therefore have training associated with this
subject area. The researcher received approval for this study prior to collecting data.
Informed consent was obtained through an electronic consent form. This form
was sent to study participants via electronic mail prior to the researcher providing the
SurveyMonkey link (Appendix B). There were no identifying characteristics or
information of the participants of this study available to the Researcher or Research
Advisor. All of the collected information was maintained with the utmost confidentiality
and secured through the use of SurveyMonkey software which utilizes https encryption.
Additionally, access to the anonymous results of the questionnaire through
SurveyMonkey was only available to the researcher and research Advisor. The
researcher protected data as possible, but unfortunately it is not possible to provide
43
absolute guarantees for the confidentiality of electronic data. Additionally, the researcher
was not able to remove anonymous data from the database if a participant decided to
withdraw the data. Fortunately, the researcher did not receive any requests from
participants requesting data to be withdrawn. The researcher’s electronic mail address
was provided in the consent form in the case that participants had questions or concerns.
Data Collection Process
After receiving Human Subjects approval, the researcher sent the study
questionnaire to a national list serv of victim’s advocates who work in the college
population. The procedures of this study are to solicit participants from a national list
serv in which those in the field of IPV college victim advocacy share information and
network, electronic mail requests from California State University (CSU) Women’s
Resource Centers and Gender Equity Centers and University of California (UC)
Women’s Resource Centers and Gender Equity Centers. The survey was administered
via SurveyMonkey.com as this is easily accessible and commonly used. SurveyMonkey
software provides secure data collection through encrypted https links and because
participants are able to remain anonymous. The data was only accessible to the
researcher and research sponsor. The researcher contacted Victim’s Advocates on
college campuses and professional staff members of women’s resource center and gender
equity centers in the CSU and UC systems. It should be noted that not all campuses have
Victim’s Advocates and/or women’s resource centers and/or gender equity centers.
44
Through searching through CSU and UC system websites to find email addresses
for the appropriate staff, depending on the services provided by each campus, the
researcher compiled a list of email addresses. The researcher sent an email including a
brief request, attached the electronic consent form and a link to the survey to each person
on this list. The first page of the SurveyMonkey survey stated:
I have read and understand that the Informed Consent document provided by the
Primary Investigator, By clicking “agree” I consent to participating in this survey
and understand that my participation is completely voluntary. By clicking
“agree” I also provide an electronic signature. By clicking “disagree” I do not
consent to participating in this survey and understand that my choice to not
participate is completely voluntary.
One participant did not consent to the survey and therefore the survey automatically
closed for that individual. There were 35 consented responses to this survey.
Participants were required to choose to consent or to not consent to participating in the
survey, but consensual participants were not required to answer all of the questions in the
survey.
Data Analysis Plan
The data collected from the SurveyMonkey secure website was organized by the
researcher into quantitative and qualitative categories. Once the data was organized,
quantitative data was analyzed utilizing SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences)
software and qualitative data was organized thematically. Interpretations of the data were
45
made possible through relevant statistical analysis of the nominal, ordinal and interval
level variables. The findings that emerged from the data analysis are presented in the next
chapter.
46
Chapter 4
STUDY FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
This study collected both quantitative and qualitative data through a semistructured questionnaire administered via Survey Monkey and the resulting data was
analyzed using SPSS software and a qualitative content analysis. The respondents of this
study were 35 professional members of the University of California (UC) and California
State University (CSU) systems’ violence prevention services and Women’s Resource
Centers/Gender Equity Centers. This chapter will provide the findings related to
misogynistic cultural factors, teen dating violence, barriers to academic success in higher
education, frequently reported types of IPV in the college population, college campus’
level of preparedness in combatting IPV, education/outreach as prevention tools, service
provision challenges, macro measures for campus safety and identification of areas of
improvement for college campuses.
Misogynistic Cultural Factors
In the American culture there is a high tolerance for violence as evidenced by
media, video games, pornography and advertisements. This tolerance for violence affects
both American men and women as the CDC estimates that one in four women and one in
seven men have been the victims of severe physical IPV in their lifetimes (2010).
Although both men and women can be victims/survivors of IPV, this public health issue
disproportionately affects women. Misogyny in the American culture is pervasive and
therefore easily bleeds into how partners treat each other in romantic relationships.
Additionally, this misogynistic culture creates nonempowering expectations about sexual
47
intimacy, a lack of education regarding healthy versus unhealthy relationships, power and
control dynamics, strict gender roles which create a forced dichotomy of submissive or
dominant and masculine or feminine roles.
As we live in a patriarchal culture, misogyny and thus IPV pervades into our
elementary, middle and high schools along with our institutes of higher education.
Although we understand that IPV is a public health crisis, limited data has been collected
about IPV in the college population. This study found that ninety-six percent (96%) of
survey respondents believe that IPV is a problem for college students. One survey
respondent stated,
Yes. I believe IPV is a problem. There is a culture of silence around interpersonal
violence that does not support victims coming forth. In addition, there seems to be
an acceptance of some forms of violence as normal due to its portrayal in the
media (i.e. Jersey Shore, Real Housewives, etc.). I believe there is also a stigma
placed on men who are victims of IPV that keeps them from reporting and/or
seeking help.
This response is powerful and highlights the role of media in the promotion of violence
and the stigma associated with being a male victim of IPV. Additionally, the culture of
silence is mentioned which is important to consider as IPV is a serious public health issue
creating both physical and mental trauma affecting countless individuals. In a culture of
silence, there is less of a chance for prevention, early intervention and widespread
support services for victims/survivors of IPV. Through education, early intervention and
advocacy, it is possible to assist victims/survivors of IPV in a timely manner which may
48
reduce the harm associated with longer term IPV. Living in a misogynistic culture does
not mean that it is completely impossible to change cultural myths associated with IPV,
but does mean that social workers, victim’s advocates and public health educators must
embody creative educational strategies and begin outreach and education starting with
young children.
Teen Dating Violence
Teen dating violence is a significant risk factor for future IPV and has the
potential to last throughout the life course without proper advocacy and intervention.
According to the CDC’s Injury Center: Violence Prevention Center, teen dating violence
includes, “relationship abuse, intimate partner violence, relationship violence, dating
abuse, domestic abuse and domestic violence” (2012). The 2011 Youth Risk Behavior
Survey found that 9.4% of current high school students reported being injured by an
intimate partner through being hit, slapped or physically hurt. Additionally, the 2010
NIPSVS found that one in five women and nearly one in seven men who have
experienced IPV in their lifetime experienced their first violent attack by an intimate
partner between the ages of 11 and 17 years of age (CDC, 2012).
The topic of teen dating violence is significant as adolescents and teens may have
a lack of understanding of the factors that constitute IPV and therefore may be less likely
to access support services. Additionally, as potential adult supporters may be unaware of
the severity and intensity of teen dating violence, access to appropriate advocacy and
intervention services may not be easily accessible. It is of vital importance that
adolescents and young adults are aware of what constitutes a healthy relationship and that
49
potential adult supporters are aware of how to support healthy relationships as
consequences of teen dating violence can be extremely damaging. Some of the
consequences of abusive teen relationships include barriers to academic success,
increased rates of binge drinking, suicide attempts and physical fighting. In addition,
learned behaviors from early abusive relationships can develop into patterns of violence
that negatively affect future dating relationships (CDC, 2012).
As teens transition into institutions of higher education, there is the potential that
new college students will have experienced teen dating violence. Participants of this
survey reported that teens may be inadequately prepared for dating relationships and may
have a folly of nonvulnerability, especially regarding emotional abuse. One participant
responded,
Many college students are somewhat inexperienced with dating, and are not
familiar with the warning signs / red flags of a potentially abusive relationship.
Many students, like most other people, believe that if it's no physically abusive it's
not that bad.
Additionally, the availability of education, advocacy and support services for teens may
positively contribute to prevention of longer term and more fully developed IPV as the
teens transition into adulthood.
As teens transition into college romantic relationships it is important for
university staff and faculty, victim’s advocates and other service providers to education
students about not only early signs of IPV, but also what they envision in their future
healthy relationships. Another participant stated,
50
College Students, are just one of many populations who can suffer from this,
especially since relationships take on a new form and significance around this
time. Students are exploring are forming their standards, their philosophies, their
norms, and their boundaries in the reals of relationships, intimacy, etc.
In order to best serve teens and young college students, service providers and educators
must consider the developmental stages of the individuals that they are working with.
With a context of teen dating violence, service providers and educators have the potential
to provide prevention and early intervention services which in turn have the potential to
save innumerable lives.
Frequently Reported Types of IPV Abuse in the College Population
The CDC’s Injury Center generally defines IPV as threats of or actual physical,
sexual or psychological violence by a current or former intimate partner. Intimate partner
violence has the potential to negatively impact both physical and mental health. It is
estimated that IPV continues to impact the health of victims/survivors for as many as
fifteen years after the abuse has stopped. In addition, the health behaviors of
victims/survivors may be significantly impacted by IPV through high-risk sexual
behaviors, substance use/abuse, unhealthy eating habits and excessive use of health
services (2012).
As IPV has the potential to create significant health impacts, it is extremely
important that service providers understand the types of IPV most common in specified
populations, such as college students. The results of this study indicated that the service
providers surveyed had advocated for college students experiencing psychological,
51
sexual, verbal, physical, stalking and other forms of IPV. Respondents (n=27) affirmed
that they advocated on behalf of victims/survivors who had experienced the following
types of violence: 81.5% psychological, 55.6% sexual, 37.0% verbal, 37.0% physical,
11.1% stalking and 33.3% other. Other forms of violence include cyber violence,
possessiveness, manipulation and controlling relationships. Respondents were permitted
to respond to multiple forms of violence.
Table 1
Frequencies of specified types of IPV
Yes
No
n (%)
n (%)
Psychological
22 (81.5%)
5 (18.5%)
Sexual
15 (55.6%)
12 (44.4%)
Verbal
10 (37.0%)
17 (63.0%)
Physical
10 (37.0%)
17 (63.0%)
Stalking
3 (11.1%)
24 (88.9%)
Other
9 (33.3%)
18 (66.7%)
Those who advocate for college victims/survivors experiencing IPV not only
reported frequencies in the types of abuse they see in their clients, but also state unique
dynamics which suggest special characteristics in the college population. One respondent
stated that, “unique aspects of power and control we see on our small and isolated college
52
campus include things like gossip and turning mutual friends against the survivor as well
as taking advantage of who has access to transportation”. The aforementioned quote does
not reference traditional types of violence and highlights the importance of considering
all aspects of IPV.
Although it is helpful to have knowledge of the different forms of IPV that
victims/survivors may experience, it is even more important to understand how these
forms of violence affect the academic performance of victims/survivors. Respondents
(n=25) overwhelmingly stated (n=19, 76.0%) that students in IPV relationships have
changes in their GPA and academic performance. One respondent stated,
I see many students struggling with academics due to the IPV issue. Abusers
demand that the victim skips class to take care of him/her, the abuse[r] believes
the victim is cheating when they are really in class or studying, victims have a
hard time focusing on studying because the abuser is so demanding. I've even
seen victims pick up extra jobs in order to support their abuser - even while in
college.
With additional education and therefore more in depth understanding of the dynamics of
IPV in the college population, service providers, staff/faculty and peers will have the skill
sets to recognize signs of violence in this population. Without this knowledge base, it is
likely that assumptions about the victim/survivor’s academic performance issues may be
tied to traits such as laziness, apathy or low intelligence.
53
Other respondents attributed issues with academic success for victims/survivors
of IPV as withdrawal from their community, withdrawing from some or all classes, lower
GPA, escalation of violence during midterms and finals, poor class attendance, limited
time to study and difficulty focusing due to emotional turmoil. In terms of sexual
violence, consent and relationship preparedness another respondent stated that,
Sex is a taboo subject preventing individuals to talk about it. With the lack of
communication of the matter comes the lack of the necessary information such as
consent. Consent must be given at all times. Sometimes a partner may think they
have the right to engage in a sexual activity, and the victim thinks they have to
engage in the action as well because they are partners. I believe verbal and
emotional abuse also occur often in college. Again, many uneducated individuals
do not consider some of these actions violence, but they are, thus may occur many
times do to lack of knowledge.
With the knowledge of the frequencies of psychological, sexual, verbal, physical and
stalking IPV, it is also important that we consider the importance of education and
outreach on college campuses as prevention and early intervention tools.
Barriers to Academic Success in Higher Education
There are many potential consequences to the academic success of college
students experiencing IPV. Academic success includes, but is not limited to GPA, ability
to be involved in internships and vocational interests, the ability to network academically
and professionally and ample time to study. Although any form of IPV is negative, IPV
in the college population has unique dynamics and future implications. The perpetrator
54
creating academic sabotage through interfering with the activities that would contribute
to the academic success of the victim/survivor. An example of this unique dynamic is the
timing of abuse within the academic semester.
It is commonly known by those involved in academia that during midterms and
finals academic expectations increase through cumulative tests and complex assignments.
If IPV increases at these points in the semester, there is serious potential for the
victim/survivor of IPV to experience secondary impacts of the abuse that can create
significant barriers to academic success. Figure 1: Perception of influence on academic
performance illustrates that 76% of respondents (n=19) stated that they advocated for
students in IPV relationships who experienced negative impacts to their academic
performance. This figure also importantly shows that 24% of survey respondents (n=6)
replied not applicable meaning that no survey respondents stated that they saw no
changes in academic performance.
Figure 1: Perception of influence on academic performance
55
One survey respondent stated that, “most of them [victims/survivors] have a drop
in GPA. Perpetrators tend to sabotage their grades by escalating the violence during
midterms and finals”. In this regard, the survey results confirm what anecdotal evidence
has suggested in the past. Additionally, other survey respondents reported that due to the
stress of a violent relationship, often victims/survivors have difficulties in focusing on
academic assignments and tasks. Some respondents stated that due to perpetrator
jealousy and control it is often difficult for the victim/survivor to join study groups or
attend tutoring.
It is vital that service providers consider the potential barriers to academic success
that IPV can create for students in violent relationships. One survey respondent stated,
Many survivors report their partner intentionally sabotaging their academics
(picking fights while they're studying or the night before a big exam, refusing to
let them leave to go to class, texting & checking up on them during class) in other
cases the overall stress of the abuse creates symptoms that make it difficult for the
student to do well academically. I've noticed that the students who tend to suffer
more serious long-term academic issues…because of IPV are often students who
did not have a strong support system (both at the university and at home), and
overall did not enter the university with a strong set of skills to manage a high
stress academic environment (time management, studying skills, knowledge of
campus resources, personal coping skills). Students who did possess that skill set
prior to the IPV usually dealt with less severe academic issues and had a much
easier time improving their academics once the IPV was addressed.
56
This response is especially powerful as we consider the potential impact that teen dating
violence has on the health of our future generations of college students. It is of the
utmost importance that service providers are educated about the dynamics of IPV in the
college population in considering the complexities and intricacies that may be present in
the abusive relationship. It is extremely important that administrative staff, faculty and
student health services on college campuses are equipped to provide proper support to
college students experiencing IPV.
In terms of the physical and mental health impacts on college students
experiencing IPV, a majority of the survey respondents (n=24) stated that they have
advocated for students who are experiencing a variety of mental and physical health
issues. The most commonly reported mental health issues were anxiety, depression,
disordered eating, PTSD, suicidality, panic attacks, substance use disorders and stress.
The most commonly reported physical health issues were sleep disorders, cutting/self
mutilation, stomach problems/irritable bowel syndrome, pain, sexually transmitted
infections and pregnancy. Other issues reported by survey respondents include fear, low
self esteem/low self-worth, shame, guilt, isolation, flashbacks, distress, despair,
embarrassment, feeling responsible for abusive partner’s actions, humiliation, social
instability, trust issues, feeling overwhelmed and feeling that it is his/her fault.
Respondents were able to reply with the main health issues that students
experiencing IPV presented to them with; therefore the aggregate percentages were
collected with many responses. The results show that of total responses (n=81), 49.4%
(n=40) of reported issues were mental health related, 17.3% (n=14) were physical health
57
related and 33.3% (n=27) were considered to be other issues. Through the collected data
it becomes apparent that mental health issues are of the utmost importance for advocates
and other service providers to be aware of and trained in treating or providing referrals to
appropriate health care services.
Level of Preparedness of College Campuses in Combatting IPV
In 1972 the United States Department of Education: Office for Civil Rights
implemented Title IX of the Education Amendments. This amendment prohibits
discrimination on the basis of biological sex/gender in academic programs or higher
education activities that receive Federal education funds. Title IX specifies that sexual
harassment (including sexual violence) is considered to be a form of discrimination.
Sexual violence is further defined as, “physical sexual acts perpetrated against a person’s
will or where a person is incapable of giving consent due to the victim’s use of drugs or
alcohol” (p. 1, 2011). Additionally, sexual violence is considered to be rape, sexual
assault, sexual battery and/or sexual coercion. School districts and institutes of higher
education that receive Federal funds are required to comply with Title IX and are
provided with a “Dear Colleague” letter in order to provider clarity in meeting the
obligations of this amendment.
The Title IX “Dear Colleague” sexual harassment and sexual violence letter
provides specific obligations to guide school districts and institutes of higher education.
Examples of these obligations are response to sexual harassment and sexual violence,
procedures for dissemination of a notice of nondiscrimination, designation of an
employee to carry out Title IX requirements and publish grievance procedures, education
58
and prevention guidelines and remedies and enforcement (2011). These guidelines for
sexual harassment and sexual violence prevention, intervention and reporting are
provided with specific details for implementation, although additional funding is not
provided for school districts and/or colleges/universities.
In addition to Title IX requirements, colleges/universities receiving federal
education funds are required to follow the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security
Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act. According to the Clery Center for Security on
Campus, “Summary of the Jeanne Clery Act”, this federal law is enforced by the United
States Department of Education and requires colleges/universities to disclose campus
crime statistic information annually to the campus community regarding crimes that
happened on or around campus. Under the Clery Act, reportable crimes include criminal
homicide, sexual offenses, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft and
arson. In addition, schools must report statistics for liquor law violations, drug law
violations and illegal weapons possession. This act also requires reporting for hate
crimes. In 1992 the Clery Act was amended to include basic rights for victims of sexual
assault and was further expanded in 1998 to include additional reporting requirements
(2012).
Although both the “Dear Colleague” letter of Title IX and the Clery Act are
important macro measures to uphold campus safety in terms of sexual harassment and
sexual violence, neither includes sufficient information and recommendations for
students experiencing IPV. In March 2013 The Campus Sexual Violence Elimination
(SaVE) Act was passed by Congress as a part of the Violence Against Women Act
59
(VAWA). According to the Clery Center for Security on Campus, The Campus SaVE
Act is meant to compliment the Title IX guidelines as Title IX does not cover issues of
stalking and IPV on college campuses. In addition, the Campus SaVE Act provides an
update to the Jeanne Clery Act (2012).
The Campus SaVE Act provides a vital turning point for colleges and universities
as it requires that incidents of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and
stalking be reported in the annual campus crime statistics. Additionally this act requires
that students, faculty/staff and employees who report an act of violence are provided with
basic rights such as assistance from campus authorities, academic, living, transportation
and work situation changes if need be, assistance with no contact or restraining orders, a
clear understanding of the institutional policies and procedures, and contact information
for counseling, health, victim advocacy, legal assistance and other on-campus and
community resources. In addition, the Campus SaVE Act requires accountability by the
institution, provides educational guidelines and a statement of collaboration between the
United States Departments of Justice, Education and Health & Human Services in order
to best respond to domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking (Clery
Center for Security on Campus, 2012).
Although the Title IX “Dear Colleague” letter, Jeanne Clery Act and Campus
SaVE Act are all well intentioned and important macro measures in preventing and
appropriately responding to issues of sexual harassment, sexual violence, IPV, dating
violence and stalking, they are all unfunded mandates. Theoretically, these acts provide
school districts and colleges/universities with guidelines and structure in preventing and
60
responding to incidents of violence. As the Campus SaVE Act was passed in March
2013, sufficient time has not passed to judge the effectiveness of this act. Survey
respondents were surveyed prior to the passing of the Campus SaVE Act.
Study respondents were asked if services on the California college campuses that
they work on were more focused toward sexual assault prevention, IPV prevention or
both. Results indicate that 50% (n=13) of respondents stated there were more sexual
assault prevention focused initiatives and 43.3% (n=11) stated that both sexual assault
and IPV prevention were provided by their campus. No survey respondents (n=26) stated
specifically that there were focused prevention efforts for IPV. Although it is of
paramount importance that there is a focus on both sexual assault and IPV prevention and
intervention, there are differences between sexual assault and IPV therefore dictating
different types of services.
Table 2:
Focus of prevention services on college campuses
Frequency
Percent
(n)
(%)
Sexual assault prevention
13
50.0%
IPV
0
0.0%
Both sexual assault and IPV prevention
11
43.3%
N/A
2
7.7%
61
For the health, safety and academic success of all college students, it is of vital
importance that both areas receive focused attention. Additionally, now according to
Title IX and the Campus SaVE Act, both areas of education are required by not only best
practices, but also by law.
Participants were asked if they believe that college campuses are doing enough to
combat issues associated with IPV among college students. An overwhelming majority
of survey respondents (92.3%, n=25) stated that they did not believe that college
campuses were doing enough to combat IPV and two respondents (7.4%, n=2) replied not
applicable (see Figure 2). One survey respondent stated, “I think that college campuses
are floundering as they try to find ways to combat IPV among students. I don't think they
are doing enough, but I do think that certain individuals on each campus are really
trying!” Another participant stated, “There are mandates and requirements about sexual
harassment and sexual assault, but rarely if ever is IPV mentioned”.
In addition to issues of college campuses simply not doing enough to combat IPV,
some survey participants expressed their dissatisfaction with the punishment of
perpetrators and treatment of victims within the university setting. One respondent
stated,
With issues such as social justice, violence, and more specifically intimate partner
violence, the campus does not do its job to enforce education on these subjects.
Thus, individuals stay uneducated, they do not realize what they are doing is
wrong, and continue the task, since victims may not know they too have rights in
the relationship.
62
Another respondent powerfully stated,
On my campus, I think there's a perception that it's not an extremely serious
offense, so abusers are often not held accountable in meaningful ways… I see a
lot of emphasis on "empowering survivors" to leave the relationship and in some
cases have had survivors sanctioned for violating policy if the abuser shows up at
their dorm room and refuses to leave or destroys property. While the university
believes it is doing something to combat IPV, in reality they are not addressing
the root causes of the issue and not adequately holding abusers accountable.
The issues discussed by survey respondents are fundamental to the understanding of
issues of IPV in the college population. Arguably, if a victim/survivor does not feel
supported by the policies and mandates at his/her particular campus, there is potential that
less reporting and/or advocacy requests will occur. In the absence of strong systems
which combat IPV on college campuses, students will arguably be more prone to
academic failure.
Traditionally college campuses focus prevention and education efforts on sexual
assault prevention. Although the subject of sexual violence is extremely important for
college campuses to focus on, it is also vital for the health of college students that IPV
prevention and intervention efforts are widely visible and accessible. This is true
particularly for students who have difficulties establishing social networks and social
capitol to prevent the further occurrence of IPV.
63
Figure 2: Perception of campus efforts to combat IPV
Education as a Measure of Prevention
The Title IX “Dear Colleague” letter for sexual harassment and sexual violence
requires that school districts and colleges/universities provide a certain level of education
and prevention. Title IX recommends that prevention education place a special focus on
victim services and resources available at each institution, identification of sexual
harassment and sexual violence, the institution’s specific policies and disciplinary
procedures and the consequences of violating policies. The “Dear Colleague” letter
suggests that the education is conducted at orientation programs for new students,
faculty/staff and other employees, training for Resident Assistant (RA) student
employees who work and live in the dorms/residence halls, to student athletes and
coaches and at back to school night or other large school-wide events (2011).
64
An important aspect of the prevention education guidelines in the “Dear
Colleague” letter is that the educational programs must include information about
bystander intervention, encouragement of reporting incidents of sexual violence and clear
intentions of student safety. In addition, this letter suggests that school districts and
colleges/universities prepare educational pamphlets and materials that include
information about policies and resources specific to each institution (2011).
In terms of education, the Campus SaVE Act requires that colleges/universities
provide programming for students, staff/faculty and employees about domestic violence,
dating violence, sexual assault and stalking. The education must provide primary
prevention and awareness information to all new students, staff/faculty and employees,
safe and educationally positive options for bystander intervention, information about risk
reduction and warning signs of abusive behavior and prevention and ongoing prevention
programming for students, staff/faculty and employees (Cleary Center for Security on
Campus, 2012).
As colleges/universities are required to provide education about sexual
harassment and sexual violence through the Title IX “Dear Colleague” letter many
campuses have some form of sexual violence education as a part of new student
orientation, classroom presentation and outreach. Arguably, not all colleges/universities
provide education or sufficient enough education about sexual violence. Additionally, it
is fairly safe to say that many college/universities are not providing sufficient IPV
education as the Campus SaVE Act was not passed until March 2013.
65
In terms of the areas of improvement that colleges/universities could potentially
make for IPV education, survey respondents stated that colleges/universities especially
need to improve IPV education, provide more IPV support services throughout campus
(I.E. athletics, judicial affairs, campus leaders, administration and counseling), provide
more funding for IPV education and awareness and increase punishments for
perpetrators. In order to see improvements in prevention, advocacy and education about
IPV respondents stated that there need to be more office space for those providing IPV
advocacy, improved use of research driven information, improvement in prevention
education, improvement in risk reduction education (i.g. bystander intervention),
awareness among faculty, improved counseling services, additional empathy among
campus members, improved confidentiality practices, improved advocacy,
destigmitization, more IPV services throughout campus and more publicity of IPV
support services.
Figure 3: Areas for improvement
66
Figure 3: Areas for Improvement shows the main campus aspects that survey
respondents (n=37) believe should be improved in order to better support the academic
success of students experiencing IPV. This figure shows that 29.73% (n=11) of
respondents believe that education about IPV should be improved, 13.51% (n=5) of
respondents believe that support services should be expanded and further supported,
8.11% (n=3) believe that there should be additional funding for IPV advocacy and 8.11%
(n=3) believe that there should be additional punishments for students who are
perpetrators. Additionally, 40.54% (n=15) believe that other services can also be
improved. Respondents stated that there should be improved risk reduction education, a
focus on destigmitization about IPV, improved confidentiality practices, additional office
space, utilization of research driven practices and improvement of prevention education.
Additionally, respondents stated that there should also be awareness of IPV among
faculty, improved counseling services, additional campus empathy, additional advocacy,
more services in general and more publicity about support services.
Service Provision Challenges
General services that may be available on college campuses include, but are not
limited to; victim advocacy, counseling services, peer/friend support, housing support,
judicial conduct and law enforcement. Support services are not consistently available on
all college/university campuses, and where services are available they may not be
sufficiently accessible for victims/survivors of IPV. Some of the potential challenges for
those advocating for college students who are victims/survivors of IPV are that there is a
67
focus on sexual violence prevention and education, that students may not seek IPV
advocacy services until later in the abusive relationship and that the first point of contact
for IPV advocacy may not be a victim’s advocate or trained professional.
Although IPV is a significant public health issue with serious physical and mental
health implications and can create significant barriers to academic success, until recently
there were no federal guidelines, laws or legislation providing colleges/universities with a
comprehensive guide of how to support college students who are victims/survivors of
IPV. The Campus SaVE Act may act as a catalyst for change at the macro level and has
the potential to improve campus safety and retention for millions of college
victims/survivors of IPV.
As survey participants responded to this study prior to the passage of the Campus
SaVE Act, they based their answers off of how their college/university functions solely
under the Title IX “Dear Colleague” letter and The Clery Act. Half of respondents
(n=13, 50.0%) stated that there is greater focus for sexual assault prevention, 40.7%
(n=11) stated that both sexual assault and IPV prevention education is included on their
campuses and 7.4% (n=2) stated that this question was not applicable to their campus.
The answers for those who responded “not applicable” could be interpreted to mean that
neither sexual assault nor IPV prevention education are conducted on their campuses.
Of the respondents who stated that there is a focus on both sexual assault and IPV
prevention on their campus, many answered that the education was mainly focused
toward sexual assault prevention. One respondent stated, “I would say that all areas are
68
Table 3:
Professionals’ perspectives on campus educational focus
Frequency
Percent
(n)
(%)
Sexual Assault Prevention
13
48.1%
Both Sexual Assault and IPV Prevention
11
40.7%
N/A
2
7.4%
covered, but that sexual assault is more addressed than IPV”. Another survey respondent
agreed stating, “More towards sexual assault prevention. IPV is lumped in with it as a
side note”. Positively, some of the respondents stated that although at this point there
was more of a focus of sexual assault prevention education, IPV is being incorporated
more than in the past. One respondent stated, “As of now primarily sexual assault, but
we are expanding our offerings on IPV”.
Figure 4: Professionals’ perspectives on campus educational focus
69
If education and services are focused more toward sexual assault prevention than
IPV prevention it is possible that students who are victims/survivors of IPV may have
less knowledge of the services available on their campus. Of service providers surveyed,
the vast majority stated that they were not the first point of contact for victims/survivors
of IPV. Survey respondents who stated that they were not the first point of contact for
students (n=12, 70.6%) stated that the first point of contact was a friend/peer, housing
staff/resident assistant, counseling services, women’s resource center/gender equity
center, pride center, student health center, roommate or family member.
Table 4:
Was the trained victim’s advocate the first point of contact?
Frequency
Percent
(n)
(%)
Yes
5
29.4%
No
12
70.6%
Table 4 shows that in a majority of cases, the trained victim’s advocate is not the
first point of contact. In fact, respondents of this survey stated that in only 29.4% cases
they were the first point of contact meaning that 70.6% of the time an individual not
trained specifically to advocate for victims/survivors was the first point of contact.
Figure 5 importantly illustrates that survey respondents who were not the first point of
contact stated that the most frequent first points of contact were those who are
traditionally not trained to advocate for students experiencing IPV.
70
Respondents stated that of untrained first points of contact, 56.67% were friends,
13.33% were housing staff, 10.00% were counseling staff and that 6.67% were women’s
resource center. Other individuals, 13.33% who were named as first points of contact
were campus pride centers, student health centers, roommates and family members.
Figure 5: First point of contact
It is important to note that the majority of people who were the first point of
contact for victims/survivors of IPV were most likely not formally trained to provide
victim advocacy services. This provides important information to the field as it will be
vital for the lay person to be provided with education about IPV identification and
campus and community resources.
71
In addition, it will be of vital importance for untrained individuals to have training
and education as victims/survivors do not necessarily access formal advocacy services
until the abusive relationship has progressed. Survey respondents stated that most often
victims/survivors do not access their services until the relationship has progressed to
close to one year (61.5%). Some service providers stated that their services were not
accessed until one to three years into the relationship (23.1%).
Figure 6: Duration of abusive relationship upon service request
These figures show the importance of all students, staff/faculty and employees
being trained about awareness, identification and resources for those experiencing IPV.
Early intervention is a key component in mitigating the long term consequences of IPV in
terms of barriers to academic success and negative physical and mental health impacts.
72
Chapter 5
CONCLUSION, SUMMARY, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Study Conclusions
This study exhibits important findings on the academic impacts of college
students who are involved in abusive relationships. Also, this study begins to assess the
intricacies of the victims’/survivors’ decision to seek and receive services. Although IPV
is a significant public health issue, the impacts to college students in violent relationships
have not been adequately studied and therefore the results of this study are a small
contribution to legitimizing the issue of IPV in the college population.
The first significant key finding of this study is related to specified type of
violence experienced by college students who utilize the services provided by the study
participants. Although popular culture assumes that physical violence is the most
commonly reported type of violence, the data of this study show that psychological
violence is the most common form of violence. Results show that college students
experiencing IPV are impacted by specific types of violence predominately in
psychological and sexual domains followed by verbal, physical, stalking and other.
Additionally, 76% of respondents stated that students in IPV relationships have
changes that negatively impact their GPA and academic performance. Although
academic performance changes alone cannot provide a direct link to an abusive
relationship, the changes in academic success have the potential to cause students who
73
are victims/survivors of IPV with secondary trauma or impacts. It is important that
victim’s advocates and other service providers are available to intervene academically
and assist students in achieving improved academic outcomes.
Aside from GPA and other markers of academic performance, the majority of
respondents stated that they advocated for students in IPV relationships who experienced
negative impacts to their academic performance. Importantly, other respondents
answered “not applicable”. Although about one fifth of the respondents considered the
question to be not applicable none of the survey respondents stated that there were no
negative impacts to victims/survivors of the college population in terms of academic
progress.
The health and safety of students attending any college university is of the utmost
importance in terms of their overall wellness and potential academic success.
Respondents stated that they most commonly advocated for students experiencing
anxiety, depression, disordered eating, PTSD, suicidality, panic attacks, substance use
disorders and stress. In addition, in terms of physical health issues respondents stated
that students most commonly present with cutting/self mutilation, stomach
problems/irritable bowel syndrome, pain, sexually transmitted infections and pregnancy.
Outside of specified physical and mental health issues, respondents also stated that
victims/survivors report feelings of fear, low self esteem/low self-worth, shame, guilt,
isolation, flashbacks, distress, despair, embarrassment, feeling responsible for abusive
partners’ actions, humiliation, social instability, trust issues, feeling overwhelmed and
74
feeling that it is his/her fault. The data show that 49.4% of service providers advocated
for students with mental health issues, 17.3% advocated for students with physical health
issues and 33.3% advocated for students with other issues.
In terms of prevention and awareness education focus, study respondents stated
that on the campuses of 50% of respondents there were more sexual assault prevention
focused initiatives and on the campuses of 43.3% there were both sexual assault and IPV
prevention education. Out of this sample, no survey respondents stated that there are
focused prevention education efforts for IPV on their campuses. Without awareness and
prevention, there is potential for many issues to arise.
Related to education, respondents stated that in terms of college campus’ level of
preparedness in combatting issues associated with IPV for students, 92.3% stated that
they did not believe that college campuses were doing enough to combat IPV and 7.4%
of respondents stated not applicable (see Figure 2). This information exhibits that the
vast majority of victim’s advocates do not feel that their college campus is equipped to
support students who are experiencing issues of IPV.
Although the majority of survey respondents stated that college campuses are not
prepared in combatting IPV, they did provide areas of college campuses that can
potentially be improved in order to better serve victims/survivors. Overall, 29.73% of
respondents stated that additional education about IPV should be incorporated on their
campus, 13.51% of respondents stated that other support services should be expanded and
75
supported, 8.11% of respondents believe that additional funding around this issue is
required and 8.11% of respondents hoped for additional punishments for students who
are perpetrators if IPV (see Figure 3).
Respondents stated that in a majority of cases they observe that the first point of
contact for victims/survivors were generally untrained individuals. Table 4 and Figure 5
show that in 70.6% of cases an individual not trained specifically to advocate for
victims/survivors of IPV was the first point of contact. This data importantly illustrates
that in a majority of cases, the first point of contact is a lay person rather than a trained
professional. Respondents stated that of untrained first points of contact, 56.67% were
friends, 13.33% were housing staff, 10.00% were counseling staff and that 6.67% were
women’s resource center/gender equity center staff. Other individuals, 13.33% were
campus pride centers, student health centers, roommates and family members.
The findings of this study powerfully exhibit that improvement in the area of IPV
education, service provision and accessibility for victims/survivors in the college
population is necessary to support the health and academic success of this population.
Although the Campus SaVE Act has the potential to provide a functional framework for
colleges/universities across the United States in providing improved IPV, dating violence
and stalking support, the unfunded mandate will take years to assess and implement.
With that, it will be of vital importance that social workers practicing at the micro level,
victim’s advocates and other service provides are well trained and equipped to provide
competent and ethical service to victims/survivors of IPV in the college population.
76
Recommendations
Recommendations arising from this study are presented within different areas of
the levels of social work practice: micro, mezzo and macro as all areas of social work
have the potential to improve the health and safety of victims/survivors of IPV. With a
collaborative approach to this serious public health issue, coordinated services may
provide victims/survivors with increased safety, academic success and increased
willingness to access services.
In terms of direct practice social work, the main recommendations surround
service utilization and more effectively allocating resources in order for services to be
widely available to all victims/survivors. In addition, social workers directly advocating
for victims/survivors of IPV should receive training about the impact of IPV on academic
performance. This training needs to be provided to victim’s advocates so that they can
competently serve clients.
It is of vital importance that direct practice social workers in the area of IPV are
knowledgeable about interventions that best serve this population. For example, it will
be crucial for social workers who offer services at the micro level to have a clear
understanding of healthy relationships and positive relationships. Additionally, it will be
important for social workers who offer services at the micro level to have an
understanding of developmental stages of the clients as with a history of trauma as it is
possible that a client has not progressed to the developmental stage that matches his/her
chronological age. Also, it is of the utmost importance that social workers practicing
77
with victims/survivors of IPV to consider and work through issues of counter
transference in establishing clear boundaries that do not interference with effective
service delivery.
Social workers who work at the mezzo level must consider the systemic factors
that contribute to IPV or lack of treatment of IPV such as agency/university culture and
service delivery challenges. As it is of paramount importance to deliver coherent services
especially because IPV victims may have dysfunctional personal relationships and may
be exhausted at the time of seeking advocacy. Service providers should also model
appropriate relationships within their agency and address appropriate relationship
standards from the first point of contact to the termination process. Through modeling
appropriate relationships and behavior patterns, social workers have the potential to
empower clients in not repeating relationships that they may be accustomed to.
Mezzo level social workers also have the opportunity to work with clients through
the family system by working with individual members who may contribute to the
violence or be victims/survivors also. This recommendation is important as it does not
treat the victim in isolation and does not place the burden of recovery solely on the
victim/survivor. Additionally, it is important to consider the cultural aspects to IPV,
especially in the family system. For example, within certain cultures, the family system
significantly contributes to a victim/survivor staying in abusive relationships out of
cultural and family obligations. This recommendation also includes a strong suggestion
for service providers to receive cultural education cross culturally in order to more
effectively serve all clients with varying cultural backgrounds.
78
Macro level social work should have a clear understanding of the consequences
that victims/survivors experience in the family system, university environment and
informal dating environment. This level of social work advocacy should also analyze the
effectiveness of federal, state and local policies and acts such as VAWA including Title
IX and the Campus SaVE Act. It is important that social workers practicing at the macro
level are aware of the benefits and issues of any policies, especially unfunded mandates.
Social workers who focus on policy have the potential to analyze the policy benefits to
the individual or the community or both the individual and the community. For example,
the Campus SaVE act is a policy which theoretically benefits both the individual and the
community. College campus policies are generally written to uphold campus community
safety which has the potential to indirectly benefit the individual.
Social workers at the macro level have the opportunity to monitor the potential
fall out of policy and legal issues at the mezzo and micro level. Additionally, macro level
social workers should promote the research of topics related to IPV. Potential areas for
future research include but are not limited to: studying victims directly in order to
conduct follow up research, the extent of the effectiveness of services, prevention
campaigns and level of education versus effectiveness of service providers.
Additionally, macro level social workers have the responsibility to promote
funding for events, women’s resource centers, libraries with violence prevention
education resources and for a physical location for victims/survivors to receive social
support and safety resource information. Physical space is not only important for the
purpose of social support, but is also of paramount importance so that students
79
experiencing IPV do not remain socially isolated. Abusive partners generally utilize
social and family isolation as part of the abuse. Also, macro level social workers should
consider the importance of funding for bystander intervention programs due to their
effectiveness in community and individual safety.
Theoretically, it is important for social workers at all levels to consider Bandura’s
Self Efficacy Theory, Classical Strain Theory, Radical Feminist Theory, Akers’ Social
Learning Theory, Social Role Theory and the Transtheoretical/Stages of Change Model
(see Chapter 1)in their advocacy. A well defined theoretical framework has the potential
to assist social workers in better understanding the perspective and circumstances of
victims/survivors. In the future it will be important for social workers to add to the
theoretical body of knowledge in order to continue to improve specific theoretical
interventions.
Additional funding is not only important for expanding the body of knowledge,
but also for improving resource availability. For example, one of the respondents stated
that after seeing clients she has significant issues in connecting her clients to university
counseling services due to long wait lists. If there is a break down in support system,
there is potential for victims/survivors to become disengaged in the recovery and safety
process. Additionally, professional judgment needs to be considered during safety
planning to assist clients in making the decision to leave at the appropriate and safest
points. Safety planning should be initiated by an advocate, but should be guided and
supported by the victim/survivor.
80
Self determination should be considered and respected at all levels of advocacy.
With self determination there is the potential for victims/survivors to make decisions that
work best for their situations. Also, victims/survivors are the expert in their process and
the process of leaving should be planned sometimes months in advance by the
victim/survivor. Service providers must be trained in presenting all of the options and
asking appropriate questions which support the victims’/survivors’ self determination.
Implications for Social Work
The issues and impacts associated with IPV throughout the United States are clear
(see Chapter 2) and communities, including social workers, have responded. Although
there has been significant progress in this area, there is still a great amount of work to be
done in the areas of direct practice, advocacy, education, prevention measures and policy.
Social workers have the unique opportunity to work in micro, mezzo and macro areas to
improve services provided to victims/survivors of IPV. Although IPV is endemic, each
population requires specialized research and treatment and therefore the issue of IPV in
the college population is in need of urgent attention.
Based on the recommendations discussed above there are implications and
opportunities for social work practice at the micro, mezzo and macro levels. These
recommendations may begin to assist social workers in better service, advocacy and
resource allocation for victims/survivors of IPV in the college population. As IPV is a
significant public health issue with the potential to create not only barriers to academic
success, but also physical and mental health issues, it is urgent that social workers are
competent in this area.
81
It is the desire of the researcher that victims/survivors are adequately supported in
any population as it is clear that IPV has the potential to impact all individuals. This
study focused on victims/survivors of IPV in the college population. Therefore, it is also
the desire of the researcher that this area receives a greater amount of attention.
Social workers have the potential to more effectively advocate for
victims/survivors of IPV with a well developed theoretical framework, interventions
tailored appropriately to the population and a clear understanding of current research in
IPV prevention and service allocation. In addition, it is extremely important that social
workers advocating for victims/survivors have clear boundaries, appropriate clinical
supervision in order to avoid and work through issues of counter transference and a
willingness to allow the client to be in the expert role.
Arguably, the most important aspect to appropriate advocacy is social workers
having cultural understanding, sensitivity and a willingness to learn about new cultures.
It is often the case that family systems and the culture at large play a significant role in
the victims’/survivors’ experience of violence and willingness to leave or ability to leave.
Victims/survivors of IPV are a vulnerable population which deserves appropriate,
competent and ethical care and advocacy. As the field of social work is vast in scope,
social workers have opportunities to advocate at all levels of social work in diverse
settings and communities.
82
Appendix A. Human Subjects Approval Letter
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO
DIVISION OF SOCIAL WORK
TO:
Amelia Stults
Date: 9/25/12
FROM: Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects
RE: YOUR RECENT HUMAN SUBJECTS APPLICATION
We are writing on behalf of the Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects from the
Division of Social Work. Your proposed study, “Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) IN
College Students: Dynamics and Implications.”
__X_ approved as _ _X
_EXEMPT _ __ NO RISK ____ MINIMAL RISK.
Your human subjects approval number is: 12-13-008. Please use this number in
all official correspondence and written materials relative to your study. Your
approval expires one year from this date. Approval carries with it that you will
inform the Committee promptly should an adverse reaction occur, and that you
will make no modification in the protocol without prior approval of the
Committee.
The committee wishes you the best in your research.
Professors: Professors: Maria Dinis, Jude Antonyappan, Teiahsha Bankhead, Serge Lee,
Kisun Nam, Maura O’Keefe, Dale Russell, Francis Yuen.
Cc: Antonyappan
83
References
Alaggia, R. , Regehr, C. , & Jenney, A. (2012). Risky business: An ecological analysis of
intimate partner violence disclosure. Research on Social Work Practice, 22(3),
301-312.
American College Health Association. (2012). National College Health Assessment.
Retrieved from http://www.acha-ncha.org/docs/ACHANCHAII_ReferenceGroup_Executive Summary_Fall2011.pdf
Ard, K. L., & Makadon, H. J. (2011). Addressing intimate partner violence in lesbian,
gay, bisexual and transgender patients. Society of General Internal Medicine,
26(8), 630-633. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1697-6
Avant, E. , Swopes, R. , Davis, J. , & Elhai, J. (2011). Psychological abuse and
posttraumatic stress symptoms in college students. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 26(15), 3080-3097.
Babin, E. , Palazzolo, K. , & Rivera, K. (2012). Communication skills, social support,
and burnout among advocates in a domestic violence agency. Journal of Applied
Communication Research, 40(2), 147-166.
CDC. (2012). Injury center: Violence prevention teen dating violence. Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/teen_dating_viol
ence.html
84
CDC. (2010). Injury center: Violence prevention-Intimate partner violence:
Consequences. Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/intimatepartnerviolence/consequences.ht
ml
CDC. (2010). Intimate partner violence: Definitions. Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/intimatepartnerviolence/definitions.html
CDC. (2010). National intimate partner and sexual violence survey: Highlights of
2010 findings. Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_FactSheet-a.pdf
Campbell, J. (2004). Helping women understand their risk in situations of intimate
partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(12), 1464-1477.
Campbell, J. , Glass, N. , Sharps, P. , Laughon, K. , & Bloom, T. (2007). Intimate partner
homicide. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 8(3), 246-269.
Cismaru, M. , & Lavack, A. (2011). Campaigns targeting perpetrators of intimate partner
violence. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 12(4), 183-197.
Clery Center for Security on Campus. (2012). Summary of the Jeanne Clery Act.
Retrieved from http://www.securityoncampus.org/summary-jeanne-clery-act
Clery Center for Security on Campus. (2012). The Campus Sexual Violence Elimination
(SaVE) Act. Retrieved from http://www.securityoncampus.org/campus-sexualviolence-elimination-save-act
85
Cochran, J. , Sellers, C. , Wiesbrock, V. , & Palacios, W. (2011). Repetitive intimate
partner victimization: An exploratory application of social learning theory.
Deviant Behavior, 32(9), 790-817.
Daley, E. M., & Noland, V.J. (2001). Intimate Partner Violence in College Students: A
Cross-Cultural Comparison. The International Electronic Journal of Health
Education, 4. Retrieved from http://www.bvsde.paho.org/bvsacd/cd32/daley.pdf
DePrince, A. , Labus, J. , Belknap, J. , Buckingham, S. , & Gover, A. (2012). The
impact of community-based outreach on psychological distress and victim safety
in women exposed to intimate partner abuse. Journal of Consulting & Clinical
Psychology, 80(2), 211-221.
Eckes, T., & Trautner, H. M. (Eds.). (2000). The Developmental Social Psychology of
Gender. Mehwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
Edwards, K. , Murphy, M. , Tansill, E. , Myrick, C. , Probst, D. , et al. (2012). A
qualitative analysis of college women's leaving processes in abusive relationships.
Journal of American College Health 60(3), 204-210.
Featherstone, B., & Trinder, L. (1997). Familiar subjects? Domestic violence and child
welfare. Child & Family Social Work, 2(3), 147-159.
Gondolf, E. (2009). Implementing mental health treatment for batterer program
participants: Interagency breakdowns and underlying issues. Violence Against
Women, 15(6), 638-655.
86
Karakurt, G. , & Cumbie, T. (2012). The relationship between egalitarianism, dominance,
and violence in intimate relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 27(2), 115122.
Keeling, J. , & Fisher, C. (2012). Women's early relational experiences that lead to
domestic violence. Qualitative Health Research, 22(11), 1559-1567.
Leone, J. , Lane, S. , Koumans, E. , DeMott, K. , Wojtowycz, M. , et al. (2010). Effects of
intimate partner violence on pregnancy trauma and placental abruption. Journal of
Women's Health (15409996), 19(8), 1501-1509.
Letourneau, N. , Duffy, L. , & Duffett-Leger, L. (2012). Mothers affected by domestic
violence: Intersections and opportunities with the justice system. Journal of
Family Violence, 27(6), 585-596.
Loke, A. , Wan, M. , & Hayter, M. (2012). The lived experience of women victims of
intimate partner violence. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21(15/16), 2336-2346.
McCloskey, L. A., Williams, C. M., Lichter, E., Gerber, M., Ganz, M. L., & Sage, R.
(2007). Abused women disclose partner interference with health care: An
unrecognized form of battering. Society of General Internal Medicine, 22(8),
1067-1072.
McMahon, S. , & Armstrong, D. (2012). Intimate partner violence during pregnancy:
Best practices for social workers. Health & Social Work, 37(1), 9-17.
Mason, B. , & Smithey, M. (2012). The effects of academic and interpersonal stress on
dating violence among college students: A test of classical strain theory. Journal
of Interpersonal Violence, 27(5), 974-986.
87
Melton, H. , & Sillito, C. (2012). The role of gender in officially reported intimate partner
abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(6), 1090-1111., 60(3), 204-210.
Moore, A. N. , Frohwirth, L. , & Miller, E. (2010). Male reproductive control of women
who have experienced intimate partner violence in the United States. Social
Science & Medicine, 70(11), 1737-1744.
Nannini, A. , Lazar, J. , Berg, C. , Barger, M. , Tomashek, K. , et al. (2011). Rates
of hospital visits for assault during pregnancy and the year postpartum: Timing
matters. Public Health Reports, 126(5), 664-668.
Narula, A. , Agarwal, G. , & McCarthy, L. (2012). Intimate partner violence: Patients'
experiences and perceptions in family practice. Family Practice, 29(5), 593-600.
Nemeth, J. , Bonomi, A. , Lee, M. , & Ludwin, J. (2012). Sexual infidelity as trigger for
intimate partner violence. Journal of Women's Health (15409996), 21(9), 942949.
Pico-Alfonso, M. (2005). Psychological intimate partner violence: The major predictor of
posttraumatic stress disorder in abused women. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral
Reviews, 29(1), 181-193.
Rivas-Diez, R. , Sanchez-Lopez, M. , & Cuellar-Flores, I. (2012). P-1478 - mental health
in battered women by their partners. European Psychiatry, 27, 1.
Romitoa, P. , Turan, J. , & de Marchi, M. (2005). The impact of current and past
interpersonal violence on women's mental health. Social Science & Medicine,
60(8), 1717-1727.
88
Sanchez-Lorente, S. , Blasco-Ros, C. , & Martinez, M. (2012). Factors that contribute or
impede the physical health recovery of women exposed to intimate partner
violence: A longitudinal study. Women's Health Issues, 22(5), e491-e500.
Song, L. (2012). Service utilization, perceived changes of self, and life satisfaction
among women who experienced intimate partner abuse: The mediation effect of
empowerment. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(6), 1112-1136.
Sorenson, S. (2006). Firearm use in intimate partner violence: A brief overview.
Evaluation Review, 30(3), 229-236.
Stover, C. , Meadows, A. , & Kaufman, J. (2009). Interventions for intimate partner
violence: Review and implications for evidence-based practice. Professional
Psychology, Research & Practice, 40(3), 223-233.
Straus, H. , Cerulli, C. , McNutt, L. , Rhodes, K. , Conner, K. , et al. (2009). Intimate
partner violence and functional health status: Associations with severity, danger,
and self-advocacy behaviors. Journal of Women's Health (15409996), 18(5), 625631.
United States Department of Education: Office for Civil Rights. (2011). Dear Colleague
letter for sexual harassment and sexual violence letter (retrieved from
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/dear_colleague_sexual_violence.pd
f). Washington, DC.
Washington, O. , & Moxley, D. (2013). Self-efficacy as a unifying construct in nursingsocial work collaboration with vulnerable populations. Nursing Inquiry, 20(1), 4250.
89
Williams, J. , Ghandour, R. , & Kub, J. (2008). Female perpetration of violence in
heterosexual intimate relationships: Adolescence through adulthood. Trauma,
Violence & Abuse, 9(4), 227-249.