Social Work Education and Intimate
Partner Violence:
How Prepared Are Recent Master
of Social Work Graduates?
Dante M. de Tablan, MSW
School of Social Work
University of Maryland, Baltimore
Abstract
The prevalence of intimate partner violence requires that social workers
be prepared and able to respond; however, research shows that social
workers receive limited education about IPV. Results from a cross-sectional
survey of 228 recent MSW graduates show that those who graduated more
recently feel less prepared and less knowledgeable about IPV than those
who graduated earlier. Multiple linear regression analyses indicated that age,
graduation year, field placement, seminars outside the MSW program, topics
in the MSW program and post-MSW training predicted perceived
preparedness. Graduation year, seminars outside the MSW program, topics
in the MSW program and training post-MSW predicted perceived knowledge.
Only race and social work licensure predicted actual IPV knowledge.
Implications in educating social workers in Southeast Asia will be discussed
including expanding educational exposure to IPV, and examining the role of
race and cross-cultural responsiveness by the social worker vis-à-vis the IPV
victim may assist recent MSW graduates to become well-informed and better
equipped to respond effectively.
Background
 Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) – coercive or
aggressive behaviors committed by a current or former
spouse, partner, girlfriend, or boyfriend, dating, or
sexual partners against an intimate partner
 Four Types: sexual violence, physical violence,
stalking, and psychological aggression
Background
 Reported IPV rates among women vary widely from
15% to 71% according to a World Health Organization
study (Ellsberg et al., 2008). The U.S. Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 2014) reported
that in 2010, one in four women have experienced
intimate partner violence (IPV), while one in seven men
experienced the same.
Background
 In Vietnam, nearly a third (31.5%) of women have
experienced physical violence from their intimate
partners (Yount et al., 2014).
 In Indonesia, IPV prevalence is estimated at < 1% of
cases reported by service providers to the National
Commission on Violence Against Women (Iskandar et
al., 2015).
 In the Philippines, 13% of the women in Hindin &
Adair’s (2002) sample reported IPV.
Literature Review
 In Black et al.’s study, MSW students were
underprepared to deal with IPV as a whole, and a
greater educational focus on IPV as complex construct
is required (2010). Through a qualitative survey
research design, Black et al. (2010) examined the
thoughts about IPV among social work students and
found that the 124 students in the sample were more
likely to focus on individual and interpersonal
relationships as a response to a domestic violence
scenario, rather than the power and control aspects of
the IPV relationship.
Literature Review
 Collins and Dressler (2008) sought to compare social
workers’ and anthropology students’ cultural models of
the causes of domestic violence. Using a qualitative
design, the cultural beliefs of the causes of IPV were
examined among 64 MSW students and 16
anthropology students. The authors found that while
there was consensus in both groups relating to the
cultural causes of IPV, the social work students had a
more nuanced understanding of the causes of IPV
(Collins and Dressler, 2008).
Literature Review
 Cann et al. (2001) in examining attitudes, knowledge,
and levels of detection towards domestic violence in
the United Kingdom, found that women, nurses, and
mental health workers had significantly more
knowledge and greater sensitivity towards IPV victims
than other health workers.
Literature Review
 Kanno et al. (2010) identified that MSW field placement
experiences have a significant role in the education of
students. Students are required to work in the field for 900
hours and there is some evidence that students often enter
their placements with apprehension, stress, anxiety, with
unclear expectations, and negative emotions that may well
interfere with effective learning (Barlow & Hall, 2004; Barlow
et al, 2006; Gelman, 2004; Rompf, Royse, & Dhooper,
1993). The student may enter the field with low confidence,
role confusion or conflict, and undergo emotional stress
(Gelman, 2004). In the absence of adequate preparation,
the student may enter the field with apprehension and
anxiety and become at risk for burnout.
Research Questions
 Are more recent graduates in a Master of Social Work
program better prepared regarding IPV than those who
graduated earlier?
 Are later graduates in a Master of Social Work program
more knowledgeable regarding IPV than those who
graduated earlier?
 What demographic, student background and
educational factors predict increased preparedness
and greater knowledge among recent MSW graduates
regarding IPV?
Method
Procedures
 Designed as a cross-sectional study, a one-time survey was administered in
spring 2014 to recent MSW graduates from an accredited university in the
Mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Participants were sent an introduction
e-mail announcing the study and the opportunity to participate. A follow-up email was sent later that invited participation and provided a link where the
survey can be completed. Two follow up reminders were sent to nonresponders, one three days after the initial link and one a week after the initial
invitation. The reminder e-mail included a direct link to the survey (Dillman,
Smyth, & Christian, 2009). Survey data were kept confidential but responses
were tracked to enable follow up mail surveys to non-responders.
 The mailing included a letter describing the study and a self addressed
stamped return envelope. Mailed surveys did not include a link to the online
version as researchers have found this complicates the response and actually
decreases the response rate to paper surveys (Medway and Fulton, 2012). No
financial or gift incentives were used for survey participation.
Participants
 Of the 1,758 surveys that were distributed to MSW graduates from
2008 to 2013 via email, 156 were completed, yielding a response
rate of 8.9%. Of the remaining 1,602 participants who did not
respond to the online survey, 1,000 individuals were randomly
selected to receive a paper survey. Of those 1000, 155 were
undeliverable. For the remaining 845, 111 were received, yielding
a 13.14% response rate.
 Of the 267 total surveys received, two surveys were excluded for
non-graduation from the particular school, along with 11 survey
respondents who opened the survey but did not fill out the
questionnaire as well as 26 who did not complete the IPV
subscales, leaving a sample size for analysis of 228.
 A power analysis was performed using G*Power (Version 3)
indicating that this study needed at least 83 cases for 11 predictors
to achieve power at 0.95.
Missing Data
 Missing data. An SPSS (Version 22) analysis showed
that all 14 variables (3 dependent variables and 11
independent variables) used in this study had missing
data.
 Analysis further showed missing value patterns. Nearly
10% of survey respondents skipped or stopped at the
IPV portion of the questionnaire, which is near the end
of the survey questionnaire. Casewise deletion was
applied to cases with missing responses on IPV
subscales (n=26).
Dependent Variables
 Actual knowledge of IPV was measured through five multiple choice test
questions that were selected from the adapted PREMIS. The multiple choices
listed in each of the five questions were transformed into a total of 17 recoded
variables. A total mean score was computed to arrive at an Actual Knowledge
score. While no Cronbach alpha was reported, observed alpha was .79.
 Perceived knowledge was measured using the Perceived Knowledge
subscale from the adapted PREMIS, which ranges from 1 (“Nothing”) to 7
(“Very much”) in having knowledge of IPV. This subscale demonstrated high
internal consistency with a reported Cronbach's Alpha = .97 and an observed
∝ = .94). The 16 items were transformed by computing the mean total score.
 Perceived preparedness was measured using the Perceived Preparedness
subscale from the adapted PREMIS that ranges from 1 (“Not prepared”) to 7
(“Quite well prepared”) and also demonstrated high reliability in Connor et al.’s
study (Cronbach Alpha = .97, and an observed ∝ = .96). Twelve items were
transformed to compute the total mean score.
11 Independent Variables

Gender was recoded as “female” and “not female,” collapsing “male” and “transgender” into the latter.

Race was recoded as “White” and “non-White.”

Age was a continuous variable.

Date of graduation was recoded as dichotomous “Less recent” for 2008-2010 graduates, and “More
recent” for 2011-2013 graduates.

Licensure was coded as dichotomous “Yes/No” responses.

Both personal experience and witness with IPV were dichotomous “Yes/No” questions while the three
educational exposure questions were also coded as dichotomous “Yes/No” responses.

The four aspects of educational exposure which consists of (a) having had an academic field
placement in the area of IPV, (b) taking an IPV course or training outside the master of social work
program, (c) having enrolled in a Master of Social Work program that covered topics in IPV, and (d)
training post-MSW program, were coded as dichotomous “Yes/No” responses.
Data Analysis

Univariate statistics. The frequencies and percentages of the characteristics of the
sample were reported. Gender, race, age, year of graduation, licensure, personal
experience of IPV, personal witness to IPV, IPV-related field placement, IPV seminars
outside the MSW program, IPV topics in the MSW program and training post-MSW
program were analyzed.

Bivariate statistics. Less recent MSW graduates (2008-2010) were compared to more
recent MSW graduates (2011-2013). This categorization coincided with the State of
Maryland’s StateStat Plan, which made IPV a State-level priority after 2010. The MSW
graduates’ scores on IPV Perceived Preparedness scale, Perceived Knowledge scale,
and Knowledge scale of the PREMIS Questionnaire were compared. Effect size was
determined by partial eta squared.

Multivariate analysis. Each of the characteristics of the sample were included in three
multiple linear regression analyses to determine: (a) if the bivariate result comparing
more recent MSW graduates’ preparedness, perceived knowledge and actual knowledge
of IPV remained the same after controlling for other factors, to those who graduated
earlier, and (b) which factors predicted increased preparedness, perceived knowledge
and actual knowledge regarding IPV.
Table 1. Sample Characteristics of Recent MSW Graduates (N = 228)
Demographic Factors
N
%
Female
205
89.9
White
170
74.6
2008 – 2010 Graduates
97
42.5
2010 – 2013 Graduates
131
57.5
Licensed
200
88.1
Experienced IPV
69
39.5
Witnessed IPV
82
36.1
Field Placement
19
8.5
Seminars outside MSW
49
21.9
Topics in MSW Program
87
38.2
Training Post-MSW
87
38.2
Note. MSW = Master of Social Work degree
IPV = Intimate Partner Violence
Table 2. Perceived Preparedness, Perceived Knowledge, and Actual
Knowledge of IPV Among Recent MSW Graduates
2008-2010
2011-2013
M
SD
n
M
SD
n
F
df
p
η2
d
Perceived Preparedness
5.17
1.19
92
4.63
1.26
125
10.04
1,215
.002*
.04
.45
Perceived Knowledge
4.94
1.21
90
4.44
1.24
124
8.61
1,212
.004*
.04
.41
.72
0.16
97
.74
0.18
131
0.79
1,226
.376
.00
-.12
Variables
Actual Knowledge
p <.01*
Table 3. Linear Regression Analysis of IPV Perceived Preparedness and Knowledge, and Actual Knowledge of
Recent MSW Graduates
Perceived Preparedness
Variable
Perceived Knowledge
Actual Knowledge
B
P
95%CI
B
P
95%CI
B
P
95%CI
Gender
-0.140
0.59
-0.14, 0.26
-0.143
0.59
-0.14, 0.27
0.045
0.26
-0.03, 0.12
Race
-0.072
0.69
-0.07, 0.18
-0.136
0.46
00.14, 0.18
-0.081
0.003**
-0.13, -0.03
Age
-0.026
0.01*
-0.26, 0.01
-0.014
0.16
-0.52, 0.17
0.001
0.70
-0.00, 0.00
Graduate Year
-0.689
0.000***
-0.69, 0.17
-0.515
0.002**
-0.52, 0.17
0.036
0.15
-0.01, 0.08
Licensure
0.218
0.39
-0.22, 0.25
0.108
0.66
0.11, 0.25
0.194
0.012*
0.02, 0.17
Experienced IPV
0.220
0.19
0.22, 0.17
0.206
0.23
0.21, 0.17
0.037
0.16
-0.01, 0.09
Witnessed IPV
0.051
0.76
0.05, 0.171
0.028
0.87
0.03, 0.17
-0.014
0.58
-0.06,0.041
Field Placement
0.581
0.04*
0.58, 0.29
0.562
0.006**
0.56, 029
0.024
0.57
-0.06, 0.11
Seminars nonMSW
0.443
0.03*
0.44, 0.21
0.561
0.006**
0.56, 020
-0.041
0.18
-0.10, 0.02
Topics in MSW
0.682
0.000***
0.36, 1.01
0.682
0.000***
0.36, 1.01
0.013
0.60
-0.04, 0.06
Training PostMSW
0.652
0.000***
0.32, 0.98
0.667
0.000***
0.33, 1.00
0.042
0.10
-0.01, 0.09
Discussion
 Field internships have always been one of the key pillars of social work
education. Identifying IPV-related agency field placements that are open to
learning, developing field supervisors by providing field supervision training,
and incentivizing field supervision through engagement of practitioners are
some of the capacity building opportunities to explore. Students tend to give
immediate feedback as to the efficacy of the field placement experience.
 Strategically invest in one or two local IPV-related agencies that can
provide first-rate experiences for students and field supervisors alike.
Consider international internships that will also offer much needed crosscultural appreciation of program and practice.
 Develop agency practitioners into effective field supervisors by providing
continuing feedback, training, and guidance. Engaging field supervisors to
become clinical faculty adds resource and strengthens the social work
professional network.
Discussion
 The students’ perceived preparedness in, and knowledge of
IPV may be further enhanced by seminars outside the MSW
and BSSW programs.
 Encouraging and incentivizing students to attend in-service
trainings sponsored by NGOs, will inform students of the
importance and urgency of the work. They will hear directly
from practitioners the daily challenges in engaging and serving
IPV victims.
 Organizing workshops, whether student-led or faculty-led will
yield many benefits including greater appreciation in organizing
and scheduling workshop presenters and participants while
learning the many facets of IPV.
 Student and faculty attendance at conferences through
scholarships and funded student and faculty support may
further enhance preparedness and knowledge of IPV.
Discussion
 Regarding IPV Topics in the MSW or BSSW program: incorporate
IPV-related case studies, expert guest speakers, and collaborative
student projects.
 Harvard Business School and the Harvard School of Education primarily
utilize case studies to train professionals. Case studies encourage
inductive discussions among students with diverse backgrounds and
experiences. Teachers can capitalize on the growing experience of the
program participants. As more second career individuals enter the social
work profession, they bring a wealth of knowledge, competencies, and
experience which need to be harnessed, developed, and deployed.
 Field experts can provide a deeper perspective, and a new professional
alliance, not to mention a welcome respite your the teacher and students.
Collaborative student projects although messy at times, can maximize the
research and learning capacity of its members, benefiting the class as a
whole.
Discussion
 Finally, continuing education after the MSW or BSSW program can
enrich their knowledge and nourish the new social work
professional’s appreciation of colleagues.
 Encouraging new graduates to pursue licensure, if available in the
country, can improve not only their knowledge of IPV but will boost
their professional identity as well. However, if licensure is not yet
established by the appropriate credentialing institutions, providing
support to graduates by informing them of education and
employment opportunities is a sensible recourse.
 Include taking an IPV courses as a requirement in licensure
renewal. California and Florida are the only two states that require
social work licensees to complete IPV courses to for renewal.
Discussion
 Perceived Preparedness and Perceived Knowledge may be related to social
worker self-efficacy in addressing IPV. Osteen et al’s (2014) study on social
work student preparedness in assisting clients at risk of suicide may provide
parallel lessons for MSW graduates and their ability to address IPV. Since
there is no commonly accepted IPV Actual Knowledge Subscale,
strengthening social worker self-efficacy offers a foundation to build on.
 Cross-cultural exchanges of social work practice and philosophy may increase
our combined repertoire of IPV interventions. The strength of clinical social
work practice in the United States, if translated to Southeast Asia may benefit
individual and family interventions for IPV victims in Southeast Asia.
Conversely, feminist and community-level interventions, which tend to
dominate social work and community development efforts in the Asia-Pacific
region may balance out the IPV interventions dominated by behavioral and
psychotherapeutic modalities most prevalent in the United States.
Discussion
 Since race is a significant predictor in determining actual knowledge of IPV,
i.e., as a social work graduate’s race changes from White to Non-White, one
can predict a 3% decrease in actual knowledge of IPV.
 Therefore, investing in cross-cultural training regarding intimate partner
violence can identify multiple cultural factors that can affect IPV knowledge.
These include shame, embarrassment, providers not asking about IPV,
religious beliefs, language barriers, settings for self-disclosure, and forced
silence or by choice (Montalvo-Liendo, 2008), especially within non-White
groups.
 The need to establish trust in a compassionate and supportive environment,
as well as to listen attentively and without judgment are some of the
prerequisites to effectively intervene with women from Asian, Hawaiian,
Japanese, and Latino backgrounds; and especially among Filipinas,
counselors of the same background is most helpful (Montalvo-Liendo, 2008).
Acquiring a nuanced understanding of these aspects can greatly enhance
social worker knowledge regarding IPV vis-à-vis various racial groups.
Strengths
 The present study has a number of strengths and limitations. Since
there is limited research on IPV and IPV intervention in social work
(Black, Weisz & Bennett, 2010; Connor, et al., 2012; Nouer, et al.,
2012), this current study adds to this developing field.
 At present, this is one of a few identified investigations that report
perceptions, preparedness and knowledge regarding intimate partner
violence among recent MSW graduates.
 Another strength of this study is its use of tested and recognized
measures of perceptions, preparedness and knowledge on IPV
adapted from the Provider Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner
Violence Survey (PREMIS) tool published by Short, et al. (2006).
 In addition, statistical power was addressed given the sample size (N
= 228).
Limitations

Only recent graduates from one urban school of social work in the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States were surveyed
in this study. Therefore, results of this investigation cannot be generalized to other graduates of master level programs of
social work.

Nearly 10% of surveys (26) were not included in the final sample because they lacked responses on the IPV subscales,
thus rendering them incomplete. It was unclear if survey respondents stopped because they did not know the material.
Nevertheless, it is difficult to extrapolate conclusions from this occurrence.

In addition, because certain items from PREMIS were not included in this study, e.g., additional Actual Knowledge items,
estimation of IPV training hours before graduate school, and alcohol consumption and other substances as a predictor of
IPV, explication of the constructs may be inadequate thereby underrepresenting the characteristics of the constructs
presented here (Shadish, Cook & Campbell, 2002).

A possible threat to internal validity can be an event related to intimate partner violence during the time of the survey
(Shadish, et al., 2002). Media coverage was extensive particularly in the team’s home city and state where the subject
school of social work is located An ANOVA showed no difference in Perceived Preparedness and Perceived Knowledge
scores; but did yield a statistically significant difference in Actual Knowledge scores between those who responded online
(M = .76, SD = .13, N = 107) compared to those who responded by paper survey (M = .71, SD = .20, N = 121).

In addition, this cross-sectional study only allows for a one-time examination of the relationships of variables included in
the study and cannot be observed as they change overtime.
Conclusion

IPV is a cross-cutting issue that touches child and family welfare, family counseling services, the
criminal justice system, mental health, addiction interventions, medical systems, income assistance
programs, gerontology and disability services, and community-based services (Arseneault, Steward &
Miller, 2013).

Given this charge, it is vital that social workers are properly trained, are adequately knowledgeable
and possess the skills to interact effectively with victims of IPV and their families.

This present investigation demonstrated the importance of IPV-related field placement, IPV topics in
the MSW coursework, additional IPV seminars outside the MSW program and continuing IPV-related
training after graduation, in predicting preparation and knowledge. These aspects of social work
education provide the necessary underpinning to critically examine past and current practices and
their theoretical bases, while developing multifaceted approaches and correct methods for gathering
valid and reliable data” (Colarossi, 2005, pp. 151-152).

Given the prevalence of IPV, research in social work education and IPV on how perceived
preparedness and knowledge translates to effective behavior (Osteen, et al, 2014) especially in
culturally diverse social service settings (Collins & Dressler, 2008) is urgently needed.

Finally, further research is needed to determine how aspects of social work education are related to
global, national, State and local-level interventions and policies designed to address intimate partner
violence and its collateral effects.
References
Ablorh-Odjidja, A., Clark, C., & Cox, E. (2008). Intimate partner violence among pregnant and parenting women: Local health
department strategies for assessment, intervention, and prevention. (NACCHO Report). Retrieved from National
Association of County and City Health Officials website.
Aday, L.A. & Cornelius, L.J. (2006). Designing and conducting health surveys (3rd edition) San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
American Medical Association. (1992). Physicians and domestic violence. Journal of the Medical American Association, 8, 235-267.
Arseneault, R., Steward, T. & Miller, A. (2013). Intimate partner violence training for social work: A social action approach. (Report).
New Brunswick, Canada: Muriel McQueen Fergusson Centre for Family Violence Research.
Barlow, C, & Hall, B. (2004). Issues of power and resistance in social work education. International Journal of Learning, 10,
2670.
2663-
Black B. M., Weisz A. N. & L. W. Bennett. (2010). Graduating social work students’ perspectives on domestic violence. Affilia,
173-184.
25(2),
Borkowski M., Murch M., & Walker, V. (1983). Marital violence: The community response. London, England: Tavistock.
Campbell, J. & Humphreys, J. (1993). Nursing care of survivors of family violence. St. Louis,
MO: Mosby Year Book.
Cann, K., Withnell, S., Shakespeare, Doll, H., & Thomas, J. (2001). Domestic Violence: A comparative survey of levels of detection,
knowledge, and attitudes in healthcare workers. Public Health, 115(2), 89-95.
References
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression analysis in the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, New
Jersey: Erlbaum.
Colarossi, L. A response to Danis & Lockhart: What guides social work knowledge about violence against women? Journal of Social
Work Education, 41(1), 147-159.
Collins, C. C. & Dressler, W. W. (2008). Cultural models of domestic violence: Perspectives of social work and anthropology
Journal of Social Work Education, 44(2), 53-73.
Connor, P.D., Nouer, S.S., Mackey, S. N., Tipton, N.G., & Lloyd, A.K. (2011). Psychometric
tool for healthcare students. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 26(5), 1012–1035.
students.
properties of an intimate partner violence
Connor, P.D., Nouer, S.S., Mackey, S. N., Banet, M.S., & Tipton, N.G. (2012). Overcoming barriers in intimate partner violence
education and training of graduate social work students. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 32, 29–45.
Council on Social Work Education. (2014). Accreditation. Retrieved from http://www.cswe.org/default.aspx?id=17491, pp. 6-8.
Creative Research Systems (2012). Sample Size Calculator. Retrieved from http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm.
D’Andrade, R.G. (1984). Cultural meaning systems. In R.A. Schweder and R.A. Levine, (Eds.), Culture theory: Essays on mind, self,
and emotion (pp. 88-119). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
References
Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D., & Christian, L. (2009). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. (3rd ed).
NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Hoboken,
Dillman, D.A. (2007). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. New York, NY: Wiley Press.
Dobash R.E. & Dobash, R. (1979). Violence against wives: A case against patriarchy. New York, NY: Free Press.
Engel, R.J. & Schutt, R.K. (2013). The practice of research in social work, 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ellsberg, M., Jansen, H.A., Heise, L., Watts, C.H., Garcia-Moreno, C. Intimate partner violence and woment’s physical and mental health in
the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence: an observational study. Lancet
2008; 371(9619):1165-72.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and
regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160.
Frippiat, D. and Marquis, N. (2010). Web surveys in the social sciences: An overview.
Population-E, 65(2), 285-312.
Gelman, C. R. (2004). Anxiety experienced by foundation-year MSW students entering field placement: Implications for
admissions, curriculum, and field education. Journal of Social Work Education, 40(1), 39-54.
General Statistics Office (2010). “Keeping silent is dying”: Results from the National Study on Domestic Violence Against Women in Viet
Nam. Ha Noi, Vietnam.
References
Han, R. & Abdou-McFarland, N. (2013). Action for change: Empowering women victims of intimate partner violence to build
healthier and safer lives. (Report). New Brunswick: Muriel McQueen Fergusson Centre for Family Violence
Research.
Hindin, J.M. & Adair, L.S. (2002). Who’s at risk? Factors associated with intimate partner violence in the Philippines.
Science & Medicine, 55(8), 1385-1399.
Social
Kanno, H., & Koeske G. (2010). MSW students' satisfaction with their field placements: The role of preparedness and
supervision quality. Journal of Social Work Education, 46(1), 23-38.
Maiuro, R.D., Vitaliano, P.P., Sugg, N.K., Thomspon, D.C., Rivara, F.P., & Thompson, R.S. (2000). Development of a
healthcare provider survey for domestic violence: Psychometric properties. American Journal of
Preventative Medicine, 19(4), 245-252.
Montalvo-Liendo, N. (2008). Cross-cultural factors in disclosure of intimate partner violence: An integrated view.
of Advanced Nursing 65(1), 20-34 doi: 10.111/j.1365-2648.20089.04850.x
Journal
Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence (2014). Public policy and legislation. Retrieved from:
http://mnadv.org/law-public-policy/legislation-mnadv/.
Maryland State of Central Records Division (2012). Crime in Maryland. Retrieved from:
https://www.goccp.maryland.gov.
McMullan, E. C., Carlan, P. E & Nored, L.S. (2010). Future law enforcement officers and social workers: Perceptions of
domestic violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(8), 1367-1387.
References
Osteen, P. M., Jacobson, J. M., & Sharpe, T. L. (2014). Suicide prevention in social work education: How prepared are
social work students? Journal of Social Work Education, 50, 349-364.
Philippine Commission on Women, (2004). http://www.pcw.gov.ph/focus-areas/violence-against-women/initiatives
Plichta, S. B., Payne, B., Carmody, D., & Gagnon, E. (2007, November). Intimate partner violence: What do social workers
want to know?. Poster session presented at the meeting of the American Public Health Association,
Washington, D.C.
Rompf, E. L., Royse, D., & Dhooper, S. S. (1993). Anxiety preceding field work: What students worry about. Journal of
Teaching in Social Work, 7, 81-95.
Rosenbaum A., & Maiuro, R.D. (1990). Treatment of spouse abusers. In Ammerman R.L. & Hersen, M. (Eds.),
Treatment of family violence: A source book (pp.280–309). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Saltzman, L.E., Fanslow, J.L., McMahon, P.M., Shelley, G.A. Intimate partner violence surveillance: uniform definitions
and recommended data elements: version 1.0. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control; 2002.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D. & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal
inference. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Shore, B. (1996). Culture in mind: Cognition, culture, and the problem of meaning. New York: Oxford University Press.
References
Short, L. M., Alpert, E., Harris, J. M. Jr., & Surprenant, Z. J. (2006). PREMIS: A comprehensive and reliable
tool for measuring physician readiness to manage IPV. American Journal of
Preventive
Medicine, 30(2), 173–180.
StateStat. (2014). Governor O’Malley’s 16 Strategic Goals. Retrieved from https://data.maryland.gov/goals.
Stylianou, A. & McMahon, S. (2013, April). Requiring continuing education units on
violence. [letter]. Social Work, 58(2), 189-190.
interpersonal
Senreich, E. & Straussner, S.L.A. (2002). Impact of MSW education on knowledge and attitudes regarding
substance abusing clients. Journal of Social Work
Education, 49(2),
321-336.
Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, F. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Upper Saddle River, New
Pearson.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevalence and Characteristics of Sexual Violence, Stalking, and Intimate
Victimization – National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, United
Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov. /mmwr/pdf.
Jersey:
Prevention. (2014).
Partner Violence
States, 2011.