Shannon Lisa, Logan T K, Cole Jennifer
University of Kentucky, KY 40536, USA.
J Interpers Violence. 2007 Sep;22(9):1114-30. doi: 10.1177/0886260507302880.
The legal status of women's intimate relationships may allow for different experiences with intimate partner violence (IPV) and the protections received from the criminal justice system. There has been limited research examining differences in IPV and protective orders for women in marital and cohabiting intimate relationships. This study examines differences in experiences with IPV and factors related to protective orders: stipulations, violations, and perceived efficacy in a sample of married (n = 392) and cohabiting (n = 307) women with protective orders. Results suggest (a) married and cohabiting women are significantly different on a number of demographic characteristics; however, after controlling for these demographic differences, (b) married and cohabiting women's experiences with IPV are similar in almost all dimensions, except with the psychological tactic of degradation; and (c) married and cohabiting women receive similar protective order stipulations, experience similar rates of violations, and have the same overall perceptions of safety, freedom, and effectiveness pertaining to the domestic violence order. Implications for policy are discussed.
女性亲密关系的法律地位可能导致她们在亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）方面有不同经历，以及从刑事司法系统获得不同的保护。针对婚姻和同居亲密关系中女性的IPV及保护令差异的研究有限。本研究在有保护令的已婚女性（n = 392）和同居女性（n = 307）样本中，考察了IPV经历差异以及与保护令相关的因素：条款、违规情况和感知效力。结果表明：（a）已婚女性和同居女性在一些人口统计学特征上存在显著差异；然而，在控制了这些人口统计学差异后，（b）已婚女性和同居女性在IPV方面的经历在几乎所有维度都相似，除了贬低这一心理策略；（c）已婚女性和同居女性获得相似的保护令条款，经历相似的违规率，并且对家庭暴力令在安全、自由和效力方面有相同的总体认知。文中讨论了该研究对政策的启示。
