Session: Examining Patterns of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) and Violence Types Among IPV Survivors, Batterers, and Couples (Society for Social Work and Research 20th Annual Conference - Grand Challenges for Social Work: Setting a Research Agenda for the Future)

As research on intimate partner violence (IPV) has matured in recent years, a more complex understanding of IPV has begun to develop, with important implications for both research and practice. One emergent area of study is the role of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs, which include childhood victimization as well as other forms of adversity such as parental substance abuse) in shaping later IPV victimization and perpetration; a second is the interplay of violence and coercion types among couples. What these two critical areas have in common is a focus on dynamic patterns of co-occurring victimization, vs. the overriding focus on one form of violence so common in the empirical literature. As many leading violence researchers have recently noted, a concerted focus on examining these complex patterns is critical to improving our empirical knowledge base, revitalizing our methods, and enhancing the effectiveness of our interventions. This focus is not only important to the field of IPV research: It also stands to contribute to our discipline’s Grand Challenges, given that one of the challenges is to stop family violence. Thus, the purpose of this symposium is to highlight IPV research that uses innovative methods to examine patterns of ACEs and violence types within diverse samples of survivors, batterers, and couples.

The first presentation by Kennedy, Bybee, and Ramirez uses longitudinal multilevel modeling (MLM) to explore the role of cumulative victimization (community/school violence, witnessing IPV within the family, physical maltreatment by a caregiver, and sexual abuse), during childhood and adolescence, in predicting adolescent IPV victimization within a sample of 60 young mothers, assessed for an average of 15 years each using the life history calendar method. Results demonstrate that higher levels of cumulative childhood victimization by age 12 are associated with steeper increases in IPV victimization over the course of adolescence, after controlling for age at first partner and number of partners during adolescence. The second presentation by Priester and Kulkarni uses secondary data collected from a batterer intervention program (BIP) to examine the role of ACEs (physical, sexual, and emotional maltreatment; neglect; and household dysfunction such as substance abuse or mental illness) on treatment outcomes among the 282 BIP participants. Findings indicate that program participants reported higher than average rate of ACEs, with almost one-third reporting three or more ACEs; higher rate of ACEs was associated with greater odds of being terminated from the program. The third presentation by Mennicke uses secondary data to explore patterns of IPV (physical, sexual, and psychological perpetration and victimization) and coercive control within a diverse sample of couples (N = 714). Results from the cluster analyses support the notion of distinct patterns or types of IPV, including the four categories proposed by Johnson (2006), as well as two new control-related categories: situational violence, violent resistance, intimate terrorism, mutual coercive control, situational control, and control resistance. Taken together, the presentations advance our understanding of the complex patterns of violence and victimization, showcase innovative methods, and direct us toward more nuanced intervention approaches.