Women’s narratives of their lived experience when love and abuse co-exist in intimate partner relationships, provide insight into the ways that their action for safety is impacted by their beliefs about love, the micro-politics of these relationships, and the macro-politics of the structural inequalities that constrain these relationships. Women’s vulnerability to abuse is increased and their access to safety limited by a belief in love as a promise, the dominant romance narratives including the fairy tale and dark romance narratives, by the practice of love with the two core conditions that support abuse, and by the social structures and institutions of society that constrain these relationships. Understanding the impact of how love is practiced, the dominant narratives of love and abuse, and the ways that social structures and institutions constrain women when love and abuse co-exist will enhance women’s access to safety and social work services.

The Ideal Standards Model (Simpson, Fletcher and Campbell, 2001) suggests that individuals regulate themselves and their partners based on how closely their perceptions match their ideal standards. Overall, Fletcher and Simpson (2006) provided empirical support for the regulatory function of the Ideal Standards Model and concluded that standards which may initiate regulation reflect three pivotal domains; warmth/trustworthiness, attractiveness/vitality and status/resources. In Study 1, 150 individuals (in heterosexual relationships or had been in the previous six months) spontaneously reported prior regulatory attempts that had focused on changing themselves, their partner or their relationship. Participants then described their most salient regulatory attempt in detail and rated the success of this attempt. In Study 2, 96 individuals (in heterosexual relationships) self-rated various personality and relationship characteristics. Participants also indicated how they would likely respond (using a set of likert scales) to partner initiated regulation attempts which were provided via vignette descriptions. As predicted, results indicated (a) that regulatory attempts reflect the pivotal domains of the Ideal Standards Model, (b) predicted gender differences in the use of regulation, (c) increased regulatory success with the use of interpersonal strategies and (d) increased relationship quality with less negative reactions to regulatory attempts. Results also indicated that women were more likely to respond negatively than men, particularly when the regulation attempt focused on their attractiveness. Implication and explanations are discussed.

Women’s narratives of their lived experience when love and abuse co-exist in intimate partner relationships, provide insight into the ways that their action for safety is impacted by their beliefs about love, the micro-politics of these relationships, and the macro-politics of the structural inequalities that constrain these relationships. Women’s vulnerability to abuse is increased and their access to safety limited by a belief in love as a promise, the dominant romance narratives including the fairy tale and dark romance narratives, by the practice of love with the two core conditions that support abuse, and by the social structures and institutions of society that constrain these relationships. Understanding the impact of how love is practiced, the dominant narratives of love and abuse, and the ways that social structures and institutions constrain women when love and abuse co-exist will enhance women’s access to safety and social work services.

国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Georgia State University, 2008. / Title from file title page. Kenneth B. Matheny, committee chair; Yiu-Man B. Chung, William L. Curlette, Gregory L. Brack, committee members. Description based on contents viewed Aug. 20, 2009. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.)--Humboldt State University, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 39-46). Also available via Humboldt Digital Scholar.

Thesis (M.A.)--Georgia State University, 2008. / Title from title page (Digital Archive@GSU, viewed June 14, 2010) Julia Perilla, committee chair; Roger Bakeman, Gabriel Kuperminc, committee members. Includes bibliographical references (p. 81-94).

Thesis (M.P.H.)--Georgia State University, 2009. / Title from file title page. Monica H. Swahn, committee chair; John Beltrami, Stacy L. DeJesus, committee members. Description based on contents viewed Nov. 12, 2009. Includes bibliographical references (p. 79-83).

abstract: Research has demonstrated that intimate partner violence (IPV) plays an important role in relationship satisfaction. Consistently, the research has indicated a negative association between the prevalence of IPV and relationship satisfaction (Cano & Vivian, 2003; Hotaling & Sugarman, 1990; Vivian & Langhrinrichsen-Rohling, 1994); however, more recent research has provided evidence of higher relationship satisfaction when IPV is present (Frieze, 2005; Hamby & Gray-Little, 2000; Williams & Frieze, 2005). There has been less emphasis placed on uncovering possible explanations for this inconsistency. Some researchers have suggested that victims find ways to rationalize their offender's behavior (Ackerman & Field, 2011), do not consider themselves victims of violence (Hamby & Gray-Little, 2000), or even fail to identify physical violence as IPV (Ferraro & Johnson, 1983) in order to maintain their desire to feel satisfied in their relationship. There is a need for additional research to understand why an individual might report higher relationship satisfaction when IPV is present in her/his intimate relationship and attempt to uncover underlying, contributing factors of IPV. This study sought understanding of the potential mediating role that idealization, the overly positive illusions of a partner or the intimate relationship (Murray, Holmes, & Griffin, 1996a; 1996b), may play on the association between IPV and relationship satisfaction. Additionally, gender was examined as a potential moderator between the predictor and outcome variables as IPV research has consistently documented the need for greater gender symmetry within this topic. One hundred and fifty-two adults (75 males and 77 females) who were currently involved in an intimate relationship (e.g., dating, engaged, married) or had been within the past 12-months completed a survey that assessed IPV, idealization, and relationship satisfaction. Three types of IPV were measured for the purposes of this study (i.e., psychological aggression, physical assault, and sexual coercion), and each was analyzed separately. Results indicated that idealization served as a mediating variable in the relationship between IPV and relationship satisfaction for all three types of IPV. Gender was not found to moderate the relationships for any of the three types of IPV and relationship satisfaction. Limitations, implications, and future research are discussed. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Counseling Psychology 2018

Doctor of Philosophy / School of Family Studies and Human Services / Sandra M. Stith / Intimate partner homicide (IPH) is a serious problem throughout the world. Research has identified a history of intimate partner violence (IPV) as a risk factor for IPH (Campbell et al., 2007). However, we know that not all individuals who perpetrate IPV end up perpetrating IPH, and not all victims of IPV end up becoming victims of IPH. There is a need to identify additional risk factors for IPH in order to potentially help identify individuals who may be at a greater risk for IPH perpetration or victimization. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis on risk factors for male IPH perpetration and female IPH victimization. This meta-analysis examined results from 17 studies, which included 148 effect sizes to be used in the analysis. The overall sample size included in the study was 10,143. This study compared IPV samples and IPH samples as a means to aid in identifying risk factors that may place individuals who are victims or perpetrators of IPV at a greater risk for IPH perpetration or victimization. Results of our analyses indicated that the strongest risk factors for male IPH perpetration were the perpetrator having direct access to a gun, perpetrator’s’ previous threats with a weapon, perpetrator’s previous non-fatal strangulation, perpetrator’s previous rape of the victim, perpetrator’s demonstration of controlling behaviors, perpetrator’s previous threats to harm the victim, and the perpetrator’s previous stalking of the victim. We found that the strongest risk factors for female IPH victimization were the victim being abused by the perpetrator while pregnant, the victim’s substance abuse, the victim having less than a high school education, being separated from the perpetrator, and having children from a previous relationship (not with the perpetrator). Implications for law enforcement personnel, victim advocates, mental health professionals, as well as other professionals who may be in contact with potential IPH perpetrators and victims are discussed.