Ample research explores individual factors associated with sexual violence, yet individual, dyadic, and environmental influences on intimate partner sexual violence (IPSV) occurring in the larger context of non-intimate partner violence (NIPSV) remain relatively unexplored. The current study aimed to determine the extent to which county-level indicators in combination with individual and dyadic factors are associated with sexual violence across relationship types. Reported IPSV and NIPSV cases were obtained from the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation’s (TBI) online incident-based reporting system. County-level variables indicative of neighborhood physical disorder, violent crime, income inequality, firearm prevalence, and community alcohol use patterns were retrieved from the online resource County Health Rankings and Roadmaps. Using a nested case–control design, we determined significant sexual violence risk within younger cohorts and across relationship types, finding three significant county-level factors: 1) income inequality, 2) rate of firearm fatalities, and 3) percentage of female residents. Suggested prevention and intervention efforts include targeting younger age groups for IPSV and NIPSV education, developing resources for a range of relational partners, improving legal access and law enforcement training for reporting, and continued examination of the role of firearms.

A novel about intergenerational sexual violence.

This study examined about 500 mock juror perceptions in a murder trial in which the defendant claims to have killed her abusive husband in self-defense. The defendant’s psychological diagnosis, the husband’s alcohol abuse history, and documentation of domestic violence were varied across conditions. Results showed that medical evidence of domestic violence had a significant effect on guilt ratings and on perceptions of blame for the husband’s death. History of alcohol use of the husband influenced mock jurors’ perceptions of the credibility of the defendant. Juror gender effects were also found on verdict ratings. In contrast, no main effect was found for the defendant’s diagnosis.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.