Women & Criminal Justice

ISSN: 0897-4454 (Print) 1541-0323 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wwcj20

Revisiting Albert Bandura's Social Learning

Theory to Better Understand and Assist Victims of
Intimate Personal Violence

James F. Anderson & Kimberly Kras

To cite this article: James F. Anderson & Kimberly Kras (2007) Revisiting Albert Bandura's
Social Learning Theory to Better Understand and Assist Victims of Intimate Personal Violence,
Women & Criminal Justice, 17:1, 99-124, DOI: 10.1300/J012v17n01_05

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J012v17n01_05

Published online: 09 Oct 2008.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 3912

View related articles

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wwcj20

Download by: [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] Date: 25 February 2016, At: 09:29
 Revisiting Albert Bandura’s
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

Social Learning Theory to Better

Understand and Assist Victims
of Intimate Personal Violence
James F. Anderson
Kimberly Kras

ABSTRACT. Domestic violence or intimate personal violence, a matter

once considered private, has gained increased attention as a public health
crisis. In their efforts to better understand and prevent this behavior, so-
cial science researchers and epidemiologists have discovered the link be-
tween early exposure to violence and spousal abuse. This paper uses Albert
Bandura’s social learning theory to explain interpersonal and inter-
generational violence. In the final analysis, it argues that effective treat-
ment and prevention should include both criminal justice and public health
strategies. doi:10.1300/J012v17n01_05 [Article copies available for a fee from
The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address:
<[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com>
© 2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

James F. Anderson is Professor and Chair of Department of Criminal Justice at East

Carolina University (ECU). Prior to arriving at ECU, he was Professor of Criminal Jus-
tice and Criminology at University of Missouri-Kansas City. He received his doctorate
in Criminal Justice from Sam Houston State University and a master’s degree in Crimi-
nology from Alabama State University. He has published five books and several arti-
cles in the area of criminal justice and criminology. His research interests include child
sexual abuse, elderly abuse, domestic violence, crime and public health, and crimino-
logical theories. He is currently working on a criminal procedures text.
Kimberly Kras received her master’s degree in Criminal Justice from Department
of Sociology, Criminal Justice & Criminology at University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Her areas of interests include intimate partner violence, female bullying, feminism, and
female participation in crime. She is currently researching girl bullying in the Kansas
City, Missouri school system.
Women & Criminal Justice, Vol. 17(1) 2005
Available online at http://wcj.haworthpress.com
© 2005 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1300/J012v17n01_05 99
 100 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

KEYWORDS. Cycle of violence, epidemiologists, intimate partner

violence, public health approaches, Centers for Disease and Control, sex
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

role egalitarianism, social learning theory

INTRODUCTION

Domestic violence, or intimate personal violence, a matter once

considered private, has gained increased attention as a public health
crisis. The issue has become a dominant area of criminological and
victimological inquiry and is viewed as a major social problem with
disastrous consequences (Pleck, 1987; Hines & Saudino, 2002). The
World Health Organization (2002) reports that domestic violence refers
to any behavior within an intimate relationship that causes either physi-
cal, psychological, or sexual harm, or a combination of these to those
involved or participating in the relationship. These behaviors are exten-
sive and typically include physical aggression (slapping, hitting, kick-
ing, and beating); psychological abuse (intimidation, constant belittling,
and humiliation); forced intercourse and other forms of sexual coercion;
and various controlling behavior (isolation from family and friends,
monitoring of movement and restricting access to information or help)
(see Wallace, 1998; Karmen, 2004; Gosselin, 2005; World Health Or-
ganization, 2002). When these behaviors occur repeatedly, they are re-
ferred to as battering (see Champion, 1997; Gosselin, 2005). Despite its
extensive nature, domestic violence, like rape, is a crime that is likely to
go unreported or vastly underreported (for a host of reasons that may
range from fear to economic dependency, or societal pressure to remain
in an abusive situation so as not to destroy the family unit to being in
love with the abuser). Therefore, any statistics provided on domestic
violence, at best, should be accepted with caution and taken as a conser-
vative estimate of the occurrence (Karmen, 2004). Nevertheless, the
National Center for Injury Prevention and Control reports that in 2002,
there were 5.3 million intimate partner crimes committed among women
aged 18 and older in America. The violence resulted in nearly 2 million
injuries and nearly 1,300 deaths (Centers for Disease and Control,
2003). However, the National Violence Against Women Survey esti-
mates 5.9 million physical assaults occur against women each year by
current or former husbands, cohabiting partners, or dates. Moreover,
Kalmuss (1984) also found that in abusive relationships, on average,
both partners equally took part in the violence, However, the injurious
effects it leaves on women have been the focus of public concern.
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 101

Domestic violence is a serious form of interpersonal violence be-

cause its effect goes beyond criminal justice and extends into the public
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

health system. For example, when incidents of domestic violence are re-
ported to the police, officers may affect an arrest if the abuser is bellig-
erent or out of control in their presence, or if the victim (woman) has
visible scars and bruises that demand that the abuser be taken into cus-
tody. However, Mastrofski, Snipes, Parks, and Maxwell (2000), report
the closer the relationship between victim and offender, the greater the
likelihood that police will not respond to a victim’s complaint or make
an arrest. However, just because the abuser is taken into custody does
not mean that the suffering ends for the victim. According to epi-
demiologists at the Centers for Disease and Control and others in the
public health system, the sheer numbers of intimate personal violence
victims make the problem an epidemic. Moreover, the victims face neg-
ative health consequences after victimization. In fact, a growing body of
research reveals that many women who experience intimate violence
suffer from depression, suicide attempts, chronic pain syndromes, psy-
chosomatic disorders, physical injury, gastrointestinal disorders, irrita-
ble bowel syndrome, and a variety of reproductive health consequences
(see Dickinson et al., 1999; Felitti et al., 1998; Koss, Woodruff, & Koss,
1991; Follette, et al., 1996; and Heise, Moore, & Toubia, 1995). There-
fore, intimate personal violence affects both the criminal justice and
public health systems.
Another area of increasing concern about intimate personal violence
is the effect it has on children who witness abuse. A great deal of re-
search has been conducted to analyze effects, such as posttraumatic
stress disorder, learning disabilities, and social dysfunction, but of par-
ticular interest to this paper are the lingering effects of violent and ag-
gressive behavior on victims’ future relationships (Benda & Corwyn,
2002; Halford et al., 2000; Hines & Saudino, 2002; Gefner et al., 2000;
Kalmuss, 1984; Skuja & Halford, 2004; Stith & Farley, 1993; Thomas,
2003; Tontondonato & Crew, 1992). One theory in particular that has
been used to explain intimate partner violence is the social learning the-
ory. When examining this crime through a social learning theory, it is
posited that violence toward an intimate is a learned behavior. Specifi-
cally, violence is learned in the context of the home and, unfortunately,
is shaped during the early years of one’s childhood. When this factor is
combined with exposure to violence, researchers have found this to be a
potent combination for future aggressive behavior (Howell & Pugliesi,
1988; Hines & Saudino, 2002; Kalmuss, 1984; Skuja & Halford, 2004;
Thomas, 2003; Tedeschi & Felson, 1994; Williams, 1989; Tontodonato
 102 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

& Crew, 1992). It is now a common perception that the family’s func-
tion, previously thought to teach values and morals, is now the context
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

in which children are taught either directly or vicariously that violence

is valued (Benda & Corwyn, 2002). This disrupted value system can
have long-term effects on future aggressive behaviors, particularly
intimate personal violence.
General notions about the acquisition of certain behaviors have been
developed and theorized throughout modern history (Nye, 1996). For
certain types of behavior, such as aggression and violence, it is socially
accepted that these behaviors and responses are learned functions, and
some theorists even explained these behaviors through learning models
(Nye, 1996; Bandura, 1973; Miller & Doddard, 1941). According to
Bandura (1973) there seems to be some consensus that “among the vari-
ous human activities that are subject of attention, none has aroused
deeper concern than man’s aggressiveness” (p. 1). Aggressive behavior
generates many potential injurious hazards and has become an increas-
ing concern in recent years, particularly in family settings (Nye, 1996;
Bandura, 1973; Halford, Sanders, & Behrens, 2000; Belknap, 2001).
Therefore, this paper explains violence and aggression toward intimate
partners through learning models. More specifically, Part One revisits
Albert Bandura’s social learning theory to explain the process by which
an individual learns aggressive behaviors, as well as how the theory ex-
plains intimate personal violence. Part Two discusses the cycle of
spousal abuse. Part Three offers viable policy recommendations to pre-
vent intimate personal violence. In the final analysis, the paper presents
measures that can be taken to counteract the effects of negative social
learning and some criminal justice and public health approaches to
prevent intimate personal violence.

PART I: REVISITING ALBERT BANDURA’S SOCIAL

LEARNING THEORY

Albert Bandura developed social learning theory in response to the

archaic position that aggressive behavior is a product of innate aggres-
sive drives. Social learning theory rests on the basic tenet that “human
behavior is learned . . . it is acquired rather than innate” (Miller &
Doddard, 1941, p. 1). More specifically, Miller and Doddard (1941) de-
fined learning theory as the study of circumstances, which connect a
stimulus to a response; the response of course is the behavior sought to
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 103

be understood. However, Bandura (1973) felt that aggression could be

better predicted and controlled by examining the social context, the per-
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

formers, and the cues of such behavior. Therefore, social learning the-
ory focuses on external stimuli in order to deconstruct behavior in
relationship to the response patterns (Bandura, 1973; Hines & Saudino,
2002; Williams, 1989; Tontodonato & Crew, 1992; Miller & Doddard,
1941). Social learning theory posits that response patterns to particular
stimuli are learned through either experience or observation (Bandura,
1973). According to Bandura “most responses are learned inadver-
tently, or on purpose, through example” and this component of learning
is essential to understanding the process by which individuals engage in
aggression (p. 44). Bandura’s theory is most influential in describing
this concept of vicarious learning, or modeling, where individuals learn
behaviors without actually experiencing the behavior (Burger, 2000).
Bandura (1973) also expresses that no other influence is more powerful
and ubiquitous regarding how people learn behavior than the actions of
others.
Social learning theory posits that there are three regulatory systems
that control behavior (Bandura, 1973). First, the antecedent induce-
ments greatly influence the time and response of behavior. The stimulus
that occurs before the behavioral response must be appropriate in rela-
tionship to social context and performers. Second, response feedback
influences also serve an important function. Following a response, the
reinforcements, by experience or observation, will greatly impact the
occurrence of the behavior in the future. Third, Bandura (1973) ac-
knowledges the importance of cognitive functions in social learning.
For example, Bandura notes that for aggressive behavior to occur some
people “become easily angered by the sight or thought of individuals
with whom they have had hostile encounters,” and this memory is ac-
quired through the learning process (p. 45). Bandura developed the con-
cept of reciprocal determinism, which refers to the mutual influence that
external determinants and internal factors, to describe the social-cogni-
tive relationship that explains how certain behaviors are acquired (Bur-
ger, 2000). Tedeschi and Felson (1994) support this contention by
asserting that cognitive association allows for the connection of the
stimuli to the response.
Social learning theory further explains that modeling is an essential
function in learning aggressive behavior, and is greatly enforced by
repetition and symbolic reinforcement (Siegel, 2000; Bandura, 1973;
Tedeschi & Felson, 1994). Although modeling behavior occurs in a variety
 104 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

of situations, such as peer relationships and through media, this paper

focuses primarily on modeling through family examples.
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

Modeling behavior is mostly impacted by the anticipated consequences

of the behavior. In a study conducted by Bandura (1973), boys who were
labeled aggressive had parents who modeled and reinforced combative
responses to threatening stimuli, and most boys had situations where both
parents were aggressive models. Bandura (1973) also expected that chil-
dren are reminded of aggressive behaviors through discipline enforced by
their parents, and the parents are using discipline to gain desired effects.
Simply put, children model this behavior and use aggression in order to
obtain a desired outcome. Tedeschi and Felson (1994) support this state-
ment by arguing that it is the anticipated outcomes, not the reaction of the
victim that leads to aggression. In their study, Tedeschi and Felson ex-
plain that social learning theory is the basis for the hypothesis that pun-
ished children are more likely to aggress.
In addition to Bandura’s (1973) three regulatory systems, other theo-
rists have added modes of learning and researchers use them to supple-
ment the work conducted by Bandura (Miller & Doddard, 1941; Siegel,
2000). Miller and Doddard (1941) identified four components of learn-
ing. First, an individual must have the drive to make a certain type of re-
sponse or behavior. Second, a stimulus or cue must be delivered at the
appropriate time and be consistent and connected to the third compo-
nent, which is response. Response is the desired or undesired behavior
that follows delivery of a cue or stimulus (Siegel, 2000). Finally, in or-
der for the behavior to be reinforced or learned, a reward must follow
the occurrence of a particular response. Within the context of violent or
unstable family structures, the use of violence, or physical harm are re-
sponses to lack of control or stressful stimuli in the perpetrator’s envi-
ronment (Bandura, 1973; Miller & Doddard, 1941; Siegel, 2000). The
violence is, therefore, reinforced by compliance of the individual or
submission by the person being abused, in most cases a wife or other
intimate female, as discussed further in this paper.

Learning Abusive Behavior

Social learning theory aims to explain the processes by which aggres-

sive behavior is learned or acquired by individuals. Some social learn-
ing theorists predict that observing marital violence in family settings as
a youth may increase the likelihood that one will engage in future mari-
tal violence (Stith & Farley, 1993). Williams (1989) offers a description
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 105

of such a learning environment in which aggressive behaviors are

modeled:
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

A violent social learning environment is an environment in which

one is exposed to violent behaviors either directly or indirectly, as
well as to the attitudes and conditions that promote these behav-
iors. Potentially, one exposed to such an environment may inter-
pret, adapt, or generalize such behaviors, cues and information in
order to meet his needs . . . violent social learning environment re-
fers to environments where the acts of pushing, shoving, grabbing,
slapping, kicking, choking, scratching, jerking, twisting, biting,
hitting, throwing something at someone, threatening or using a
gun or knife on someone, or beating someone up occurs. (p. 98)

Exposure to violence can mean seeing it, hearing it, observing the ef-
fects of it (such as injuries), or sensing it, and they estimate that 15% of
children in their study were exposed to domestic violence, though this
may be an underestimate due to underreporting (Rossman, Hughes, &
Rosenburg, 1999). Social learning theory is a key explanation in under-
standing the root cause of this crime. The child views his or her parent
being physically abusive in response to stressful stimuli and ascertains
that through violent behavior the desired effect (e.g., control or cathar-
sis) will be achieved. The child sees that by using a violent response, his
or her parent is satisfied and has overcome the stressful stimulus
(Williams, 1989). Individuals with high levels of aggression and violent
behavior may feel that “conflict situations are intolerable” (Williams,
1989, p. 103). Over the course of time, combined with the malleable
shape of young values and understanding, the child learns that aggres-
sive behavior will achieve a desired result. This concept is reinforced
throughout childhood. Social learning theorists would expect that this
child has learned violent responses to stressful stimuli through exposure
to violent models. Further, it is suggested that individuals who learn
aggressive behavior can generalize particular responses to new situa-
tions (Miller & Doddard, 1941).
Dutton (1995) asserts that within family structures, imitative and
self-reinforcing functions are essential components in acquisition of ag-
gression. In his study, Dutton (1995) found that abused boys were more
likely to identify with their aggressor, usually a parent, and perpetuate
the abuse in their future. Social learning theorists might assume that the
child has learned that abusive behaviors gain desired rewards after wit-
nessing his or her parents gain desired effects from domestic violence.
 106 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

In a study conducted by Benda and Corwyn (2002), they found that

elements of social learning were significantly related to delinquency
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

among boys aged 13-18. They found that the effects of prior abuse were
the best predictor of violence among older youth (aged 16-18). Although
they found that older youth were impacted highly by their peer rela-
tions, younger adolescents were more influenced by family interactions
(Benda & Corwyn, 2002). This finding is consistent with Shahinfar,
Kuperschmidt, and Matza’s (2001) research which revealed that ag-
gressive children are shaped by their familial relationships. They dis-
covered in their study that 110 incarcerated adolescents who witnessed
violence were associated with greater outcomes of aggression, and
being victimized was associated with hostile social skills and an overall
acceptance of violence. The authors further suggested that “any kind of
exposure heightens social cognitive deficits” citing that in their study,
social cognitive deficits were related to prior violent experiences
(Shahinfar et al., 2001, p. 139). Social learning theory takes into ac-
count the effects of abnormal cognitive functioning in the inability to
relate with others without using violence. Vicarious learning, or model-
ing, has been connected to learning violent behavior (Bandura, 1973).
Witnessing increases this behavior among boys and supplies them with
a limited understanding of how to resolve stressful situations. This ele-
ment plays an essential role, along with gender dynamics, and intimate
relationship factors in the cycle of spousal abuse.

PART 2: THE CYCLE OF SPOUSAL ABUSE

AND SOCIAL LEARNING

Research on intimate violence supports the claim that children model

the behavior and response patterns of their parents and close family
members (Benda & Corwyn, 2002; Halford et al., 2000; Hines &
Saudino, 2002; Gefner et al., 2000; Kalmuss, 1984; Skuja & Halford,
2004; Stith & Farley, 1993; Howell & Pugliesi, 1988; Rossman et al.,
1999; Tedeschi & Felson, 1994). This factor is especially crucial to the
study of domestic violence, because it is an intimate crime. The ramifi-
cations and implications of findings about the effects of witnessing or
experiencing violence as a child are important in the social response to
this cycle of crime. The effects of modeling are evident in the occur-
rence of spousal assault (Tedeschi & Felson, 1994). Aggressive be-
havior is instigated and maintained through the process of modeling
(Tedeschi & Felson, 1994). An individual’s “family of origin” can
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 107

model two forms of violence through exposure (witnessing) to abuse or

being abused (Hines & Saudino, 2002, p. 213). Seeing prior models’
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

success via abusive behaviors suggests that a similar behavior will be-
get a similar response (Tedeschi & Felson, 1994). In terms of witness-
ing spousal abuse, the cycle of violence continues through modeling.
Through a review of the literature, Tontodonato and Crew (1992) posit
that “modeling of aggression in intimate relationships (especially the
family), leads to the acceptance of aggression as a response conflict, and
the consequences of aggression play a role in who is likely to use dating
violence” (p. 4). The complex relationship between these factors has
been subject to much research and continues to develop new approaches
to understanding spousal abuse.
The effects of witnessing abuse during childhood on future spousal
abuse have been well documented. Kalmuss (1984) found in her study
of over 2,000 adults recounting their childhood experiences that aggre-
ssive behaviors during childhood were significantly related to marital
aggression. Kalmuss also found that children modeled family behavior
that was not directed at them. In a more recent corroboration of Kalmuss’
work, Skuja and Halford (2004) found that parental modeling lead men
to aggressive conflict resolution. In their study of 30 couples exposed to
violence and 30 who were not exposed, they found that exposed couples
were more dominating in their responses to conflict than nonexposed.
They also found that those exposed to violence during childhood re-
ported more negative cognition than those who were not exposed.
These results support the notion that children will model the emotions
and affect of parent examples. Witnessing aggression in the family
teaches that aggression is an appropriate response in an intimate rela-
tionship (Kalmuss, 1984; Skuja & Halford, 2004). These findings sup-
port Bandura’s assertion that vicarious learning can be a substantial
factor in learning abusive behavior. Further, it was discovered that mod-
eling of parental abuse was not entirely sex-specific, but parent violence
elevated the risk of adult male relationship violence. Kalmuss (1984)
concludes that violent behavior is transferred through generations and
has two dependent variables–victimization and perpetration. In a re-
view of the literature, Williams (1989) supports these findings by re-
porting that between 50 and 80% of abusive behavior was related to the
intergenerational transmission of violence. These findings are signifi-
cant in explaining the process of modeling in learned behavior accord-
ing to the tenets of social learning theory. Family members model
violent conflict resolution, as well as victimize the observer, and this
 108 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

experience is transmitted to the child, which the child then repeats. A

generation of violent socially learned behavior has been sustained.
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

Social learning theory offers an explanation of intimate personal vio-

lence by accounting for the cognitive functioning involved in intimate
partner aggression. Social learning theorists maintain that the cognitive
mechanisms used to regulate aggression and response-stimuli patterns
with intimate partners must be addressed. The emotions and memory
stimulated by stress-provoking situations will result in passively learn-
ing responses. When adults display violent models of conflict resolu-
tion in the presence of children, they will be more likely to use violence
in their future relationships (Halford et al., 2000; Bandura, 1973). Ac-
cording to social learning theory, those individuals with prior exposure
to violent models will have a different quality of cognitive functioning
than those who did not. Halford et al. (2000) suggested that adult rela-
tionship violence would be higher if males have an inability to manage
intimate relationship conflict and negative emotions. In a study of 71
engaged couples, it was found that both men and women exposed to vi-
olence experienced greater nonverbal negative effect and behavioral
negativity, although their levels differed by gender. Social learning the-
ory suggests that when a child is exposed to violence in the home, he or
she will cognitively replicate the situations in which it occurred, and the
negative emotions attached to the past experiences will result in violent
behavior. They found a strong interdependence of negative behaviors
between partners, meaning that if one had negative behavior, the other
partner would match the behavior. This result supports additional find-
ings cited by the authors that the prevalence of violence in couples is
roughly equal among males and females, though it is qualitatively dif-
ferent (Halford et al., 2000). The authors also found that poor conflict
management was related to parental modeling of such behavior. This is
consistent with social learning theory’s suggestion that individuals will
model their emotions and relationship expectations after what they ob-
serve from their parents. Stated another way, individuals who witness
violent responses to marital conflict, or other situations misguided as
marital conflict, will utilize these same responses to gain resolution of
the situation. According to social learning theory, individuals who have
been exposed to violence as youth will have interpreted limited re-
sponse opportunities to particular conflicts. If a child sees his father
abuse his mother when money is scarce, the child will come to view it as
a marital dysfunction. In addition to viewing it as a marital dysfunction,
social learning theory posits that the child will come to refer to money
problems as marital problems, as well as identifying violence as an
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 109

appropriate and only solution. The effects of modeling, or vicarious

learning, impact the propensity to use violent conflict resolutions, and
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

social learning theory predicts these individuals will struggle with

appropriate conflict identification and resolution.
Hines and Saudino (2002) support this tenet of social learning theory
by asserting that witnessing parental violence can be the primary model
for future aggression in intimate relationships. The likelihood that a
child will abuse a spouse later in life increases because the child associ-
ates the situational factors with their prior observations (Hines &
Saudino, 2002). One function of social learning theory, the individual’s
stimulus and response connection, has been reinforced. Williams (1989)
proposes that regardless of current experiences, the prior exposure to
violence may sensitize individuals to certain behaviors of a spouse
deemed threatening. The experiences as a child will enhance the likeli-
hood that he or she will use violence to respond to the behaviors of their
significant other regardless of how closely it resembles the behaviors of
his parents. The child will not only learn which behaviors to respond to,
but more importantly the types of emotions provoked by the behavior of
the partner. If a child witnesses his parents fight violently over money
after another stressful behavior had occurred, such as serving dinner
late, social learning theory suggests that the child may internalize that
response as being provoked by his mother’s serving dinner late. In
adulthood, the child will view serving dinner late as a stress- provoking
behavior. The constant, yet ambiguous, social environment in which the
child is reared gives the child the models and contacts for future violent
behavior.
William’s (1989) study of 20 batterers and 20 nonbatterers also ex-
amined the issue of social learning environment. Although it was found
that the greatest potential for learning aggressive and abusive behavior
came from nonfamily peers, the batterers felt more victimized in their en-
vironments (Williams, 1989). Williams suggests that in order not to be
revictimized in interpersonal relationships, the batterer may resort to vio-
lence to solve their conflicts. According to social learning theory, the ex-
posure to victimization may increase the likelihood that the victim will
engage in victimizing behavior as a result of limited appropriate models.
Hines & Saudino’s (2002) recognition of two dependent variables–per-
petration and victimization–seems to be supported here. The victim mod-
els the behavior of their example and social learning theory predicts that
they will later become the perpetrator to avoid being revictimized, as well
as perpetuating being the only response pattern learned.
 110 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Social learning theory relies on the context of interpersonal relation-

ships, as well as perception of relationships in the greater society, to
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

predict violent behavior among couples. Family models will exhibit

gendered behavior and reinforce traditional roles in conjunction with
violent responses, making one appear the function of the other. Issues
regarding gender roles impact the belief shared and learned through
family and society. In a sample of 91 men in a committed relationship,
Stith and Farley (1993) found that approval of marital abuse and a high
score on the Sex Role Egalitarianism Scale (Beere et al., 1984 in Stith &
Farley, 1993) were directly related to the use of severe marital violence.
It was also found that sex role egalitarianism, or gender neutral response
attitude, and observation of marital violence had indirect effects on en-
gaging in marital violence. It is asserted that sex role attitudes and ap-
proval of marital violence may stem from general attitudes toward male
dominance within marriage (Stith & Farley, 1993; Williams, 1989;
Howell & Pugliesi, 1988). This is consistent with social learning the-
ory’s position that individuals model behavior from family, society, and
peers, with each contributing to the learning environment. Social learn-
ing perspectives hold that being exposed to marital violence in a tradi-
tional sex role atmosphere may influence a male significant other’s
acceptance of spousal abuse as a conflict response. When this behavior
is doubly reinforced through family and society models of behavior, the
male normalizes aggressive behavior, and the female normalizes her
victimization.
Howell and Pugliesi (1988) conducted a replication of Straus and
Gelles’s (1976) original study on violence in couples. Howard and
Pugliesi (1988) took a smaller sample of only male respondents and ex-
amined issues related to economics and violent parental models. Results
showed that men working in a blue-collar occupation increased the odds
of engaging in domestic violence by one and one half times. It was also
found that younger males were almost three times more likely to engage
in abuse than older men. Additionally, those males who had observed
parental violence as a child were two and half times more likely to be
abusive in interpersonal relationships (Howell & Pugliesi, 1988). These
results support traditional gender roles, which are modeled by children
in their family environments. Results also indicated support for Stith
and Farley’s (1993) conclusion that legitimization of intimate violence
is associated with dating violence. When both men and women legiti-
mize violence as an appropriate response, they perpetuate the cycle of
violence. Individuals will learn appropriate gender behavior through their
parent models, and more specifically, when this behavior emphasizes
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 111

violence against females, the behavior will also be reinforced by tradi-

tional gender roles of society. Social learning theory takes into account
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

the intense reinforcement of behaviors by family situations, as well as

the reinforcements from other societal institutions such as school,
church, and media. Social learning perspectives posit that when individ-
uals learn to value violent behavior as a stress response, they model that
behavior for their own children. When both parents accept violence in
the home, this practice and belief will be reinforced for their children.
The potency of factors such as prior exposure to intimate personal vio-
lence and societal acceptance of such abuse, contribute heavily to the
likelihood of future abuse. The perpetuation of the cycle of violence
creates a climate where domestic abuse is accepted and normalized, as
well as supported by the larger society. The perpetuation of violence oc-
curs as a result of improper social learning environments, but is a testa-
ment to the importance of parental and societal modeling on the behavior
of children. Herein lay the policy implications of the social learning the-
ory explanation of intimate personal violence.

PART 3: POLICY IMPLICATIONS

Intimate personal violence is a serious public health problem that af-

fects people who exist within the context of abusive relationships.
Those directly affected by it are men, women, and children. With re-
spect to the latter, child experts warn that early exposure to violence
could have the unintended consequence of the manifestation of this be-
havior when children become adults. The criminal justice system gets
involved when police are dispatched to investigate incidences of physi-
cal abuse when it is reported. Sometimes police make an arrest, and
other times, they do not. Research suggests that when the victim and of-
fender are closely related to each other, police are reluctant to make an
arrest unless compelling reasons justify such actions. Intimate violence
also affects the public health system since victims of abuse often seek
both short- and long-term treatment for physical, psychological, and
emotional injuries inflicted by an abuser. Trying to find a remedy for in-
timate violence requires every sector of the community working to-
gether in an attempt to reach out to offenders, provide services to
women and increase penalties for abusers, and adequately responding
to the needs of children. Therefore, our policies recommendations are
threefold: First, they target children who are reared in violent environ-
ments (to prevent the continuation of the cycle of violence). Second,
 112 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

they target the criminal justice system and how to effectively respond to
offenders. Third, they present public health approaches that can be used
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

in preventing interpersonal violence.

Helping to Resocialize Children

Social learning theory has been used to explain aggressive and vio-
lent behavior for decades (Akers, 1994). Theorists and social scientists
agree that learning certain behaviors is a fundamental process by which
humans develop behavior patterns and characteristics (Bandura, 1973;
Miller & Doddard, 1941). While often used to offer explanations for ag-
gression, this theory has also been utilized to further explain the genera-
tional effects of violence on future intimate relationships (Bandura,
1973; Kalmuss, 1984; Heffner, Jaffe, & Suderman, 2000; Halford et al.,
2000; Hines & Saudino, 2002; Skuja & Halford, 2004). The continuous
cycle of learned behavior from parent to child perpetuates the violent
environment. This understanding has been important to the comprehen-
sion of intimate personal violence.
Research has yet to consistently report that exposure to violence as a
child is the greatest predictor of future violence (Surette, 1998; Brannigan,
1987; Brannigan & Kapardis, 1986; Feshbach & Singer 1971; Freedman,
1984; Howitt & Cumberbatch, 1975; Milavsky et al., 1982; Mould,
1988; Wurzel & Lometti, 1984). However, lack of findings does not ig-
nore the fact that these family dysfunctions are destructive and disrup-
tive to child development. Policy should focus on the prevention of such
violence.
Another important policy direction is where to focus more research
and resources. Placing funds and early interventions in the home may
provide a break in the cycle of violence (Belknap, 2001). Rossman,
Hughes, and Rosenberg (1999) suggest a three-tiered preventive treat-
ment approach. First, intervention should be aimed at the general popu-
lation, and current awareness strategies have shown this to be effective.
Second, the intervention should always target at-risk populations, and
focus on identifying those who are at risk. Third, interventions are di-
rected toward reactive treatment, where individuals who have already
been exposed or victimized can receive help in order to reduce the
long-term effects of such abuse (Rossman et al., 1999). We suggest that
intensive or concentrated efforts be targeted in lower income areas
where violence tend to be reported the most. Interventions can occur in
elementary, junior high, and high schools. Local schools may prove to
be a critical area to intervene since survey research indicates boys and
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 113

girls have different perceptions of interpersonal violence. For example,

Skeehan, Kim, and Galvin (2004) report in a survey of boys and girls
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

aged 8 to 12 years, girls cited concerns about interpersonal violence

while boys did not consider interpersonal violence an issue. Of special
interest is the possibility of intervening with psychological treatments
in young children who have been identified in homes of violence. Be-
cause it has been shown that nonfamily peers also have an intense im-
pact on the behaviors learned in young people, the resources directed at
home life might consider expanding to include interventions regarding
peer relations. It seems ironic that social views about the family are
thought to be nourishing and value driven, yet have turned into a very
disruptive and violent environment for children to grow up (Benda &
Corwyn, 2002). However, efforts to resocialize children who have been
subjected to violence is not enough; criminal justice policy must re-
move and punish offenders; otherwise, children will not be safe and will
continue to receive exposure to more violence.
In some cases, experts advise that children would be better off in the
long term if they were removed from violent environments into a do-
mestic violence shelter. They warn that this step is not necessary in ev-
ery case, but in homes where violence is continuous, this is a measure
that should be explored. One such program is the Rose Brooks Center of
Kansas City, Missouri. It began in 1978 in response to the growing
number of domestic violence victims (women and children). The Center
offers prevention programming, crisis intervention, and other support-
ive services to thousands who are in need each year. Some of the social
services include court advocacy, outreach therapy, transitional housing,
and children’s program. The Center is an invaluable resource since it
provides transitional housing to women who are attempting to work to-
ward self-sufficiency and whose children are in need of counseling and
therapy. Rose Brooks provides critical case management and therapeu-
tic services to children who reside at this emergency shelter. Rose
Brooks Center is unique in that it provides transitional shelter for 90
days and then places some victims in an independent living arrange-
ment for a period of six months to two years. Residents are either not
charged for their living arrangement or they pay based on their income.
It is believed that when the victims of intimate personal violence can es-
cape from abuse into a shelter, the therapy received by women and chil-
dren could serve to help resocialize the child into not accepting violence
as a legitimate behavioral response. In fact, efforts are made to teach
children that nonviolent conflict resolutions are always better to resolve
intimate personal conflicts, despite the violence that they have been
 114 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

exposed to, Another way to resocialize children who have been exposed
to violence is for schools to make proactive steps in educating children
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

on the dangers of violence. Schools can introduce an antiviolence cur-

riculum into the education process to sensitize children about the nega-
tive effects of violence and peaceful dispute resolutions with the goal
that what is learned in the school environment will carry over into the
respective communities where students reside (Crime and Violence
Prevention Center, 1994).

Criminal Justice Response

Fyfe, Klinger, and Flavin (1997) argue that historically police offi-
cers have been reluctant to make arrests in family matters in general, but
especially matters between spouses even when strong evidence exists
suggesting that intimate violence had occurred. Parker, Meier, and
Monahan (1989) contend that police are reluctant to make arrests in do-
mestic disputes for a number of reasons that include (1) officers view
domestic disputes as matters that can be better handled by social service
providers, (2) officers feel uncomfortable about the private nature of
domestic disputes, and (3) officers feel when an arrest is made, the vic-
tim will only drop the charges pending against the abuser. Feminists ar-
gue that despite the ambivalence and discomfort that officers may feel,
many victims of intimate personal violence continue to suffer and are
subjected to continued violence, some of which is often fatal.
Where criminal justice policy is concerned, experts argue that police
and court officials (prosecutors and judges) should take the enforce-
ment of protection or restraining orders seriously and even where possi-
ble, monitor the movement of abusers as an attempt to determine
whether they are in violation of a restraining order and to determine
whether abusers are stalking or harassing a former spouse, cohabitant,
or ex-significant other, and even employ the use of no-drop prosecution
policies combined with mandatory arrests policies (Iovanni & Milleer,
2001). While some experts believe that the enforcement of civil orders
hold promise, research offers mixed results (Bureau of Justice Statis-
tics, 1998). For example, Harpell and Smith (1996) report that in Den-
ver and Boulder, Colorado, protection orders were initially effective for
the first year in preventing the reoccurrence of intimate partner violence
compared with similar situations where no protection order was given.
However, their effectiveness declined as time progressed. But why did
the deterrent effect of the protection order dissipate over time? Can it be
attributed to a lack of enforcement or a lack of follow-up on the part of
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 115

law enforcement officers? Despite this, Buzawa and Buzawa (1990)

find that when protection orders were violated, police rarely arrested the
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

abuser. What kind of message does a lack of enforcement sends to

intimate partner abusers? What message does it send to the victims of
intimate personal violence?
Again, we argue from a policy standpoint that there must be strict en-
forcement of protection orders to ensure the safety of intimate personal
violence victims. At the same time, while research has shown that a for-
mal arrest is not a foolproof deterrent to preventing intimate personal vi-
olence (Gaines & Miller, 2006), it does appear to have a stronger
deterrent effect on some offenders (those married and employed) rather
than other offenders (those who are unemployed and live in poverty).
This may suggest that a formal arrest works better on abusers who have
more to lose than those who are not attached by marriage or vested in
employment. Because of this finding, experts are beginning to question
the wisdom of mandatory arrests policies in areas known for high levels
of crime, unemployment, and unmarried couples. However, research
conducted by Iovanni and Miller (2001) find that some jurisdictions are
experimenting with offering domestic abusers probation if they agree to
participate in treatment programs. If the participant successfully com-
pletes the program, his sentence will be suspended. Moreover, in these
cases, probation officers play a major role in assisting the abuser to
realize the domestic violence is a serious problem.
Notwithstanding the research that supports the contention that a man-
datory arrests works on some offenders but not on others, and in fact,
may actually create more violence directed at the victims who are poor
and unmarried (Iovanni & Miller, 2001), we contend that mandatory ar-
rests should still be used since research reveals that while an arrest does
not act as a deterrent to criminal behavior per se, it does require the
arrestee to appear in court and face the prospect of incarceration. More-
over, these experts contend that an arrest leads to shaming and public
humiliation that could cost the abuser the loss of employment, family,
and the respect of valued friends. Therefore , this may be enough for
some offenders to avoid the risk and desist abusing an intimate. As of
2002, in addition to 23 states, the District of Columbia have passed
mandatory arrest laws commanding officers to make an arrest in cases
of domestic violence. We support such legislation and believe that if
other states pass similar laws that remove police discretion in these vol-
atile situations that it would lead to fewer cases of continued violence.
We also endorse the use of the International Association Chiefs of Po-
lice (IACP) model and think it wise for other law enforcement agencies
 116 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

in the country to adopt it since the model requires that police officers
have a zero tolerance for domestic violence. Police officers are required
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

to undergo education and training on issues related to domestic vio-

lence. It teaches officers to recognize all aspects of domestic violence,
to develop a response protocol, and understand victim safety and fed-
eral laws on domestic violence. Furthermore, the model recommends a
background screen of all police recruits (Lonsway & Harrington, 2003).
While the model targets police, this is a perfect way to sensitize officers
to intimate personal violence and to have knowledgeable officers res-
ponding with sensitivity to these volatile situations when they are re-
ported.
We also agree with recent finding of victimological research that a
lack of police response to offenders who engage in crime has the unin-
tended effect of those same offenders engaging in repeat victimization
(Farrell, Phillips, & Pease, 1995). In cases where an arrest is not made,
we suggest that local communities engage in practices that are currently
being used around the country to call attention to the problem of inti-
mate violence. For example, some communities are experimenting with
innovative strategies to prevent intimate partner abuse. They are em-
ploying the use of public shaming, picketing an abuser’s home or work-
place or mandatory use of community service as a punishment for
abuse. While these suggestions may appear radical, they should be con-
sidered for policy if they can be shown to be effective deterrents. Be-
cause the dynamics of intimate personal violence are complex and
effect children, offenders, and victims, policy should also extend to the
public health system.

Public Health Response

Earlier we argued that because of the negative health consequences

associated with intimate personal violence, the issue moves beyond
merely processing offenders in the justice system to providing health
services to victim. Therefore, viable policy should rely on public health
approaches, as well as criminal justice strategies to prevent crime and
violence. The public health approach has a proven history of success-
fully preventing the transmission of sexual diseases and other injuries
Americans face. In fact, by declaring violence as a public health issue, it
becomes treatable and preventable like other health epidemics (Anderson,
Grandison, & Dyson, 1996). Public health focuses on the health of the
populations at greatest risk of disease prevention (World Health Orga-
nization, 2002). The public health system is concerned with violence in
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 117

general because it is responsible for premature deaths and injuries to

millions each year, and intimate personal violence is no exception
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

(Rosenberg & Mercy, 1991). Public health officials view the use of
strict “law and order” approaches as the sole method of addressing
violence as ineffective and not likely to impact the crime problem
(Prothrow-Stith & Spivak, 1991). As such, epidemiologists suggest the
use of the public health approach since it relies on a multidisciplinary
methodology directed at changing attitudes, knowledge, and behavior.
For example, a public health approach to preventing intimate violence
enlists professionals in law, public health, sociology, criminology, eco-
nomics, psychology, and anthropology to find solutions to violence
(Rosenberg & Mercy, 1991). Because of this, we contend that efforts to
prevent violence can be successful when agencies such as the police,
health services, judiciary, and support services work together. Simply
put, the problem is too broad for one agency to succeed. The public
health strategy or the epidemiological approach to prevent intimate vio-
lence is divided into five steps that include: (1) defining the injury or
health problem; (2) identifying the risk and protective factors associated
with the problem; (3) developing and testing prevention strategies to
control the problem; (4) implementing the interventions to improve the
health of the populations; and (5) monitoring those interventions to as-
sess their effectiveness.
Epidemiologists argue that prevention must come through interven-
tions after a problem has been identified by either the assessment pro-
cess of a public health agency or through community concerns. The
public health system uses several intervention methods: primary pre-
vention, secondary prevention, and tertiary prevention. First, primary
prevention seeks to avoid the occurrence of an illness or injury by pre-
venting exposure to risk factors (e.g., preventing the occurrence of the
act by being proactive in terms of educating victims, abusers, potential
abusers, police, prosecutors, and helping agencies and the community at
large about intimate personal violence). Next, secondary prevention
seeks to minimize the severity of the illness or injury-causing event
once the event has occurred (e.g., quickly getting treatment and coun-
seling for victims and offenders of intimate personal violence). Third,
tertiary prevention seeks to minimize disability by providing medical
care and treatment services (e.g., develop treatment centers and medical
services). Epidemiologists view an injury as the result of a “chain of
causation” involving an agent, a host, and the environment (Braithwaite
& Taylor, 1992). Prevention is achieved by breaking the chain of
causation at any step (see Schneider, 2000).
 118 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Where intimate personal violence is concerned, it could be as easy as

removing either the victim or abuser from the home and offering treat-
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

ment to both parties in an attempt to prevent the continuation of the be-

havior. At the same time, children should also be removed or provided
treatment in order to counter the negative efforts of exposure to vio-
lence. More specifically, epidemiologists are concerned with who is be-
ing injured or contracting a disease. Second, when is the injury or
disease occurring? Third, where is the injury or disease occurring?
From this information, epidemiologists can make better decisions about
why the injury or disease is occurring. Their primary goal is to use this
knowledge to control and prevent the spread of injuries and diseases.
Currently, epidemiologists report that women are 2 to 3 times more
likely to report an intimate partner pushed, grabbed, or shoved them and
7 to 14 times more likely to report a partner beat, chocked, or tied them
down. Moreover, research estimates that each year in the United States,
40% to 70% of female murder victims were killed by their boyfriends in
the context of ongoing abusive relationship (see Bailey, 1997; Tjaden &
Thoennes, 2000). Put simply, public health officials believe that it is
more important to determine why people become violent and to develop
strategies to reduce the risk factors that lead to violence (Doerner &
Lab, 1995). Therefore, we believe that public health polices should (1)
advance more research devoted to intimate partner violence, (2) streng-
then informal sources of support, (3) link social programs, and (4) capi-
talize on the power of television.
Research on Intimate Partner Violence
Public health officials contend that intimate violence continues to oc-
cur because of the lack of information known about its theoretical
causes. This has been a major area that has frustrated the effects of suc-
cessfully responding to the behavior. Public health officials advance the
idea that more research should focus on domestic violence situations.
For example, is intimate personal violence caused by factors such as
learning, economics, sexism, or poverty? From these factors, findings
should target the prevalence, consequences, and risk factors associated
with intimate personal violence. Public health officials suggest that those
studying intimate personal violence use the longitudinal methodology
since it measures the effects of abuse over extended periods of time.
These studies will reveal the impact that violence has over the life course
and will reveal information explaining how everyone in and outside of
the household is affected by the abuse. Moreover, these studies should
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 119

reveal the impact that violence has on one’s quality of health. It is hoped
that the results will present risk factors that influences the chance of vio-
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

lence and victimization. This research should enable officials to create

proper interventions and provide them with credible information to use
when confronting policymakers (politicians) who control monetary re-
sources that are needed to improve the plight of victims of domestic vio-
lence. More specifically, research should lead to programs designed to
prevent and respond to intimate violence, including education pro-
grams, legal and policy changes, services for victims, programs that tar-
get offenders of violence, and also programs that are created to change
social attitudes and behavior.

Strengthen Informal Sources of Support

Since intimate personal violence is a communitywide problem, its

solutions should come from initiatives from everyone in the commu-
nity. As such, any viable solution to violence will draw on the entire
community’s resources. As mentioned earlier, many victims of intimate
personal violence do not report the incident to the police, nor do they
seek help from social service agencies. Consequently, they continue to
suffer since they are subjected to physical and psychological abuse.
They are also never helped, since they seek no assistance in recovery.
Many believe this occurs for several reasons such as the private nature
of the offense, embarrassment, and the social stigma attached to receiv-
ing help from formal agencies or announcing to the community that vio-
lence is occurring in one’s household. Research indicates that for some
people, informal networks can be more effective than formal networks.
Therefore, we suggest an expansion in the use of informal sources of
support such as neighborhood networks with friends, religious and
community groups, and the workplace when possible. Though they will
not have extensive funding, we believe that these networks can be very
effective in helping victims receive help they otherwise will not get.
While we do not suggest that informal sources of support should replace
formal networks, we do believe that for people who refuse or are
reluctant to get formal help, they should seek resources from the
informal structures in their respective communities.

Link Social Programs

Intimate personal violence is a complex public health problem with

many factors that must be addressed. Public health experts report there
 120 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

is overlap in the risk factors that could lead to violent behavior. There is
also grave concern about children who witness violence in the home and
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

what the outcome could mean with respect to behavioral problems in

youth and early childhood. Notwithstanding this, the possibility exists
that the manifestation of violence could resurface during adulthood.
Therefore, researchers suggest that there is a pressing need to present
early intervention services to families that are considered as high risk to
violence before dysfunction sets in and violence becomes intergen-
erational. Public health officials argue that while aggression and vio-
lence have common sources, treatment and service programs tend to
approach problems such as youth violence, child abuse, substance
abuse, and partner violence differently. We contend that both research
and programs treatment efforts should be linked to effectively address
the commonalities found among the different types of violence and ag-
gression since in most cases, a number of abuses can be found within the
same household. We caution that unless aggressive efforts are taken to
isolate and detect potentially violent behavior patterns found in youths,
it will be difficult to determine whether any attempt to help will be
successful.

Capitalize on the Power of Television and Radio

Part of the public health strategy relies on using the media, especially
television and radio to disseminate and sensitize viewers with informa-
tion. This is often accomplished via public service announcements that
are used to inform the public of the realities of different diseases and in-
juries that effect Americans each year. Where diseases are concerned, it
is common to view and hear announcements about the dangers of
AIDS/HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. More specifically,
viewers and listeners often receive information on prevalence, inci-
dence, and segments of the population that are at risk of contracting the
disease. Recently, epidemiologists and other public health officials
have begun to address the dangers of intimate personal violence, child
abuse, and child sexual abuse and their consequences. The use of televi-
sion and radio as media in the prevention of intimate personal violence
could prove to be effective methods for reaching those who are at risk of
engaging and experiencing violence, since millions of viewers and lis-
teners are regularly turned in to watch and listen to various programs
each day. We believe that public health officials should make greater
use of the media to address intimate personal violence because it lends
itself to captured audiences.
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 121

CONCLUSION
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

Intimate personal violence is a major public health problem that af-

fects men, women, and children. It also spills over into the criminal jus-
tice system when law enforcement officers make an arrest or enforce a
restraining order. Social service agencies and the public health system
get involved when the victims of abuse need assistance or treatment for
injuries sustained as a result of violence. Perhaps what is more impor-
tant is that research indicates that early exposure to violence within the
context of the home may have the unintended effect of behavior mani-
festation later in adulthood. Stated another way, to the extent the chil-
dren are reared in households where violence is pervasive and is used as
a model of conflict resolution, research suggests that these children face
a greater likelihood of being either directly or indirectly socialized into
accepting such behavior as a legitimate form of response when con-
fronted with similar situations as adults. Therefore, preventions should
be threefold. It should target resocializing children who are exposed to
violence, punishing offenders, and better assisting the women who face
both physical and psychological victimizations. This can only be ac-
complished by employing strategies used by both the criminal justice
and public health systems or uniting a host of people and agencies to
work together toward its prevention. We believe that with this twin
strategy, attitudes toward traditional roles and violence will change, and
this will carry over into future interpersonal relationships. A failure to
adhere to these policy recommendations may mean that more and more
children and women will experience the cycle of violence.

REFERENCES
Akers, R. L. (1994). Criminological theories: Introduction and evaluation. Los An-
geles, CA: Roxbury Publishing Company.
Anderson, J. F., & Dyson, L. (2002). Criminological theories: Understanding crime in
America. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Anderson, J. F., Grandison, T., & Dyson, L. (1996). Victims of random violence and
the public health implication: A health care or criminal justice issue? Journal of
Criminal Justice, 24(5), 379-391.
Bailey, J. E. (1997). Risk factors for violent death of women in the home. Archives of
Internal Medicine, 157, 177-182.
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Belknap, J. (2001). The invisible woman (2nd ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson.
 122 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Benda, B. B., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). The effect of abuse in childhood and in adoles-
cence on violence among adolescents. Youth & Society, 33(3), 339-365.
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

Braithwaite, R., & Taylor, S. E. (1992). Health issues in the black community. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publications.
Brannigan, A. (1987). Is obscenity criminogenic? Society, 24, 12-19.
Brannigan, A., & Kapardis, A. (1986). The controversy over pornography and sex
crimes: The criminological evidence and beyond. Australian and New Zealand
Journal of Criminology, 19, 259-284.
Burger, J. M. (2000). Personality (5th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson.
Crime and Violence Prevention Center (1994). Gangs: A community response. Cali-
fornia Attorney Generals’ Office.
Dickinson, L. M. et al. (1999). Health-related quality of life and symptom profiles of
female survivors of sexual abuse. Archives of Family Medicine, 8, 35-43.
Doerner, W. C., & Lab, S. P. (1995). Victimology (3rd ed). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson
Publishing.
Dutton, D. G. (1995). Male abusiveness in intimate relationships. Clinical Psychology
Review, 15(6), 567-581.
Farrell, G. P., & Pease, K. (1995). Like taking candy: Why does repeat victimization
occur? British Journal of Criminology, 35, 384-99.
Felitti, V. J. et al (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to
many of the leading causes of death in adults: The adverse Childhood Experience
(ACE) study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14, 245-258.
Feshback, S., & Singer, R. D. (1971). Television and aggression: An experimental field
study. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Freedman, J. (1984). Effect of television violence on aggressiveness. Psychological
Bulletin, 96, 227-246.
Fyfe, J. F., Klinger, D. A., & Flavin, J. M. (1997). Differential police treatment of
male-on- female spousal violence. Criminology, 35, 455-473.
Gaines, L. K., & Miller, R. L. (2006). Criminal justice in action: The core. Belmont,
CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.
Geffner, R. A., Jaffe, & Peter G., Sudermann, Marlies. (2000). Children exposed to do-
mestic violence: Current issues in research, intervention, prevention, and policy de-
velopment. New York: Haworth Maltreatment & Trauma Press.
Gosselin, D. K. (2005). Heavyhands: An introduction to the crimes of family violence.
(3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson/Prentice-Hall.
Halford, W Kim, Sanders, Matthew R., & Behrens, Brett C. (2000). Repeating the er-
rors of our parents? Family of origin spouse violence and observed conflict man-
agement in engaged couples. Family Process, 39(2), 219-235.
Heise, L, Moore, K., & Toubia, N. (1995). Sexual coercion and women’s reproductive
health: A focus on research. New York: Population Council.
Hines, D. A., & Saudino, K. J. (2002). Intergenerational transmission of intimate part-
ner violence: A behavioral genetic perspective. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 3(3),
210-225.
Howell, Marylin J., & Pugliesi, Karen L. (1988). Husbands who harm: predicting
spousal violence by men. Journal of Family Violence, 3(1), 15-27.
 James F. Anderson and Kimberly Kras 123

Howitt, D., & Cumberbatch, G. (1975). Mass media violence and society. New York:
Wiley.
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

Iovanni, L., & Miller, S. L. (2001). Criminal justice system responses to domestic vio-
lence: Law enforcement and the courts. In Claire M. Renzetti, Jeffrey L. Edleson,
and Raquel K. Bergen (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women.
Kalmuss, D. S. (1984). The intergenerational transmission of marital aggression. Jour-
nal of Marriage and the Family, 46, 11-19.
Karmen, A. (2004). Crime victims: An introduction to victimology. (5th ed.). Belmont,
CA: Thomson/ Wadsworth.
Koss, M. P., Woodruff, W. J., Koss, P. G. (1991). Criminal victimization among pri-
mary care medical patients: Prevalence, incidence, and physical usuage. Behavioral
Science and Law, 9, 85-96.
Lonsway, K., & Harrington, P. (2003). Model policy for officer domestic violence.
Law and Order, 51(10), 141-149.
Mastrofski, S. D., Snipes, J. B., Parks, R. B., and Maxwell, C. D. (2000). The helping
hand of the law: Police control of citizens on request. Criminology, 38, 307.
Milavsky, J., Kessler, R., Supp, H., & Rubins, W. (1982). Television and aggression:
Results of a panel study. In D. Pearl, L. Bouthilet, and J. Lazar (Eds.), Television
and behavior. Vol. 2. Technical Reviews, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, National Institute of Public Health, pp. 138-157.
Miller, N. E., & Dollard, J. (1941). Social learning and imitation. New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press.
Mould, D. (1988). The pornography-sexual crime debate. Journal of Sex Research, 25,
267-288.
Nye, R. D. (1996). Three psychologies: Perspectives from Freud, Skinner, and Rogers.
Pacific, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Parker, L. C., Meirer, R. D., & Monahan, L. H. (1989). Interpersonal psychology for
criminal justice. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
Pleck, E. (1987). Domestic tyranny: The making of American social policy against fam-
ily violence from colonial times to the present. New York: Oxford University Press.
Prowthrow-Stith, D., & Spivak, H. (1991). Homicide and violence: Contemporary
health problems for American’s black community. In R. L. Braithwaite and S. Tay-
lor (Eds.), Health Issues in the Black Community. San Francisco: Josey-Bass.
Rennison, C. & Welchans, S. (2000). Intimate Partner Violence. National Crime Vic-
timization Survey, United States Department of Justice-Bureau of Justice Statistics,
Special Report.
Rosenberg, M. L., & Mercy, J. A. (1991). Assaultive violence. In M. L. Rosenberg and
M. A. Fenley (Eds.), Violence in America. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rossman, B. B. Robbie, Hughes, Honore M., & Rosenburg, Mindy S. (1999). Children
and the Impact of Interparental Violence. Philedelphia, PA: Brunner/Mazel.
Schneider, M. J. (2000). Introduction public health. Gaitherbury, Maryland: Aspen
Publishers.
Siegel, L. (2000). Criminology (7th ed.). Belmont CA: Wadswoth/Thomson Learning.
Shahinfar, A., Kuperschmidt, J. B., & Matza, L. S. (2001). The relation between expo-
sure to violence and social information processing among incarcerated adolescents.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 110(1), 136-141.
 124 WOMEN & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Sheehan, K., Kim, L. E., & Galvin, J. P. (2004). Urban children’s perceptions of vio-
lence. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 158(1), 74-77.
Downloaded by [Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi] at 09:29 25 February 2016

Skuja, K., & Halford, W. (2004). Repeating the errors of our parents? Parental violence
in men’s family of origin and conflict management in dating couples. Journal of In-
terpersonal violence, 19(6), 623-638.
Stith, S. M., & Farley, S. C. (1993). A predictive model of male spousal violence. Jour-
nal of Family Violence, 8(2), 183-201.
Surette, R. (1998). Media, Crime and Criminal Justice: Images and realities. Belmont,
CA: West/Wadsworth.
Tedeschi, J. T., & Felson, R. B. (1994). Violence, aggression and coercive actions.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Thomas, P. (2003). Protection, dissociation, and internal roles: Modeling and Treating
effects of child abuse. Review of General Psychology, 7(4), 364-380.
Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (2004). Extent, nature, and consequences of intimate part-
ner violence: Findings from the national violence against women survey, research
report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
Tontodonato, P., & Crew, K. B. (1992). Dating violence, social learning theory, and
gender: A multivariate analysis. Violence and Victims, 7(1), 3-14.
Wallace, Harvey. (1999). Family violence: Legal, medical, and social perspectives.
(2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Williams, O. (1989). Spouse abuse: Social learning, attribution and interventions.
Journal of Health and Social Policy, 1(2), 91-107.
Wurzel, A., & Lometti, G. (1984). Researching television violence. Society, 21, 22-30.

doi:10.1300/J012v17n01_05