RT Article
T1 My Reactions to “Johnson’s Typology of Intimate Partner Violence: Reflecting on the First 25 Years and Looking Ahead”
JF Journal of family violence
VO 39
IS 1
SP 149
OP 152
A1 Johnson, Michael P.
LA English
YR 2024
UL https://krimdok.uni-tuebingen.de/Record/1879834855
AB After a brief expression of my gratitude for the support I have received over the years, I move on to make five general points about the papers in this special issue. First, I believe that, taken together, the three literature reviews accomplish three quite different tasks: (a) they document the nature of the impact of the typology on the research literature, (b) they affirm the validity of the typology, and (c) they illustrate the general problem of the publication of seriously flawed analyses in refereed journals. Second, the other six papers in the issue highlight the importance of attending to the impact of specific context on the dynamics of intimate partner violence. Third, although the typology has certainly had considerable impact on both research and practice, there is probably still a large body of research and practice that does not attend to the distinctions that I believe are central to understanding and intervening in intimate partner violence. Fourth, there is always an interpersonal context within which the specific violent acts of intimate partner violence are embedded, and the most important aspects of that interpersonal context are matters of coercion and control. Finally, and most important, gender heavily influences matters of coercion and control and must therefore remain central to our understanding of intimate partner violence.
K1 Coercive Control
K1 domestic violence
K1 Intimate Partner Violence
K1 Johnson’s typology
DO 10.1007/s10896-023-00595-7