000			02156nab a22003017a 4500
999			_c5311 _d5311
005			20250625151425.0
008			170227t2009 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aAFVC
100			_4Hamby, Sherry
245			_aThe gender debate about intimate partner violence : _bsolutions and dead ends _cSherry Hamby
260			_bAmerican Psychological Association, _c2009
500			_aPsychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 2009, 1(1): 24-34
500			_aRecommended reading
520			_a"The debate on gender continues to define much scholarship on partner violence. No other single issue is as important to identifying one's theoretical and political position among those who are concerned about intimate partner violence (IPV). At this point in time, several well-documented conclusions can be drawn. First, two common estimates—under 10% female-perpetrated and 50% or more female-perpetrated—are quite discrepant from virtually all other data on physical violence. Second, several key definitional and measurement issues explain a large part of this discrepancy. Third, a number of commonly mentioned possibilities for measurement artifacts are unlikely sources of the gender parity found in many studies of IPV. This article will review each of these issues and suggest a third approach, the moderate asymmetry approach. The moderate asymmetry hypothesis for IPV is currently best-supported by the data, and it should be emphasized until a better alternative is found.: (Author's abstract). Record #5311
650			_9181 _aDATA ANALYSIS
650			_aRECOMMENDED READING _96431
650			_aDOMESTIC VIOLENCE _9203
650			_aGENDER _9269
650			_aGENDER SYMMETRY DEBATE _96447
650			_aINTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE _9431
650			_aPERPETRATORS _92644
650		0	_94412 _aWOMEN'S USE OF VIOLENCE
651		4	_aUNITED STATES _92646
773	0		_tPsychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 2009, 1(1): 24-34
830			_aPsychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy _96443
856			_uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015066 _yRead abstract
942			_2ddc _cARTICLE