Journal of Language and Social Psychology

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Robertson, K.
Right arrow Articles by Murachver, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 25, No. 4, 406-422 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0261927X06292991

Intimate Partner Violence

Linguistic Features and Accommodation Behavior of Perpetrators and Victims

Kirsten Robertson

Tamar Murachver

University of Otago Dunedin, New Zealand

The present study compared the communication behavior of individuals with and without histories of intimate partner violence (IPV). Specifically, the authors examined participants’ use of and accommodation toward facilitative and nonfacilitative language features as a function of their abuse histories. The findings revealed that perpetrators and victims of IPV used fewer facilitative and polite language features. Additionally, men with histories of IPV were more likely to use nonfacilitative language features. The examination of accommodation behavior revealed that perpetrators of psychological abuse were more likely to accommodate toward nonfacilitative language features and were less likely to accommodate toward facilitative language features. In all other instances, participants modified their speech toward the manipulated styles. In light of these findings, recommendations are made for IPV treatment initiatives.

Key Words: intimate partner violence • communication behavior • accommodation behavior • facilitative and nonfacilitative language • perpetrators and victims

References

  • Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 651-680.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Baron, N. S. (2004). See you online: Gender issues in college students use of instant messaging. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23, 397-429.[Abstract]
  • Bilous, F. R., & Krauss, R. M. (1988). Dominance and accommodation in the conversational behaviors of same and mixed-gender dyads. Language and Communication, 8, 183-194.[CrossRef]
  • Brush, L. D. (1990). Violent acts and injurious outcomes in married couples: Methodological issues in the National Survey of Families and Households. Gender and Society, 4, 56-67.
  • Burman, B., Margolin, G., & John, R. S. (1993). America's angriest home videos: Behavioral contingencies observed in home re-enactments of marital conflict. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 28-39.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Colley, A., Todd, Z., Bland, M., Holmes, M., Khanom, N., & Pike, H. (2004). Style and context in e-mails and letters to male and female friends. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23, 369-378.[Abstract]
  • Cordova, J. V., Jacobson, N. S., Gottman, J. M., Rushe, R., & Cox, G. (1993). Negative reciprocity and communication in couples with a violent husband. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 102, 559-564.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Dobash, R. E., & Dobash, R. P. (1979). Violence against wives. New York: Free Press.
  • Feldman, C. M., & Ridley, C. A. (2000). The role of conflict-based communication responses and outcomes in male domestic violence toward female partners. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 552-573.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Fitzpatrick, M. A., Mulac, A., & Dindia, K. (1995). Gender-preferential language use in spouse and stranger interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 14, 18-39.[Abstract]
  • Giles, H., Coupland, N., & Coupland, J. (1991). Accommodation theory: Communication context, and consequence. In H. Giles, J. Coupland, & N. Coupland (Eds.), Contexts of accommodation: Developments in applied sociolinguistics (pp. 1-68). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hannah, A., & Murachver, T. (1999). Gender and conversational style as predictors of conversational behavior. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18, 153-174.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Smutzler, N., & Stuart, G. L. (1998). Demand and withdraw communication among couples experiencing husband violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 731-743.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Maccoby, E. E. (1990). Gender and relationships: A developmental account. American Psychologist, 45, 513-520.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Magdol, L., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Fagan, J., Newman, D. L., & Silva, P. A. (1997). Gender differences in partner violence in a birth cohort of 21-year-olds: Bridging the gap between clinical and epidemiological approaches. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 68-78.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Maltz, D. N., & Borker, R. A. (1982). A cultural approach to male-female miscommunication. In J. A. Gumperz (Ed.), Language and social identity (pp. 195-216). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Mehl, M. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2003). The sounds of social life: A psychometric analysis of students daily social environments and natural conversations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 857-870.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Mulac, A., & Lundell, T. L. (1986). Linguistic contributors to the gender-linked language effect. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 5, 81-101.[Abstract]
  • Mulac, A., Wiemann, J. M., Widenmann, S. J., & Gibson, T. W. (1988). Male/female language differences and effects in same-sex and mixed-sex dyads: The gender-linked language effect. Communication Monographs, 55, 315-335.
  • Pennebaker, J. W., & Francis, M. E. (1999). Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count: LIWC. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Robertson, K., & Murachver, T. (2003). Children's speech accommodation to gendered language styles. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 22, 321-334.[Abstract]
  • Robertson, K., & Murachver, T. (in press). It takes two to tangle: Gender symmetry in intimate partner violence. Basic and Applied Social Psychology.
  • Ronan, G. F., Dreer, L. E., Dollard, K. M., & Ronan, D. W. (2004). Violent couples: Coping and communication skills. Journal of Family Violence, 19, 131-137.[CrossRef]
  • Straus, M. A. (1990). The conflict tactics scale and it's critics: An evaluation and new data on validity and reliability. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 49-73). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishing.
  • Straus, M. A. (2004a, September). Cross cultural reliability and validity of the revised conflict tactics scale. Paper presented at the XV1 World Meeting of ISRA, Santorini, Greece.
  • Straus, M. A. (2004b). Prevalence of violence against dating partners by male and female university students worldwide. Violence Against Women, 10, 790-811.[Abstract]
  • Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283-316.[Abstract]
  • Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: William Morrow.
  • Thomson, R. W., & Murachver, T. (2001). Predicting gender from electronic discourse. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 193-208.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Thomson, R., Murachver, T., & Green, J. (2001). Where is the gender in gendered language? Psychological Science, 12, 71-75.

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Robertson, K.
Right arrow Articles by Murachver, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?