Scoping Review of Bidirectional Intimate Partner Violence Using Dyadic Data

Area of Science:

• Social Sciences
• Psychology
• Criminology

Background:

• Intimate partner violence (IPV) is often viewed as unidirectional.
• However, historical debate and research suggest bidirectional IPV, where both partners perpetrate and experience violence, is prevalent.
• Dyadic data collection, where both partners report on IPV, is crucial due to low agreement between partner reports.

Purpose of the Study:

• To identify the rates of bidirectional IPV.
• To examine how different reporting methodologies influence bidirectional IPV rates in studies utilizing dyadic data.

Main Methods:

• A systematic database search was conducted.
• Included studies involved adults (18+), reported bidirectional IPV rates, used dyadic data, were peer-reviewed, and focused on US samples.
• 34 studies were reviewed.

Main Results:

• Rates of bidirectional IPV varied significantly across studies, ranging from 10.0% to 96.6% (median 35.0%).
• Substantial variability existed in study instrumentation, definitions of bidirectional IPV, and sample types, hindering cross-study comparisons.
• Many studies defined bidirectional IPV based on either partner's report or used the higher score in cases of disagreement, potentially overrepresenting its prevalence (10%-80% range).

Conclusions:

• There is significant variability in reported bidirectional IPV rates, influenced by methodological differences.
• Current methods for defining bidirectional IPV, especially when partner reports conflict, may lead to overestimation.
• Further research is essential to establish standardized methods for defining bidirectional IPV, particularly in cases of reporting discrepancies.