"One study has shown that if the husband had not previously assaulted the wife but she had assaulted him (however mild the assault), there was a 15% probability that he would seriously assault her the next year-far higher than normal. Furthermore, increases in recidivism among male offenders have been correlated to the actions of their spouses. A recidivism rate of 6% has been reported when the female partner abstained from violence compared with a rate of 23% when the wife used minor violence and 42% when the wife engaged in severe violence (Feld & Straus, 1989).
Research by Michael Johnson (1995, 2000) proposes a typology of violent relationships that accounts at least partially for the impact of a violent family structure on subsequent acts of domestic violence. He believes that there are distinct causes, developmental dynamics, and probable requirements for different types of interventions. His typology of domestic violence is based on the dimensions of physical aggression and coercive control. Intimate terrorism (which he labeled “patriarchal terrorism") is perpetrated by a partner who is the generally violent offender described previously. In contrast, common couple violence is committed by both partners, either or both of whom might be individually violent but neither of whom is controlling. The violence might be a product of the couple's behavioral relationship. Hence, the same offender might not be abusive in a different relationship...
In his research, Johnson (2000) found that only 11% of violence fit the terrorism category"
--- Responding to Domestic Violence: The Integration of Criminal Justice and Human Services / Eve S. Buzawa, Carl G. Buzawa, Evan D. Stark
Keywords: Domestic abuse, reciprocal