Our findings that half of relationships with violence could be characterized as reciprocally violent are consistent with prior studies.8,9,11 We were surprised to find, however, that among relationships with nonreciprocal violence, women were the perpetrators in a majority of cases, regardless of participant gender. One possible explanation for this, assuming that men and women are equally likely to initiate physical violence,20 is that men, who are typically larger and stronger, are less likely to retaliate if struck first by their partner. Thus, some men may be following the norm that “men shouldn’t hit women” when struck first by their partner. A different explanation is that men are simply less willing to report hitting their partner than are women.21
This explanation cannot account for the data, however, as both men and women reported a larger proportion of nonreciprocal violence perpetrated by women than by men. One might be tempted to think that men who perpetrate violence in nonreciprocal relationships are the traditional male “batterer.” However, the data were not consistent with this representation; women who were victims of nonreciprocal violence experienced less violence and a lower likelihood of injury than did women who were victims of violence in reciprocally violent relationships. Some have suggested that survey studies, such as this one, likely exclude the more severely abused women typically studied in clinical settings.22 Thus, our findings may represent 1 form of partner violence—what Johnson23 has called common couple violence or situational violence—that is likely to be found in broader population samples rather than in clinical samples.
In analyses of reports of violence frequency and injury occurrence, 2 clear findings emerged. First, perpetrators who were men were more likely to inflict an injury on a partner than were those who were women, regardless of reciprocity status. This replicates findings in the literature at large that women are more likely to be injured by partner violence than are men.1,7 Second, relationships with reciprocal violence resulted in more frequent violence (by women only) and a greater likelihood of injury caused by both male and female perpetrators. Reciprocal violence was more dangerous for the victim, both men and women, than was nonreciprocal violence. In fact, men in relationships with reciprocal violence were reportedly injured more often (25.2%) than were women in relationships with nonreciprocal violence (20.0%); this is important as violence perpetrated by women is often seen as not serious.10 An important caveat to these findings is that we do not know the extent or severity of the injuries reported, only that they were reported to have occurred.
These findings highlight the importance of considering relationship violence in the context of the relationship. Many authors have noted that research and prevention should begin to shift away from the sole focus on violence by men against women given the accumulation of data indicating that partner violence is perpetrated by both men and women.10,20 The data presented here suggest that it is critical to begin to study some of the relationship processes that contribute to reciprocal partner violence as those are most likely to result in injury.