To Örebro University

oru.seÖrebro University Publications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 44 of 44
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Edhammer, Helene
    et al.
    School of Law, Psychology and Social Work, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Vulnerability Factors of Intimate Partner Violence Among Victims of Partner Only and Generally Violent Perpetrators2022In: Journal of family Violence, ISSN 0885-7482, E-ISSN 1573-2851Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Purpose: The aim of this study was to examine how victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) differ in terms of vulnerability factors and risk of being re-victimized, by comparing victims of the two most consistently identified IPV male perpetrator subtypes: the Partner Only (PO) violent and the Generally Violent (GV).

    Methods: The current study analyzed IPV reported to the Swedish police and consisted of a sample of 1479 cases of male-to-female perpetrated IPV. The material mainly consisted of IPV risk assessments conducted by the police.

    Results: The results showed that vulnerability factors were significantly more common among victims of GV perpetrators, including inconsistent attitudes or behaviors, extreme fear of the perpetrator, inadequate support or resources, an unsafe living situation, and health problems. Moreover, victims of GV perpetrators were generally assessed by the police with a significantly higher risk of being re-victimized by IPV. Finally, in relation to the victim vulnerability factors most strongly associated with an elevated assessed risk for IPV re-victimization, the presence of extreme fear of the perpetrator and having an unsafe living situation were significantly related to such outcomes for both groups of victims.

    Conclusion: In sum, the results of this study contribute to the scant body of knowledge on IPV victim subtypes and their vulnerability profiles. In addition to facilitating the risk assessment of repeated IPV, such knowledge could also indicate what type of support different victim subtypes require in order to prevent IPV.

  • 2.
    Larsson, Anna-Karin
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences.
    Att bedöma och hantera risk för våld i nära relation i gles- och landsbygd: Nyttiggörande av forskningsresultat från RISKSAM-projektet i dialog med socialtjänst och polis2023Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Syftet med projektet har varit att förmedla forskningsresultat om riskhantering och samverkan avseende våld i nära relation, stalkning och hedersrelaterat våld och förtryck till yrkesverksamma inom polis och socialtjänst, samt att undersöka utmaningar och behov rörande frågor om riskbedömning, riskhantering och samverkan kring våld i nära relationer i gles- och landsbygdskommuner.

    Projektet knyter an till forskningsprogrammet RISKSAM som syftar till att implementera och utvärdera en hållbar och evidensbaserad arbetsmodell, RISKSAM, för arbetet med riskhantering och samverkan vad gäller våld i nära relation. RISKSAM är en förkortning för RISKhantering och SAMverkan. En huvudsaklig ambition med nyttiggörandeprojektet har varit att medverka till att sprida information om RISKSAM och i dialog med de yrkesverksamma utveckla modellen ännu mer specifikt till de utmaningar som gles- och landsbygd står inför.

    Under våren 2023 har vi således besökt praktiker inom socialtjänst och polis i gles- och landsbygd. Forskare och doktorander inom RISKSAM-programmet besökte regionerna Dalarna, Värmland, Västra Götaland, Västerbotten, Örebro och Östergötland, där ett eller flera kommunbesök genomfördes i varje region. Varje besök har bestått av presentationer om RISKSAM och preliminära resultat ur detta projekt, samt fokusgruppsintervjuer om gles- och landsbygdens specifika utmaningar och de yrkesverksammas behov och stöd.

    Våra resultat visade att det finns både utmaningar och möjligheter med arbetet med riskbedömning, riskhantering och samverkan kring ärenden med våld i nära relationer i gles- och landsbygdskommuner. I riskbedömningsarbetet fann vi att det fanns utmaningar i att identifiera våld men också att det kan finnas bristande organisatorisk kompetens att riskbedöma. Enskilda medarbetare har kompetens men omsättningen av personal och svårigheter att rekrytera, försvårar upprätthållandet av kompetens inom organisationen. Arbetet med riskbedömning kan även försvåras på grund av olika faktorer och brist på erfarenhet då dessa ärenden är sällan-ärenden.

    I rapportens andra del redovisas utmaningar och möjligheter med riskhantering. Vi belyser verksamheternas bristande förutsättningar och de få insatser som finns att erbjuda på hemmaplan, att verktygslådan att arbeta med är liten, och att det finns en svårighet att hantera möjligheten till anonymitet på mindre orter. Vi lyfter både utmaningar och möjligheter med glesbefolkade samhällen, som fördelen med närhet till varandra och en känsla av att ta hand om varandra, men också nackdelarna med att det är svårt att vara anonym, ta emot insatser och att återvända till hemorten efter våldet och en vistelse i ett skyddat boende.

    I del tre i rapporten beskriver vi de utmaningar och möjligheter som yrkesverksamma upplever i relation till samverkan – både intern och extern – i ärenden med våld i nära relation. Detta innefattade, bland annat, hur den geografiska närheten (till exempel att sitta i samma byggnad) mellan yrkesverksamma underlättar samverkan. Samtidigt är samverkansformerna sårbara utifrån att de baseras på person snarare än funktion och den externa samverkan som sker är nästan uteslutande ostrukturerad. Det finns dock en vilja till ökad samverkan och existerande plattformar för detta, dock upplever flera yrkesverksamma att det saknas rätt verktyg för att åstadkomma detta.

    Rapporten avslutas med en sammanfattande diskussion om utmaningar och möjligheter i arbetet med våld i nära relation i gles- och landsbygd. Här lämnas även konkreta förslag på hur praktiker i gles- och landsbygd kan stärkas i sitt arbete i relation till riskbedömning, riskhantering och samverkan.

    Download full text (pdf)
    Att bedöma och hantera risk för våld i nära relation i gles- och landsbygd
  • 3.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Mittuniversitetet.
    Identifying risk for recidivism among partner violent men reported to the Swedish police2020Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a global public health issue, where every third woman has experienced such violence. Moreover, IPV recidivism rates are generally high. These figures indicate that the police need a better understanding of the risk factors related to those perpetrators who pose the highest risk of recidivating in IPV. To this end, research has found that IPV perpetrators who are violent towards their partner as well as others (referred to as the antisocial subtype) display more risk factors for IPV than those perpetrators who are violent only against their partner (referred to as the family-only subtype). However, there are still uncertainties whether these two subtypes differ in terms of characteristics related to recidivism (i.e., risk profile) and actual recidivism. Thus, this thesis aimed to examine differences in risk profiles and recidivism rates between the antisocial perpetrators and the family-only perpetrators. This thesis was based on a systematic literature review and three empirical studies. The empirical studies were based on data collected from the Swedish police and consisted of IPV risk assessments. The risk assessments were performed by the police using the Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER). These empirical studies relied on a sample of 657 male perpetrators who had been reported to the police and subjected to a violence risk assessment for allegedly perpetrating IPV against a female partner. The results demonstrated that categorizing partner violent men as either antisocial or family-only can help identify the perpetrators most at risk to recidivate in IPV. As such, the antisocial perpetrators displayed a greater diversity as well as degree of risk factors for IPV, and were more likely to recidivate in IPV, despite legal interventions from the police. In contrast, the family-only perpetrators presented with fewer risk factors, were characterized as socially well-adjusted outside of the relationship, and less likely to recidivate in IPV. However, several family-only perpetrators recidivated in IPV, meaning that such perpetrators should not routinely be dismissed as low-risk perpetrators. In conclusion, the results of this thesis can be used to improve the ability of those assigned to assess risk for future IPV to identify those perpetrators most at risk to recidivate. In turn, this could enable a more informed and adequate response aiming to prevent, or at best reduce, this risk. 

    List of papers
    1. Family-only perpetrators of intimate partner violence: A systematic review
    Open this publication in new window or tab >>Family-only perpetrators of intimate partner violence: A systematic review
    2020 (English)In: Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, ISSN 1524-8380, E-ISSN 1552-8324, Vol. 21, no 2, p. 367-381Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
    Abstract [en]

    This article presents the first systematic review of family-only intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators (as originally proposed by Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart). The aims of the present review were to summarize and describe the prevalence of the family-only perpetrator subtype, as well as to investigate what characteristics were associated with perpetrators within this subtype. Electronic literature searches in several databases (e.g., PsychINFO, Web of Science, and PubMed) were carried out. Of the 3,434 studies identified, 30 studies met the inclusion criteria as well as the methodological quality criteria. Thematic analyses were conducted, where several themes and subthemes were identified. The proportion of family-only perpetrators, averaged across sample types, was 47.5%. Drawing on the thematic analyses of the reviewed studies, family-only perpetrators presented as a less violent subtype, displaying several pro-social personality traits, as well as a lower degree of psychopathology. The findings were inline with Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart’s predictions. The findings also demonstrated the utility of a 2-fold typology, consisting of a family-only and a generally violent (GV) subtype, as well as the need to reconsider the one-size-fits-all approach to IPV treatment. We also included a discussion of the terminology of the subtypes and propose an adoption of the terms “partner onlyviolent” and “generally violent” subtypes.

    Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
    Sage Publications, 2020
    Keywords
    Family-only, general violence, intimate partner violence, subtype, systematic review, typology
    National Category
    Other Social Sciences
    Research subject
    Criminology
    Identifiers
    urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-68882 (URN)10.1177/1524838018770410 (DOI)000512778600009 ()29695216 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85046661632 (Scopus ID)
    Available from: 2018-09-12 Created: 2018-09-12 Last updated: 2020-11-16Bibliographically approved
    2. Risk factors for intimate partner violence: A comparison of antisocial and family-only perpetrators
    Open this publication in new window or tab >>Risk factors for intimate partner violence: A comparison of antisocial and family-only perpetrators
    2019 (English)In: Journal of Interpersonal Violence, ISSN 0886-2605, E-ISSN 1552-6518, Vol. 34, no 2, p. 219-239Article in journal (Refereed) Published
    Abstract [en]

    Subtyping male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) based ontheir generality of violence could facilitate the difficult task of matchingperpetrator subtype with efficient risk management strategies. As such, theaim of the present study was to compare antisocial and family-only maleperpetrators of interpersonal violence in terms of (a) demographic andlegal characteristics, (b) risk factors for violence, and (c) assessed risk andthe importance of specific risk factors for violence. A quantitative designwas used in this retrospective register study on data obtained from theSwedish police. Risk assessments performed with the Swedish version ofthe Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER) andpolice registers were used. A sample of 657 male alleged IPV perpetratorswere classified as antisocial (n = 341) or family-only (n = 316) based on theirgenerality of violence. The results showed that the antisocial perpetratorswere significantly younger, as well as more psychologically abusive. Antisocialperpetrators also had significantly more present risk factors for IPV, and wereassessed with a significantly higher risk for acute and severe or deadly IPV, compared with the family-only perpetrators. The subtypes also evidencedunique risk factors with a significant impact on elevated risk for acute andsevere or deadly such violence. Key findings in the present study concernedthe subtypes evidencing unique risk factors increasing the risk for acute andsevere or deadly IPV. Major implications of this study include the findings ofsuch unique “red flag” risk factors for each subtype. To prevent future IPV,it is vital for the risk assessor to be aware of these red flags when makingdecisions about risk, as well as risk management strategies.

    Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
    Sage Publications, 2019
    Keywords
    intimate partner violence, antisocial perpetrators, family-only perpetrators, B-SAFER, risk factors
    National Category
    Psychology
    Research subject
    Criminology
    Identifiers
    urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-49583 (URN)10.1177/0886260516640547 (DOI)000453216700001 ()27021731 (PubMedID)2-s2.0-85052022255 (Scopus ID)
    Note

    Funding Agency:

    Swedish Crime Victim Compensation and Support Authority

    Available from: 2016-03-29 Created: 2016-03-29 Last updated: 2020-11-16Bibliographically approved
    3. Recidivism in Intimate Partner Violence Among Antisocial and Family-Only Perpetrators
    Open this publication in new window or tab >>Recidivism in Intimate Partner Violence Among Antisocial and Family-Only Perpetrators
    2017 (English)In: Criminal justice and behavior, ISSN 0093-8548, E-ISSN 1552-3594, Vol. 44, no 11, p. 1477-1495Article in journal (Refereed) Published
    Abstract [en]

    The aim of this study was to compare antisocial and family-only intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators in terms of IPV recidivism rates, type of recidivism crime, and time to recidivism. A total sample of 628 perpetrators was categorized as antisocial (n = 327) or family-only (n = 301) based on general criminality. Results demonstrated that antisocial perpetrators recidivated to a larger extent than family-only perpetrators (27.2% vs. 12.9%). Antisocial perpetrators were more prone to recidivate in both physical and nonphysical violence. Of the perpetrators who recidivated, the majority did so within the first year after their index crime. However, antisocial perpetrators recidivated more than family-only perpetrators after the first year. key findings consisted of the subtypes’ differing propensity to reoffend and their different critical time periods for recidivism. These findings suggest the need for different risk management strategies depending on perpetrator subtype to prevent future violence.

    Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
    Sage Publications, 2017
    Keywords
    intimate partner violence; recidivism; perpetrators; antisocial; family-only
    National Category
    Law and Society
    Research subject
    Criminology
    Identifiers
    urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-61083 (URN)10.1177/0093854817719916 (DOI)000418299300005 ()2-s2.0-85030320762 (Scopus ID)
    Funder
    The Swedish Crime Victim Compensation and Support Authority
    Available from: 2017-09-19 Created: 2017-09-19 Last updated: 2020-11-16Bibliographically approved
    4. Characteristics and Recidivism in Relation to Arrest: Differentiating Between Partner Violent Perpetrator Subtypes
    Open this publication in new window or tab >>Characteristics and Recidivism in Relation to Arrest: Differentiating Between Partner Violent Perpetrator Subtypes
    2020 (English)In: Nordic Journal of Criminology, ISSN 2578-983X, Vol. 21, no 2, p. 203-222Article in journal (Refereed) Published
    Abstract [en]

    This study aimed to describe and compare arrested and non-arrested male intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators, in terms of individual characteristics and variables related to the IPV incident, in a sample of 628 perpetrators reported to the Swedish police. We also explored recidivism rates in relation to arrest within the total sample, as well as among subtypes of partner violent men (i.e. generally violent [GV] and partner only [PO] violent). The perpetrators in this longitudinal study were reported to the police for male-to-female perpetrated IPV and subjected to a structured violencerisk assessment between 2011 and 2014. The results showed that arrested perpetrators were more likely to be reported for severe forms of IPV, being assessed by the police post-arrest with a higher risk for recidivism, and being more likely to be prosecuted for the reported IPV incident. There was also a significant interaction effect between subtypes and arrest for IPV recidivism within 12 months post-arrest. Among those perpetrators who were arrested, GV perpetrators were more than four times as likely as PO violent perpetrators to recidivate in IPV. The results of this study high-light the importance of differentiating between subtypes when examining the impact of sanctions on IPV recidivism

    Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
    Routledge, 2020
    Keywords
    Arrest, intimate partner violence, subtypes, recidivism, deterrent
    National Category
    Other Social Sciences not elsewhere specified
    Research subject
    Criminology
    Identifiers
    urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-79595 (URN)10.1080/2578983X.2020.1727119 (DOI)2-s2.0-85095392801 (Scopus ID)
    Funder
    The Swedish Crime Victim Compensation and Support Authority
    Available from: 2020-01-31 Created: 2020-01-31 Last updated: 2021-01-15Bibliographically approved
    Download full text (pdf)
    FULLTEXT01
  • 4.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Department of Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden.
    Kvinnors rätt till trygghet2015Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 5.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Riskfaktorer för partnervåld utifrån covid-19-restriktioner2020Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 6.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Subtyper av partnervåldsförövare2016Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 7.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Två typer av partnervåldsförövare2021In: Texter om våld, ISSN 2004-3775, no 1, p. 44-48Article in journal (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 8.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Våldsutövare: Aktuellt forskningsläge och praktiska implikationer2021Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 9.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Klint, Filippa
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Behovsinventering av insatser för våldsutövare i nära relation i Örebro län2022Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 10.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Australia.
    Arrest as a protective intervention among intimate partner violent men2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The literature on the effect of arrest on recidivism among perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) is inconclusive. As such, studies have found that arrest can have a deterrent effect, a provocative effect, or no effect at all. Despite previous recommendations to examine the effect of arrest using IPV perpetrators typologies, only one such previous study has been carried out. In this paper we explore the effect of arrest on recidivism among IPV perpetrators. More specifically, we will present preliminary results pertaining to differences between arrested and non-arrested perpetrators on demographical and offense related variables to discern if, and how, these two groups differ. Furthermore, we will also present the results related to the possibly deterrent effect of arrest on recidivism among partner violent men in general, as well as among subtypes of such men. The sample consisted of 628 male alleged perpetrators reported to the Swedish police for a male-to-female perpetrated act of IPV and subjected to a structured violence risk assessment. The results are discussed in terms of theory and from an IPV risk management perspective, as well as in relation to the RISKSAM model.

  • 11.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Att bedöma och hantera risk för återfall - vad säger forskningen?2022Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 12.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Department of Health Science, Mid Sweden University, Sweden.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Australia.
    Characteristics and Recidivism in Relation to Arrest: Differentiating Between Partner Violent Perpetrator Subtypes2020In: Nordic Journal of Criminology, ISSN 2578-983X, Vol. 21, no 2, p. 203-222Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study aimed to describe and compare arrested and non-arrested male intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators, in terms of individual characteristics and variables related to the IPV incident, in a sample of 628 perpetrators reported to the Swedish police. We also explored recidivism rates in relation to arrest within the total sample, as well as among subtypes of partner violent men (i.e. generally violent [GV] and partner only [PO] violent). The perpetrators in this longitudinal study were reported to the police for male-to-female perpetrated IPV and subjected to a structured violencerisk assessment between 2011 and 2014. The results showed that arrested perpetrators were more likely to be reported for severe forms of IPV, being assessed by the police post-arrest with a higher risk for recidivism, and being more likely to be prosecuted for the reported IPV incident. There was also a significant interaction effect between subtypes and arrest for IPV recidivism within 12 months post-arrest. Among those perpetrators who were arrested, GV perpetrators were more than four times as likely as PO violent perpetrators to recidivate in IPV. The results of this study high-light the importance of differentiating between subtypes when examining the impact of sanctions on IPV recidivism

  • 13.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne Victoria, Australia.
    Family-only perpetrators of intimate partner violence: A systematic review2020In: Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, ISSN 1524-8380, E-ISSN 1552-8324, Vol. 21, no 2, p. 367-381Article, review/survey (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article presents the first systematic review of family-only intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators (as originally proposed by Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart). The aims of the present review were to summarize and describe the prevalence of the family-only perpetrator subtype, as well as to investigate what characteristics were associated with perpetrators within this subtype. Electronic literature searches in several databases (e.g., PsychINFO, Web of Science, and PubMed) were carried out. Of the 3,434 studies identified, 30 studies met the inclusion criteria as well as the methodological quality criteria. Thematic analyses were conducted, where several themes and subthemes were identified. The proportion of family-only perpetrators, averaged across sample types, was 47.5%. Drawing on the thematic analyses of the reviewed studies, family-only perpetrators presented as a less violent subtype, displaying several pro-social personality traits, as well as a lower degree of psychopathology. The findings were inline with Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart’s predictions. The findings also demonstrated the utility of a 2-fold typology, consisting of a family-only and a generally violent (GV) subtype, as well as the need to reconsider the one-size-fits-all approach to IPV treatment. We also included a discussion of the terminology of the subtypes and propose an adoption of the terms “partner onlyviolent” and “generally violent” subtypes.

  • 14.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia.
    Policing family violence in rural areas2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This presentation will describe the primary results of a prospective research project spanning over eight years (2009-2016), introducing a structured approach to policing family violence. This research project was funded by the Swedish Crime Victim Support and Compensation Authority. The aim of the research project was to implement and evaluate the use of structured professional judgments tool of assessing violence for risk. More specifically, risk assessment checklists for intimate partner violence, stalking, and honor related violence was introduced as a working method within the two Swedish police districts of Jämtland and Västernorrland. The first phase of the project constituted of the implementation of the risk assessment checklists. This involved training the police in how to use the checklists. The second phase of the project constituted of data collection and evaluation. Thus, risk assessments performed between 2011 and 2014 for all police-reported cases of intimate partner violence, stalking, and honor related violence in the two police districts were collected. Furthermore, risk management strategies recommended by the police, in order to prevent future violence, were evaluated. Additionally, qualitative interviews with police and district attorneys were conducted. The results demonstrated that the use of structured violence risk assessment checklists works well within the Swedish police to reduce the risk for violence by suggesting proper risk management. However, the results demonstrated that there was no existing routine for documenting the risk management strategies, making follow up evaluation of their efficacy difficult. Finally, an overall presentation of the research papers produced, based on the results of this project, will be given.

  • 15.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia.
    Recidivism in intimate partner violence among antisocial and family-only perpetrators2017Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Research of recidivism among intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrator subtypes has demonstrated inconclusive results. The present study sought to outline the recidivism patterns between two subtypes; antisocial and family-only perpetrators. The aim of this study was to compare these subtypes regarding IPV recidivism rates and type of recidivism crime. We also explored and compared time to IPV recidivism between the subtypes. In this prospective study data was obtained from the Swedish police. The material constituted of 628 male IPV perpetrators subjected to a structured violence risk assessment between 2011 and 2014 in two Swedish police districts. The perpetrators were categorized as antisocial (n = 327) or family-only (n = 301) based on general criminality. Recidivism was measured as any new police report of an IPV related crime. Results demonstrated that antisocial perpetrators recidivated to a larger extent than family-only perpetrators (27.2% vs. 12.9%). Antisocial perpetrators were more prone to recidivate in both physical and non-physical violence. Furthermore, antisocial perpetrators had a longer critical time period for recidivism and recidivated faster in non-physically violent IPV compared to family-only perpetrators. These findings highlight the need to consider different risk management strategies depending on the type of IPV perpetrator in order to prevent future violence.

  • 16.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia.
    Recidivism in Intimate Partner Violence Among Antisocial and Family-Only Perpetrators2017In: Criminal justice and behavior, ISSN 0093-8548, E-ISSN 1552-3594, Vol. 44, no 11, p. 1477-1495Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The aim of this study was to compare antisocial and family-only intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators in terms of IPV recidivism rates, type of recidivism crime, and time to recidivism. A total sample of 628 perpetrators was categorized as antisocial (n = 327) or family-only (n = 301) based on general criminality. Results demonstrated that antisocial perpetrators recidivated to a larger extent than family-only perpetrators (27.2% vs. 12.9%). Antisocial perpetrators were more prone to recidivate in both physical and nonphysical violence. Of the perpetrators who recidivated, the majority did so within the first year after their index crime. However, antisocial perpetrators recidivated more than family-only perpetrators after the first year. key findings consisted of the subtypes’ differing propensity to reoffend and their different critical time periods for recidivism. These findings suggest the need for different risk management strategies depending on perpetrator subtype to prevent future violence.

  • 17.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Riskfaktorer för våld i nära relation bland unga partnervåldsförövare2021Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
  • 18.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Riskfaktorer för våld i nära relation bland unga partnervåldsförövare2021Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 19.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science at Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Rural Differences in Victim Vulnerability and Revictimization of Intimate Partner Violence2023In: Violence and Victims, ISSN 0886-6708, E-ISSN 1945-7073, Vol. 38, no 2, p. 185-202Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The aim of this study was to examine the association between the victim vulnerability factors included in the intimate partner violence (IPV) risk assessment tool used by the Swedish police (Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk [B-SAFER]) and rates of IPV revictimization among female victims living in rural towns, countryside, or remote areas. This study also aimed to examine the interaction between rurality and IPV revictimization in relation to victim vulnerability. The sample consisted of 695 cases of male-to-female perpetrated IPV, which had been reported to the Swedish police and subjected to a B-SAFER assessment. Rates of revictimization were examined in police registers. The results demonstrated that several vulnerability factors could discriminate between IPV revictimization across rurality. There was also an interaction effect between rurality and IPV revictimization in relation to the number of victim vulnerability factors present, where revictimization was more common for victims with many vulnerability factors living in more sparsely populated areas.

    The full text will be freely available from 2024-04-01 00:00
  • 20.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Australia.
    Återfall i nytt partnervåld bland subtyper av partnervåldsförövare2017Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 21.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences.
    Strand, Susanne J. M.
    Örebro University, School of Behavioural, Social and Legal Sciences. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Victim Retraction From Police Investigations of Intimate Partner Violence2024In: Psychology of Violence, ISSN 2152-0828, E-ISSN 2152-081X, Vol. 14, no 1, p. 45-55Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Objective: Previous research has reported inconclusive results pertaining to the predictors for victim retraction and participation in police investigations of intimate partner violence (IPV). The aim of this study was therefore to examine characteristics and consequences associated with victim retraction and participation in police investigations of IPV. Additionally, we also examined characteristics and consequences in relation to victim retraction and participation in police risk management strategies.

    Method: We analyzed a sample of 668 cases of male-to-female IPV reported to Swedish police, where characteristics were retrieved mainly from risk assessments of IPV re-victimization conducted by the police for all cases. Additionally, follow-up information of prosecutions, convictions, and rates of IPV re-victimization were examined for each case.

    Results: The main results show a higher proportion of vulnerability factors present in cases where women retracted than in cases where they participated. In contrast, there were more risk factors present in cases where victims participated, and such participation was more likely to result in a perpetrator's prosecution and conviction. There was no significant association between IPV re-victimization and victim retraction or participation.

    Conclusion: Victim participation in the police investigation and the risk management increased the likelihood of conviction, illustrating the importance of criminal justice professionals supporting, encouraging, and motivating women who have experienced IPV to participate in the criminal justice process.

  • 22.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Selenius, Heidi
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Hur ökad kunskap om partnervåldsförövare kan förhindra våldsutsatthet2015Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [sv]

    Föreliggande presentation ämnar redogöra för mitt avhandlingsprojekt. Detta baseras på ett av Brottsoffermyndigheten finansierat projekt om användandet av strukturerade riskbedömningar inom polisen för att förhindra våld. Forskning har visat att användandet av strukturerade checklistor för bedömning av risk är en välfungerande metod att använda inom såväl polis, kriminalvård och rättspsykiatri för bedömning och hantering av risk för våld. Projektet ”Strukturerade vs ostrukturerade riskbedömningar för våld”, som avslutas sommaren 2016, initierades 2009 av kriminologisektionen vid Mittuniversitetet i Sundsvall. En strukturerad arbetsmetod, bestående av strukturerade checklistor för partnervåld, stalkning och hedersrelaterat våld, implementerades i Jämtlands samt Västernorrlands polismyndighet. En sådan checklista var Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide: Short Version (SARA: SV). Denna checklista syftar till att förhindra partnervåld genom att erbjuda ett strukturerat och systematiskt tillvägagångssätt att bedöma risk för upprepat sådant våld.

    Den första delstudien i avhandlingen baseras på sådana SARA: SV- bedömningar och fokuserar på karaktäristika hos olika subtyper av misstänkta partnervåldsförövare. Dessa förövare fördelades i två grupper baserat på typ av våld. Tidigare forskning på området har påvisat att partnervåldsförövare utgör en heterogen grupp, varvid klassificeringen av sådana förövare har uppmärksammats som ett viktigt forskningsområde. En av de mest distinkt särskiljande drag som karaktäriserar olika subtyper av partnervåldsförövare är våldets generalitet. De förövare som ej begränsar sitt våldsutövande enbart till sin partner (så kallade ”antisociala förövare”) har uppvisat flertalet unika karaktäristika jämfört med de förövare som enbart är våldsamma mot sin partner (så kallade ”family-only-förövare”). Bland annat har de antisociala förövarna i större utsträckning missbruksproblem, psykiska problem och använder allvarligare våld jämfört med family-only-förövare (se exempelvis Thijssen & de Ruiter, 2011; Walsh et al., 2010).

    En av de främsta anledningarna till att identifiera sådana subtyper är möjligheten att i större utsträckning förhindra partnervåld. Genom att ta hänsyn till de individuella skillnader som finns hos olika subtyper av partnervåldsförövare kan mest lämpliga riskhanteringstrategi för respektive subtyp användas. Ett sådant förfarande syftar i slutändan till att minimera risken för upprepad viktimisering för den drabbade. Mot bakgrund av detta presenteras upplägget och genomförandet av den första delstudien i avhandlingen. Studien kommer mer specifikt att undersöka eventuella skillnader i bakgrundsfaktorer och riskfaktorer för upprepat partnervåld, mellan antisociala- och family-only- förövare. Datainsamlingen har genomförts och preliminära analyser kommer att presenteras. Slutligen kommer även upplägget och planeringen för den andra delstudien i avhandlingsprojektet kort att presenteras. Denna studie kommer att bygga vidare på dessa subtyper av partnervåldsförövare och undersöka återfall i brottslighet.

  • 23.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University Australia.
    Selenius, Heidi
    Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
    One size does not fit all: How typologies of intimate partner violent men can inform and facilitate police risk assessment and management of such violence2018Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 24.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Australia.
    Selenius, Heidi
    Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
    ”One size does not fit all”: Hur kunskap om typologier av partnervåldsförövare kan förbättra polisens riskbedömning och riskhantering av partnervåld2018Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 25.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Australia.
    Selenius, Heidi
    Proposing a typology of intimate partner violent men: Implications for risk assessment and management2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Background: Unlike traditional beliefs male intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators are a heterogeneous group of offenders and, thus, differ from each other in several important aspects. However, there is no agreed upon procedure for creating such typologies.

    Objective: The aim of this presentation is to propose a typology of IPV perpetrators that can be practically useful for the police and other criminal justice professionals, in terms of risk assessment and management for future such violence.

    Method: The results are based on (a) a sample of 628 male IPV perpetrators reported to the Swedish police for allegedly perpetrating IPV towards a current or former female partner, and (b) a systematic review of IPV perpetrator typology papers.

    Results: The results of both the empirical data and the systematic review favor a two-subtype typology, consisting of a partner only violent subtype and a generally violent subtype (N = 301 and N = 327, respectively, in our empirical data). The subtypes differed on several behavioral and psychosocial risk factors, as well as in terms of IPV recidivism.

    Discussion: The differences between the subtypes in our proposed typology are important to consider in terms of risk assessment and management of IPV. Thus, the generally violent subtype demonstrated more risk factors and higher recidivism rates than the partner only violent subtype. As such, identifying IPV perpetrators as either partner only violent or generally violent is an important first step in any IPV violence risk assessment. Subsequently, the risk management strategies that follow a risk assessment should be tailored to the specific subtype’s risk factors (needs). Policy implications of the proposed typology will be also discussed.

    Conclusions: The results our research support the notion that IPV perpetrators should be considered as a heterogeneous group of offenders, although much valuable information and guidance in assessing risk and planning risk management strategies can be gained from differentiating between partner only violent and generally violent IPV perpetrators.

  • 26.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden.
    Strand, Susanne
    Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Selenius, Heidi
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Risk factors for intimate partner violence: A comparison of antisocial and family-only perpetrators2016Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) are a heterogeneous group. Thus, they demonstrate different risk factors for violence and require different risk management interventions. Subtyping IPV perpetrators could facilitate the task of matching perpetrators with adequate interventions, aiming for IPV prevention. The present study compared differences between antisocial and family-only perpetrators, regarding risk factors for IPV, assessed risk and the importance of specific risk factors for such violence. In this retrospective file study, data was obtained from the Swedish police. Risk assessments performed with the Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER; Kropp, Hart, & Belfrage, 2008), and police registers were used. A sample of 657 male alleged perpetrators of IPV were classified as eitherantisocial (n= 341) orfamily-only (n= 316) perpetrators, based on their generality of violence as assessed within the B-SAFER. The results demonstrated that antisocial perpetrators had significantly more risk factors for IPV present in the B-SAFER, and were assessed with significantly higher risk for acute and severe or deadly IPV, compared to the family-only perpetrators. The subtypes also evidenced unique (i.e., ‘red flag’) risk factors that had significant impact on elevated risk ratings for acute and severe or deadly IPV. Key findings, concerning the importance of the unique risk factors for IPV for each subtype, will be discussed. In a risk assessment and management context, these ‘red flag’ risk factors are important to consider when determining overall risk and recommending management strategies.

  • 27.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Department of Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Selenius, Heidi
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Risk factors for intimate partner violence: A comparison of antisocial and family-only perpetrators2019In: Journal of Interpersonal Violence, ISSN 0886-2605, E-ISSN 1552-6518, Vol. 34, no 2, p. 219-239Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Subtyping male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) based ontheir generality of violence could facilitate the difficult task of matchingperpetrator subtype with efficient risk management strategies. As such, theaim of the present study was to compare antisocial and family-only maleperpetrators of interpersonal violence in terms of (a) demographic andlegal characteristics, (b) risk factors for violence, and (c) assessed risk andthe importance of specific risk factors for violence. A quantitative designwas used in this retrospective register study on data obtained from theSwedish police. Risk assessments performed with the Swedish version ofthe Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER) andpolice registers were used. A sample of 657 male alleged IPV perpetratorswere classified as antisocial (n = 341) or family-only (n = 316) based on theirgenerality of violence. The results showed that the antisocial perpetratorswere significantly younger, as well as more psychologically abusive. Antisocialperpetrators also had significantly more present risk factors for IPV, and wereassessed with a significantly higher risk for acute and severe or deadly IPV, compared with the family-only perpetrators. The subtypes also evidencedunique risk factors with a significant impact on elevated risk for acute andsevere or deadly such violence. Key findings in the present study concernedthe subtypes evidencing unique risk factors increasing the risk for acute andsevere or deadly IPV. Major implications of this study include the findings ofsuch unique “red flag” risk factors for each subtype. To prevent future IPV,it is vital for the risk assessor to be aware of these red flags when makingdecisions about risk, as well as risk management strategies.

  • 28.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Department of Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Storey, Jennifer E.
    Selenius, Heidi
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Fröberg, Sofi
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Implementing effective police risk assessment and management for family violence2016Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 29.
    Petersson, Joakim
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Thunberg, Sara
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Vulnerability factors among women victimized by intimate partner violence and the presence of children2022In: Journal of family Violence, ISSN 0885-7482, E-ISSN 1573-2851, Vol. 37, no 7, p. 1057-1069Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study aimed to a) examine the presence of children in relation to victim vulnerability factors and assessed risk for intimate partner violence (IPV) re-victimization, and b) examine the police response, in terms of risk management, in IPV cases with and without children, respectively. Data from a sample of 1407 women who had reported IPV victimization to the Swedish police was analyzed. The material consisted of risk assessments conducted by the police using the Swedish version of the Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER) checklist, as well as the recommended risk management strategies. A series of chi-square tests of independence revealed that women with and without children, respectively, displayed different vulnerability factors to different extents. Women with children expressed more extreme fear of the perpetrator and were more likely to have an unsafe living situation, whereas women without children displayed more inconsistent attitudes or behaviors and health problems. However, binary logistic regression analyses showed that the victim vulnerability factors that were most strongly associated with an elevated risk rating for IPV re-victimization were generally the same for both groups of victims. Finally, the presence of children was related to a higher risk rating for imminent IPV re-victimization and to recommendations of more than standard levels of risk management strategies. The results indicate that the Swedish police consider the presence of children in relation to a victim’s risk for re-victimization as well as in terms of recommended risk management strategies.

    Download full text (pdf)
    Vulnerability factors among women victimized by intimate partner violence and the presence of children
  • 30.
    Selenius, Heidi
    et al.
    Department of Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden.
    Strand, Susanne
    Department of Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden; Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Department of Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden.
    Recidivism among perpetrators of gross violation of a woman´s integrity in Sweden2015Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 31.
    Stjernqvist, Johan
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
    Risk factors for intimate partner violence among native and immigrant male partners in Sweden2022In: Nordic Journal of Criminology, ISSN 2578-983X, Vol. 23, no 2, p. 192-211Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study aimed to examine the importance of differentiating between partner violent men in terms of immigrant or native Swedish background, when assessing risk for intimate partner violence (IPV) recidivism. A quantitative design was used with a sample of 1263 alleged male perpetrators reported for IPV-related crimes to the Swedish police. Data consisted of police officers’ risk assessments using the Swedish version of the Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER). Results showed that risk factors such as 'Violent threats or thoughts', and 'Violent attitudes', were more common for perpetrators with an immigrant background. In contrast, risk factors such as 'General criminality' and 'Substance use problems' were more common among native perpetrators. Furthermore, in relation to the importance of specific risk factors for an elevated risk of IPV recidivism, such risk was elevated for perpetrators with a native background when ‘Violent threats or thoughts’, ‘General criminality’ and ‘Relationship problems’ were present. Corresponding factors for immigrant perpetrators consisted of ‘Escalation’ and ‘General criminality’. These results are essential for the police to recognize and understand since only victims in IPV cases with an elevated assessed risk will be eligible for risk management and protective actions.

    Download full text (pdf)
    Risk factors for intimate partner violence among native and immigrant male partners in Sweden
  • 32.
    Stjernqvist, Johan
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Strand, Susanne
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Australia.
    The importance of immigrant background when identifying risk factors for intimate partner violence2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Intimate partner violence (IPV) is an extensive issue in every society. It does not matter what kind of socioeconomic, religious or cultural group an individual belong to since this type of violence is widely-spread across the globe. Studies have shown that IPV perpetrators are not a heterogene-ous group and that risk factors differ between different groups of individ-uals. Therefore, it is essential that the subsequent risk management take this heterogeneity into consideration. The aim of this study was to identify which risk factors can be seen as the most contributory when it comes to assessing the summary risk ratings in a sample of alleged IPV cases where both the perpetrator and the victim shares the same background. The data consisted of 926 B-SAFER risk assessments done by the Swedish Police for IPV cases divided into seven different groups: Sweden, Northern Europe, Europe, Eastern Europe and Russia, Middle East, Africa, and Asia. The results show that risk factors have different impact on the summary risk ratings across groups, where risk factors related to the nature of the IPV and victim vulnerability factors are more common in groups with immi-grant background, while risk factors related to psycho-social adjustment were overall more common in the group of IPV perpetrators with Swedish background. The results are discussed in terms of the integrated ecological framework and from an IPV risk management perspective, as well as in relation to the RISKSAM model.

  • 33.
    Strand, Susanne J. M.
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science at Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Selenius, Heidi
    Department of Special Education, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Psychology, Linnaeus University, Växjö, Sweden.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Storey, Jennifer E.
    School of Psychology, University of Kent, Kent, UK.
    Repeated and Systematic Intimate Partner Violence in Rural Areas in Sweden2021In: International Criminology, ISSN 2662-9968, Vol. 1, no 3, p. 220-233Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Violence against women lacks geographical boundaries, although research demonstrates higher rates of such violence in rural areas compared to urban areas. The repeated and systematic intimate partner violence (IPV) is especially problematic in isolated areas. This study aims to investigate how repeated and systematic IPV, was handled by the criminal justice system in rural areas in Sweden and how risk and victim vulnerability factors were related to recidivism in this longitudinal prospective study. The sample consisted of alleged perpetrators of repeated and systematic IPV who had been either reported, charged, or convicted of repeated and systematic IPV defined according to the Swedish Law Gross Violation of a Woman’s Integrity targeting such violence, in two rural Swedish police districts during 2011–2014 (N = 258). Results demonstrated that 30% of IPV perpetrators were charged with the Gross violation offense and 5% were charged for other IPV-related offenses. The conviction for the Gross violation offense was 11% and 24% for other IPV-related offenses. 56% were not charged or convicted of any IPV-related offenses. Perpetrators convicted of the Gross Violation offense were more likely to receive longer prison sentences than perpetrators convicted of other IPV-related offenses. Victim cooperation in the police investigation increased the likelihood for prosecution with 7.3 times and for a conviction with 6.1 times. In terms of recidivism 24% engaged in IPV towards the same victim and another 27% recidivated into general criminality. Recidivists had higher summary risk ratings and more individual risk factors than non-recidivists, such as general criminality, employment problems and mental health problems, and victim vulnerability factors including personal problems. To reduce re-victimization, risk and vulnerability factors and supporting victims to cooperate in the police investigation should be considered when forming risk management strategies to protect victims of repeated and systematic IPV in such rural areas.

  • 34.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Diffuse violence: Anti-violence interventions and perpetrator programmes2021Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 35.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Australia.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Legal risk management strategies: The use of arrest and restraining orders as protective interventions in cases of intimate partner violence2019Conference paper (Refereed)
  • 36.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Australia.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Preventing domestic violence with men and boys: Challenges and opportunities2019Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 37.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Preventing domestic violence with men and boys: Challenges and opportunities2019Report (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
    Abstract [en]

    The Mutual Learning Seminar, in Stockholm, examined Sweden’s recent innovative policy to prevent domestic violence with men and boys. Government representatives and gender experts from 15 EU Member States participated. The seminar was an excellent opportunity to discuss new thinking and approaches to the prevention of domestic violence. The importance of prevention and increased collaboration is emphasised in the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (“Istanbul Convention”), which is currently being implemented by the majority of EU Member States.

    The basis for the good practice in Sweden is the National Strategy for Preventing & Combating Men’s Violence Against Women, 2017-2026. The strategy puts an emphasis on targeted work with men who perpetrate violence against women to prevent its reoccurrence through structured risk assessments and treatment programmes. It follows a universal approach to working with all relevant stakeholders in social services, health, education, gender equality, probation and crime prevention, and with specialised civil society organisations, in long-term prevention to address gender stereotypes, in particular destructive masculinity norms.

    One successful initiative presented at the seminar is a bystander violence prevention programme with young people in the town of Botkyrka. The project focuses on building trust between young people and the police, social services and schools. It has helped to build awareness of respectful relationships and consent. Another innovative violence prevention programme is run by the County Administration Board of Västerbotten, which is working strategically for long-term crime prevention with four rural municipalities where access to services is very limited.

    The seminar discussions focussed on the many opportunities and challenges in engaging men and boys in prevention. Participants highlighted the need for coordinated long-term approaches amongst service providers in national, regional and local authorities and the importance of improving the evidence-base in working with perpetrators. The presented good practice examples showed the importance of building trust in disadvantaged communities, integrating violence prevention into existing programmes and structures and how essential the effective coordination of services around the goal of violence prevention is. Key challenges identified by the seminar participants included the need for better integration of prevention in health services, building awareness about intersectional inequalities and the need for sound methodologies to evaluate the effectiveness of programmes. The common agreement was that both targeted and universal approaches are needed and that peer learning can support this.

  • 38.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Risk assessment and risk management of intimate partner violence and stalking in urban, rural and remote areas2019Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 39.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Risk management of Domestic Violence2019In: The EU Mutual Learning Programme in Gender Equality: Preventing domestic violence with Men and Boys: Challenges and Opportunities, European Commission, 2019Conference paper (Refereed)
    Download full text (pdf)
    Risk Management of Domestic Violence
  • 40.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Structured risk management within and between police and social service reduces intimate partner violence2019Conference paper (Other academic)
  • 41.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre of Forensic Behavioral Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    The RISKSAM - A Structured Risk Management Model to use when Preventing Interpersonal Violence2020Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Intimate partner violence and stalking are global public health issues, with at least one in three women and one in six men being a target of such violence at some point during their lifetime (WHO 2013; BRÅ, 2014). Victims of such violence report increased rates of mental ill-health in addition to the social, financial, and physical costs of victimization (Diette et al., 2014; Hansen et al., 2010; Korkodeilou, 2017; Sheridan & Scott, 2010). Relationship violence can intrude into the victim´s workplace, further impacting upon the victim, presenting a liability for companies, and creating the potential for harm to a wider range of people. 

    Minimizing the impact of such violence requires an understanding of the nature of risk involved in each case, and what kinds of risk management may be most effective. This can be informed by the use of risk assessment tools, however, different organizations often use different tools, leading to different results or emphases. This in turn can interfere with effective communication and the development of good risk management plans. This presentation will introduce the RISKSAM, a framework designed to facilitate collaboration and communication about risk and risk management among different groups within or between organizations. The RISKSAM was developed from the presenter´s research with police agencies in both Sweden and Australia (Belfrage & Strand, 2012; McEwan et al., 2017; Petersson & Strand 2019; Strand & Storey, 2019), and is currently being used and evaluated in a Swedish social services department. This presentation will describe the need for and development of the RISKSAM based on our previous work with police, and present a case study of its use by a security agency in a case in which IPV created risk concerns within the victim´s workplace. 

  • 42.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    The structured risk management model, the RISKSAM2019In: The Stockholm Criminology Symposium 2019: Program & Abstracts, The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå) , 2019, p. 137-138Conference paper (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a global public health issue, where every third woman has been a victim of such violence. One way to combat IPV is to perform risk assessment with a subsequent risk management. There is a knowledge gap on what types of risk management work and for whom.This is further complicated due to the need for collaboration between police, social service and other agencies. To this end police and social service perform structured risk assessments, although different ones and separately. Furthermore, the subsequent risk management is unstructured, which includes lack of routines for collaboration and documentation. These shortcomings also make it difficult to evaluate the preventive effect of the protective actions. We have developed a structured risk management model, the RISKSAM, for collaboration within and between agencies working with IPV, based on our results of longitudinal studies of the police work in Sweden. The aim of this presentation is twofold; first we present findings from our project on how risk management have been conducted by the police, and second we will introduce the RISKSAM model.

    The results show that few victims were provided with risk management, mainly due to lack of resources. Moreover, since the police only have a few different risk management strategies to use, of which the security talk is the most prevalent one, the problem is more how to prioritise cases with high risk for future violence. Problems also arise when police and social services assess the risk from different perspectives, which leads to different levels of priority of the case. This highlights the need for a structured risk 138 Tuesday, June 11 management model supporting them to collaborate in deciding on adequate risk management for the victim. The RISKSAM will attempt to solve these issues and to provide a common structure that will facilitate multi agency collaboration.

  • 43.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Department of Social Sciences, Mid Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden.
    Fröberg, Sofi
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Storey, Jennifer E.
    School of Law, University of London, London, UK.
    Polisens arbete med riskbedömning och riskhantering för partnervåldsrelaterad brottslighet: Implementering och utvärdering av införandet av strukturerade riskbedömningar för partnervåldsrelaterad brottslighet som en arbetsmetod vid polismyndigheterna i Västernorrland och Jämtland under perioden 2011-20142016Report (Other academic)
  • 44.
    Strand, Susanne
    et al.
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work. Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University, Melbourne, Australia.
    Petersson, Joakim
    Örebro University, School of Law, Psychology and Social Work.
    Storey, Jennifer
    Royal Holloway, University of London, UK.
    Policing intimate partner violence in rural areas in Sweden2017Conference paper (Refereed)
1 - 44 of 44
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf