“Sometimes cathartic. Sometimes quite raw”: Benefit and harm in an intimate partner violence trial

J. Valpied, A. Cini, Lorna O'Doherty, A. Taket, K. Hegarty

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    20 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Research on intimate partner violence (IPV) has increased over the past two decades, however empirical research on potential harm to participants is limited. The aim of this study was to assess whether 272 women involved in a general practice based IPV intervention trial (weave) reported more benefit or harm, whether this differed by intervention or comparison group, and what types of benefit and harm were reported. Feedback was obtained via adapted Consequences of Screening Tool, visual analogue scale and open-ended question in baseline, 6-month, 12-month and 24-month surveys (all participants), and semi-structured interviews (subset of 28 participants). Participants in both the intervention and comparison groups tended to respond positively on all quantitative items, although on a number of items, the intervention group responded even more positively. At 6 and 12 months, 51.1% and 54.7% of all participants, respectively, reported their quality of life as becoming better and over 40% of women at each time-point, indicated they felt more positive about themselves as a result of some aspect of their involvement in weave. 42% of all participants reported their home lives becoming less difficult. In qualitative analyses, positive themes identified were altruism, value, evaluation of relationship, validation, self-awareness, empowerment, positive reinforcement, catharsis, motivation to seek help, and response to the research process. Negative themes identified were short-term emotional reactions, long-term emotional reactions, recall, retraumatization and minimization. Many participants indicated short-term negative emotions had been balanced by longer-term positive benefits. Further research is needed regarding characteristics and experiences of the small minority of participants who did not report positive benefit. Publisher statement: NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in . Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Aggression and Violent Behavior [Vol 19, Issue 6, (2014)]. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2014.09.005]
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)673–685
    JournalAggression and Violent Behavior
    Volume19
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2014

    Bibliographical note

    The full text of this item is not available from the repository.
    NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in <Journal title>. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Aggression and Violent Behavior [Vol 19, Issue 6, (2014)]. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2014.09.005]

    Keywords

    • Intimate partner violence
    • Intimate partner abuse
    • Domestic violence
    • Research participation
    • Harm
    • Benefit

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of '“Sometimes cathartic. Sometimes quite raw”: Benefit and harm in an intimate partner violence trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this