↓ Skip to main content

Exploring Relationships: A Systematic Review on Intimate Partner Violence and Attachment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
242 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Exploring Relationships: A Systematic Review on Intimate Partner Violence and Attachment
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01166
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patrizia Velotti, Sara Beomonte Zobel, Guyonne Rogier, Renata Tambelli

Abstract

Background: Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is an important public health challenge. In recent years, there has been a greater awareness concerning this phenomenon, its causes and consequences. Due to the relational nature of IPV, attachment theory (Bowlby, 1988) appears a useful framework to read the phenomenon and to better understand its components and its dynamics to provide more precise and tailored interventions in the future. Purpose: To summarize our knowledge of the research concerning IPV and attachment with an aim to better design and implement future research. Methods: Computer database researches were conducted using the following databases: Psychinfo, Psycharticle, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed (all years to the 01/02/2018). Search terms were compiled into two concepts for all database namely Attachment and IPV. Results: After removing the duplicates, a total of 3,598 records was screened, resulting in the identification of 319 full-text articles to be further scrutinized. Upon closer examination, there was consensus that 113 of those studies met the study inclusion criteria. Data was organized considering specifically studies concerning (1) IPV victimization and attachment, (2) IPV perpetration and attachment (both these sections were articulated in Physical, Psychological, and Sexual IPV), and (3) New research (comprising same-sex couples, IPV and attachment in couple contexts and IPV profiles and attachment among perpetrators). Conclusion: A number of studies failed to find significant associations between insecure attachment and IPV victimization or perpetration. Additional research is needed to provide a greater understanding of different IPV forms and to aid in the development of prevention and treatment interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 242 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 242 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 33 14%
Student > Master 29 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 7%
Researcher 11 5%
Other 25 10%
Unknown 99 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 81 33%
Social Sciences 19 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 2%
Other 18 7%
Unknown 103 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 January 2022.
All research outputs
#6,266,095
of 25,380,089 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,946
of 34,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,711
of 331,198 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#271
of 720 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,380,089 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,365 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,198 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 720 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.