skip to main content
research-article
Public Access

Digital Technologies and Intimate Partner Violence: A Qualitative Analysis with Multiple Stakeholders

Published: 06 December 2017 Publication History

Abstract

Digital technologies, including mobile devices, cloud computing services, and social networks, play a nuanced role in intimate partner violence (IPV) settings, including domestic abuse, stalking, and surveillance of victims by abusive partners. However, the interactions among victims of IPV, abusers, law enforcement, counselors, and others --- and the roles that digital technologies play in these interactions --- are poorly understood. We present a qualitative study that analyzes the role of digital technologies in the IPV ecosystem in New York City. Findings from semi-structured interviews with 40 IPV professionals and nine focus groups with 32 survivors of IPV reveal a complex set of socio-technical challenges that stem from the intimate nature of the relationships involved and the complexities of managing shared social circles. Both IPV professionals and survivors feel that they do not possess adequate expertise to be able to identify or cope with technology-enabled IPV, and there are currently insufficient best practices to help them deal with abuse via technology. We also reveal a number of tensions and trade-offs in negotiating technology's role in social support and legal procedures. Taken together, our findings contribute a nuanced understanding of technology's role in the IPV ecosystem and yield recommendations for HCI and technology experts interested in aiding victims of abuse.

References

[1]
Gregory D Abowd, Anind K Dey, Peter J Brown, Nigel Davies, Mark Smith, and Pete Steggles. 1999. Towards a better understanding of context and context-awareness International Symposium on Handheld and Ubiquitous Computing. Springer, 304--307.
[2]
Carmen Alvarez, Gina Fedock, Karen Trister Grace, and Jacquelyn Campbell. 2016. Provider screening and counseling for intimate partner violence a systematic review of practices and influencing factors. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse (2016).
[3]
Budi Arief, Kovila PL Coopamootoo, Martin Emms, and Aad van Moorsel. 2014. Sensible Privacy: How We Can Protect Domestic Violence Survivors Without Facilitating Misuse Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society. ACM, 201--204.
[4]
Zahra Ashktorab and Jessica Vitak. 2016. Designing Cyberbullying Mitigation and Prevention Solutions through Participatory Design With Teenagers. In ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3895--3905.
[5]
Michele C Black, Kathleen C Basile, Matthew J Breiding, Sharon G Smith, Mikel L Walters, Melissa T Merrick, Jieru Chen, and Mark R Stevens. 2011. The national intimate partner and sexual violence survey (NISVS): 2010 summary report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vol. 25 (2011).
[6]
Jacquelyn C. Campbell, Daniel W. Webster, and Nancy Glass. 2009. The Danger Assessment. Journal of Interpersonal Violence Vol. 24, 4 (2009), 653--674.
[7]
Judy C Chang, Diane Dado, Lynn Hawker, Patricia A Cluss, Raquel Buranosky, Leslie Slagel, Melissa McNeil, and Sarah Hudson Scholle. 2010. Understanding turning points in intimate partner violence: factors and circumstances leading women victims toward change. Journal of women's health Vol. 19, 2 (2010), 251--259.
[8]
Ann L Coker, Paige H Smith, Martie P Thompson, Robert E McKeown, Lesa Bethea, and Keith E Davis. 2002. Social support protects against the negative effects of partner violence on mental health. Journal of women's health & gender-based medicine, Vol. 11, 5 (2002), 465--476.
[9]
Ann L Coker, Ken W Watkins, Paige H Smith, and Heather M Brandt. 2003. Social support reduces the impact of partner violence on health: application of structural equation models. Preventive medicine, Vol. 37, 3 (2003), 259--267.
[10]
Sunny Consolvo, Jaeyeon Jung, Ben Greenstein, Pauline Powledge, Gabriel Maganis, and Daniel Avrahami. 2010. The Wi-Fi privacy ticker: improving awareness & control of personal information exposure on Wi-Fi. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Ubiquitous computing. ACM, 321--330.
[11]
Jill P Dimond, Casey Fiesler, and Amy S Bruckman. 2011. Domestic violence and information communication technologies. Interacting with Computers Vol. 23, 5 (2011), 413--421.
[12]
Karthik Dinakar, Birago Jones, Catherine Havasi, Henry Lieberman, and Rosalind Picard. 2012. Common sense reasoning for detection, prevention, and mitigation of cyberbullying. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS), Vol. 2, 3 (2012), 18.
[13]
Martin Emms, Budi Arief, and Aad van Moorsel. 2012. Electronic footprints in the sand: Technologies for assisting domestic violence survivors Annual Privacy Forum. Springer, 203--214.
[14]
Cynthia Fraser, Erica Olsen, Kaofeng Lee, Cindy Southworth, and Sarah Tucker. 2010. The new age of stalking: technological implications for stalking. Juvenile and family court journal Vol. 61, 4 (2010), 39--55.
[15]
Joel H Garner and Christopher D Maxwell. 2008. Coordinated community responses to intimate partner violence in the 20th and 21st centuries. Criminology & Public Policy Vol. 7, 4 (2008), 525--535.
[16]
Reem M Ghandour, Jacquelyn C Campbell, and Jacqueline Lloyd. 2015. Screening and counseling for intimate partner violence: A vision for the future. Journal of Women's Health Vol. 24, 1 (2015), 57--61.
[17]
Nancy Glass, Stephen Dearwater, and Jacquelyn Campbell. 2001. Intimate partner violence screening and intervention: data from eleven Pennsylvania and California community hospital emergency departments. Journal of Emergency Nursing Vol. 27, 2 (2001), 141--149.
[18]
Maritza Johnson, Serge Egelman, and Steven M Bellovin. 2012. Facebook and privacy: it's complicated. In Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS). ACM, Article 9, 9:1--9:15 pages.
[19]
Carol E Jordan. 2004. Intimate Partner Violence and the Justice System An Examination of the Interface. Journal of interpersonal violence Vol. 19, 12 (2004), 1412--1434.
[20]
Ruogu Kang, Laura Dabbish, Nathaniel Fruchter, and Sara Kiesler. 2015. My data just goes everywhere: user mental models of the internet and implications for privacy and security. In Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS). 39--52.
[21]
Andrew King-Ries. 2010. Teens, technology, and cyberstalking: The domestic violence wave of the future. Tex. J. Women & L. Vol. 20 (2010), 131.
[22]
Etienne G Krug, James A Mercy, Linda L Dahlberg, and Anthony B Zwi. 2002. The world report on violence and health. The lancet, Vol. 360, 9339 (2002), 1083--1088.
[23]
Christopher A. Le Dantec, Robert G. Farrell, Jim E. Christensen, Mark Bailey, Jason B. Ellis, Wendy A. Kellogg, and W. Keith Edwards. 2011. Publics in Practice: Ubiquitous Computing at a Shelter for Homeless Mothers Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '11). 1687--1696.
[24]
Karen EC Levy. 2014. Intimate surveillance. Idaho L. Rev. Vol. 51 (2014), 679.
[25]
Michael Massimi, Jill P Dimond, and Christopher A Le Dantec. 2012. Finding a new normal: the role of technology in life disruptions ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. ACM, 719--728.
[26]
Tara Matthews, Kathleen O'Leary, Anna Turner, Manya Sleeper, Jill Woelfer, Martin Shelton, Cori Manthorne, Elizabeth Churchill, and Sunny Consolvo. 2017. Stories from survivors: Privacy and security practices when coping with intimate partner abuse. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2017), 2189--2201.
[27]
Virginia A Moyer. 2013. Screening for intimate partner violence and abuse of elderly and vulnerable adults: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. Annals of internal medicine Vol. 158, 6 (2013), 478--486.
[28]
Christine E Murray, G Evette Horton, Catherine Higgins Johnson, Lori Notestine, Bethany Garr, Allison Marsh Pow, Paulina Flasch, and Elizabeth Doom. 2015. Domestic violence service providers' perceptions of safety planning: a focus group study. Journal of Family Violence Vol. 30, 3 (2015), 381--392.
[29]
Shirley Patton. 2003. Pathways: How women leave violent men. Partnerships Against Domestic Violence Vol. 1 (2003).
[30]
Rebecca F Rabin, Jacky M Jennings, Jacquelyn C Campbell, and Megan H Bair-Merritt. 2009. Intimate partner violence screening tools: a systematic review. American journal of preventive medicine Vol. 36, 5 (2009), 439--445.
[31]
Aily Shimizu. 2013. Domestic violence in the digital age: Towards the creation of a comprehensive cyberstalking statute. Berkeley J. Gender L. & Just. Vol. 28 (2013), 116.
[32]
Safe Chat Silicon Valley. 2017. Safe Chat Silicon Valley. (2017). http://safechatsv.com/
[33]
Cynthia Southworth, Jerry Finn, Shawndell Dawson, Cynthia Fraser, and Sarah Tucker. 2007. Intimate partner violence, technology, and stalking. Violence against women Vol. 13, 8 (2007), 842--856.
[34]
David R Thomas. 2006. A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American journal of evaluation Vol. 27, 2 (2006), 237--246.
[35]
National Network to End Domestic Violence. 2017. Tech Safety App. (2017). https://techsafetyapp.org/
[36]
Kylee Trevillion, Bryony Hughes, Gene Feder, Rohan Borschmann, Siân Oram, and Louise M Howard. 2014. Disclosure of domestic violence in mental health settings: A qualitative meta-synthesis. International Review of Psychiatry Vol. 26, 4 (2014), 430--444.
[37]
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. 2017. Statistics. (2017). http://ncadv.org/learn-more/statistics
[38]
Jill Waalen, Mary M Goodwin, Alison M Spitz, Ruth Petersen, and Linda E Saltzman. 2000. Screening for intimate partner violence by health care providers: barriers and interventions. American journal of preventive medicine Vol. 19, 4 (2000), 230--237.
[39]
Lenore E Walker. 1977. Battered women and learned helplessness. Victimology (1977).
[40]
Rick Wash. 2010. Folk models of home computer security. In Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS). ACM, Article 11, 11:1--11:16 pages.
[41]
Jill Palzkill Woelfer and David G Hendry. 2011. Designing ubiquitous information systems for a community of homeless young people: precaution and a way forward. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Vol. 15, 6 (2011), 565--573.
[42]
Delanie Woodlock. 2016. The abuse of technology in domestic violence and stalking. Violence against women (2016).
[43]
Min Xie, Janet L Lauritsen, and Karen Heimer. 2012. Intimate partner violence in US Metropolitan areas: The contextual influences of police and social services. Criminology, Vol. 50, 4 (2012), 961--992.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)"Say I'm in public...I don't want my nudes to pop up."Proceedings of the Twentieth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security10.5555/3696899.3696922(433-451)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
  • (2024)The Critical Role of School Environment in Preventing Online Gender-Based ViolenceKnE Social Sciences10.18502/kss.v9i23.16722Online publication date: 30-Jul-2024
  • (2024)Exploring police attitudes on victims’ delayed reporting and victim blame in technology-facilitated IPVCrime Science10.1186/s40163-024-00213-x13:1Online publication date: 21-May-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Digital Technologies and Intimate Partner Violence: A Qualitative Analysis with Multiple Stakeholders

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
    Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 1, Issue CSCW
    November 2017
    2095 pages
    EISSN:2573-0142
    DOI:10.1145/3171581
    Issue’s Table of Contents
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 06 December 2017
    Published in PACMHCI Volume 1, Issue CSCW

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. IPV
    2. domestic abuse
    3. domestic violence
    4. intimate partner violence
    5. privacy
    6. safety
    7. security
    8. violence against women

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)882
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)121
    Reflects downloads up to 20 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)"Say I'm in public...I don't want my nudes to pop up."Proceedings of the Twentieth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security10.5555/3696899.3696922(433-451)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
    • (2024)The Critical Role of School Environment in Preventing Online Gender-Based ViolenceKnE Social Sciences10.18502/kss.v9i23.16722Online publication date: 30-Jul-2024
    • (2024)Exploring police attitudes on victims’ delayed reporting and victim blame in technology-facilitated IPVCrime Science10.1186/s40163-024-00213-x13:1Online publication date: 21-May-2024
    • (2024)Safeguarding the “Internet of Things” for Victim-Survivors of Domestic and Family Violence: Anticipating Exploitative Use and Encouraging Safety-by-DesignViolence Against Women10.1177/10778012231222486Online publication date: 2-Jan-2024
    • (2024)Threat Modeling Healthcare Privacy in the United StatesACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction10.1145/3704634Online publication date: 18-Nov-2024
    • (2024)The Sociotechnical Stack: Opportunities for Social Computing Research in Non-Consensual Intimate MediaProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36869148:CSCW2(1-21)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
    • (2024)Feminist Interaction Techniques: Social Consent Signals to Deter NCIM ScreenshotsProceedings of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology10.1145/3654777.3676380(1-14)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
    • (2024)Privacy Norms of Transformative Fandom: A Case Study of an Activity-Defined CommunityProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36373888:CSCW1(1-29)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
    • (2024)A Critical Analysis of the Prevalence of Technology-Facilitated Abuse in US College StudentsExtended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3652036(1-12)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
    • (2024)Expanding Concepts of Non-Consensual Image-Disclosure Abuse: A Study of NCIDA in PakistanProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642871(1-17)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Login options

    Full Access

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media