Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

Intimate partner violence and child maltreatment: Understanding

intra- and intergenerational connections
Lynette M. Renner a , Kristen Shook Slack b,
a
b

University of Missouri-Columbia, School of Social Work, Columbia, MO, USA

University of Wisconsin, Madison, Institute for Research on Poverty, Madison,
School of Social Work, 1350 University Avenue, Madison, WI 53706, USA

Received 16 February 2004; received in revised form 6 December 2005; accepted 9 December 2005

Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study is to assess the extent to which intimate partner violence and different forms
of child maltreatment occur within and across childhood and adulthood for a high-risk group of women.
Method: Low-income adult women were interviewed, retrospectively, regarding their experiences with intimate
partner violence and child maltreatment in childhood and adulthood, and intra- and intergenerational relationships
between multiple forms of family violence were identified.
Results: Analyses demonstrated weak to moderate associations between various forms of violence within generations. Only weak support was found for the transmission of violence hypothesis that maltreated children are more
likely to grow up to maltreat their own children. Stronger support was found for the theory of learned helplessness,
whereby children maltreated or witness to violence during childhood are more likely to be victimized as an adult.
Conclusion: The results from this study suggest that interventions with children who are identified for one form
of victimization should be assessed for other forms of victimization, and interventions should also address learned
behaviors or beliefs associated with continued or future victimization.
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Domestic violence; Child maltreatment; Family violence

This research was supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01 HD39148 and K01
HD41703-01), and the Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Corresponding author.
0145-2134/$ see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.12.005

600

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

Introduction
Past research has generated evidence supporting the intergenerational transmission of family violence,
although rates of transmission vary substantially across studies. Since few studies distinguish specific
forms of family violence within the same sample (e.g., intimate partner violence, child physical abuse,
child sexual abuse, and child neglect), little is known about the exact nature of intergenerational pathways
of family violence. Furthermore, past research on intergenerational family violence has often relied upon
samples derived from child protection system caseloads or domestic violence shelters or service agencies,
limiting an understanding of this phenomenon in more general populations.
The purposes of this analysis are to assess the extent to which different forms of family violence occur
during childhood and during adulthood within the same sample, and to understand the intergenerational
relationships within and across specific forms of family violence. Data from a study of mothers receiving
public assistance are used to explore these questions. While the present studys sample of public assistance
recipients does not represent a general population, it does represent an important risk group on which to
focus family violence research since rates of both intimate partner violence (IPV) and child maltreatment
are markedly higher in populations of public assistance recipients than in the general population (Allard,
Albelda, Colten, & Cosenza, 1997; Ards, Myers, Chung, Malkis, & Hagerty, 2003; Nagel, 1998; Roper
& Weeks, 1993; Shook, 1999; Wilt & Olson, 1996). Our study offers further evidence of the withinand across-generation co-occurrence of different forms of family violence, and the role of IPV in these
associations.

Background
Co-occurrence of different forms of family violence
Several studies have found that different forms of family violence co-occur. For example, in a retrospective study of over 17,000 adults, Dong, Anda, Dube, Giles, and Felitti (2003) found that respondents
who experienced childhood sexual abuse were also significantly likely to experience childhood emotional
abuse, childhood physical abuse, and exposure to IPV. Other studies have also documented a significant
degree of overlap among various forms of childhood maltreatment (Clemmons, DiLillo, Martinez, DeGue,
& Jeffcott, 2003; Higgins & McCabe, 2000; Moeller, Bachman, & Moeller, 1993; Scher, Forde, McQuaid,
& Stein, 2004). Such evidence underscores the complex nature of family violence and the necessity of
studying multiple forms of violence simultaneously.
As recognition of interpersonal violence as a critical societal problem has increased, greater attention
has been paid to the link between IPV and child maltreatment in both research and policy. However, because these forms of violence are usually addressed by separate social service systems and by
researchers studying only one of these victimized populations (Edleson, 1999), a comprehensive understanding of their co-occurrence is lacking. Two different approaches have typically been taken to assess
this relationship: (1) use of samples derived from child protection systems to identify the occurrence of
IPV and (2) use of domestic violence and homeless shelter samples to assess the occurrence of child
maltreatment (Edleson, 1999). Based on estimates from these two types of studies, approximately 30
to 60% of families experiencing either type of violence are simultaneously affected by the other form
of violence (Appel & Holden, 1998; Edleson, 1999). Furthermore, the overlap between IPV and child

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

601

maltreatment is not limited to physical and sexual abuse. Associations between IPV and child neglect
have also been identified (Beeman, Hagemeister, & Edleson, 2001; McGuigan & Pratt, 2001).
In addition to understanding the extent to which different forms of family violence co-occur, it is
important to consider the various ways in which such relationships emerge. IPV may co-occur with child
physical abuse if the perpetrator uses harsh physical discipline or force with children, but it may also
stem from the adult victims efforts to over-discipline children in an attempt to avoid conflict with an
abusive partner or spouse in the household, or from the adult victims diminished tolerance for or ability
to manage parenting stresses (Coohey, 2004). Violence between adults may also lead to child neglect
through parenting and mental health problems associated with an adult caregivers victimization, such
as depression or substance abuse, or through the abusive partners own neglectful caregiving practices
(Coohey & Zhang, 2006; Hartley, 2004).
Intergenerational transmission of child maltreatment
The intergenerational transmission of violence hypothesis has been a part of professional literature for
decades (Kempe, Silverman, Steele, Droegemueller, & Silver, 1962; Steele & Pollock, 1968). Its most
common articulation is that children who are maltreated are more likely to grow up to become maltreating
parents than are children who are not victimized. Several studies have shown that the majority of abusing
parents were also abused as children (Herrenkohl, Herrenkohl, & Toedter, 1983; Milner & Chilamkurti,
1991; Pears & Capaldi, 2001; Steele & Pollock, 1974), and that parents with histories of abuse or neglect
or exposure to harsh parenting practices during childhood are also more likely than parents without such
histories to engage in similar behavior with their own offspring (Coohey & Braun, 1997; Merrill, Hervig,
& Milner, 1996; Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 1980).
Despite assertions supporting the intergenerational nature of violence, others have raised questions
about the validity of this hypothesis (Cicchetti & Aber, 1980; Kaufman & Zigler, 1987, 1989, 1993;
Stark, 1985; Widom, 1989). Researchers caution that while being maltreated as a child does increase
ones propensity for becoming abusive, the path between these two events is far from direct or inevitable
(Kaufman & Zigler, 1987, p. 190). Existing research has produced highly variable estimates of the rate
of the intergenerational transmission of child maltreatment, ranging from as low as 7% to as high as 70%
(Egeland, Jacobvitz, & Papatola, 1987; Egeland, Jacobvitz, & Sroufe, 1988; Gil, 1970; Hunter & Kilstrom,
1979; Straus, 1979a). A meta-analysis of 10 studies focusing on the intergenerational transmission of
child physical abuse across two generations put forth eight methodological standards for conducting
intergenerational research and noted that only one of the reviewed studies met all eight standards (Ertem,
Leventhal, & Dobbs, 2000). However, this scientifically rigorous review did find some support for the
intergenerational abuse hypothesis.
Intergenerational transmission of intimate partner violence
Results from studies focusing on the intergenerational occurrence of IPV are conflicting. Kalmuss
(1984) found evidence that being physically abused as a child and observing physical violence between
ones parents are both strongly related to involvement in severe marital aggression as an adult, with
witnessing IPV being the stronger predictor of later IPV. Heyman and Slep (2002) found that women
exposed to both IPV and child physical abuse had a significant risk of maltreating their own children,
as well as for adult IPV perpetration and victimization, compared to women exposed to single forms of

602

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

family violence as children. Findings by Straus et al. (1980) and Steinmetz (1977) also lend support to the
intergenerational transmission of IPV; however, the overall results of a meta-analysis on the relationship
between witnessing or experiencing family violence during childhood and perpetrating or experiencing
violent behaviors in an adult marital or partnered relationship suggest that there is only a weak to moderate
relationship (Stith, Rosen, Middleton, Busch, Lundeberg, & Carlton, 2000).
Problems conducting research on intergenerational violence
There are several potential reasons for the discrepant findings from recent research on the intergenerational transmission of violence. First, protective factors could diminish the likelihood of abusive
behaviors being repeated across generations (Hunter & Kilstrom, 1979; Kaufman & Zigler, 1987, 1993).
For example, Widom (1989) suggests that a childs natural abilities, psychological predispositions, and
social supports may mitigate the effects of child abuse. Egeland, Jacobvitz, and Sroufe (1988) found that
repeaters of family violence were less likely to have had one parent who provided love and support during
childhood, reported more stressful life events, and were less likely to be involved in a supportive adult
partner relationship than non-repeaters. Other potential moderators include the severity and frequency of
family-of-origin aggression, and the degree of identification with the aggressor (Egeland, Jacobvitz, &
Papatola, 1987).
Second, much of the research on the intergenerational transmission of violence relies upon clinical
versus community samples, and on retrospective versus prospective designs, yielding mixed results. A
critique of earlier studies relying on clinical or convenience samples is that they often lacked control
groups and tended to overstate the intergenerational transmission hypothesis (MacEwen, 1994; Widom,
1989). Researchers have suggested that the rate of abuse across generations is higher in retrospective
studies than in studies with prospective designs, in part because retrospective studies often rely upon
high-risk samples (Egeland, 1993; Kaufman & Zigler, 1987, 1993).
Third, earlier studies also tended to assess intergenerational associations for single types of family
violence (Straus & Kantor, 1994) or failed to distinguish between different types of maltreatment, which
limits an understanding of the mechanisms that drive the transmission of family violence from one
generation to the next (Edleson, 1999). Given that evidence has begun to emerge on the co-occurrence
of multiple types of family violence within generations (Beeman et al., 2001; Clemmons et al., 2003;
Dong et al., 2003; Edleson, 1999; Higgins & McCabe, 2000; Moeller et al., 1993; Scher et al., 2004), it
is important to address this complexity in family violence research to avoid generating results based on
mis-specified models.

Theory
The intergenerational transmission of violence hypothesis has roots in several theories, including attachment theory (Egeland, Jacobvitz, & Papatola, 1987; Egeland, Jacobvitz, & Sroufe, 1988), an ecological
or multi-factor approach (Belsky, 1980; Langeland & Dijkstra, 1995), and biological or genetic theories
of aggressive behavior (Muller, Hunter, & Stollak, 1995). One of the more common theories espoused
in the existing intergenerational violence literature is social learning theory. According to social learning
theory, behaviors are learned by modeling the observed behaviors of others (Akers, 1977; Bandura, 1977,
1979). When applied to the cycle of violence, this theory postulates that maltreated children observe and

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

603

learn violent behaviors from their parents or other adult models and subsequently use these learned violent
behaviors in their adult lives and/or with their own children (Feshbach, 1980). However, when applied
to the intergenerational transmission of IPV, particularly for women, a slightly different mechanism may
be at work. Once involved in an abusive relationship, some women may find strategies for avoiding or
resisting violence by a partner or flee from the violent relationship, while other women may adopt a
learned helplessness response to violence.
Learned helplessness focuses on individual perceptions and behaviors in response to uncontrollable
circumstances or events, whereby persons develop negative beliefs about their abilities or their own actions
(Peterson, Maier, & Seligman, 1993). A learned helplessness response among women experiencing IPV
may relate to perceptions of loss of control and helplessness learned from childhood experiences (Walker,
1983). The theory proposes that susceptibility to being a victim is a socially learned behavior that often
begins in the family of origin, but also has the potential to develop in adulthood (Walker, 1977/1978,
1983). We consider this mechanism as a possible explanation for intergenerational connections across
various forms of family violence. However, we do not view mechanisms suggested by social learning or
learned helplessness theories as deterministic, since rates of intergenerational transmission of violence
do not suggest that all, or even most, individuals victimized during childhood become perpetrators or
victims in adulthood.
Present study
In the present analysis, the interpretation of the intergenerational transmission of violence hypothesis
focuses on the assumption that abused children are more likely to grow up to be abusive parents than
are non-abused children. This study also applies learned helplessness and social learning theories to IPV,
hypothesizing that female children who are exposed to IPV in their families of origin are more likely to
be victimized by an intimate partner in adulthood. In the analysis, the following research questions are
explored:
1. To what extent do various forms of family violence co-occur during childhood and during adulthood?
2. Are specific forms of family violence during childhood associated with the same forms of family
violence in adulthood?
3. Are various forms of childhood victimization associated with adulthood intimate partner violence
victimization, or the co-occurrence of IPV victimization and the perpetration of child maltreatment in
adulthood?
Methods
Sample and data sources
This research takes place within the context of an ongoing longitudinal study, the Illinois Families
Study (IFS), which tracks families who were receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
benefits in 1998. TANF is the federal program in the United States that provides cash assistance to lowincome families with minor-aged children (US Public Law 104-193). The IFS sample (N = 1,899) was
selected from the 1998 TANF caseload in Illinois. Case identification numbers were randomly selected

604

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

from administrative data provided by the Illinois Department of Human Services, which administers the
TANF Program. Prior to selection, cases involving parents under the age of 18 were excluded from the
sampling pool, and the pool was stratified by region to ensure adequate representation from smaller urban
and rural regions, as well as larger urban areas. The IFS was approved by the Northwestern University
Institutional Review Board. Informed consent for participating in the annual surveys was obtained from
sample members prior to their initial survey interview. Informed consent for allowing continued access
to administrative data sources included in the sampling frame dataset was obtained after the completion
of the initial survey.
The IFS involves five waves of survey data collection. The present study uses data from the first three
waves of the IFS. The first wave of survey data collection occurred in late 1999 and early 2000, and
survey data collection for subsequent waves occurred in 2001 and 2002. The response rate for the first
wave of data collection was 72% (N = 1,363), and the retention rates for the second and third waves were
87% (N = 1,183) and 79% (N = 1,072), respectively. Analysis weights are used to adjust for sampling
stratification and survey non-response. More details on the study design, including the sampling strategy
and survey methodology, have been published (Lewis, Shook, Stevens, Kleppner, Lewis, & Riger, 2000;
Slack, Holl, Lee, McDaniel, Altenbernd, & Stevens, 2003).
In conjunction with survey data, administrative data from the Illinois Department of Children and
Family Services (IDCFS) on investigated child maltreatment reports from January 1980 through June
2002 are used. All respondents were asked to consent to continued access to these data; 92% of IFS
respondents provided this consent. Thirty-six respondents from the Wave 3 survey who did not grant
permission for administrative data access were excluded. Comparisons of consenters and non-consenters
(not shown) using survey and sampling frame data did not yield statistically significant differences on
any of the forms of family violence under study, from either childhood or adulthood. Twenty-five males
and six respondents who were not the biological or adoptive parent of one or more children in their care
were further excluded. Males were excluded because the intergenerational dynamics of maltreatment and
victimization have been found to differ for males and females (Gelles, 1976; Heyman & Slep, 2002;
OLeary & Curley, 1986; Pagelow, 1981; Rosenbaum & OLeary, 1981). Non-parent respondents were
excluded because the dynamics of violence may involve more than two generations, which could introduce
bias to the results. The final sample size is 1,005.

Measures
Dependent variables
This study incorporates investigated reports of child maltreatment of the respondents children (or
child maltreatment in generation two), for which the respondents are the alleged perpetrators. Reports
of abuse or neglect by other individuals are not included in this analysis since they may confound an
understanding of whether victimization in childhood is associated with perpetration of maltreatment by the
same individual in adulthood. Reports are included regardless of whether they were substantiated or not.
Previous research has shown that the outcomes associated with families whose reports are substantiated
and unsubstantiated are similar (Leiter, Myers, & Zingraff, 1994), and that most unsubstantiated reports
either involve likely maltreatment or service needs related to the prevention of maltreatment (Drake,
1996). Child maltreatment reports were further refined according to the type of maltreatment allegation

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

605

(i.e., physical abuse, neglect, and risk of harm). Reports of substance abuse, emotional abuse, and sexual
abuse allegations were not included in the present analyses due to their low incidence in the sample.
Neglect includes allegations of inadequate food, clothing, shelter, medical care, or supervision. Risk-ofharm allegations involve situations of likely future abuse or neglect. Because the Illinois child protection
system administrative data did not distinguish between risk of harm for different types of maltreatment
until 2002, we do not know whether this allegation is more representative of risk of harm from physical
abuse or neglect. However, an analysis (not shown) of the associations between risk of harm allegations
and other allegations of physical abuse and neglect over the entire study period suggest that the risk of
harm category is slightly more representative of physical abuse than neglect. The frequency of alleged
child maltreatment by the respondent is 31.3% over the period for which CPS report data were available.
The annual surveys include a measure of severe physical IPV, with items adapted from the Massachusetts study of women on welfare (Allard et al., 1997), and the Conflict Tactics Scale (Straus,
1979b). Examples of items include: Has any current or former spouse or partner ever hit, slapped, or
kicked you?; . . . thrown or shoved you onto the floor, against a wall, or down stairs?; or . . . hurt
you badly enough that you went to a doctor or clinic? In Wave 1, respondents were verbally asked
these questions by a survey interviewer, who recorded the responses. IPV in Wave 3 was assessed via a
confidential self-report survey. In the present analysis, lifetime IPV includes respondents who answered
yes to any of the items of severe physical IPV in either Wave 1 or Wave 3. This measure identifies
respondents only as victims of IPV, and not as perpetrators.
Independent variables
Family violence history. Four single item, self-reported measures of respondents childhood experiences
captured child physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, and witnessing domestic violence. The four items
include: When you were growing up, was there an adult in your household who was physically violent
or abusive to another adult in the household?; How many times do you remember this person severely
physically punishing you or physically abusing you?; As a child, do you feel like you were seriously
neglected by a parent or caregiver?; and Has a stranger, friend, acquaintance, date, or relative ever tried
or succeeded in doing something sexual to you or made you do something sexual to them against your
wishes? An affirmative response to the last question was followed with a question asking, How old
were you the first time this happened? Only cases involving respondents under the age of 18 were coded
as victims of childhood sexual abuse for the current analysis. Similar to the procedure used for estimating
IPV in the sample, these questions were verbally asked and answered in Wave 1 of the IFS, but answered
in the context of a confidential self-report survey in Wave 3. Respondents who answered affirmatively to
any of the above items in either wave were coded as having experienced childhood violence.
Other control variables. Control variables include whether a respondent gave birth to her first child
as a teenager, high school or GED completion, race/ethnicity (Hispanic and non-Hispanic White were
included as two dummy variables; the omitted category is non-Hispanic Black), no history of marriage
(compared to all other marital statuses), and age at the time of first employment. A number of other
childhood history variables are controlled, including whether the respondents family of origin received
welfare during all or part of her childhood, fathers level of education, mothers level of education, whether
the respondent lived with both of her parents for all or part of her childhood, whether the respondent
was ever held back to repeat a grade in school, and whether she lived in foster care for any part of her

606

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

Table 1
Control variable descriptive statistics (N = 1,005)
Variable description

Percent

Demographic and family structure characteristics

Age in wave 3 (mean, SD)
Never married
Teenage parent

33.43 (8.19)
58
63

Race/ethnicity
Non-Hispanic black
Non-Hispanic white
Hispanic
Received high school diploma
Ever held back a grade in school

81
7
12
50
21

Lived with both parents until age 16

Part of the time
All of the time
Ever live in foster care while growing up

20
44
4

Family history of welfare receipt

Yes
No
Dont know

43
52
5

Fathers education
Less than high school
At least high school/GED
Missing/dont know

13
30
57

Mothers education
Less than high school
At least high school/GED
Missing/dont know

23
46
31

childhood. Due to a substantial proportion of missing values on several childhood history variables (i.e.,
family welfare receipt, and each parents education level), three additional dummy variables for missing
values were included which enabled us to retain observations where information on the original variables
were missing.
Although the annual surveys contain a broad array of additional measures that potentially influence
child maltreatment and IPV, these measures could not be dated in relation to the occurrence of the study
outcomes. For this reason, measures were chosen only if they could reasonably be assumed to precede
investigations of maltreatment related to the respondents own children or her adulthood victimization by
an intimate partner.
Table 1 provides descriptive statistics associated with demographic and family structure characteristics.
Descriptive statistics associated with family violence measures are reported in Table 2. With respect to
adulthood family violence, 31% of the sample was reported to CPS for child abuse or neglect, and
37% have a history of adult IPV victimization. Twenty-nine percent of the samples were exposed to
childhood IPV, 25% were physically abused, 12% were sexually abused, and 8% felt they were neglected

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

607

Table 2
Family violence descriptive statistics (N = 1,005)
Variable description

Percent

Childhood
Physically abused as child
Exposed to IPV as child
Sexually abused as child
Felt neglected as child

25
29
12
8

Adulthood
IPV victimization
Ever reported for abuse or neglect
Ever reported for neglect
Ever reported for physical abuse
Ever reported for risk of physical harm

37
31
23
13
14

as children. In addition, four percent of respondents indicated they had spent some of their childhood in
foster care.
Analysis
Correlational analyses were conducted to assess the degree of association between different forms
of family violence within and across generations. Logistic regressions were conducted to predict the
various forms of adulthood family violence (i.e., IPV victimization during adulthood, and allegations of
physical abuse, neglect, and risk of harm pertaining to ones own children). Lastly, a multinomial analysis
was conducted to determine which factors or combinations of factors placed families at greater risk for
IPV, child maltreatment, or both forms of interpersonal violence, with particular attention to the primary
caregivers history of physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, and exposure to IPV. In a multinomial analysis,
the logit is in a generalized form, where the omitted category is the reference category or denominator of
each logit (Patetta, 2001). For each parameter, there are k 1 estimates, where k is the number of categories
in the dependent variable. This type of analysis sheds light on whether particular childhood factors are
predictive of maltreating ones own children in adulthood in the absence of adult IPV victimization; in
the presence of adult IPV victimization, but in the absence of maltreatment of ones own children in
adulthood; or in the presence of both forms of family violence in adulthood.
Results
Table 3 presents the results of correlational analyses depicting associations between different forms of
family violence within and across generations. Results show that moderate, statistically significant correlations exist between all four forms of childhood violence, with the strongest association existing for childhood physical abuse and witnessing parental IPV (Pearsons r = .52, p < .01). During adulthood, respondents IPV victimization is weakly correlated with child maltreatment reports concerning her own children
(Pearsons r = .10, p < .01). This relationship is driven by weak associations with reports of all three types
of maltreatment measured for this analysis (e.g., physical abuse, neglect and risk of physical harm).
Reports of physical abuse by the respondent are moderately associated with reports of neglect and risk of

608

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

Table 3
Correlations (N = 1,005)
(1)
Childhood physical abuse (1)
Childhood neglect (2)
Childhood sexual abuse (3)
Childhood IPV exposure (4)
Adult lifetime IPV (5)
Adult CPS report (6)
Adult physical abuse report (7)
Adult neglect report (8)
Adult risk of harm report (9)
**

p < .05;

***

1.00
.30***
.38***
.52***
.31***
.06
.06
.09***
.09***

(2)
1.00
.20***
.23***
.13***
.06
.04
.11***
.05

(3)

1.00
.34***
.28***
.06
.06
.07**
.07**

(4)

1.00
.29***
.04
.03
.04
.01

(5)

1.00
.10***
.08**
.11***
.08***

(6)

1.00
.57***
.80***
.59***

(7)

1.00
.40***
.52***

(8)

1.00
.53***

(9)

1.00

p < .01.

physical harm by the respondent (r = .40, p < .01; r = .52, p < .01, respectively), and reports of neglect by
the respondent are moderately associated with reports of risk of harm by the respondent (r = .53, p < .01).
In terms of cross-generational correlations, weak to moderate associations emerge. The strongest
correlations are between adulthood IPV and three forms of childhood violence (physical abuse, sexual
abuse, and witnessing IPV). These associations range from .28 to .31 (p < .01). Contrary to expectation,
associations between the same forms of violence (e.g., physical abuse-physical abuse; neglect-neglect)
across generations are weak, and for physical abuse, the correlation is not statistically significant. However, a relationship exists between childhood physical abuse and risk of harm allegations pertaining to
respondents children.
Table 4 presents the results from logistic regressions predicting various forms of family violence in
respondents adulthood families. Odds ratios may be interpreted as a factor change in the odds of a given
(dichotomized) outcome (Long, 1997). Values greater than 1 indicate higher risk for a specified outcome,
and values less than 1 indicates lower risk for an outcome. For example, when predicting adulthood IPV
in Table 4, the odds ratio associated with childhood physical abuse is 2.58. Therefore, respondents who
reported experiencing physical abuse during childhood are 2.58 times more likely to experience IPV
during adulthood than respondents who did not report physical abuse during childhood.
Controlling for family of origin characteristics, the only forms of adulthood family violence associated
with childhood victimization are risk of harm and IPV. Childhood physical abuse raises the likelihood of a
risk of harm allegation pertaining to ones own children (odds ratio = 2.04, p < .01). Interestingly, all forms
of childhood family violence, with the exception of neglect, are positively associated with adulthood IPV.
Being physically or sexually abused as a child, or witnessing parental IPV as a child, all increase the risk
of this adulthood outcome by 200 to 300%. The weak association between survey respondents reports of
feeling neglected in childhood and alleged neglect of their own children that emerged in the correlational
analysis did not retain statistical significance in the multivariate analysis.
Several other childhood factors (not shown) are associated with adulthood family violence. Having a high school education reduces the likelihood of all forms of maltreatment pertaining to ones
own children; being of Hispanic origin (compared to non-Hispanic Blacks) reduces the likelihood of
neglect; non-Hispanic Whites are more likely than non-Hispanic Blacks to have reports of risk of harm
related to their children and to have been victimized by an intimate partner during adulthood. Never having married is associated with a lower likelihood of adulthood IPV. Having a family of origin who

Variable name

Childhood physical abuse

Childhood neglect
Childhood sexual abuse
Childhood IPV
**

Adult physical abuse

Adult neglect/inadequate supervision

Adult risk of harm

Adult IPV

Odds ratio

Confidence
interval

Odds ratio

Confidence
interval

Odds ratio

Confidence
interval

Odds ratio

Confidence
interval

1.41
.90
1.26
.87

(0.76, 2.27)
(0.42, 1.92)
(0.70, 2.27)
(0.52, 1.45)

1.45
1.76
1.12
.85

(0.94, 2.23)
(0.98, 3.18)
(0.69, 1.84)
(0.56, 1.29)

2.04***
.95
1.21
.66

(1.20, 3.45)
(0.46, 1.96)
(0.67, 2.18)
(0.39, 1.09)

2.58***
1.00
2.99***
1.99***

(1.75, 3.83)
(0.56, 1.80)
(1.84, 4.90)
(1.40, 2.84)

p < .05; *** p < .01; results for other control variables not shown.

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

Table 4
Logistic regressions (N = 1,005)

609

610

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

Table 5
Multinomial regression (N = 1,005)
Variable name

Childhood physical abuse

Childhood neglect
Childhood sexual abuse
Childhood IPV
**

Adult IPV and CM

Adult IPV only

Adult CM only

Odds ratio

Confidence
interval

Odds ratio

Confidence
interval

Odds ratio

Confidence
interval

2.91***
1.09
3.05***
1.84**

(1.66, 5.08)
(0.50, 2.38)
(1.60, 5.85)
(1.09, 3.12)

2.53***
.94
2.87***
2.02***

(1.58, 4.05)
(0.46, 1.92)
(1.62, 5.10)
(1.32, 3.10)

1.04
1.03
.93
.98

(0.57, 1.90)
(0.43, 2.47)
(0.41, 2.09)
(0.58, 1.65)

p < .05; *** p < .01; results for other control variables not shown.

received welfare is associated with an increased risk of neglect related to ones own children, and
having lived in foster care during childhood significantly increases the likelihood of physical abuse
of ones children (controlling for childhood victimization). Living with both parents for all of ones
childhood is, contrary to expectation, associated with an increased risk of a neglect allegation during
adulthood, compared to those who lived with a single parent for their entire childhood. Also unexpectedly, the higher the education level of a respondents mother, the greater the likelihood of adulthood IPV
victimization.
Table 5 presents results from the multinomial analysis, which predicts different combinations of family
violence during adulthood (i.e., co-occurring child maltreatment and IPV, IPV only, and child maltreatment [of any form] only). Compared to respondents with no adulthood IPV or allegations of maltreatment
related to their children, respondents with a history of childhood sexual abuse (odds ratio = 3.05) or childhood physical abuse (odds ratio = 2.91) are three times more likely to have IPV and child maltreatment
co-occur in adulthood. Childhood physical abuse, sexual abuse, and witnessing IPV are all positively
associated with the occurrence of only IPV during adulthood. No form of childhood victimization is
associated with only the occurrence of child maltreatment in adulthood (i.e., maltreatment perpetrated
against ones own children).
As in the logistic regressions, higher education is associated with a lower likelihood of child maltreatment reports in adulthood, but only in the absence of IPV. Hispanic respondents are less likely to
be reported for only child maltreatment (compared to non-Hispanic Blacks) and non-Hispanic Whites
are more likely than non-Hispanic Blacks to experience both forms of family violence in adulthood.
Never marrying is inversely associated with the co-occurrence of IPV and child maltreatment, and with
IPV only; childhood family welfare receipt is positively associated with child maltreatment only; and
having repeated a grade during childhood is positively associated with the combination of IPV and child
maltreatment in adulthood (marginally significant), but negatively associated with child maltreatment
only.

Discussion
There are a number of key findings in this study. First, we found that physical abuse during childhood
is moderately correlated with sexual abuse, neglect, and witnessing IPV during childhood. Second, we
did not find evidence of a bivariate correlation between physical abuse during childhood and physical

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

611

abuse of ones own children in adulthood. Furthermore, when controlling for other forms of childhood
violence (with and without other covariates), the cross-generational relationship for physical abuse does
not emerge.
Third, some evidence of intergenerational relationships for neglect and for IPV emerged. The occurrence of each during childhood is associated with the same form of violence in adulthood; however, only
the relationship of childhood exposure to IPV and adult IPV remains after controlling for other covariates.
The cross-generational relationships for these types of violence have been significantly under-studied relative to physical abuse, and analyses suggest that these other aspects of intergenerational transmission
should be further explored in research. Since risk of harm allegations capture risk of future harm from
both physical abuse and neglect, this may provide some support for the intergenerational transmission of
physical abuse, although one cannot know for certain which form of maltreatment drives the observed
intergenerational association.
Fourth, the finding that three of four forms of childhood violence (physical abuse, sexual abuse,
and witnessing IPV) are highly predictive of adulthood IPV victimization raises important questions
about the mechanisms underlying the intergenerational transmission hypothesis, at least as applied to
females. Results from the logistic regressions presented in Table 4 offer some support for the theory
of learned helplessness, whereby children maltreated or exposed to violence during childhood may be
more likely to be victimized as adults. In other words, they may be learning or modeling victim
behaviors or beliefs, as opposed to behaviors or beliefs associated with the perpetration of maltreatment.
Given that the multinomial analysis showed that various forms of childhood violence are associated
with the occurrence of IPV in adulthood, and with maltreatment of ones own children in adulthood
for only those respondents who also experienced adult IPV, it is critical to consider the nature of adulthood victimization in any study of the intergenerational transmission of maltreatment. Where support
for an intergenerational hypothesis is found in other research, it is possible that various forms of childhood maltreatment are linked to adult perpetration of maltreatment through IPV. Studies exploring the
mediating role of IPV in the intergenerational hypothesis are needed to explore this possibility in more
detail.
Limitations and strengths of study
There are several caveats to consider with respect to the results. First, the findings rely entirely upon
retrospective data, a limitation that is common to much of the research on the intergenerational transmission of family violence, and which has been criticized for its potential to overstate intergenerational
effects (Egeland, 1993; Kaufman & Zigler, 1987, 1993).
Measures of childhood family violence and adulthood IPV were collected using self-reports by respondents. Such data are subject to errors in recall, although some studies have found adult womens memories
of their childhood abuse experiences to be reliable measures (Dube, Williamson, Thompson, Felitti, &
Anda, 2004; Meyer, Muenzenmaier, Cancienne, & Struening, 1996).
Measures of child maltreatment associated with respondents own children were derived from official child protection report records. Although using different modes of data collection for the childhood
and the adulthood maltreatment variables may introduce instrumentation bias to the results (Pedhazur &
Schmelkin, 1991), there are compelling reasons to use different data collection modes for this particular analytic topic. Self-report data on child maltreatment perpetration may lead to response bias in that
some respondents may under-report sensitive information, particularly if such information is viewed by

612

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

respondents as socially undesirable (Pedhazur & Schmelkin, 1991). Official reports of child maltreatment are not plagued by social desirability bias (although they are not without their own limitations).
This problem may also be present with respect to self-reports of childhood victimization and adulthood
IPV victimization.
It is a commonly held belief that official reports of child maltreatment under-represent actual rates
of child maltreatment (English, 1998). For this reason, our estimates of associations between childhood
victimization and adulthood perpetration of child maltreatment are likely to be conservative and reflective
of more severe or detectable forms of abuse and neglect. However, the processes leading to detection of
child maltreatment may be different than the processes leading to actual maltreatment (regardless of its
detection). Furthermore, IPV may play a significant role in the detection of child maltreatment by child
welfare systems. In the present study, the relationships that emerge between various forms of violence,
both within and across generations, may in part reflect mechanisms related to detection of violence by a
particular service system.
Another limitation of the present study is that respondents have differing periods of risk exposure for
adulthood family violence, given the age distribution of Illinois Families Study survey respondents (i.e.,
1858 years old as of Wave 1). In other words, older respondents have had more time to experience family
violence than younger respondents. An attempt is made to control for this by including respondents age
in the statistical models; however, this strategy does not overcome the statistical bias that may arise
with time-censored data. Event history analytical techniques would be more effective in addressing this
bias (Yoshihama & Gillespie, 2002). However, because the exact dates or even years of occurrence for
adulthood IPV are unavailable for this study, this statistical technique could not be applied in the current
investigation.
The analyses do not control for potentially important factors associated with family violence, such as
substance use, depression, and physical health. In order to preserve the temporal ordering of predictors in
relation to adulthood family violence, predictors are limited to those that reflect respondents childhoods.
Study data offer only limited information on childhood characteristics, and as a result, the relationships
that emerge between childhood family violence and adulthood family violence in the analyses may be
mis-specified, to the extent that they are influenced by key omitted variables. Despite this limitation,
the ability to control for several key factors in childhood, including family structure, education level of
respondents parents, and family welfare status, as well as any foster care episodes during childhood,
strengthens the analyses. The last factor listed above, foster care, is important to control because it reduces
the likelihood that the observed effects related to childhood family violence are actually an artifact of
experiences in out-of-home care.
Unlike much of the existing research, the present study does not rely upon a sample derived
from populations already identified for family violence. Instead, it relies upon a sample demonstrated to have a higher risk of family violencefamilies receiving welfarebut who have not been
selected from client systems that address family violence (i.e., domestic violence shelters, child protection systems). The association between receipt of welfare benefits and both IPV and child maltreatment has been well-documented in the literature (Allard et al., 1997; Lloyd & Taluc, 1999;
Nagel, 1998; Slack et al., 2003; Waldfogel, 2004), lending support to the present studys focus
on a population of families who have received TANF benefits. It is important to remember that
this study focuses on women who have received public assistance benefits. There may be important unmeasured characteristics associated with both welfare receipt and family violence across the
lifespan.

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

613

Implications
There are several implications for prevention and intervention programs in the area of family violence.
First, significant impacts may not be attainable if interventions focus on only one form of violence. Of
particular importance is the ability to address IPV in the context of child maltreatment prevention or
intervention programs, both as a means of effectively addressing the current context of family violence,
and as a strategy for reducing the risk of a childs potential IPV victimization in adulthood. Second,
assessment of child maltreatment risk in any given family should involve inquiries about whether a parent
or caregiver experienced different forms of family violence during childhood. It should not be assumed
that physical abuse during childhood is the most salient predictor of child physical abuse in adulthood.
Additionally, the intergenerational risk of maltreatment may be indirect in nature, with adulthood IPV
operating as a possible mediator. Parenting interventions to prevent or reduce child maltreatment should
consider the role of adulthood victimization as it affects a parents ability to care for her children. Although
the present study does not assess the mechanisms connecting one form of family violence to another, it
does shed light on which forms of violence tend to co-occur within generations. This information may
be used in future research to explore the complex pathways between intimate partner violence and child
maltreatment in greater detail, both within and across generations.
Conclusion
Findings from this investigation indicate statistically significant associations between various forms
of family violence during childhood and during adulthood. Women with childhood histories of physical
abuse are more likely than women without childhood histories of physical abuse to have children at
risk for physical harm, but it is unclear whether such risk stems from physical abuse or neglect. Study
findings also show that a childhood history of physical abuse, sexual abuse, or exposure to IPV predicts
involvement in a physically violent relationship in adulthood. Childhood histories of family violence
predict maltreatment of ones own children only for respondents who have also experienced IPV during
adulthood. Although this study did not generate clear support for the transmission of child physical abuse,
evidence emerged to support a mechanism of learned helplessness, whereby different forms of family
violence experienced during childhood lead to an increased risk of victimization in adulthood.
References
Akers, R. L. (1977). Deviant behavior: A social learning approach (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Allard, M., Albelda, R., Colten, M., & Cosenza, C. (1997). In harms way? Domestic violence, AFDC receipt, and welfare
reform in Massachusetts. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts at Boston.
Appel, A. E., & Holden, G. W. (1998). The co-occurrence of spouse and physical child abuse: A review and appraisal. Journal
of Family Psychology, 12(4), 578599.
Ards, S. D., Myers, S. L., Chung, C., Malkis, A., & Hagerty, B. (2003). Decomposing Black-White differences in child maltreatment. Child Maltreatment, 8(2), 112121.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1979). The social learning perspective: Mechanisms of aggression. In H. Toch (Ed.), Psychology of crime and
criminal justice (pp. 198236). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Beeman, S. K., Hagemeister, A. K., & Edleson, J. L. (2001). Case assessment and service receipt in families experiencing both
child maltreatment and women battering. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16(5), 437458.

614

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

Belsky, J. (1980). Child maltreatment. An ecological integration. American Psychologist, 35(4), 320335.
Cicchetti, D., & Aber, J. L. (1980). Abused children-abusive parents: An overstated case? Harvard Educational Review, 50,
244255.
Clemmons, J. C., DiLillo, D., Martinez, I. G., DeGue, S., & Jeffcott, M. (2003). Co-occurring forms of child maltreatment and
adult adjustment reported by Latina college students. Child Abuse & Neglect, 27(7), 751767.
Coohey, C. (2004). Battered mothers who physically abuse their children. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(8), 943952.
Coohey, C., & Braun, N. (1997). Toward an integrated framework for understanding child physical abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect,
21(11), 10811094.
Coohey, C., & Zhang, Y. (2006). The role of men in chronic supervisory neglect. Child Maltreatment, 11(1), 2733.
Dong, M., Anda, R. F., Dube, S. R., Giles, W. H., & Felitti, V. J. (2003). The relationship of exposure to childhood sexual abuse
to other forms of abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction during childhood. Child Abuse & Neglect, 27(6), 625639.
Drake, B. (1996). Unraveling unsubstantiated. Child Maltreatment, 1(3), 261271.
Dube, S. R., Williamson, D. F., Thompson, T., Felitti, V. J., & Anda, R. F. (2004). Assessing the reliability of retrospective reports
of adverse childhood experiences among adult HMO members attending a primary care clinic. Child Abuse & Neglect, 28(7),
729737.
Edleson, J. L. (1999). The overlap between child maltreatment and woman battering. Violence Against Women, 5(2),
134154.
Egeland, B. (1993). A history of abuse if a major risk factor for abusing the next generation. In R. J. Gelles & D. R. Loseke
(Eds.), Current controversies on family violence (pp. 197208). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Egeland, B., Jacobvitz, D., & Papatola, K. (1987). Intergenerational continuity of abuse. In R. J. Gelles & J. B. Lancaster (Eds.),
Child abuse and neglect. Biosocial dimensions (pp. 255276). New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Egeland, B., Jacobvitz, D., & Sroufe, L. A. (1988). Breaking the cycle of abuse. Child Development, 59, 10801088.
English, D. J. (1998). The extent and consequences of child maltreatment. The Future of Children, 8(1), 3953.
Ertem, I. O., Leventhal, J. M., & Dobbs, S. (2000). Intergenerational continuity of child physical abuse: How good is the evidence?
The Lancet, 356, 814819.
Feshbach, S. (1980). Child abuse and the dynamics of human aggression and violence. In G. Gerbner, C. J. Ross, & E. Zigler
(Eds.), Child abuse: An agenda for action (pp. 4860). New York: Oxford University Press.
Gelles, R. J. (1976). Family violence. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Gil, D. (1970). Violence against children. Physical child abuse in the United States. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hartley, C. C. (2004). Severe domestic violence and child maltreatment: Considering child physical abuse, neglect and failure
to protect. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 373392.
Herrenkohl, E. C., Herrenkohl, R. C., & Toedter, L. J. (1983). Perspectives on the intergenerational transmission of abuse. In D.
Finkelhor, R. J. Gelles, G. T. Hotaling, & M. A. Straus (Eds.), The dark side of families. Current family violence research
(pp. 305316). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Heyman, R. G., & Slep, A. M. S. (2002). Do child abuse and interparental violence lead to adulthood family violence? Journal
of Marriage and the Family, 64(4), 864870.
Higgins, D. J., & McCabe, M. P. (2000). Multi-type maltreatment and the long-term adjustment of adults. Child Abuse Review,
9, 618.
Hunter, R. S., & Kilstrom, N. (1979). Breaking the cycle in abusive families. American Journal of Psychiatry, 136(10), 13201322.
Kalmuss, D. (1984). The intergenerational transmission of marital aggression. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 46(1), 1119.
Kaufman, J., & Zigler, E. (1987). Do abused children become abusive parents? American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57(2),
186192.
Kaufman, J., & Zigler, E. (1989). The intergenerational transmission of abuse. In D. Cicchetti & V. Carlson (Eds.), Child
maltreatment: Theory and research on the causes and consequences of child abuse and neglect (pp. 129150). New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Kaufman, J., & Zigler, E. (1993). The intergenerational transmission of abuse is overstated. In R. J. Gelles & D. R. Loseke
(Eds.), Current controversies on family violence (pp. 209221). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Kempe, C. H., Silverman, F. N., Steele, B. F., Droegemueller, W., & Silver, H. K. (1962). The battered child syndrome. Journal
of the American Medical Association, 181(1), 1724.
Langeland, W., & Dijkstra, S. (1995). Breaking the intergenerational transmission of child abuse: Beyond the mother-child
relationship. Child Abuse Review, 4, 413.

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

615

Leiter, J., Myers, K. A., & Zingraff, M. T. (1994). Substantiated and unsubstantiated cases of maltreatment: Do their consequences
differ? Social Work Research, 18(2), 6782.
Lewis, D. A., Shook, K., Stevens, A. B., Kleppner, P., Lewis, J., Riger, & S. (2000). Work, welfare, and well-being: An independent
look at welfare reform in Illinois. Project description and first-year report of the Illinois Families Study. Evanston, IL: Institute
for Policy Research.
Lloyd, S., & Taluc, N. (1999). The effects of male violence on female employment. Violence Against Women, 5(4), 370392.
Long, J. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Advanced quantitative techniques in the
social sciences series, 7. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
MacEwen, K. E. (1994). Refining the intergenerational transmission hypothesis. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9(3), 350365.
McGuigan, W. M., & Pratt, C. C. (2001). The predictive impact of domestic violence on three types of child maltreatment. Child
Abuse & Neglect, 25, 869883.
Merrill, L. L., Hervig, L. K., & Milner, J. S. (1996). Childhood parenting experiences, intimate partner conflict resolution, and
adult risk for child physical abuse. Child Abuse & Neglect, 20(11), 10491065.
Meyer, I. H., Muenzenmaier, K., Cancienne, J., & Struening, E. (1996). Reliability and validity of a measure of sexual and
physical abuse histories among women with serious mental illness. Child Abuse & Neglect, 20(3), 213219.
Milner, J. S., & Chilamkurti, C. (1991). Physical child abuse perpetrator characteristics. A review of the literature. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 6(3), 345366.
Moeller, T. P., Bachman, G. A., & Moeller, J. R. (1993). The combined effects of physical, sexual, and emotional abuse during
childhood: Long-term health consequences for women. Child Abuse & Neglect, 17(5), 623640.
Muller, R. T., Hunter, J. E., & Stollak, G. (1995). The intergenerational transmission of corporal punishment: A comparison of
social learning and temperament models. Child Abuse & Neglect, 19(11), 13231335.
Nagel, M. V. (1998). Domestic violence: Prevalence and implications for employment among welfare recipients. (Publication
No. HEHS9912). Washington, DC: US General Accounting Office.
OLeary, K. D., & Curley, A. D. (1986). Assertion and family violence: Correlates of spouse abuse. Journal of Marital and
Family Therapy, 12(3), 281289.
Pagelow, M. (1981). Factors affecting womens decisions to leave violent relationships. Journal of Family Issues, 2,
391414.
Patetta, M. (2001). Categorical data analysis using logistic regression: Course notes. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.
Pears, K. C., & Capaldi, D. M. (2001). Intergenerational transmission of abuse: A two-generational prospective study of an
at-risk sample. Child Abuse & Neglect, 25(11), 14391461.
Pedhazur, E. J., & Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Peterson, C., Maier, S. F., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1993). Learned helplessness: A theory for the age of personal control. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Roper, P., & Weeks, G. (1993). Over half of the women on public assistance in Washington State reported physical and sexual
abuse as adults (Issue Brief). Seattle, WA: Washington State Institute for Public Policy.
Rosenbaum, A., & OLeary, K. D. (1981). Marital violence: Characteristics of abusive couples. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 49, 6371.
Scher, C. D., Forde, D. R., McQuaid, J. R., & Stein, M. B. (2004). Prevalence and demographic correlates of childhood
maltreatment in an adult community sample. Child Abuse & Neglect, 28(2), 167180.
Shook, K. (1999). Does the loss of welfare income increase the risk of involvement with the child welfare system? Children and
Youth Services Review, 21(8/9), 693724.
Slack, K. S., Holl, J. L., Lee, B. J., McDaniel, M., Altenbernd, L., & Stevens, A. B. (2003). Child protective intervention in
the context of welfare reform: The effects of work and welfare on maltreatment reports. Journal of Policy Analysis and
Management, 22(4), 517536.
Stark, E. (1985). Women battering, child abuse, and social heredity: What is the relationship? Marital Violence: Sociological
Review Monograph, 31, 141171.
Steele, B. J., & Pollock, C. B. (1968). A psychiatric study of parents who abuse infants and small children. In R. E. Helfer & C.
H. Kempe (Eds.), The battered child (pp. 103147). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Steele, B. J., & Pollock, C. B. (1974). A psychiatric study of parents who abuse infants and small children. In R. E. Helfer & C.
H. Kempe (Eds.), The battered child (2nd ed., pp. 80133). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

616

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

Steinmetz, S. K. (1977). The cycle of violence: Assertive, aggressive, and abusive family interaction. New York: Praeger Publishing Company.
Stith, S. M., Rosen, K. H., Middleton, K. A., Busch, A. L., Lundeberg, K., & Carlton, R. P. (2000). The intergenerational
transmission of spouse abuse: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 62(3), 640654.
Straus, M. A. (1979a). Family patterns and child abuse in a nationally representative sample. Child Abuse & Neglect, 3, 213225.
Straus, M. A. (1979b). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales. Journal of Marriage and
the Family, 41(1), 7588.
Straus, M. A., & Kantor, G. K. (1994). Corporal punishment of adolescents by parents: A risk factor in the epidemiology of
depression, suicide, alcohol abuse, child abuse, and wife beating. Adolescence, 29(115), 543561.
Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. K. (1980). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family. Garden City, NY:
Doubleday.
Waldfogel, J. (2004). Welfare reform and the child welfare system. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 919939.
Walker, L. (1977/1978). Battered women and learned helplessness. Victimology, 2, 525534.
Walker, L. (1983). The battered women syndrome study. In D. Finkelhor, R. J. Gelles, G. T. Hotaling, & M. A. Straus (Eds.),
The dark side of families. Current family violence research (pp. 3148). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Widom, C. S. (1989). Does violence beget violence? A critical examination of the literature. Psychological Bulletin, 106(1),
328.
Wilt, S., & Olson, S. (1996). Prevalence of domestic violence in the United States. Journal of the American Medical Womens
Association, 51, 7788.
Yoshihama, M., & Gillespie, B. W. (2002). Age adjustment and recall bias in the analysis of domestic violence data: Methodological improvements through the application of survival analysis methods. Journal of Family Violence, 17(3), 199221.

Resume
Objectif : Le but de cette e tude fut devaluer dans quelle mesure un groupe de femme a` risque e leve ont
vecu la violence conjugale et les diverses formes de maltraitance durant leur enfance et de lenfance vers
lage adulte.
Methode : On a interviewe des femmes a` revenu minime a` savoir, en retrospective, la violence conjugale
et les mauvais traitements auxquels elles ont e te exposees en enfance et en a ge adulte. On a aussi discerne
les liens entre les diverses formes de violence familiale entre et a` linterieur des generations.
Resultats : Lanalyse demontre des liens allant du faible au modere, entre les diverses formes de violence
a` linterieur des generations. Seul un faible appui a e te note en faveur de lhypoth`ese voulant que les
enfants maltraites soient plus aptes a` devenir des parents maltraitants. Par contre, letude tend a` confirmer
la theorie a` savoir que detre victime est un comportement appris, c.-`a-d. que les enfants victimes ou
exposes a` la violence sont plus aptes a` devenir eux-memes des victimes en a ge adulte.
Conclusion : Les resultats de cette e tude semblent indiquer que les interventions aupr`es des enfants
victimes dune forme ou autre de violence devraient subir une e valuation pour determiner sils ont e te
victimes dans dautres sens, et les interventions devraient prendre en consideration les comportements
appris qui sassocient au risque de demeurer ou de devenir victime.

Resumen
Objetivo: El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la medida en que la violencia de pareja y las diferentes
formas de maltrato infantil ocurren durante y a lo largo de la infancia y de la edad adulta en un grupo de
mujeres de alto-riesgo.

L.M. Renner, K.S. Slack / Child Abuse & Neglect 30 (2006) 599617

617

Metodo: Se entrevisto de manera retrospectiva a un grupo de mujeres de bajos ingresos en relacion con
sus experiencias de violencia de pareja y de maltrato infantil durante la infancia y la edad adulta. Se
identificaron tambien las relaciones intra e intergeneracionales entre las multiples formas de violencia
familiar.
Resultados: Los analisis demostraron asociacion debiles y moderadas entre varias formas de violencia
para cada generacion. Se encontro un debil apoyo para la hipotesis de la transmision de la violencia en el
sentido de que los ninos maltratados tienen mas posibilidades de maltratar a sus hijos cuando sean adultos.
Se encontro un fuerte apoyo para la teora de la indefension aprendida en el sentido de que quienes en
la infancia han sufrido o han observado violencia familiar tienen mas posibilidades de ser vctimas de
violencia cuando sean adultos.
Conclusiones: Los resultados de este estudio sugieren que en las intervenciones con ninos que han
sido identificados por una forma de victimizacion se deben evaluar otras formas de victimizacion y
que las intervenciones deben tener en cuenta las conductas de indefension aprendida asociadas con una
victimizacion continuada.