Coercive Control in 2SLGBTQQIA+ Relationships

Final Report Highlights

About the project

This project examines and synthesizes existing knowledge on coercive control in intimate partner relationships with a focus on how coercive control is experienced, measured, and policed in Two Spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, questioning, intersex, and asexual (2SLGBTQQIA+) individuals. Guided by a theoretical framework of intersectionality, the project assesses research progress since a 2014 narrative review of “psychological aggression,” to help inform the methods and direction of future research. The project design intentionally incorporates engagement with cross-sectorial stakeholders to inform our methods, help frame our findings, and mobilize knowledge related to promising practices and research gaps. Debates regarding legislation to criminalize coercive control are underway in Canada; yet it remains unclear how police will assess coercive control, and how they can best support 2SLGBTQQIA+ victims.

Existing measures and theories of coercive control largely evaluate men’s use of coercive control in relationships with women. Thus, the study of coercive control in 2SLGBTQQIA+ communities is in need of timely attention and an inclusive intersectional lens. Through a scoping review of academic and grey literature on studies of experiences, measurement, and police perspectives of coercive control, the project aims to:

● Examine the extent and ways 2SLGBTQQIA+ individuals experience coercive control;

● Appraise the methods used to measure coercive control experienced by 2SLGBTQQIA+ individuals;

● Understand how police perceive and respond to coercive control in the context of intimate partner violence and specifically in 2SLGBTQQIA+ communities.

Overview of Findings

● Over 1,774 non-duplicate records screened in duplicate, resulting in 264 academic and 13 grey literature full-text records reviewed, with data extraction completed in duplicate.

● Most studies conducted in the USA; 12 academic and 6 grey literature studies in Canada.

● Sexual, gender, and racial identities:

o identities were determined by participants’ self-report in almost all studies

o although many studies concerned (or assumed) participants were cisgender, 112 (40% of total extracted records) included participants identifying as transgender

o 97 (35% of total extracted records) included Indigenous individuals, most often identified as American Indian

● Coercive control measurement:

o most studies did not name the behaviour as “coercive control” but included aspects of it as part of a broad assessment of intimate partner violence or abuse

o authors used a variety of measures to capture coercive control; one third (88, 32%) used only questions created by the authors as their measure

● The most common form of coercive control studied was sexual coercion, followed by emotional abuse; a minority of studies examined the range of coercive control including economic, intimidation, isolation, and surveillance.

● Experiences of coercive control:

o nearly one third of studies (92, 33%) did not report on coercive control prevalence

o one third of academic studies (98, 37%) and most grey literature studies (10, 77%) compared LGBTQ and other participants, finding that coercive control was more common in LGBTQ individuals and was related to mental health problems

o less than 1 in 5 (46, 17%) studies specifically reported on participants’ experience of coercion related to their gender or sexual identities, such as threatening to out the person or identity abuse (e.g., misgendering, coercing the partner not to transition)

● Reporting to police:

o 38 (14%) studies inquired about participants’ perceptions or experiences with police; however, most did not describe reporting coercive control, specifically, to the police

o qualitative studies described participants’ hesitancy to report violence in their relationships to police, fearing an unsupportive response and sometimes experiencing violence and identity abuse (e.g., misgendering), although actual experiences of reporting to police tended to be positive

Methodological gaps and implications for future research identified to date

● There is a lack of agreed definition of coercive control or accepted standard of measurement, making it challenging to summarize the extent of the problem or identify 2SLGBTQQIA+ participants’ distinct experiences; therefore, further research into measures is warranted, especially given the need for police to assess coercive control.

● Qualitative studies complement and extend quantitative work by naming and illustrating participants’ experiences, which could inform further development of more inclusive measures of coercive behaviours specifically targeting 2SLGBTQQIA+ individuals.

● Quantitative surveys might include open-ended questions about experiences of coercive control so that analyses can involve more mixed methods and avoid collapsing the diversity of gender and sexuality among the respondents into singular categories; this approach will also permit more intersectional analyses even when groups are small in samples.

● There is a need to include individuals who identify as nonbinary, questioning, intersex, and asexual individuals to address the knowledge gap in their experiences of coercive control experiences, as they are often missing from participant samples, not identified as unique groups, and excluded from study results.

Policy implications

● Funding organizations should support research by scholars in Canada on coercive control experiences of 2SLGBTQQIA+ individuals, especially research with, by, and for Two Spirit Indigenous communities.

● Policing organizations may need to examine how they will recognize and respond to coercive control in 2SLGBTQQIA+ individuals, and engage with 2SLGBTQQIA+ communities as they develop their policies and practices to respond to and support individuals who report coercive control.

● There is an opportunity for engaging with 2SLGBTQQIA+ communities to develop a shared understanding of coercive control, develop standard measurement, and increase resources for addressing coercive control and developing research scholarship in this field.

Suggested citation

Hilton, N. Z., Ham, E., Radatz, D., Smith, C. M., Snow, N., Wintermute, J., Jennings-Fitz-Gerald, E., Patterson, S., & Lee, J. (2023). A scoping review of the lived experience, measurement, and policing of coercive control in 2SLGBTQQIA+ relationships. Final report to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.