Coercive Control: What is it, and how do we deal with it?
AI-generated image: an abstract representation of coercive control using shapes and colours.
What is this about?
Understanding, Defining, and Assessing Coercive Control to Prevent IPV
This project is led by N. Zoe Hilton, Ph.D., University of Toronto and Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care; Dana Radatz, Ph.D., Niagara University; Kevin Nunes, Ph.D., Carleton University; Elke Ham, Waypoint Centre for Mental Health Care; and Benjamin Presta, MA Student, Carleton University and RA at Waypoint.
This project is supported in part by funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Council.
We want to connect academic scholars, community-based researchers, practitioners, and the broader public through outreach activities to identify knowledge gaps and research directions to understand, define, and assess coercive control.
How will we accomplish this?
1. Enhance knowledge of coercive control among IPV researchers and practitioners through a virtual seminar series by scholars who are international experts on coercive control.
2. Connect and promote collaboration among academic scholars and community-based researchers who study IPV through a networking event with facilitated discussions to identify knowledge gaps, research directions, and opportunities for cross-disciplinary research on coercive control.
3. Engage the general public in discussions about research priorities aimed at developing a mutual understanding of how to comprehend, define, and evaluate coercive control.
Networking Event October 29, 2024, Vaughan, ON
Our research team hosted a networking event aimed to bring researchers from across Canada together to identify needs and gaps for future research on coercive control within intimate partner relationships. Nine researchers in diverse psychology, criminology, sociology, and mental health fields, three graduate students, and a team from Waypoint, Carleton University, and Niagara University in Ontario spent a day presenting their related research and discussing its implications for understanding, defining, and advancing research on coercive control. The event brought numerous research questions and priorities to light and provided direction for our own research team. Finally, researchers at the event discussed collaborations in future research in a number of priority areas related to coercive control.
Top row from left: Kevin Nunes, Elke Ham, Elnaz Moghimi, Chris Smith, Brandon Sparks, Ben Presta, Maaike Helmus, Cassidy Hatton, Dana Radatz, Sandy Jung
Front row from left: Zoe Hilton, Madison Fairholm, Crystal Giesbrecht, Natasha Maltais, Bronwen Perley-Robertson
Networking Event Summary
The networking event featured three panels, each with three speakers discussing various themes. The first panel focused on coercive control, beginning with Dr. Brandon Sparks from St. Francis Xavier University, who addressed sextortion and the importance of assessing motives for legal sanctions. Dr. Crystal Giesbrecht from the Provincial Association of Transition Houses then discussed how animal maltreatment can indicate coercive control in cases of intimate partner violence. Lastly, Dr. Maaike Helmus from Simon Fraser University presented research showing that attitudes supporting IPV and denial predict recidivism, suggesting these factors should be included in coercive control assessments.
“Researchers need to provide the training so that better data is collected and so there's more data in the files, and then this can be an iterative process.”
“I love how we're getting ahead and looking into implementation, [the] four domains and the examples were very helpful. Putting that definition out there can help us with implementation.”
The second panel focused on coercive control, featuring researchers discussing evidence-based policing and socio-legal issues. Dr. Chris M. Smith from the University of Toronto highlighted coercive control as rooted in patriarchal and gender-based violence, noting that victims in marginalized communities often hesitate to engage with a criminal justice system that has historically victimized them. PhD candidate Bronwen Perley-Robertson from Carleton University discussed the difficulties in quantifying coercive control due to dynamic behaviours leading to data gaps, which complicate law enforcement responses and policymaking. Dr. Sandy Jung from MacEwan University presented her research on identifying controlling behaviours related to intimate partner violence, emphasizing the importance of recognizing these behaviours. She outlined four key facets: finances (controlling money), relationships (isolation), well-being (withholding necessities), and power and threats (denying freedoms and making threats).
“The idea of defining coercive control, …. how do we define it in the broader sense: are we looking at it as a risk factor, or is this what we want to predict?”
“In human trafficking research, there are reports of traffickers buying people a small dog, which [they use to] then control them. This typology piece is interesting because it's the motive and so we have different risk management or treatment strategies. I think the animal piece can further clarify that for us.”
The final panel examined coercive control and its effects on marginalized communities. Dr. Elnaz Moghimi from the Waypoint Research Institute highlighted the need for a multi-faceted, biopsychosocial, and culturally sensitive approach to understanding intimate partner violence. Given equity-deserving communities' challenges in accessing support, insights from individuals with lived experiences are invaluable. PhD student Madison Fairholm from the University of Saskatchewan presented research linking psychopathy to coercive control, suggesting that treatment should target emotional aspects of psychopathy to reduce risk behaviour. Finally, Dr. Natalie Snow from Niagara University discussed the necessity of culturally responsive risk assessments in IPV cases. Traditional assessments may not be effective across diverse cultural groups, so addressing language barriers and biases is essential. Mandating cultural competency training for researchers and practitioners and involving community leaders in the assessment process can help bridge these gaps.
Survey Feedback
Participants expressed their enjoyment of the event's organization and appreciated the diversity of perspectives present. In the feedback for future events, survey responses indicated a preference for including a broader range of stakeholders, such as more practitioners, law enforcement officials, and individuals with lived experiences.
Respondents showed interest in future research topics, including refining the definition of coercive control, developing coercive control risk assessments, and exploring Intimate Partner Violence perpetrator research.
In response to this feedback, the research team has decided to focus on refining the definition of coercive control through a scoping review as the next step in their research.
Stay tuned for public webinar to provide feedback on research priorities!
“I think [information from those with lived experience] complements what we know, it doesn't compete. In research we get into these paradigms, and so lived experience can pull you out of it.”
“We need a solid definition. Even for future reviews, if there [are] too many definitions of something it'll be difficult.”
Key Research Needs and Gaps
Defining coercive control and how it differs from other abuse types.
Ask open-ended questions about coercive control in police investigations.
Train police in effective interviewing techniques.
Collect detailed criminal justice data for research.
Assess coercive control over time and its impact.
Explore funding options and survey the public.
Study the motivations of those who engage in coercive control.
Investigate coercive control in diverse relationships.
Examine the implications of specific behaviours in criminal laws.
Include perspectives of young people in research efforts.
A Multifaceted Approach to IPV and Coercive Control Research in Equity-Denied Populations
Presentation by Elnaz Moghimi, PhD
Coercive Control Networking Event, October 29, 2025, Vaughan, ON
Fall 2024 Waypoint Talks Series!
Responding to coercive control in the UK: What have we learned?
Improving prediction of intimate partner violence by identifying coercive controlling behaviours in police reports.
Assessing and addressing the hidden crime of stalking: Implications for coercive control.
Coming Soon:
Podcasts
•
Pre-recorded Webinars
•
Summary Report
•
Podcasts • Pre-recorded Webinars • Summary Report •
This project is supported in part by funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.