Technical Report

Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence, Stalking,
and Sexual Violence Among Active Duty Women
and Wives of Active Duty Men—Comparisons
with Women in the U.S. General Population, 2010
Technical Report

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
Division of Violence Prevention

Technical Report
Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence, Sexual Violence, and Stalking
among Active Duty Women and Wives of Active Duty Men—
Comparisons with Women in the U.S. General Population, 2010

Prepared by:
Michele C. Black and Melissa T. Merrick

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Atlanta, Georgia

March 2013

This report was prepared by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for the Department of Defense

(DoD) as part of an interagency agreement between the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and the CDC.

The interagency agreement set forth multi-agency (NIJ, CDC, DoD) efforts in support of the

2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey.

ii

Technical Report

Technical Report

TAble Of COnTenTS
list of Tables and figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Key findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Appendix A: Victimization Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Appendix b: Tables and figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

iii

iv

Technical Report

TAbleS AnD fIGUReS
Contact Sexual Violence
Table 1

Table 2

Table 3
Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence for Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in
the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population, Active Duty
Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence for Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in
the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population, Active Duty
Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men by Type of Perpetrator — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the
12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women by Deployment History — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the
12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women by Deployment History and Type of
Perpetrator — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in
the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s Deployment
History — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in
the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s Deployment
History and Type of Perpetrator — NISVS 2010

Stalking
Table 7

Table 8

Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12

Prevalence of Stalking in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior
to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population, Active Duty Women, and Wives of
Active Duty Men — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Stalking in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior
to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population, Active Duty Women, and Wives of
Active Duty Men by Type of Perpetrator — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Stalking in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior
to the Survey among Active Duty Women by Deployment History — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Stalking in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the
Survey among Active Duty Women by Deployment History and Type of Perpetrator — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Stalking in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior
to the Survey among Wives of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s Deployment History — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Stalking in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior
to the Survey among Wives of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s Deployment History and Type of
Perpetrator — NISVS 2010

Technical Report

Psychological Aggression
Table 13

Table 14

Table 15

Prevalence of Psychological Aggression by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior
to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General U.S.
Population, Active Duty Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Psychological Aggression by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to
the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women by Deployment
History — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Psychological Aggression by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior
to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives of Active Duty Men by
Spouse’s Deployment History — NISVS 2010

Physical Violence
Table 16

Table 17

Table 18

Table 19

Table 20

Table 21

Prevalence of Physical Violence by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the
Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population,
Active Duty Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Physical Violence by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the
Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population,
Active Duty Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men by Severity of Physical Violence — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Physical Violence by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the
Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women by Deployment
History — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Physical Violence by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the
Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s
Deployment History — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Physical Violence by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the
Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women by Deployment
History and Severity of Physical Violence — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Physical Violence by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the
Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s
Deployment History and Severity of Physical Violence — NISVS 2010

Physical Violence, Rape, or Stalking
Table 22

Table 23

Table 24

Prevalence of Physical Violence, Rape, or Stalking by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior
to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General Population,
Active Duty Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men by Severity of Physical Violence — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Physical Violence, Rape, or Stalking by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women
by Deployment History and Severity of Physical Violence — NISVS 2010
Prevalence of Physical Violence, Rape, or Stalking by an Intimate Partner in Lifetime, in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives of Active Duty
Men by Spouse's Deployment History and Severity of Physical Violence — NISVS 2010

v

vi

Technical Report

Acknowledgments
We would like to extend our gratitude to the Department of Defense for their financial

support of the 2010 data collection for the National Intimate Partner and Sexual

Violence Survey and acknowledge the following individuals from the

Department of Defense for their input and expertise:

David Lloyd, Cathy A. Flynn, Kathy Robertson, and Nathan Galbreath

We would also like to thank Lynn Jenkins, Paula Orlosky Williams, and the NISVS Science

Team from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for their contributions in

developing this report, and Andy Peytchev and Lisa Carley-Baxter from the Research

Triangle Institute for the 2010 NISVS data collection and statistical support for this

report. We also extend our thanks to our federal partners from the National Institute

of Justice — Angela Moore, Bernie Auchter, and Christine Crossland — in support

of the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey.

We would also like to acknowledge the following individuals who substantially

contributed to the development of the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence

Survey. We give special thanks to Kathleen C. Basile, Michele C. Black,

Matthew J. Breiding, James A. Mercy, Linda E. Saltzman, and Sharon G. Smith.

Technical Report

eXeCUTIVe SUMMARY

The initial year (2010) of the
National Intimate Partner and
Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS)
included a random sample of the
general U.S. population and two
random samples from the military:
active duty women and wives of
active duty men. For the general
U.S. population, a dual sampling
frame was used (cell phone and
landline). The Active Duty Master
File was the sampling frame for the
active duty women; the Defense
Enrollment Eligibility Reporting
System file was the sampling frame
for the wives of active duty men.
In 2010, there were 9,086
completed interviews of women
in the general population and
2,836 completed interviews of
women in the military samples
(1,408 active duty women and
1,428 wives of active duty men).
The survey methods for all
samples were identical; data were
collected simultaneously and
consistently across the general and
military populations in the first
two quarters of 2010. To address
population differences between
the general U.S. population of
women and women in the military
samples, odds ratios were adjusted
by age and marital status for active
duty women and adjusted by age
for wives of active duty men.
The NISVS questionnaire that
was administered to the military
samples and the general
population sample for this study
includes behaviorally specific
questions that assess intimate
partner violence (IPV), sexual

violence (SV) by any perpetrator,
and stalking by any perpetrator
over the lifetime and during the
three years and the 12 months
prior to the survey. Because
deployment typically lasts from
6 to 12 months with no physical
interactions between spouses, the
three-year period was essential
to increase the likelihood that
experiences relevant to spouses
included time periods when they
were in the same geographic
location. Active duty women were
asked about the length in months
of their deployment during the
three years prior to the survey,
while wives of active duty men
were asked about their spouse’s
deployment length during the
three years prior to the survey.
Throughout this report, the
prevalence will be reported for
the following three time periods:
lifetime, three-year, and one-year.
Significant differences between
women in the general population
and women in the military
samples were tested using logistic
regression models that adjusted
for age and marital status. Tests
involving wives of active duty
men were not adjusted for marital
status because this was a specific
component of the sampling frame.
Adjusted odds ratios are used
to assess significant differences
throughout this report.

Key findings
• Overall, the prevalence of IPV, SV,

and stalking were similar among
women in the U.S. population,
active duty women, and wives of
active duty men.
• Among women in the general
population aged 18 to 59 years,
40.3% experienced lifetime
contact sexual violence. Similarly,
36.3% of active duty women and
32.8% of wives of active duty
men experienced contact sexual
violence in their lifetime.
• Among women in the general
population aged 18 to 59 years,
39.7% experienced lifetime physical
violence, rape, or stalking by an
intimate partner; 31.5% of active
duty women and 29.5% of wives
of active duty men experienced
lifetime physical violence, rape, or
stalking by an intimate partner.
• Among the relatively small
number of significant differences
observed between women in the
general population and women in
the military samples, the majority
of these differences indicated
a decreased risk of IPV, contact
sexual violence by an intimate
partner, and stalking for active
duty women, compared to the
general population of women.
• With respect to deployment
history, active duty women who
were deployed during the three
years prior to the survey were
significantly more likely to have
experienced both IPV and contact
sexual violence during that time
period compared to active duty
women who were not deployed.

1

2

Technical Report

IPV and contact sexual violence
are prevalent among women
in the general U.S. population,
among active duty women, and
among wives of active duty men,
with relatively few significant
differences between women in
the general U.S. population and
women in military populations.
To inform prevention efforts, it
is important to understand the
factors that contribute to violence.
Further research would improve
our understanding of the factors
that increase the risk for violence
against women, including factors
that may be shared between the
military and general populations
(e.g., young age, belief in strict
gender roles, marital conflict and
instability, social and cultural
isolation, or inadequate sanctions
for those who perpetrate
violence). Additional research
would be important in improving
our understanding of how
military-specific factors, such as
deployment, might increase risk
(e.g., by examining the impact
of multiple deployments and
deployment in high-conflict
settings). Research could also focus
on the factors that may actually
reduce the risk of violence for
active duty women, such as access
to health care, stable housing,
family support services (e.g., Family
Advocacy Programs), and having
at least one fully employed family
member. Further exploration of risk
and protective factors related to
these forms of violence can inform
future prevention and intervention
efforts across the military and
general populations.

Technical Report

3

4

Technical Report

Technical Report

Introduction

Intimate partner violence (IPV),
sexual violence (SV), and stalking
endanger the safety, health, and
well-being of women and men
across the United States (Black,
2011). Many survivors of these
forms of violence experience lasting
physical and mental health impacts
(e.g., Bonomi, Thompson, Anderson,
Reid, Carrell, Dimer, & Rivara, 2006;
Breiding, Black, & Ryan, 2008). Our
understanding of these forms of
violence has grown substantially
over the years. However, researchers
and practitioners continue to
be challenged in their efforts to
measure and understand the
extent to which these problems
occur nationally and in specific
populations, such as in the military.
To begin to address the need for
ongoing, nationally representative,
and reliable prevalence estimates
for IPV, SV, and stalking, the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention’s (CDC) National Center
for Injury Prevention and Control
launched the National Intimate
Partner and Sexual Violence Survey
(NISVS) in 2010 with support from
the National Institute of Justice
(NIJ) and the Department of
Defense (DoD). NISVS is a nationally
representative random digit dial
telephone survey that collects
information about experiences
of IPV, SV, and stalking among
non-institutionalized English– and
Spanish-speaking women and
men aged 18 years or older in
the United States (Black, Basile,
Breiding, Smith, Walters, Merrick,
Chen, & Stevens, 2011). NISVS

provides critical information to
inform prevention and intervention
efforts to reduce the personal and
public costs associated with these
types of violence.

IPV, SV, and Stalking in
Military Populations
There is limited reliable prevalence
data available with regard to these
forms of violence for military
personnel and their spouses. As of
September 30, 2010, there were
approximately 1.4 million active duty
personnel serving in the U.S. military
(Defense Manpower Data Center
[DMDC], Active Duty Master File
[ADMF], September 2010). Women
are an integral part of the armed
forces with nearly 900,000 women
in military populations, connected
to the military through active duty
service or through marriage to an
active duty service member. Just
over 200,000 active duty military
personnel were women, and over
675,000 women were married to
male service members (DMDC,
ADMF and Active Duty Military
Family File, September 2010).
Women in military populations may
be at increased risk for IPV, SV, and
stalking compared to the women
in the civilian population due to
unique stressors and challenges
within the military population.
These challenges include issues
related to deployment (e.g., multiple
deployments; deployment in
high-conflict settings; reunification
cycles; separation from friends,
family, peers, and other social
networks; and frequent geographic

relocations) (Rentz, Martin, Gibbs,
Clinton-Sherrod, Hardison, &
Marshall, 2006; Taft, Vogt, Marshall,
Panzio, & Niles, 2007). Conversely,
there are a number of factors that
may reduce the risk of IPV, for
example, access to health care,
stable housing, family support
services (e.g., Family Advocacy
Programs), and having at least one
fully employed family member
(Rentz et al., 2006).
Relatively few studies have
directly compared the extent of
IPV in military and non-military
populations (Cronin, 1995; Griffen
& Morgan, 1988; Jones, 2012;
Heyman & Neidig, 1999; Rentz et
al., 2006). Furthermore, most of
these studies evaluated violence
only among married couples using
differing methodologies, differing
measures of abuse, and undefined
time periods. Depending on the
sampling design, survey methods,
and definitions used to measure
IPV, studies have found rates of IPV
among women in military couples
ranging from 13% to 60% (e.g.,
Jones, 2012).
In general, more attention has been
given to factors associated with the
risk of rape in military environments
(e.g., sexual harassment allowed
by military officers, unwanted
sexual advances while on duty and
in sleeping quarters) (e.g., Sadler,
Booth, Cook, & Doebbeling, 2003;
Sadler, Booth, Cook, Torner, &
Doebbeling, 2001) and the physical
and mental health consequences
of rape among victims (Mageun,

5

6

Technical Report

Cohen, Rosch, Kimerling, &
Seal, 2012; Yaeger, Himmelfarb,
Cammack, & Mintz, 2006).
Similar to IPV, few studies have
compared the extent of SV
in military and non-military
populations. However, studies
have measured the prevalence of
sexual assault among military active
duty women. A study designed to
assess the health status of female
veterans found that 23% had been
sexually assaulted while in the
military (Skinner, Kressin, Frayne,
Tripp, Hankin, Miller, & Sullivan,
2000). More recent DoD surveys
conducted in 2006 and 2010 found
that 6.8% and 4.4%, respectively,
of active duty women experienced
unwanted sexual contact in the
12 months prior to being surveyed
(Lipari, Cook, Rock, & Matos, 2006;
Rock, Lipari, Cook, & Hale, 2010).
These surveys have provided
important and much needed
information related to IPV, SV, and
stalking in the military. Such data
are necessary to inform prevention
strategies, the provision of services,
and the development of policies
that can be tailored to protect
the mental and physical health of
active duty women and wives of
active duty men who are charged
with defending national security
and freedom. However, DoD data
are often compared to civilian
data despite significant differences
in demographics between
the populations and differing
methodologies. Comparable data
collected using standard questions
and methods for the military and
civilian populations are important
for understanding the relative
magnitude of these problems.

The Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2000, Public Law
106-65, established the Defense
Task Force on Domestic Violence
to evaluate current programs
and policies associated with
domestic violence in the military
and to formulate a long-term
strategic plan to assist the DoD in
addressing domestic violence. The
Task Force also recommended that
DoD partner with NIJ and CDC to
further DoD’s research agenda to
gather information directly from
victims rather than relying only
on victimization records based
on reported cases to officials and
service providers.
In 2007, DoD established an
Interagency Agreement with NIJ, in
collaboration with CDC, providing
funds to include two military
samples in the first year (2010) of
NISVS. Data collected through CDC’s
NISVS provides reliable information
on the extent of IPV, SV, and stalking
among active duty women and
wives of active duty men that are
directly comparable to the general
population of women in the United
States. Due to limited resources
and the fact that women carry the
heaviest health burden with respect
to these forms of violence overall
(Black et al., 2011), the decision
was made by DoD to include only
women in the military subsamples.

Technical Report

7

8

Technical Report

Technical Report

Methods

The National Intimate Partner and
Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS)
is designed to provide data on
national and state-level prevalence
and characteristics of intimate
partner violence (IPV), sexual
violence (SV), and stalking. The
survey protocol received approval
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB#0920-0822) and
the Institutional Review Board
of Research Triangle Institute,
International (RTI), the contractor
responsible for sampling design,
interviewing, and data collection.

Improved Disclosure
Interviews are conducted by
RTI, on behalf of the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC), in English or Spanish
without obtaining personally
identifiable information. All
interviews are administered
by highly trained female
interviewers to put respondents
at ease to improve disclosure
of victimization experiences.
Respondents are interviewed over
the telephone (versus in person)
to create a social distance to
increase comfort with disclosing
victimization experiences. Following
recommended guidelines from
the World Health Organization
(Sullivan & Cain, 2004; WHO,
2001), a graduated informed
consent procedure is used to
maximize respondent safety, to
build rapport, and to provide
participants the opportunity to
make an informed decision about
whether participation in the survey

would be in their best interest. Of
particular importance to the military
population is that NISVS is a CDC
survey. This provides an additional
buffer for active duty women
and wives of active duty men to
improve trust and reduce concerns
regarding disclosure of this sensitive
information and how it might be
used. Furthermore, the survey does
not link personally identifiable
information to data gathered in the
survey, providing another level of
protection to all participants.
Interviewers also establish a safety
plan and follow established distress
protocols, including frequent
check-ins with participants during
the interview to assess their
emotional state and determine
whether the interview should
proceed. In addition, interviewers
remind respondents that they can
skip any question and can stop the
interview at any time. At the end
of the interview, respondents are
provided telephone numbers for
the National Domestic Violence
Hotline and the Rape, Abuse and
Incest National Network.

Sampling frames
In addition to randomly selected
individuals from the general U.S.
population, the 2010 NISVS included
randomly selected active duty
women in the Army, Navy, Marine
Corps, and Air Force, and randomly
selected wives of active duty
personnel in each branch. For this
report, data gathered from women
aged 18 to 59 years in the general
population sample were used for

comparisons with women in the
military populations.
The sampling frame for the active
duty women included women
who had provided a home or work
telephone number to the Active
Duty Master File (ADMF) and were
not deployed abroad at the time
the survey was conducted. The
sampling frame for the wives of
active duty military personnel
included women who had provided
a home or work phone number to
the Defense Enrollment Eligibility
Reporting System (DEERS) file. The
Defense Manpower Data Center
(DMDC) maintains both the ADMF
and DEERS files and provided the
randomly selected samples as
described above. A small number of
women (n=8) who were both active
duty and wives of active duty men
were represented in both frames.
However, only one such interview
was conducted; the resulting
interview data were represented in
the prevalence estimates for both
active duty women and wives of
active duty men. It is also important
to note that approximately 5% of
the women selected from the DEERS
file were not married to active duty
men at the time of the survey (e.g.,
divorced, separated).

Response and
Cooperation Rates
The comparably calculated
weighted response rates (the
proportion of randomly selected
individuals who were interviewed)
were 27.5% for the general
population, 26.5% for active duty

9

10

Technical Report

women, and 29.2% for wives
of active duty men. The overall
cooperation rate among all
participants in the 2010 survey (the
proportion of people who agreed
to participate in the interview
among those who were contacted
and determined to be eligible)
was 81.3%. The survey methods
for all samples were identical; data
were collected simultaneously and
consistently across the general and
military populations in the first two
quarters of 2010.

Violence Domains Assessed
The NISVS questionnaire includes
behaviorally specific questions
that assess violence by an
intimate partner (which includes
current or former cohabitating
or non-cohabitating romantic
or sexual partners), SV by any
perpetrator, and stalking by any
perpetrator. Questions are asked
for three time periods, including
over the lifetime, during the three
years prior to the survey, and in
the 12 months prior to the
interview. IPV includes physical
violence, psychological aggression,
sexual violence, and stalking.
Stalking is defined as experiencing
multiple harassing or threatening
tactics by the same perpetrator
or a single tactic multiple times
by the same perpetrator that
made the respondent very
fearful or made them believe
that they or someone close to
them would be harmed or killed
as a result of the perpetrator’s
behavior. SV measured in NISVS
includes completed or attempted
rape, completed alcohol- or
drug-facilitated penetration, sexual
coercion, being made to penetrate
someone else, unwanted sexual
contact experiences, and unwanted
non-contact sexual experiences.

More information on the 2010
NISVS Summary Report can
be found at (http://www.cdc.gov/
ViolencePrevention/NISVS/index.html).
This report varies from earlier NISVS
reports with respect to the way
that specific violence domains were
constructed. For purposes of this
report, the domain of SV includes
only sexual violence that involved
contact. Unwanted non-contact
sexual experiences were excluded.
This is designed to be consistent
with DoD regulations and
definitions related to sexual assault
and will be referred to as “contact
sexual violence” throughout
this report. This definition is also
consistent with definitions of
“unwanted sexual contact” used
in earlier DoD reports (Lipari,
Cook, Rock, & Matos, 2006; Rock,
Lipari, Cook, & Hale, 2010). While
the CDC definitions of unwanted
sexual contact include being
made to penetrate someone else,
this outcome did not contribute
substantively to the prevalence
of contact sexual violence among
women because the number of
women who indicated they were
made to penetrate someone else
was negligible.
A list of NISVS victimization questions
used in this report can be found in
Appendix A.

Deployment
Because deployment typically
lasts from 6 to 12 months with
no physical interactions between
spouses, questions were asked
about experiences during the three
years prior to the survey (in addition
to the 12-month and lifetime time
periods) to increase the likelihood
that experiences relevant to spouses
included time periods when they

were in the same geographic
area. To provide comparable data,
violence experienced during all
three time periods was also asked
of respondents from the general
U.S. population. Active duty women
were asked about their recent
deployment history (whether or not
they had been deployed at any time
during the three years prior to the
survey and the length in months of
such deployment) while wives of
active duty military personnel were
asked about their spouse’s recent
deployment history.

Data Analysis
To be included in the prevalence
of IPV, contact sexual violence, or
stalking, the respondent must have
experienced at least one behavior
within the relevant violence domain
during the time frame of reference
(during the lifetime, in the three
years prior to the survey, or in the
12 months prior to the survey).
The denominators in prevalence
calculations include respondents
who answered the specific question
or responded with “don’t know”
or “refused.” Missing data (cases
where all questions for constructing
an outcome of interest were not
fully administered) were excluded
from analyses. All analyses were
conducted using SUDAAN™
statistical software for analyzing
data collected through complex
sample design.
For the general population, the
estimated number of victims
affected by a particular form of
violence is based on U.S. population
estimates from the census
projections by state, sex, age, and
race/ethnicity (http://www.census.
gov/popest/states/asrh/). For the
military samples, the estimated
number of victims affected by a

Technical Report

particular form of violence is based
on data from the DMDC for the
total in each population by service
branch, age, race, ethnicity, and for
the active duty sample, rank.

Precision, Reliability,
and Confidence in
Prevalence estimates
As prevalence and population
estimates were based on a sample
population, there is a degree of
sampling error associated with
these estimates. Confidence
intervals provide a statistical
measure of the precision of a
given estimate. The smaller the
sample upon which an estimate
is based, the less precise the
estimate becomes and the wider
the confidence intervals become,
making it more difficult to
distinguish the findings from what
could have occurred by chance.
The relative standard error (RSE)
is one measure of an estimate’s
reliability. The RSE was calculated for
all estimates in this report. If the RSE
was greater than 30%, the estimate
was deemed unreliable and is
not reported. Consideration was
also given to the case count. If the
estimate was based on a numerator
< 20, the estimate was also deemed
unreliable and not reported.
Tables where specific estimates are
missing due to high RSEs or small
case counts are presented in full
with unreliable estimates noted by
dashes so that the reader can clearly
see what was assessed and where
data gaps remain.

Odds Ratios
Odds ratios are generated from
logistic regression models that
compared the prevalence of specific
forms of violence among women

in the general U.S. population
to prevalence within each of the
military samples (active duty
women and wives of active duty
men) for each of the three time
periods (lifetime, in the three years
prior to the survey, and in the year
prior to the survey). The odds ratios
are statistically significant at the
<.05 level if the confidence interval
does not include one. An odds ratio
that is significantly greater than one
means that women in that group
are more likely to have experienced
the outcome of interest during the
specified time period; an odds ratio
that is significantly less than one
means that women in that group
are less likely to have experienced
the outcome of interest during the
specified time period.
Throughout this report, there
are some instances where the
prevalence estimates are higher
among active duty women
than women in the general U.S.
population but the adjusted
odds ratios indicate that active
duty women are at lower risk for
victimization. This discrepancy
is likely explained by differences
in the age distributions of these
groups of women. Because IPV, SV,
and stalking are more common
among younger persons and
active duty women are younger
than the general population,
and because the difference in
victimization in the active duty
and general population vary
across age groups, it is important
to control for age differences
when making comparisons across
groups. Therefore, we used logistic
regression models to control for
age. The results from these models,
the adjusted odds ratios, are used
throughout this report to assess
significant differences across groups.

Adjustments for Differences in
Age and Marital Status
Overall, military populations are
much younger than the general U.S.
population. Nearly 62% of active
duty women in this study were
between 18 and 29 years of age and
45.9% of wives of active duty men
were between 18 and 29 years of
age, compared to 28.8% of women
in the general population. With
respect to marital status, 46.3% of
women in the general population
and 50.5% of active duty women
were married. Odds ratios were
adjusted to address population
differences in age and marital status
to make comparisons between the
general U.S. population of women
and active duty women more
comparable. Odds ratios involving
wives of active duty men were not
adjusted for marital status because
this was a specific component of the
sampling frame.
It is important to note that although
some prevalence estimates may
appear to differ across groups, the
statistical tests that adjust for age
and, for active duty women, marital
status, are the more appropriate
results to use. Therefore, adjusted
odds ratios are used to assess
significant differences throughout
this report.
For additional details about
NISVS methodology, please see
the NISVS: 2010 Summary Report
(Black et al., 2011).

11

12

Technical Report

Technical Report

Key findings

Contact Sexual Violence
by Any Perpetrator
Appendix B includes detailed
information regarding the
prevalence of contact sexual
violence in the general U.S.
population of women, active
duty women, and wives of active
duty men, including results by
time frame, type of perpetrator,
and deployment history (Tables
1 through 6). Some key findings
related to contact sexual violence
are summarized below.

• Approximately 40% of women

in the general population aged
18 to 59 years have experienced
lifetime contact sexual violence.
Similarly, 36.3% of active duty
women and 32.8% of wives
of active duty men have
experienced lifetime contact
sexual violence. (Table 1)
• There were no significant
differences in the lifetime, threeyear, or one-year prevalence of
contact sexual violence between
women from the general
population and either active duty
women or wives of active duty
men. (Table 1)
• Active duty women who were
deployed in the three years prior
to the survey were significantly
more likely to experience lifetime
and three-year contact sexual
violence, compared to active duty
women who were not deployed
during that time. (Table 3)
• There was no significant
difference in the lifetime
prevalence of contact sexual

violence between wives whose
spouses were deployed in the
three years prior to the survey and
wives whose spouses were not
deployed during that time. Threeyear and one-year prevalence
estimates were not reportable
with a relative standard error
(RSE) greater than 30% or cell size
below 20. (Table 5)

Stalking by Any
Perpetrator
Detailed information regarding the
prevalence of stalking in the general
U.S. population of women, active
duty women, and wives of active
duty men, including results by time
frame, type of perpetrator, and
deployment history, can be found in
Tables 7 through 12 in Appendix B.
The key findings related to stalking
are summarized below.

• Approximately 1 in 5 women

(19.1%) in the general population
aged 18 to 59 years have
experienced stalking during
their lifetime, compared to
approximately 1 in 9 active
duty women (11.4%) and
approximately 1 in 7 wives of
active duty men (14.6%). (Table 7)
• Active duty women were
significantly less likely to experience
lifetime, three-year, and one-year
stalking, compared to women
from the general population.
There were no significant
differences in the prevalence of
stalking between wives of active
duty men and women from the
general population. (Table 7)

• There were no significant

differences in the lifetime,
three-year, and one-year stalking
prevalence between active duty
women deployed in the three
years prior to the survey and
active duty women who were not
deployed in the three years prior
to the survey. (Table 9)
• Similar to active duty women,
there was no significant difference
in the lifetime prevalence of
stalking between wives of active
duty men who were deployed
in the three years prior to the
survey and wives whose spouses
were not deployed during that
time. Three-year and one-year
prevalence estimates were not
reportable with an RSE greater
than 30% or cell size below 20.
(Table 11)

Intimate Partner
Violence
Psychological Aggression by
an Intimate Partner
Detailed information regarding
the prevalence of psychological
aggression by an intimate partner
in the general U.S. population
of women, active duty women,
and wives of active duty men,
including results by time frame
and deployment history, can be
found in Tables 13 through 15
in Appendix B. Key findings are
summarized below.

• Approximately 57% of women in

the general population aged 18 to
59 years experienced psychological
aggression in their lifetime,

13

14

Technical Report

compared to 53.7% of active
duty women and 48.6% of wives
of active duty men. (Table 13)
• Active duty women were
significantly less likely to
experience lifetime, three-year,
and one-year psychological
aggression by an intimate partner,
compared to women from the
general population. For wives
of active duty men, there were
no significant differences in the
lifetime, three-year, and oneyear prevalence of psychological
aggression by an intimate partner,
compared to women from the
general population. (Table 13)
• Active duty women who were
deployed during the three
years prior to the survey were
significantly more likely to
experience lifetime psychological
aggression by an intimate partner,
compared to active duty women
who were not deployed during
the three years prior to the
survey. There were no significant
differences by deployment
history in the three-year and oneyear prevalence of psychological
aggression. (Table 14)
• For wives of active duty men,
there were no significant
differences by deployment history
in the lifetime, three-year, or oneyear prevalence of psychological
aggression by an intimate partner.
(Table 15)

Physical Violence by an
Intimate Partner
Detailed information on the
prevalence of physical violence
by an intimate partner, including
results by time frame, severity,
and deployment history, can be
found in Tables 16 through 21 in
Appendix B. In summary,

• Nearly 36% of women in the

general population aged 18 to 59
years experienced lifetime physical
violence by an intimate partner,
compared to 28.4% of active duty
women and 26.9% of wives of
active duty men. (Table 16)

• Active duty women were

significantly less likely to
experience three-year, and
one-year physical violence by an
intimate partner, compared to the
general population. There were
no significant differences in the
lifetime, three-year, and one-year
prevalence of physical violence
among wives of active duty
men, compared to the general
population. (Table 16)

• Active duty women who were

deployed during the three
years prior to the survey were
significantly more likely to
experience lifetime physical
violence by an intimate partner
compared to active duty women
who were not deployed during
the three years prior to the
survey. There was no significant
difference in the three-year
prevalence by deployment
history. The one-year prevalence
estimate was not reportable with
an RSE greater than 30% or cell
size below 20. (Table 18)

• There were no significant

differences in the lifetime
prevalence of physical violence
among wives of active duty men
who had been deployed during
the three years prior to the
survey compared to wives whose
spouses had not been deployed.
The three-year and one-year
prevalence estimates were not
reportable with an RSE greater
than 30% or cell size below 20.
(Table 19)

Physical Violence, Rape, or
Stalking by an Intimate Partner
Detailed information on the
prevalence of physical violence,
rape, or stalking by an intimate
partner, including results by time
frame and deployment history, can
be found in Tables 22 through 24 in
Appendix B. In summary,

• Nearly 40% of women in the

general population aged 18
to 59 years, 31.5% of active
duty women, and 29.5% of
wives of active duty men have
experienced physical violence,
rape, or stalking by an intimate
partner during their lifetime.
(Table 22)
• Active duty women were
significantly less likely to
experience lifetime, three-year, or
one-year physical violence, rape,
or stalking by an intimate partner,
compared to women from the
general population. There were
no significant differences in the
lifetime, three-year, and one-year
prevalence of physical violence,
rape, or stalking by an intimate
partner for wives of active duty
men, compared to women from
the general population. (Table 22)

Technical Report

• Active duty women who were

deployed in the three years prior
to the survey were significantly
more likely to experience lifetime
and three-year physical violence,
rape, or stalking by an intimate
partner, compared to those who
were not deployed in the three
years prior to the survey. (Table 23)
• There were no significant
differences in the lifetime
prevalence of physical violence,
rape, or stalking by an intimate
partner between wives whose
spouses were deployed in the
past three years and those whose
spouses were not deployed
during that time. The threeyear and one-year prevalence
estimates were not reportable
due to an RSE greater than 30% or
cell size below 20. (Table 24)

15

16

Technical Report

Technical Report

Summary
These findings provide further
evidence that intimate partner
violence (IPV), as well as contact
sexual violence and stalking by
any perpetrator, are prevalent in
the civilian and military female
populations in the United States.
In general, the prevalence of these
forms of violence were similar
among active duty women, wives
of active duty men, and women
in the general U.S. population;
after controlling for age and
marital status, the majority of odds
ratios were at or near 1.0 with no
statistically significant differences
across groups. Significant
differences, however, were observed
for 24 of the 68 comparisons tested
across groups. These significant
findings indicated a decreased risk
of IPV, contact sexual violence by
an intimate partner, or stalking for
active duty women compared to the
general population of women. In
contrast, for 9 of the 40 comparisons
tested across deployment status,
significantly increased risks for IPV
or contact sexual violence were
observed for active duty women
who had been deployed at some
point during the three years prior to
the survey, compared to those who
had not been deployed during that
time period.

17

18

Technical Report

Technical Report

Discussion

Because of the burden that these
forms of violence place on women’s
physical and emotional health,
additional research may help to
improve our understanding of the
factors that increase the risk for
violence among women that may
be shared between the military
and general populations. Examples
include further exploration of the
role of demographic differences (e.g.,
education, socioeconomic status,
race/ethnicity) and other factors (e.g.,
alcohol use, belief in strict gender
roles, marital conflict and instability,
and inadequate sanctions for those
who perpetrate violence).
Additional research regarding
factors related specifically
to military service that may
potentially influence risk would
help to further examine the
specific aspects of deployment
that contribute to risk for violence.
For example, future studies may
examine factors such as when the
victimization took place relative
to deployment, the nature of the
victimization, and the type and
number of deployments, including
whether deployment occurred in
high-conflict settings. The results
from these studies could help
ensure that appropriate prevention
strategies and responses are
in place before, during, and
after deployment. Additionally,
it is important to improve our
understanding of the factors that
may reduce the risk for violence
among active duty women, for
example, access to health care,
secure housing, family support

services (e.g., Family Advocacy
Programs), and having at least one
fully employed family member.
Such research would allow a
more thorough exploration of
the differences between civilian
and military populations and
could improve prevention practices
for both.
The findings in this report are
subject to several limitations.
Despite substantial efforts to make
respondents feel comfortable, it is
possible that respondents who are
currently in violent relationships
may choose not to participate
or choose not to disclose their
victimization experiences because
of safety or other concerns.
Similarly, some victims may not
be comfortable with disclosing
such sensitive information.
Among the military populations
there might also be concerns
about the potential ramifications
that disclosing may have on
their spouse’s status within the
military. Other limitations include
a relatively small sample size for
the military populations and not
including active duty males or male
spouses of active duty females.
Because this report provides the
first information that allows direct
comparisons between women in
the general population and women
in military populations, additional
research is needed to confirm
and extend these findings. Future
collaborative surveys among
federal agencies on this topic
should focus on including larger

sample sizes, examining subgroup
differences as described above,
and including additional questions
to provide more detail related to
military-specific issues.
Despite these limitations, the high
prevalence of intimate partner
violence (IPV), sexual violence
(SV), and stalking observed across
groups underscores the need for
effective prevention strategies.
The data in this report can be
used to inform future prevention
and intervention efforts, and
work toward addressing the
beliefs, attitudes, and messages
that may create a climate that
condones IPV, SV, and stalking.
Intimate partner violence,
sexual violence, and stalking are
pervasive problems that transcend
boundaries across the military and
general populations. Preventing
these forms of violence before
they begin; stopping further
harm to victims by providing
support, services, legal assistance,
protection orders, and shelters; and
holding perpetrators accountable
are important components
necessary to address these
important public health problems.

19

20

Technical Report

Technical Report

References
Black, M. C. (2011). Intimate partner
violence and adverse health
consequences: Implications for
clinicians. American Journal of
Lifestyle Medicine, 5(5), 428-439.
Black, M. C., Basile, K. C., Breiding, M.
J., Smith, S. G., Walters, M. L., Merrick,
M. T., Chen, J., & Stevens, M. R. (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.
Breiding, M. J., Black, M. C., & Ryan,
G. W. (2008). Chronic disease and
health risk behaviors associated with
intimate partner violence—18 U.S.
states/territories, 2005. Annuals of
Epidemiology, 18(7), 538-544.
Bonomi, A.E., Thompson, R.S.,

Anderson, M., Reid, R.J., Carrell,

D., Dimer, J.A., & Rivara, F.P. (2006).

Intimate partner violence and

women’s physical, mental, and social

functioning. American Journal of

Preventive Medicine, 30, 458-466.

Cronin, C. (1995). Adolescent reports

of parental spousal violence in

military and civilian families.

Journal of Interpersonal Violence,

10(1), 117-122.

Griffin, W. A., & Morgan, A. R. (1988).

Conflict in maritally distressed

military couples. American Journal

of Family Therapy, 16(1), 14-22.

Jones, A. D. (2012). Intimate partner

violence in military couples: A review

of the literature. Aggression and

Violent Behavior, 17(2), 147-157.

Heyman, R.E., & Neidig, P.H. (1999.)

A comparison of spousal aggression

prevalence rates in U.S. Army and

civilian representative samples.

Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 67, 239-242.

Lipari, R. N., Cook, P. J., Rock, L. M., &
Matos, K. (2006). Gender Relations
Survey of Active Duty Members.
Washington, DC: Department of
Defense. Retrieved from http://www.
sapr.mil/index.php/research.

Sullivan, C. M., & Cain, D. (2004).

Ethical and safety considerations

when obtaining information from or

about battered women for research

purposes. Journal of Interpersonal

Violence, 19(5), 603-618.

Maguen, S., Cohen, B., Ren, L., Bosch,
J., Kimerling, R., & Seal, K. (2012).
Gender differences in military sexual
trauma and mental health diagnoses
among Iraq and Afghanistan veterans
with posttraumatic stress disorder.
Women’s Health Issues, 22(1), e61-66.

Taft, C. T., Vogt, D. S., Marshall, A.

D., Panuzio, J., & Niles, B. L. (2007).

Aggression among combat veterans:

Relationships with combat exposure

and symptoms of posttraumatic

stress disorder, dysphoria, and

anxiety. Journal of Traumatic Stress,

20(2), 135-145.

Rentz, E. D., Martin, S. L., Gibbs, D. A.,
Clinton-Sherrod, M., Hardison, J., &
Marshall, S. W. (2006). Family violence
in the military: A review of the
literature. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse,
7(2), 93-108.
Rock, L. M., Lipari, R. N., Cook, P. J., &
Hale, A. J. (2010). 2010 Gender Relations
Survey of Active Duty Members.
Washington, DC: Department of
Defense. Retrieved from http://
www.sapr.mil/index.php/research.
Sadler, A. G., Booth, B. M., Cook, B. L.,
& Doebbeling, B. N. (2003). Factors
associated with women's risk of
rape in the military environment.
American Journal of Industrial
Medicine, 43(3), 262-273.
Sadler, A. G., Booth, B. M., Cook, B.
L., Torner, J. C., & Doebbeling, B.N.
(2001). The military environment:
Risk factors for women's non-fatal
assaults. Journal of Occupational
Environmental Medicine, 43(4),
325-334.
Skinner, K. M., Kressin, N., Frayne, S.,
Tripp, T. J., Hankin, C. S., Miller, D. R., &
Sullivan, L. M. (2000).The prevalence
of military sexual assault among
female veterans’ administration
outpatients. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 15(3), 291-310.

Teten, A., Schumacher, J., Taft, C.,

Stanley, M., Kent, T., Bailey, S. D., Dunn,

N. J., & White, D. L. (2010). Intimate
partner aggression perpetrated
and sustained by male Afghanistan,
Iraq, and Vietnam Veterans with and
without posttraumatic stress disorder.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25,
1612-1630.
U.S. Department of Defense. (2010).
Active duty military personnel
strengths by regional area and by
country. Retrieved from http://
siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/
MILITARY/history/hst1009.pdf.
U.S. Department of Defense, Office
of the Undersecretary of Defense,
Personnel, and Readiness. (2006).
FY 2006 population representation
in military services. Retrieved from
http://prhome.defense.gov/RFM/
MPP/ACCESSION%20POLICY/
PopRep_FY06/.
World Health Organization. (2001).
Putting women first: Ethical and safety
recommendations for research on
domestic violence against women.
Geneva, Switzerland: Department
of Gender and Women’s Health.
Yaeger, D., Himmelfarb, N., Cammack,
A., & Mintz, J. (2006). DSM-IV
diagnosed posttraumatic stress
disorder in women Veterans with
and without military sexual trauma.
Journal of General Internal Medicine,
21(S3), 565-569.

21

22

Technical Report

Technical Report

Appendix A: Victimization Questions

Contact Sexual Violence

How many people have ever…

• kissed you in a sexual way? Remember, we are only asking about things that you didn’t
want to happen.
• fondled or grabbed your sexual body parts?

When you were drunk, high, drugged,
or passed out and unable to consent,
how many people have ever…

• had vaginal sex with you? By vaginal sex, we mean that a man or boy put his penis in your vagina.
• made you receive anal sex, meaning they put their penis into your anus?
• made you perform oral sex, meaning that they put their penis in your mouth or made you
penetrate their vagina or anus with your mouth?

How many people have ever used physical
force or threats to physically harm you to
make you…

How many people have ever used physical
force or threats of physical harm to…
How many people have you had vaginal, oral,
or anal sex with after they pressured you by…

• have vaginal sex?
• receive anal sex?
• make you perform oral sex?
• make you receive oral sex?
• put their fingers or an object in your vagina or anus?
• try to have vaginal, oral, or anal sex with you, but sex did not happen?
• doing things like telling you lies, making promises about the future they knew were untrue,
threatening to end your relationship, or threatening to spread rumors about you?

• wearing you down by repeatedly asking for sex, or showing they were unhappy?
• using their authority over you, for example, your boss or your teacher?

Stalking Tactics
How many people have ever…

• watched or followed you from a distance, or spied on you with a listening device, camera, or GPS
[global positioning system]?

• approached you or showed up in places, such as your home, workplace, or school when you didn’t
want them to be there?

• left strange or potentially threatening items for you to find?
• sneaked into your home or car and did things to scare you by letting you know they had been there?
• left you unwanted messages? This includes text or voice messages.
• made unwanted phone calls to you? This includes hang-up calls.
• sent you unwanted emails, instant messages, or sent messages through websites like MySpace
or Facebook?

• left you cards, letters, flowers, or presents when they knew you didn’t want them to?

23

24

Technical Report

Psychological Aggression

How many of your romantic or sexual
partners have ever…

• acted very angry toward you in a way that seemed dangerous?
• told you that you were a loser, a failure, or not good enough?
• called you names like ugly, fat, crazy, or stupid?
• insulted, humiliated, or made fun of you in front of others?
• told you that no one else would want you?
• tried to keep you from seeing or talking to your family or friends?
• made decisions for you that should have been yours to make, such as the clothes you wear, things
you eat, or the friends you have?
• kept track of you by demanding to know where you were and what you were doing?
• made threats to physically harm you?
• threatened to hurt him- or herself or commit suicide when he or she was upset with you?
• threatened to hurt a pet or threatened to take a pet away from you?
• threatened to hurt someone you love?
• hurt someone you love?
• {if applicable} threatened to take your children away from you?
• kept you from leaving the house when you wanted to go?
• kept you from having money for your own use?
• destroyed something that was important to you?
• said things like “If I can’t have you, then no one can”?

Physical Violence
How many of your romantic or sexual
partners have ever…

• slapped you?
• pushed or shoved you?
• hit you with a fist or something hard?
• kicked you?
• hurt you by pulling your hair?
• slammed you against something?
• tried to hurt you by choking or suffocating you?
• beaten you?
• burned you on purpose?
• used a knife or gun on you?

Technical Report

25

26

Technical Report

Technical Report

Appendix b: Tables and figures
Contact Sexual Violence
Table 1
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence1 for lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and
in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population, Active
Duty Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men — nISVS 2010§
Active Duty Women2

Women in the General
U.S. Population2
Time
Frame

Active Duty Women
Compared to
General Population

Wives of Active Duty Men2

Wives of Active Duty
Men Compared to
General Population

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR6

95% CI3

Lifetime

40.3

38.4, 42.1

35,396,000

36.3

33.6, 39.0

68,000

0.9

0.8, 1.1

32.8

30.3, 35.3

228,000

1.0

0.8, 1.1

3 Year

7.7

6.2, 9.1

6,725,000

11.3

9.5, 13.1

23,000

1.1

0.8, 1.4

6.6

5.3, 7.9

48,000

1.2

0.8, 1.8

12 Months

5.2

4.4, 6.1

4,598,000

5.6

4.2, 6.9

10,000

0.8

0.5, 1.1

3.6

2.6, 4.6

25,000

0.9

0.6, 1.4

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups
because they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Contact sexual violence is defined as completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration, being made
to penetrate someone else, sexual coercion, and other unwanted sexual contact experiences.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells might not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and active duty women, controlled for age and marital status.
6
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and wives of active duty men, controlled for age.
§

27

28

Technical Report

Table 2
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence1 for lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the
12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population, Active Duty Women,
and Wives of Active Duty Men by Type of Perpetrator — nISVS 2010§
Time
Frame

Type of
Perpetrator

Active Duty Women2

Women in the General
U.S. Population2

Active Duty Women
Compared to
General Population

Wives of Active Duty Men2

Wives of Active Duty
Men Compared to
General Population

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR6

95% CI3

Lifetime

20.0

18.4, 21.5

16,404,000

12.5

10.5, 14.5

21,000

0.6†

0.5, 0.8

13.3

11.4, 15.2

84,000

0.8

0.6, 1.0

3 Years

3.7

2.7, 4.7

3,196,000

4.3

3.0, 5.5

8,000

0.7

0.4, 1.1

3.3

2.3, 4.2

23,000

1.2

0.7, 2.1

12 Months

2.8

2.2, 3.4

2,454,000

2.3

1.4, 3.2

4,000

0.6†

0.4, 1.0‡

2.3

1.5, 3.1

16,000

1.0

0.5, 1.7

Lifetime

26.7

25.0, 28.4

22,206,000

26.3

23.8, 28.8

47,000

1.1

0.9, 1.3

23.4

21.1, 25.7

153,000

1.0

0.9, 1.2

3 Years

4.0

2.9, 5.2

3,518,000

6.1

4.7, 7.5

12,000

1.3

0.9, 1.9

3.2

2.2, 4.1

22,000

1.1

0.7, 1.9

12 Months

2.5

1.9, 3.2

2,217,000

2.9

1.8, 3.9

5,000

0.9

0.6, 1.5

*

*

*

*

*

Intimate

7

Non-intimate

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because
they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
Contact sexual violence is defined as completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration, being made to
penetrate someone else, sexual coercion, and other unwanted sexual contact experiences.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and active duty women, controlled for age and marital status.
6
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and wives of active duty men, controlled for age.
7
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
†
Significantly lower prevalence, compared to women in the general population, p < .05.
‡
Confidence interval rounded to nearest tenth, actual interval does not include 1.0.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

1

Table 3
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the
12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women2 by Deployment History — nISVS 2010§
Total

Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Not Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Time
Frame

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

36.4

33.7, 39.1

68,000

38.7

35.0, 42.4

39,000

33.7

29.7, 37.7

29,000

1.3†

1.0‡, 1.7

3 Years

11.3

9.4, 13.1

22,000

12.6

10.0, 15.3

14,000

9.7

7.2, 12.2

9,000

1.6†

1.0‡, 2.5

12 Months

5.6

4.2, 7.0

10,000

5.7

3.8, 7.7

6,000

5.4

3.4, 7.4

5,000

1.3

0.7, 2.3

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because they
adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Contact sexual violence includes completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration, being made
to penetrate someone else, sexual coercion, and other unwanted sexual contact experiences.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between active duty women who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those who had not been
deployed during that time, controlled for age and marital status.
†
Significantly higher prevalence among active duty women who were deployed during the 3 years prior to the survey compared to active duty women who
were not deployed during that time period, p < .05.
‡
Confidence interval rounded to nearest tenth, actual interval does not include 1.0.
§

Technical Report

Table 4
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the
12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women2 by Deployment History and Type of
Perpetrator — nISVS 2010§
Total
Time
Frame

Type of
Perpetrator

Intimate6

Non-intimate

Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Not Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

12.6

10.6, 14.6

21,000

13.7

10.8, 16.5

13,000

11.4

8.6, 14.1

9,000

1.3

0.9, 1.9

3 Years

4.3

3.1, 5.5

8,000

4.5

2.8, 6.3

5,000

4.0

2.3, 5.7

4,000

1.3

0.7, 2.6

12 Months

2.3

1.4, 3.2

4,000

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Lifetime

26.3

23.8, 28.9

47,000

27.9

24.5, 31.4

27,000

24.4

20.8, 28.1

20,000

1.2

0.9, 1.6

3 Years

6.1

4.7, 7.5

12,000

7.0

4.9, 9.0

7,000

5.1

3.2, 7.0

5,000

1.6†

1.0‡, 2.7

12 Months

2.9

1.9, 3.9

5,000

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because
they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Contact sexual violence includes completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration, being made to
penetrate someone else, sexual coercion, and other unwanted sexual contact experiences.
2
Age range: 18–59 years of age.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between active duty women who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those who had not been deployed during that
time, controlled for age and marital status.
6
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
†
Significantly higher prevalence among active duty women who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey compared those who were not, p < .05.
‡
Confidence interval rounded to nearest tenth, actual interval does not include 1.0.
§

Table 5
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey,
and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives2 of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s
Deployment History — nISVS 2010§
Total

Spouse Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Not Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Deployed
Compared to Not Deployed

Time
Frame

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

32.9

30.4, 35.4

223,000

32.7

29.9, 35.6

173,000

33.5

28.2, 38.8

50,000

0.9

0.7, 1.2

3 Years

6.8

5.4, 8.1

48,000

7.3

5.7, 8.9

40,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

3.7

2.7, 4.7

25,000

4.1

2.9, 5.4

22,000

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because
they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Contact sexual violence includes completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration, being made
to penetrate someone else, sexual coercion, and other unwanted sexual contact experiences.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between wives of active duty men who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and wives whose spouse had not been deployed
during that time period, controlled for age.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

29

30

Technical Report

Table 6
Prevalence of Contact Sexual Violence1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the
12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives2 of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s Deployment History
and Type of Perpetrator — nISVS 2010§
Total
Type of
Perpetrator

Intimate6

Non-intimate

Spouse Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Not Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Deployed
Compared to Not Deployed

Time
Frame

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

13.3

11.4, 15.2

84,000

13.4

11.2, 15.5

66,000

13.1

9.2, 16.9

18,000

0.9

0.6, 1.4

3 Years

3.3

2.3, 4.2

23,000

3.5

2.3, 4.6

19,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

2.3

1.5, 3.1

16,000

2.5

1.5, 3.5

13,000

*

*

*

*

*

Lifetime

23.4

21.1, 25.7

153,000

23.2

20.6, 25.8

118,000

24.1

19.1, 29.0

35,000

0.9

0.7, 1.3

3 Years

3.2

2.2, 4.1

22,000

3.7

2.6, 4.9

20,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because they adjust
for potential differences across groups as described below.
Contact sexual violence includes completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration, being made to penetrate
someone else, sexual coercion, and other unwanted sexual contact experiences.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between wives of active duty men who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and wives whose spouse had not been deployed during that time
period, controlled for age.
6
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

1

Technical Report

31

Stalking

Table 7
Prevalence of Stalking1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior
to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population, Active Duty Women, and Wives
of Active Duty Men — nISVS 2010§
Active Duty Women2

Women in the General
U.S. Population2
Time Frame

Active Duty Women
Compared to General
Population

Wives of Active Duty Men2

Wives of Active Duty
Men Compared to
General Population

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR6

95% CI3

Lifetime

19.1

17.7, 20.5

16,786,000

11.4

9.7, 13.1

23,000

0.6†

0.5, 0.7

14.6

12.8, 16.4

106,000

0.9

0.7, 1.1

3 Years

7.6

6.2, 9.1

6,596,000

5.8

4.5, 7.0

12,000

0.6

†

0.4, 0.9

4.8

3.7, 6.0

35,000

0.9

0.6, 1.4

12 Months

5.4

4.5, 6.2

4,712,000

3.3

2.4, 4.2

7,000

0.5†

0.3, 0.7

3.1

2.2, 4.0

23,000

0.8

0.6, 1.3

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because they adjust
for potential differences across groups as described below.
Stalking is defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics in which the victim experienced multiple tactics or a single tactic multiple times and felt very fearful
or believed they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Stalking tactics include unwanted phone calls, voice
or text messages, hang-ups; unwanted emails, instant messages, messages through social media; unwanted cards, letters, flowers, or presents; watching or following
from a distance; spying with a listening device, camera, or global positioning system; approaching or showing up in places such as the victim's home, workplace, or school
when it was unwanted; leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find; and sneaking into the victim’s home or car and doing things to scare the victim
or let the victim know the perpetrator had been there.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and active duty women, controlled for age and marital status.
6
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and wives of active duty men, controlled for age.
†
Significantly lower prevalence, compared to women in the general population, p < .05.
§

1

32

Technical Report

Table 8
Prevalence of Stalking1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to
the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population, Active Duty Women, and Wives of Active
Duty Men by Type of Perpetrator — nISVS 2010§
Active Duty Women2

Women in the General
U.S. Population2
Type of
Perpetrator

Intimate7

Non-intimate

Time
Frame

Active Duty Women
Compared to
General Population

Wives of Active Duty Men2

Wives of Active Duty
Men Compared to
General Population

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR6

95% CI3

Lifetime

13.4

12.1, 14.6

11,510,000

6.5

5.2, 7.8

13,000

0.5†

0.4, 0.7

8.6

7.1, 10.1

61,000

0.9

0.7, 1.2

3 Years

4.7

3.5, 5.8

3,957,000

3.0

2.1, 3.9

6,000

†

0.5

0.3, 0.8

2.2

1.4, 3.0

16,000

0.9

0.5, 1.6

12 Months

3.6

2.9, 4.4

3,191,000

1.7

1.1, 2.4

3,000

0.4†

0.3, 0.7

*

*

*

*

*

Lifetime

6.4

5.5, 7.2

5,458,000

3.7

2.6, 4.7

7,000

0.6†

0.5, 0.9

5.5

4.3, 6.7

39,000

0.9

0.7, 1.2

3 Years

1.9

1.3, 2.6

1,653,000

2.1

1.3, 2.9

4,000

0.9

0.5, 1.7

2.0

1.2, 2.7

14,000

0.7

0.4, 1.3

12 Months

1.5

1.1, 1.9

1,303,000

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because they
adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Stalking is defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics in which the victim experienced multiple tactics or a single tactic multiple times and felt very fearful
or believed they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Stalking tactics include unwanted phone calls, voice or
text messages, hang-ups; unwanted emails, instant messages, messages through social media; unwanted cards, letters, flowers, or presents; watching or following from a
distance; spying with a listening device, camera, or global positioning system; approaching or showing up in places such as the victim's home, workplace, or school when it
was unwanted; leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find; and sneaking into the victim’s home or car and doing things to scare the victim or let the
victim know the perpetrator had been there.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and active duty women, controlled for age and marital status.
6
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and wives of active duty men, controlled for age.
7
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
†
Significantly lower prevalence, compared to women in the general population, p < .05.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

Technical Report

Table 9
Prevalence of Stalking1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior
to the Survey among Active Duty Women2 by Deployment History — nISVS 2010§
Total

Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Not Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Time
Frame

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

11.4

9.7, 13.2

23,000

11.3

9.0, 13.7

12,000

11.6

9.1, 14.1

11,000

0.9

0.6, 1.3

3 Years

5.8

4.5, 7.1

12,000

6.4

4.6, 8.3

7,000

5.1

3.3, 6.8

5,000

1.2

0.7, 2.0

12 Months

3.3

2.4, 4.2

7,000

3.6

2.3, 5.0

4,000

2.9

1.7, 4.1

3,000

1.0

0.5, 1.9

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because
they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Stalking is defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics in which the victim experienced multiple tactics or a single tactic multiple times and felt very fearful
or believed they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Stalking tactics include unwanted phone calls, voice or
text messages, hang-ups; unwanted emails, instant messages, messages through social media; unwanted cards, letters, flowers, or presents; watching or following from a
distance; spying with a listening device, camera, or global positioning system; approaching or showing up in places such as the victim's home, workplace, or school when
it was unwanted; leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find; and sneaking into the victim’s home or car and doing things to scare the victim or
let the victim know the perpetrator had been there.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between active duty women who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those who had not been deployed during that time
period, controlled for age and marital status.
§

33

34

Technical Report

Table 10
Prevalence of Stalking1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the
Survey among Active Duty Women2 by Deployment History and Type of Perpetrator — nISVS 2010§
Total
Type of
Perpetrator

Intimate6

Non-intimate

Time
Frame

Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Not Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

6.5

5.2, 7.8

13,000

7.4

5.5, 9.3

8,000

5.4

3.7, 7.2

5,000

1.4

0.9, 2.2

3 Years

3.0

2.1, 3.9

6,000

3.7

2.3, 5.1

4,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

1.8

1.1, 2.4

3,000

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Lifetime

3.7

2.6, 4.8

7,000

3.2

1.8, 4.6

3,000

4.3

2.6, 6.0

4,000

0.7

0.4, 1.4

3 Years

2.1

1.3, 3.0

4,000

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because
they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Stalking is defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics in which the victim experienced multiple tactics or a single tactic multiple times and felt very fearful or
believed they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Stalking tactics include unwanted phone calls, voice or text
messages, hang-ups; unwanted emails, instant messages, messages through social media; unwanted cards, letters, flowers, or presents; watching or following from a distance;
spying with a listening device, camera, or global positioning system; approaching or showing up in places such as the victim's home, workplace, or school when it was
unwanted; leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find; and sneaking into the victim’s home or car and doing things to scare the victim or let the
victim know the perpetrator had been there.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between active duty women who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those who had not been deployed during that time
period, controlled for age and marital status.
6
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

35

Technical Report

Table 11
Prevalence of Stalking1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the
Survey among Wives2 of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s Deployment History — nISVS 2010§
Total

Spouse Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Not Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Time
Frame

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted %

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

14.5

12.7, 16.3

102,000

14.9

12.8, 17.0

81,000

13.3

9.6, 17.0

21,000

1.1

0.8, 1.6

3 Years

4.9

3.7, 6.0

34,000

5.4

4.0, 6.8

30,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

3.1

2.2, 4.0

22,000

3.5

2.4, 4.7

19,000

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because
they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
Stalking is defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics in which the victim experienced multiple tactics or a single tactic multiple times and felt very fearful
or believed they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Stalking tactics include unwanted phone calls, voice or
text messages, hang-ups; unwanted emails, instant messages, messages through social media; unwanted cards, letters, flowers, or presents; watching or following from a
distance; spying with a listening device, camera, or global positioning system; approaching or showing up in places such as the victim's home, workplace, or school when
it was unwanted; leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find; and sneaking into the victim’s home or car and doing things to scare the victim or
let the victim know the perpetrator had been there.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between wives of active duty men who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those whose spouse had not been deployed during
that time period, controlled for age.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

1

36

Technical Report

Table 12
Prevalence of Stalking1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months
Prior to the Survey among Wives2 of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s Deployment History and
Type of Perpetrator — nISVS 2010§
Total
Type of
Perpetrator

Intimate6

Non-intimate

Time
Frame

Spouse Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Not Deployed in the
3 Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Deployed
Compared to Not Deployed

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

8.6

7.1, 10.0

59,000

8.5

6.9, 10.2

46,000

8.7

5.6, 11.7

13,000

0.9

0.6, 1.4

3 Years

2.2

1.4, 3.0

15,000

2.4

1.4, 3.3

13,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Lifetime

5.5

4.3, 6.7

38,000

6.2

4.8, 7.6

33,000

*

*

*

*

*

3 Years

2.0

1.3, 2.8

14,000

2.4

1.4, 3.3

13,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups
because they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Stalking is defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics in which the victim experienced multiple tactics or a single tactic multiple times and felt very fearful
or believed they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Stalking tactics include unwanted phone calls, voice or
text messages, hang-ups; unwanted emails, instant messages, messages through social media; unwanted cards, letters, flowers, or presents; watching or following from
a distance; spying with a listening device, camera, or global positioning system; approaching or showing up in places such as the victim's home, workplace, or school
when it was unwanted; leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find; and sneaking into the victim’s home or car and doing things to scare the
victim or let the victim know the perpetrator had been there.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between wives of active duty men who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those whose spouse had not been deployed
during that time period, controlled for age.
6
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

37

Technical Report

Psychological Aggression

Table 13
Prevalence of Psychological Aggression1 by an Intimate Partner2 in lifetime, in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General
U.S. Population, Active Duty Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men — nISVS 2010§
Active Duty Women3

Women in the General
U.S. Population3
Time
Frame

Active Duty Women
Compared to General
Population

Wives of Active Duty Men3

Wives of Active Duty
Men Compared to
General Population

Weighted
%

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted
%

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

AOR6

95% CI4

Weighted
%

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

AOR7

95% CI4

Lifetime

56.7

54.8, 58.6

49,828,000

53.7

51.1, 56.4

109,000

0.8†

0.7, 0.9

48.6

46.0, 51.2

352,000

1.0

0.8, 1.2

3 Years

28.2

25.7, 30.6

24,591,000

30.8

28.3, 33.4

63,000

0.8

†

0.6, 0.9

19.6

17.5, 21.7

142,000

0.8

0.6, 1.1

12 Months

18.8

17.3, 20.3

16,511,000

18.1

16.0, 20.3

37,000

0.7†

0.6, 0.8

13.9

12.1, 15.7

101,000

0.8

0.6, 1.0

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because they
adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Psychological aggression includes verbal aggression (e.g., told victim that they were a loser, a failure, or not good enough; name calling) and coercive control and entrapment
(e.g., keeping track of the victim, making decisions for the victim, threatening the victim, keeping victim from leaving the house, keeping victim from having money).
2
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
3
Age range: 18–59 years.
4
Confidence interval.
5
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
6
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and active duty women, controlled for age and marital status.
7
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and wives of active duty men, controlled for age.
†
Significantly lower prevalence compared to women in the general population, p < .05.
§

Table 14
Prevalence of Psychological Aggression1 by an Intimate Partner2 in lifetime, in the
3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women3 by
Deployment History — nISVS 2010§
Total

Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Not Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Time
Frame

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

AOR6

95% CI4

Lifetime

44.4

41.8, 47.1

90,000

47.2

43.6, 50.8

52,000

41.1

37.2, 45.1

38,000

1.3†

1.1, 1.6

3 Years

23.5

21.2, 25.9

48,000

22.6

19.5, 25.7

25,000

24.7

21.1, 28.2

23,000

1.0

0.8, 1.3

12 Months

13.0

11.2, 14.9

26,000

12.8

10.3, 15.3

14,000

13.4

10.6, 16.2

12,000

1.0

0.7, 1.4

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because they
adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
Psychological aggression includes verbal aggression (e.g., told victim that they were a loser, a failure, or not good enough; name calling) and coercive control
and entrapment (e.g., keeping track of the victim, making decisions for the victim, threatening the victim, keeping victim from leaving the house, keeping victim from
having money).
2
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
3
Age range: 18–59 years.
4
Confidence interval.
5
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
6
AOR — comparison between active duty women who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those who had not been deployed during that time period,
controlled for age and marital status.
†
Significantly higher prevalence compared to women in the general population, p < .05.
§

1

38

Technical Report

Table 15
Prevalence of Psychological Aggression1 by an Intimate Partner2 in lifetime, in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives3 of Active Duty
Men by Spouse's Deployment History — nISVS 2010§
Total

Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Not Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Time
Frame

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

AOR6

95% CI4

Lifetime

41.0

38.4, 43.5

290,000

41.2

38.3, 44.2

226,000

40.0

34.6, 45.4

63,000

1.1

0.9, 1.5

3 Years

15.0

13.1, 16.9

106,000

15.8

13.6, 18.1

87,000

12.0

8.4, 15.6

19,000

1.2

0.8, 1.7

12 Months

10.2

8.5, 11.8

72,000

10.9

9.0, 12.8

60,000

7.5

4.6, 10.4

12,000

1.4

0.9, 2.1

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups
because they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Psychological aggression includes verbal aggression (e.g., told victim that they were a loser, a failure, or not good enough; name calling) and coercive control
and entrapment (e.g., keeping track of the victim, making decisions for the victim, threatening the victim, keeping victim from leaving the house, keeping victim
from having money).
2
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
3
Age range: 18–59 years.
4
Confidence interval.
5
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
6
AOR — comparison between wives of active duty men who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and wives whose spouses had not been
deployed during that time period, controlled for age.
§

39

Technical Report

Physical Violence

Table 16
Prevalence of Physical Violence1 by an Intimate Partner2 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to
the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General U.S.
Population, Active Duty Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men — nISVS 2010§
Active Duty Women3

Women in the General
U.S. Population3
Time
Frame

Active Duty Women
Compared to General
Population

Wives of Active Duty Men3

Wives of Active Duty
Men Compared to
General Population

Weighted
%

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted
%

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

AOR6

95% CI4

Weighted
%

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

AOR7

95% CI4

Lifetime

35.7

33.9, 37.5

31,055,000

28.4

25.9, 30.9

55,000

0.9

0.7, 1.0

26.9

24.5, 29.2

189,000

1.0

0.8, 1.2

3 Years

8.7

6.9, 10.5

7,483,000

9.6

7.9, 11.3

19,000

0.7

†

‡

0.5, 1.0

7.0

5.6, 8.3

50,000

0.8

0.5, 1.5

12 Months

5.1

4.1, 6.0

4,454,000

3.1

2.1, 4.0

6,000

0.4†

0.3, 0.6

3.8

2.7, 4.8

27,000

1.0

0.7, 1.6

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because they
adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
Physical violence includes slapping, pushing, shoving, being hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt by choking
or suffocating, beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
2
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
3
Age range: 18–59 years.
4
Confidence interval.
5
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
6
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and active duty women, controlled for age and marital status.
7
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and wives of active duty men, controlled for age.
†
Significantly lower prevalence, compared to women in the general population, p < .05.
‡
Confidence interval rounded to nearest tenth, actual interval does not include 1.0.
§

1

Table 17
Prevalence of Physical Violence by an Intimate Partner1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the
Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the General U.S. Population,
Active Duty Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men by Severity of Physical Violence — nISVS 2010§
Severity
of
Physical
Violence

Slapping,
Pushing,
or Shoving
Severe7
Physical
Violence

Time
Frame

Women in the General
U.S. Population2

Active Duty Women2

Active Duty Women
Compared to
General Population

Wives of Active Duty Men2

Wives of Active Duty
Men Compared to
General Population

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR6

95% CI3

Lifetime

32.9

31.2, 34.7

28,683,000

26.1

23.7, 28.5

50,000

0.9

0.7, 1.0

24.9

22.7, 27.2

176,000

1.1

0.9, 1.3

3 Years

7.3

5.7, 8.9

6,286,000

8.7

7.1, 10.3

17,000

0.8

0.6, 1.1

6.1

4.8, 7.4

44,000

1.0

0.6, 1.6

12 Months

4.7

3.8, 5.6

4,135,000

2.5

1.6, 3.3

5,000

0.4†

0.3, 0.6

3.1

2.2, 4.1

22,000

0.9

0.6, 1.5

Lifetime

26.9

25.2, 28.6

23,465,000

19.2

17.1, 21.4

37,000

0.8†

0.6, 0.9

19.2

17.1, 21.3

136,000

1.0

0.8, 1.3

3 Years

6.2

4.6, 7.8

5,351,000

5.6

4.4, 6.9

11,000

0.5†

0.3, 0.8

4.3

3.2, 5.4

31,000

0.9

0.4, 1.9

12 Months

3.4

2.7, 4.2

3,026,000

2.0

1.2, 2.8

4,000

0.4†

0.2, 0.6

2.0

1.2, 2.7

14,000

0.8

0.4, 1.4

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because they
adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and active duty women, controlled for age and marital status.
6
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and wives of active duty men, controlled for age.
7
Severe physical violence includes being hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt by choking or suffocating,
beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
†
Significantly lower prevalence, compared to women in the general population, p < .05.
§

1

40

Technical Report

Table 18
Prevalence of Physical Violence1 by an Intimate Partner2 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior
to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women3 by
Deployment History — nISVS 2010§
Total

Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Not Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Time
Frame

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

AOR6

95% CI4

Lifetime

28.4

25.9, 30.9

54,000

32.2

28.8, 35.7

33,000

23.9

20.3, 27.4

21,000

1.5†

1.2, 2.0

3 Years

9.5

7.8, 11.2

19,000

10.1

7.8, 12.4

11,000

8.9

6.4, 11.3

8,000

1.4

0.9, 2.2

12 Months

3.0

2.0, 3.9

6,000

3.1

1.8, 4.4

3,000

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups
because they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Physical violence includes slapping, pushing, shoving, hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt
by choking or suffocating, beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
2
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
3
Age range: 18–59 years.
4
Confidence interval.
5
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
6
AOR — comparison between active duty women who had been deployed during the 3 years prior to the survey and those who had not been deployed during
that time period, controlled for age and marital status.
†
Prevalence was significantly higher among active duty women who were deployed during the 3 years prior to the survey compared to those who were not
deployed during that time period, p < .05.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

Table 19
Prevalence of Physical Violence1 by an Intimate Partner2 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to
the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives3 of Active Duty Men by
Spouse’s Deployment History — nISVS 2010§
Total

Spouse Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Not Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Deployed
Compared to Not Deployed

Time
Frame

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

Weighted %

95% CI4

Estimated
Number
of Victims5

AOR6

95% CI4

Lifetime

26.8

24.4, 29.1

184,000

28.0

25.2, 30.7

149,000

22.7

18.0, 27.3

35,000

1.2

0.9, 1.6

3 Years

7.0

5.6, 8.4

49,000

7.7

6.0, 9.3

42,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

3.9

2.8, 4.9

27,000

4.2

2.9, 5.4

23,000

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups
because they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Physical violence includes slapping, pushing, shoving, hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt
by choking or suffocating, beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
2
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
3
Age range: 18–59 years.
4
Confidence interval.
5
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
6
AOR — comparison between wives of active duty men who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those whose spouse had not been
deployed during that time period, controlled for age.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

Technical Report

Table 20
Prevalence of Physical Violence by an Intimate Partner1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior
to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty Women2 by
Deployment History and Severity of Physical Violence — nISVS 2010§
Severity
of
Physical
Violence
by an
Intimate
Partner
Slapping,
Pushing,
or Shoving

Severe6
Physical
Violence

Total
Time
Frame

Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Not Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number of
Victims4

Weighted

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

26.0

23.6, 28.5

50,000

29.2

25.8, 32.6

30,000

22.3

18.9, 25.8

20,000

1.4†

1.1, 1.9

3 Years

8.6

7.0, 10.2

17,000

9.0

6.8, 11.3

10,000

8.1

5.8, 10.4

7,000

1.4

0.9, 2.2

12 Months

2.4

1.6, 3.2

5,000

2.5

1.4, 3.7

3,000

*

*

*

*

*

Lifetime

19.1

17.0, 21.3

37,000

21.9

18.8, 24.9

23,000

16.0

12.9, 19.0

14,000

1.5†

1.1, 2.0

3 Years

5.5

4.2, 6.8

11,000

5.7

3.9, 7.4

6,000

5.4

3.5, 7.2

5,000

1.3

0.8, 2.1

12 Months

1.9

1.1, 2.7

4,000

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because
they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between active duty women who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those who had not been deployed during that
time period, controlled for age and marital status.
6
Includes being hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt by choking or suffocating, beaten, burned
on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
†
Prevalence was significantly higher among active duty women who were deployed during the 3 years before the survey compared to those who were not
deployed during that time period, p < .05.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

41

42

Technical Report

Table 21
Prevalence of Physical Violence by an Intimate Partner1 in lifetime, in the 3 Years Prior to the
Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives2 of Active Duty Men by Spouse’s
Deployment History and Severity of Physical Violence — nISVS 2010§
Severity
of
Physical
Violence
by an
Intimate
Partner
Slapping,
Pushing,
or Shoving

Severe6
Physical
Violence

Total
Time
Frame

Spouse Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Not Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Deployed
Compared to Not Deployed

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number of
Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

Weighted
%

95% CI3

Estimated
Number
of Victims4

AOR5

95% CI3

Lifetime

24.8

22.5, 27.1

171,000

25.7

23.1, 28.4

137,000

21.7

17.1, 26.2

34,000

1.1

0.8, 1.5

3 Years

6.1

4.8, 7.4

43,000

6.6

5.0, 8.1

36,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

3.2

2.2, 4.2

22,000

3.3

2.2, 4.5

18,000

*

*

*

*

*

Lifetime

19.5

17.4, 21.6

135,000

20.6

18.1, 23.0

110,000

15.9

11.9, 19.8

25,000

1.2

0.9, 1.7

3 Years

4.4

3.3, 5.5

31,000

4.8

3.5, 6.2

26,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

2.0

1.2, 2.8

14,000

2.2

1.3, 3.1

12,000

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because
they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
2
Age range: 18–59 years.
3
Confidence interval.
4
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
5
AOR — comparison between wives of active duty men who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those whose spouse had not been deployed
during that time period, controlled for age.
6
Includes being hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt by choking or suffocating, beaten, burned on
purpose, or used a knife or gun.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

Technical Report

43

Physical Violence, Rape, or Stalking

Table 22
Prevalence of Physical Violence1, Rape2, or Stalking3 by an Intimate Partner4 in lifetime, in
the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Women in the
General U.S. Population, Active Duty Women, and Wives of Active Duty Men by Severity of
Physical Violence — nISVS 2010§
Severity
of
Physical
Violence
by an
Intimate
Partner
Any
Physical
Violence,
Rape, or
Stalking
Severe10
Physical
Violence,
Rape, or
Stalking

Active Duty Women5

Women in the General
U.S. Population5
Time
Frame

Active Duty Women
Compared to General
Population

Wives of Active Duty Men5

Wives of Active Duty
Men Compared to
General Population

Weighted
%

95% CI6

Estimated
Number
of Victims7

Weighted
%

95% CI6

Estimated
Number
of Victims7

AOR8

95% CI6

Weighted
%

95% CI6

Estimated
Number
of Victims7

AOR9

95% CI6

Lifetime

39.7

37.8, 41.6

33,875,000

31.5

28.9, 34.2

56,000

0.8†

0.7, 0.9

29.5

27.1, 32.0

199,000

0.9

0.8, 1.1

3 Years

11.1

9.1, 13.0

9,337,000

11.3

9.5, 13.2

22,000

0.7†

0.5, 0.9

8.2

6.7, 9.7

58,000

0.9

0.6, 1.5

12 Months

7.6

6.5, 8.7

6,648,000

4.7

3.5, 5.9

9,000

0.4†

0.3, 0.6

4.6

3.5, 5.8

32,000

1.0

0.7, 1.5

Lifetime

35.1

33.1, 37.0

27,936,000

25.2

22.6, 27.8

40,000

0.7†

0.6, 0.8

24.2

21.8, 26.7

147,000

0.9

0.7, 1.1

3 Years

9.0

7.2, 10.8

7,586,000

7.4

5.9, 8.8

14,000

0.5†

0.4, 0.7

5.7

4.4, 7.0

39,000

0.9

0.5, 1.7

12 Months

6.3

5.3, 7.2

5,489,000

3.4

2.4, 4.5

6,000

0.4†

0.3, 0.6

2.9

2.0, 3.8

20,000

0.8

0.5, 1.2

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups because they
adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
Physical violence includes slapping, pushing, and shoving, hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt by choking or
suffocating, beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
2
Rape includes completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, and completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration.
3
Stalking is defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics in which the victim experienced multiple tactics or a single tactic multiple times and felt very fearful or believed they or
someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Stalking tactics include unwanted phone calls, voice or text messages, hang-ups; unwanted
emails, instant messages, messages through social media; unwanted cards, letters, flowers, or presents; watching or following from a distance; spying with a listening device, camera, or
global positioning system; approaching or showing up in places such as the victim's home, workplace, or school when it was unwanted; leaving strange or potentially threatening items
for the victim to find; and sneaking into the victim’s home or car and doing things to scare the victim or let the victim know the perpetrator had been there.
4
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
5
Age range: 18–59 years.
6
Confidence interval.
7
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
8
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and active duty women, controlled for age and marital status.
9
AOR — comparison between women in the general population and wives of active duty men, controlled for age.
10
Severe physical violence includes being hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt by choking or suffocating,
beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
†
Significantly lower prevalence, compared to women in the general population, p < .05.
§

1

44

Technical Report

Table 23
Prevalence of Physical Violence1, Rape2, or Stalking3 by an Intimate Partner4 in lifetime, in
the 3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Active Duty
Women5 by Deployment History and Severity of Physical Violence — nISVS 2010§
Total
Violence by
an Intimate
Partner

Time
Frame

Any Physical
Violence,
Rape, or
Stalking
Severe9
Physical
Violence,
Rape, or
Stalking

Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Not Deployed in the 3 Years
Prior to the Survey

Deployed Compared
to Not Deployed

Weighted
%

95% CI6

Estimated
Number of
Victims7

Weighted
%

95% CI6

Estimated
Number
of Victims7

Weighted
%

95% CI6

Estimated
Number
of Victims7

AOR8

95% CI6

Lifetime

31.5

28.8, 34.1

56,000

35.2

31.5, 38.8

34,000

27.2

23.4, 31.0

22,000

1.4†

1.1, 1.9

3 Years

11.2

9.4, 13.1

21,000

12.2

9.6, 14.7

13,000

10.1

7.5, 12.7

9,000

1.5†

1.0‡, 2.2

12 Months

4.6

3.4, 5.8

9,000

4.8

3.1, 6.4

5,000

4.4

2.7, 6.1

4,000

1.2

0.7, 2.1

Lifetime

25.2

22.6, 27.8

40,000

27.8

24.2, 31.4

24,000

22.0

18.3, 25.7

16,000

1.3

1.0, 1.8

3 Years

7.4

5.9, 8.8

14,000

7.8

5.8, 9.8

8,000

6.9

4.7, 9.0

6,000

1.3

0.8, 2.0

12 Months

3.4

2.4, 4.5

6,000

3.6

2.2, 5.0

4,000

3.3

1.8, 4.7

3,000

1.1

0.6, 2.2

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups
because they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Physical violence includes slapping, pushing, and shoving, hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt
by choking or suffocating, beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
2
Rape includes completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, and completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration.
3
Stalking is defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics in which the victim experienced multiple tactics or a single tactic multiple times and felt very
fearful or believed they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Stalking tactics include unwanted phone
calls, voice or text messages, hang-ups; unwanted emails, instant messages, messages through social media; unwanted cards, letters, flowers, or presents; watching
or following from a distance; spying with a listening device, camera, or global positioning system; approaching or showing up in places such as the victim's home,
workplace, or school when it was unwanted; leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find; and sneaking into the victim’s home or car and
doing things to scare the victim or let the victim know the perpetrator had been there.
4
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
5
Age range: 18–59 years.
6
Confidence interval.
7
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
8
AOR — comparison between active duty women who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those who had not been deployed during that
time, controlled for age and marital status.
9
Severe physical violence includes being hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt by choking or
suffocating, beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
†
Significantly higher prevalence among active duty women who were deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey compared to those who were not, p < .05.
‡
Confidence interval rounded to nearest tenth, actual interval does not include 1.0.
§

Technical Report

Table 24
Prevalence of Physical Violence1, Rape2, or Stalking3 by an Intimate Partner4 in lifetime, in the
3 Years Prior to the Survey, and in the 12 Months Prior to the Survey among Wives5 of Active
Duty Men by Spouse’s Deployment History and Severity of Physical Violence — nISVS 2010§
Violence
by an
Intimate
Partner
Any
Physical
Violence,
Rape, or
Stalking
Severe9
Physical
Violence,
Rape, or
Stalking

Total
Time
Frame

Spouse Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Not Deployed in the 3
Years Prior to the Survey

Spouse Deployed
Compared to Not Deployed

Weighted
%

95% CI6

Estimated
Number of
Victims7

Weighted
%

95% CI6

Estimated
Number
of Victims7

Weighted
%

95% CI6

Estimated
Number
of Victims7

AOR8

95% CI6

Lifetime

29.3

26.9, 31.8

193,000

30.4

27.5, 33.2

156,000

25.6

20.6, 30.5

37,000

1.2

0.9, 1.6

3 Years

8.2

6.7, 9.7

57,000

8.9

7.2, 10.7

48,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

4.6

3.5, 5.8

32,000

5.1

3.7, 6.5

27,000

*

*

*

*

*

Lifetime

24.2

21.8, 26.7

147,000

25.0

22.2, 27.8

118,000

21.7

16.8, 26.5

29,000

1.1

0.8, 1.5

3 Years

5.7

4.4, 7.0

39,000

6.2

4.7, 7.7

33,000

*

*

*

*

*

12 Months

2.9

2.0, 3.8

20,000

3.2

2.1, 4.3

17,000

*

*

*

*

*

The prevalence rate estimates are descriptive of each population. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR) results should be used for making comparisons across groups
because they adjust for potential differences across groups as described below.
1
Physical violence includes slapping, pushing, and shoving, hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt by
choking or suffocating, beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
2
Rape includes completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, and completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration.
3
Stalking is defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics in which the victim experienced multiple tactics or a single tactic multiple times and felt very fearful
or believed they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Stalking tactics include unwanted phone calls, voice
or text messages, hang-ups; unwanted emails, instant messages, messages through social media; unwanted cards, letters, flowers, or presents; watching or following
from a distance; spying with a listening device, camera, or global positioning system; approaching or showing up in places such as the victim's home, workplace, or
school when it was unwanted; leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find; and sneaking into the victim’s home or car and doing things to
scare the victim or let the victim know the perpetrator had been there.
4
Intimate partner refers to cohabitating or non-cohabitating romantic or sexual partners.
5
Age range: 18–59 years.
6
Confidence interval.
7
Rounded to the nearest thousand. Sums of cells may not equal the total due to rounding.
8
AOR — comparison between wives of active duty men who had been deployed in the 3 years prior to the survey and those whose spouse had not been deployed
during that time period, controlled for age.
9
Severe physical violence includes being hurt by pulling hair, hit with a fist or something hard, kicked, slammed against something, tried to hurt by choking or
suffocating, beaten, burned on purpose, or used a knife or gun.
*
Estimate is not reported; relative standard error > 30% or cell size ≤ 20.
§

45