What is Instrumental and Expressive Violence?

Violence is unfortunately not uncommon in today’s world. Violence may occur among strangers, intimate partners, or to one’s self. The most common form of violence in the United States is interpersonal violence which consists of domestic abuse, youth violence and sexual abuse (Dawson, 2004). Interpersonal violence is something our society has to deal with regularly as the pattern of violence in intimate relationships (also known as intimate partner violence and/or domestic violence) is often recurring in nature. Intimate partner violence and/or domestic violence occurs in cycles. Thus, violence happens on multiple occasions that can last over months for up to years (Ennis, 2017).  In acts of interpersonal violence, violence can be divided into two distinct categories: instrumental violence and expressive violence. These two types of violence differ in the types of motives of the perpetrator. 

Instrumental violence is motivated by a desire to obtain a benefit. This may be economic, sexual, or some other personal gain. In other words, the violence committed is a means to an end for the perpetrator does not care if they harm the victim and does not care as long as the perpetrator gets what they want (Pecino-Latorre, 2019). For example, a spouse might hit their significant other in order to gain control over household decisions (Haushofer, 2019). Instrumental violence is premeditated and often the perpetrator shows no remorse toward the victims even after the violence has been committed. On the other hand, expressive violence is one in which the perpetrator acts reactively due to some intense emotional arousal. Often an argument or conflict with the victim causes intense emotional activation and leads to emotionally charged acts of violence. These acts of violence are often not premeditated and are rather due to lack of impulse control (Pecino-Latorre, 2019). 

The social perception of these two types of violence is important and gives an understanding of the fundamental difference between the two. Expressive violence is an emotional act instead of a rational one. Therefore, there is a greater likelihood that the offender will feel remorse for the victim after the act. One may justify the violence as being an irrational, “spur of the moment” impulse rather than a representation of their disposition or personality. On the other hand, instrumental violence is premeditated and requires rational justification that the violence is “righteous”. In instrumental violence, the offender is less likely to think the act is wrong or feel remorse for the victim (Dawson, 2004). Therefore, instrumental violence is more often viewed as more cold-blooded and dangerous and is more often linked to psychopathy (Walsh, 2009). 

Being aware of the distinction between instrumental and expressive violence can help us understand the psychology behind interpersonal violence. Studying the psychology behind violence can not only help understand patterns in violence that lead to certain outcomes but also help prevent further victimization in the future. For example, offenders of expressive violence tend to be emotionally volatile or emotionally dependent and are likely to be victims of childhood trauma, such as fear of abandonment or domestic abuse (Ennis, 2017). On the other hand, offenders of instrumental violence tend to be more violent outside of the relationship, display antisocial behavior and are more likely to have substance abuse problems. Interpersonal violence is more likely to be a result of expressive violence although both types are often seen (Ennis, 2017). 
Knowing the distinction between the two can help us realize that intervention strategies for interpersonal violence should not be a “one size fits all” model. Interventions should be tailored to the type of aggressor in a relationship. For example, interventions for an offender of expressive violence should focus on anger management and emotional coping strategies, whereas interventions for an offender of instrumental violence should focus on the contingencies of their violent behaviors, like substance abuse or psychological triggers (Ennis, 2017). Current research into interpersonal violence is limited. Future research should further investigate the distinction between the two types of violence to improve intervention methods and prevent further violence.
​
References 
​Cohn, E. G., & Rotton, J. (2003). Even criminals take a holiday: Instrumental and expressive crimes on major and minor holidays. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31(4), 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0047-2352(03)00029-1
Dawson, M. (2004). Rethinking the boundaries of intimacy at the end of the century: The role of victim-defendant relationship in criminal justice decisionmaking over time. Law  Society Review, 38(1), 105–138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-9216.2004.03801004.x
Ennis, L., Toop, C., Jung, S., & Bois, S. (2017). Instrumental and reactive intimate partner violence: Offender characteristics, reoffense rates, and risk management. Journal of Threat Assessment and Management, 4(2), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1037/tam0000080 
Haushofer, J., Ringdal, C., Shapiro, J., & Wang, X. Y. (2019). Income changes and intimate partner violence: Evidence from unconditional cash transfers in Kenya. https://doi.org/10.3386/w25627 
Meneses-Reyes, R., & Quintana-Navarrete, M. (2017). On lethal interactions: Differences between expressive and instrumental homicides in Mexico City. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(1-2). https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517733280
Pecino-Latorre, Pérez-Fuentes, Patró-Hernández, & Santos-Hermoso. (2019). Expressiveness and instrumentality of crime scene behavior in Spanish homicides. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(22), 4526. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16224526
Walsh, Z., Swogger, M. T., & Kosson, D. S. (2009). Psychopathy and instrumental violence: Facet level relationships. Journal of Personality Disorders, 23(4), 416–424. https://doi.org/10.1521/pedi.2009.23.4.416