Abstract
An accurate assessment of intimate partner violence (IPV) is crucial to guide public policy and intervention. The Conflict Tactic Scales Revised (CTS-2) is one of the most widely used instruments to do so. Despite its good psychometric properties, research on interpartner agreement has pointed to low-to-moderate estimates, which generated some concerns about the validity of the results obtained through single-partner reports. This cross-sectional study introduces indexes that have not previously been used to assess interpartner agreement. Both partners' reports on perpetration and victimization were analyzed in a community sample of 268 different-sex couples. Our results generally pointed to better agreement levels on IPV occurrence than frequency, suggesting that the proxy method (i.e., using a single-partner report) could be a reliable method for assessing IPV occurrence but not its frequency in this population. Findings are discussed as well as the advantages and constraints of different IPV assessment practices.