Domestic Violence Law in Global Perspective: Trends, Gaps, and Insights from Bibliometric Analysis

Domestic violence is a pervasive issue that affects millions of individuals globally, transcending cultural, economic, and social boundaries. This study examines global scholarly trends, gaps and insight on domestic violence law by conducting a comprehensive bibliometric analysis aimed at identifying research patterns, dominant themes, and emerging areas of inquiry. Domestic violence continues to present significant legal and social challenges worldwide, yet the breadth and evolution of academic contributions in this field remain insufficiently mapped, creating a gap in understanding how legal scholarship has responded to shifting global dynamics. To address this gap, the study collected data using the Scopus advanced search function, yielding a final dataset of 1053 publications that met the predefined criteria. The methodological process involved statistical and graphical examination through the Scopus Analyzer, followed by data cleaning and harmonisation using OpenRefine to ensure accuracy and consistency across author names, keywords, and institutional affiliations. Subsequently, VOSviewer was employed to generate visualisations of co-authorship networks, keyword co-occurrence structures, and thematic clusters, enabling deeper interpretation of intellectual linkages and research trajectories. The numerical results show a marked increase in publication activity over the last decade, a concentration of contributions from high income countries, and the prominence of core research themes such as intimate partner violence, policing, gender-based discrimination, child protection, and international legal frameworks. Network visualisation further demonstrates the formation of several coherent clusters that reflect interdisciplinary intersections between law, criminology, public health, and social policy. In conclusion, the findings provide an integrated overview of global academic engagement with domestic violence law, offering valuable insights for policymakers, researchers, and practitioners seeking to understand current knowledge structures and future research directions in this critical legal domain.

domestic, violence, law, family

1. “Gender symmetry in domestic violence: A substantive and methodological research review,” in The Gender of Desire: Essays on Male Sexuality, State University of New York Press, 2005, pp. 197–216. [Online]. Available: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84899279768&partnerID=40&md5=193785f750ee7a270620dd8ce020c728 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. C. Gomes, “Sex, Law, and Domestic Violence against Women in the Modern World,” in The Cambridge World History of Sexualities: Volume 4: Modern Sexualities, vol. 4, Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra, Portugal: Cambridge University Press, 2024, pp. 358–380. doi: 10.1017/9781108896078.018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. J. Fisher, E. Lukas, A. Mavisakalyan, and J. True, “Regulation of domestic violence: a global perspective,” BMC Public Health, vol. 25, no. 1, 2025, doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-24489-z. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. I. Saktaganova, S. Surkova, B. Smatlayev, A. Zhussupov, and K. Abdilov, “Effectiveness of human protection from domestic violence under the administrative legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan,” Riv. di Stud. sulla Sostenibilita, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 279–294, 2023, doi: 10.3280/RISS2023-001-S1018. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. H. I. Bazza, “Domestic violence and women’s rights in Nigeria,” Soc. without Borders, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 175–192, 2009, doi: 10.1163/187219109X447467. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. P. Pais, “Challenging the Efficacy of Ex officio Prosecution of Domestic Violence Offenses: A Comparative Analysis,” in Sexuality, Oppression and Human Rights, TC Beirne School of Law, University of Queensland, Australia: Brill, 2019, pp. 27–45. doi: 10.1163/9781848884243_004. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. N. Maravuakula and J. Mangubhai, “From Act to Action: Engaging with Culture and Faith to End Domestic Violence in the Pacific,” in Gender-Based Violence in the Global South: Ideologies, Resistances, Responses, and Transformations, Human Rights and Social Development Division, The Pacific Community (SPC), Fiji: Taylor and Francis, 2024, pp. 205–229. doi: 10.4324/9781003350125-16. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. M. Nduna, S. Mkwananzi, N. N. Wekwete, and M. A. Makongoza, “Contextualizing the many faces of domestic violence: A focus on the global south,” in The Cambridge Handbook of the International Psychology of Women, University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa: Cambridge University Press, 2020, pp. 355–371. [Online]. Available: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85146847857&partnerID=40&md5=d7abe76aedf0bc0fc37f47becc0ae642 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. R. Cordier, D. Chung, S. Wilkes-Gillan, and R. Speyer, “The Effectiveness of Protection Orders in Reducing Recidivism in Domestic Violence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Trauma, Violence, Abus., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 804–828, 2021, doi: 10.1177/1524838019882361. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. J. L. Alves, I. B. Borges, and J. De Nadae, “Sustainability in complex projects of civil construction: Bibliometric and bibliographic review,” Gest. e Prod., vol. 28, no. 4, 2021, doi: 10.1590/1806-9649-2020v28e5389. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. D. S. Assyakur and E. M. Rosa, “Spiritual Leadership in Healthcare: A Bibliometric Analysis,” J. Aisyah J. Ilmu Kesehat., vol. 7, no. 2, 2022, doi: 10.30604/jika.v7i2.914. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. A. Verbeek, K. Debackere, M. Luwel, and E. Zimmermann, “Measuring progress and evolution in science and technology - I: The multiple uses of bibliometric indicators,” Int. J. Manag. Rev., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 179–211, 2002, doi: 10.1111/1468-2370.00083. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. N. Donthu, S. Kumar, D. Mukherjee, N. Pandey, and W. M. Lim, “How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 133, pp. 285–296, 2021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Y. C. J. Wu and T. Wu, “A decade of entrepreneurship education in the Asia Pacific for future directions in theory and practice,” 2017. doi: 10.1108/MD-05-2017-0518. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. B. Fahimnia, J. Sarkis, and H. Davarzani, “Green supply chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis,” 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.01.003. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. A. Al-Khoury et al., “Intellectual Capital History and Trends: A Bibliometric Analysis Using Scopus Database,” Sustain., vol. 14, no. 18, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su141811615. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. G. di Stefano, M. Peteraf, and G. Veronay, “Dynamic capabilities deconstructed: A bibliographic investigation into the origins, development, and future directions of the research domain,” Ind. Corp. Chang., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1187–1204, 2010, doi: 10.1093/icc/dtq027. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. G. P. Khiste and R. R. Paithankar, “Analysis of Bibliometric term in Scopus,” Int. Res. J., vol. 01, no. 32, pp. 78–83, 2017. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. D. Gu, T. Li, X. Wang, X. Yang, and Z. Yu, “Visualizing the intellectual structure and evolution of electronic health and telemedicine research,” Int. J. Med. Inform., vol. 130, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2019.08.007. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. I. Passas, “Bibliometric analysis: the main steps,” Encyclopedia, vol. 4, no. 2, 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. N. J. van Eck and L. Waltman, “Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer,” Scientometrics, vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 1053–1070, 2017, doi: 10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. N. J. van Eck and L. Waltman, “Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping,” Scientometrics, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 523–538, 2010, doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. F. P. Appio, F. Cesaroni, and A. Di Minin, “Visualizing the structure and bridges of the intellectual property management and strategy literature: a document co-citation analysis,” Scientometrics, vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 623–661, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s11192-014-1329-0. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. N. J. Van Eck and L. Waltman, “Bibliometric mapping of the computational intelligence field,” in International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowldege-Based Systems, 2007, pp. 625–645. doi: 10.1142/S0218488507004911. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. M. Ellsberg, L. Heise, R. Peña, S. Agurto, and A. Winkvist, “Researching domestic violence against women: Methological and ethical considerations,” Stud. Fam. Plann., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2001, doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2001.00001.x. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. [26] R. B. Felson, S. F. Messner, A. W. Hoskin, and G. Deane, “Reasons for reporting and not reporting domestic violence to the police,” Criminology, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 617–648, 2002, doi: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2002.tb00968.x. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. R. B. Felson and P.-P. Paré, “The reporting of domestic violence and sexual assault by nonstrangers to the police,” J. Marriage Fam., vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 597–610, 2005, doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00156.x. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. M. Ellsberg and L. Heise, “Bearing witness: Ethics in domestic violence research,” Lancet, vol. 359, no. 9317, pp. 1599–1604, 2002, doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08521-5. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. C. Hoyle and A. Sanders, “Police response to domestic violence: From victim choice to victim empowerment?,” Br. J. Criminol., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 14–36, 2000, doi: 10.1093/bjc/40.1.14. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. R. Bachman and A. L. Coker, “Police involvement in domestic violence: The interactive effects of victim injury, offender’s history of violence, and race,” Violence Vict., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 91–106, 1995, doi: 10.1891/0886-6708.10.2.91. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. E. R. Vigdor and J. A. Mercy, “Do laws restricting access to firearms by domestic violence offenders prevent intimate partner homicide?,” Eval. Rev., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 313–346, 2006, doi: 10.1177/0193841X06287307. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. C. K. Baker, K. A. Billhardt, J. Warren, C. Rollins, and N. E. Glass, “Domestic violence, housing instability, and homelessness: A review of housing policies and program practices for meeting the needs of survivors,” Aggress. Violent Behav., vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 430–439, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2010.07.005. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. M. M. Cavanaugh and R. J. Gelles, “The utility of male domestic violence offender typologies: New directions for research, policy, and practice,” J. Interpers. Violence, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 155–166, 2005, doi: 10.1177/0886260504268763. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Conflict of Law in the Safeguarding of Malaysian Intangible Cultural Heritage: A Way Forward
• Alternative Dispute Resolution in India: A Brief Overview Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. - William E. Gladstone
• The Role of Museums in Safeguarding Cultural Heritage Rights: Balancing Access and Repatriation
• An Evaluation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights' Significance and Application in Nigeria
• The Role of International Law in Shaping National Immigration Policies.