Coercive control is defined as the systematic use of demands, threats, and surveillance behaviors to gain control over an individual. Content validity appears to be an issue for existing measures of coercive control tactics, as they do not assess all of these behaviors. This study investigated the validity and reliability of the Demand, Threat, Surveillance, and Response to Demands subscales of the Coercion in Intimate Partner Relationships (CIPR) scale. Participants (N = 541) completed online measures of coercive control, physical intimate partner violence, depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder symptomatology. Confirmatory factor analyses, linear regressions, and correlational analyses investigated the construct (i.e., concurrent, convergent, and discriminant) validity of the CIPR subscales. Internal consistency of the subscales and test–retest reliability were also examined. Results provided support for the validity and reliability of the CIPR. Implications and usage of the CIPR in research and practice are discussed. We report how we determined our sample size, all data exclusions, all manipulations, and all measures in the study.

强制控制被定义为系统地使用要求、威胁和监视行为来控制个人。内容有效性似乎是现有强制控制策略措施的一个问题，因为它们并未评估所有这些行为。本研究调查了亲密伙伴关系 (CIPR) 量表中胁迫的需求、威胁、监视和需求响应子量表的有效性和可靠性。参与者（N= 541) 完成了强制控制、身体亲密伴侣暴力、抑郁和创伤后应激障碍症状学的在线测量。验证性因素分析、线性回归和相关分析调查了 CIPR 量表的构造（即，并发、收敛和判别）有效性。还检查了分量表的内部一致性和重测信度。结果为 CIPR 的有效性和可靠性提供了支持。讨论了 CIPR 在研究和实践中的意义和用途。我们报告了我们如何确定样本量、所有数据排除、所有操作以及研究中的所有措施。