{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017105263157894738, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003947368421052632, 'mean_word_length': 4.89922480620155, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Social Class, Social Learning, and Wife Abuse

There are two contemporary explanations of wife abuse: one cites the sexist structure and traditions of society; the other attributes it to social structural stress and to behavior learned in the family of origin. This article uses data from a random statewide survey of 602 married women living in Maryland to test these theories. The survey results support much of the social structural stress-childhood learning theory of wife abuse. Modifications to this theory are suggested. The survey data allow us to identify who battered women are and what types of service programs appear appropriate. Most wife-abuse victims are lower class; service programs must be designed with the needs of that population in mind.