Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: A Scoping Review of Culturally Responsive IPV Interventions for Asian Communities In the United States

Background: Although the Asian population in the United States is projected to reach 46 million by 2060 and is currently one of the fastest-growing racial and ethnic groups, Asian communities remain underrepresented in research and services related to intimate partner violence (IPV). To better support Asian IPV survivors, it is crucial to examine culturally responsive IPV interventions to assess what is already available and what still needs development. This scoping review, therefore, examines the landscape of IPV interventions specifically developed for or culturally adapted to Asian communities in the United States.

Methods: Empirical studies describing the development or outcomes of programs addressing IPV among Asian communities in the United States were included if they (a) examined an IPV intervention developed specifically for or culturally adapted to Asian communities in the United States, and (b) were published in academic journals after 1994, when the Violence Against Women Act was enacted. Using a comprehensive search strategy, we identified 4,925 unique records across well-recognized databases. Of these, 26 articles met the inclusion criteria. Along with evidence synthesis, we conducted a cultural responsiveness analysis using the Ecological Validity Model (Bernal et al., 1995) to evaluate interventions across eight dimensions: language, persons, metaphors, content, concepts, goals, methods, and context.

Results: In review of the 26 studies, 19 specific IPV interventions were identified, including micro-level therapeutic practices, mezzo-level cross-agency collaborative advocacy, and macro-level interventions aimed at transforming communities. These interventions were grouped into seven main categories: anti-carceral models, bystander interventions, media and communication campaigns, family-based interventions, teen dating violence prevention, therapeutic practices, and advocacy models. Analysis showed moderate to high levels of cultural responsiveness; 12 (63.2%) of the 19 interventions addressed 7 or all 8 dimensions in the Ecological Validity Model. The most frequently considered dimensions were Context (consideration of the social, economic, and political contexts; 94.7%) and Persons (consideration of racial and ethnic similarities between service providers and recipients; 94.7%), while the dimension Metaphors was the least addressed (culturally resonant symbols and concepts; 47.3%). Notably, only three of the reviewed interventions involved adaptations of existing evidence-based programs, with the rest primarily guided by broader theoretical approaches, practice frameworks, and community needs assessments. The findings also reveal gaps in scientific rigor and areas requiring further exploration. Of the 26 studies, over half (14, 53.8%) were descriptive or exploratory, while others focused on formative or process evaluations (6, 23.1%) and outcome evaluations (6, 23.1%). Most interventions were community-based (13, 68.4%) or online-based (4, 21.1%), with fewer efforts aimed at systemic change.

Discussion: The evidence regarding IPV interventions developed for or culturally adapted to Asian communities remains limited and continues to evolve. Additional research is needed to move beyond descriptive and exploratory stages. The dominance of community-based initiatives and the scarcity of systemic interventions suggest that communities are filling gaps left by an insufficient or ineffective formal system. Overall, this review provides valuable insight into the limited literature on culturally responsive IPV interventions, highlighting promising practices and significant gaps in the evidence base.