Study results were examined within the framework of Johnson's (1995) typology, which proposes that there are two main types of IPV: common couple violence and intimate terrorism. The latter type of violence is considered to be a more serious, less common form of violence motivated by a wish to exert general control over one's partner. It tends to escalate over time and is more likely to cause injury. The former type of violence is less serious and more common, arising out of specific arguments in a relationship; it is equally likely to be perpetrated by both males and females and does not escalate over time. The current study hypothesized that poor marital adjustment would be associated with minor violence (common couple violence). It also hypothesized that individual psychological and behavioral characteristics associated with perpetrators of IPV would be more strongly correlated with severe inflicted aggression (intimate terrorism). The study used the Modified Conflict Tactics Scale to measure IPV. The independent variables measured were marital adjustment; psychological and behavioral variables mostly previously associated with perpetrators of partner abuse; and background variables, including demographic characteristics and a history of childhood physical and emotional abuse. The two main hypotheses were apparently supported by the data, in that lower marital adjustment was primarily associated with the less severe forms of IPV; and depression and alcohol problems were associated with the more severe forms of IPV. The main effects of ethnicity were more consistent with a pattern of common couple violence, with the weakest effect of ethnicity being shown for severe inflicted IPV. The study suggests that the effects of ethnicity could be associated with differing cultural beliefs and norms regarding the meaning, purpose, and acceptability of using physically aggressive acts in dealing with marital disputes. 3 tables and 53 references