Is it coercive control? / SUR

Category 02

Surveillance and monitoring

Converts the target's life into an object of continuous visibility: location, communications, activities, and routines, through accounting demands, device access, physical presence, investigators, and everyday technologies. Official New South Wales data recorded harassment, monitoring or tracking in 56 percent of coercive-control incidents between 2024 and 2025.

Dragiewicz et al. 2018; Harris & Woodlock 2019; Woodlock 2017; Turk 2025; Hocking et al. 2025; NSW BOCSAR 2026.

Literature this family is drawn from

  • Harris, B., & Woodlock, D. (2019). Digital coercive control: Insights from two landmark domestic violence studies. The British Journal of Criminology, 59(3), 530-550.
  • Forensic linguistic evidence of psychological abuse and discursive manipulation in cyberstalking cases. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict (2026).
  • Cal. Fam. Code § 6320(c), as amended by 2020 Cal. Stat. ch. 248 (SB 1141).
  • Conn. Gen. Stat. § 46b-1(b) (Jennifer’s Law, 2021).

Literature map

Forums that enumerate this family

A statute that names a tactic is not a finding that the tactic is present.

Identifying a behavior described here does not establish a pattern of behavior and does not establish coercive control. A tactic is not a regime. The instrument consolidates peer-reviewed literature so a reader can check when in doubt. The instrument is not a coding manual. Carlton Research does not provide the instrument as a weapon.

How to cite

Carlton, C. (2026). Is it coercive control?: SUR Surveillance and monitoring. Carlton Research Instruments. /codebook/sur. Last reviewed August 31, 2026.