APA Citation
Spitzberg, B., & Cupach, W. (2007). The State of the Art of Stalking: Taking Stock of the Emerging Literature. *Aggression and Violent Behavior*, 12(1), 64-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2006.05.001
Summary
This comprehensive literature review synthesized research on stalking, establishing that former intimate partners constitute the largest category of stalkers, with patterns that can persist for years and escalate to violence. The research documented that post-relationship stalking is remarkably persistent—mean duration exceeds two years—and that the majority of stalkers make explicit threats, with a significant minority acting on them. For narcissistic abuse survivors, this research validates the reality that leaving doesn't end the danger; the narcissist's need for supply, inability to accept rejection, and sense of entitlement to your attention can generate years of unwanted contact and harassment that meets the clinical and legal definitions of stalking.
Why This Matters for Survivors
For survivors who assumed leaving would bring peace but instead face ongoing harassment, surveillance, and unwanted contact, this research validates your experience and provides critical context. Post-relationship stalking by intimate partners is the most common form of stalking, and it persists far longer than people expect. The narcissist who won't let go isn't showing unusual attachment—they're showing a documented pattern where rejection triggers escalating pursuit rather than acceptance. Understanding this helps you take protective measures seriously rather than hoping it will simply stop.
What This Research Found
Former intimate partners are the primary stalkers. Approximately 50% of female stalking victims and 30% of male victims are stalked by former romantic partners. The intimate knowledge gained through relationship, combined with rejection dynamics, makes post-relationship stalking the dominant form.
Stalking persists far longer than expected. Mean stalking duration exceeds two years, with significant numbers of cases persisting for over five years. The popular image of stalking as brief unwanted attention misrepresents the reality of remarkable, frightening persistence.
Threats are common and meaningful. Approximately 75% of stalkers make explicit threats. While not all follow through, threats predict elevated risk of violence. Between 25-40% of stalkers (depending on study) escalate to physical violence.
Stalking behavior includes diverse tactics. Research identified clusters of stalking behavior: surveillance (watching, following), unwanted contact (calls, messages, showing up), harassment (threats, property damage), and proxy pursuit (using others to contact the victim). Different stalkers use different combinations; most use multiple tactics.
Why This Matters for Survivors
Leaving doesn’t end the danger. If you left a narcissist expecting peace and instead face ongoing harassment, surveillance, and unwanted contact, you’re experiencing a documented pattern. Post-separation abuse through stalking is the most common form of stalking. Your expectation that it would simply stop was reasonable—but the research shows otherwise.
The persistence isn’t about you. Stalking is driven by the stalker’s internal needs—supply, control, inability to accept rejection—not by your responses. You’re not making it continue by existing; you’re not able to make it stop by responding differently. The narcissist’s need for supply and entitlement to your attention fuel pursuit regardless of your behavior.
Take threats seriously. If the narcissist has made threats, this elevates your risk. Most stalkers threaten; a significant minority follow through. Don’t dismiss threats as “just words” or assume they’re empty because past threats weren’t acted on. Each threat is data about the stalker’s psychological state.
Plan for persistence. Given that stalking averages over two years, protective measures must be sustainable long-term. This isn’t a short-term crisis requiring short-term response—it’s an ongoing situation requiring ongoing management. Safety planning should account for the long haul.
Clinical Implications
Assess for stalking in post-separation clients. Clients who’ve left narcissistic relationships may be experiencing stalking without recognizing it as such. Assessment should specifically ask about surveillance, unwanted contact, showing up uninvited, and monitoring—not just overt threats.
Provide education about stalking patterns. Clients may expect post-relationship pursuit to be brief. Education about typical duration (years, not weeks) helps calibrate expectations and supports sustained protective measures rather than waiting for it to “blow over.”
Support safety planning. Given stalking’s persistence and potential for escalation, safety planning is clinical priority. This includes documenting incidents, varying routines, informing key contacts, considering restraining orders (with understanding of their limitations), and connecting with domestic violence resources.
Address psychological impact. Stalking produces chronic stress, hypervigilance, and sometimes PTSD. Even without physical violence, the ongoing threat and loss of privacy constitute significant psychological harm requiring clinical attention.
Consider threat assessment referral. For cases involving explicit threats or escalating behavior, professional threat assessment can help evaluate risk level and guide protective measures. Clinicians should know when to refer beyond their expertise.
Broader Implications
Legal System Responses
Anti-stalking laws exist in all U.S. states, but enforcement varies. Understanding typical stalking patterns—persistence, diversity of tactics, escalation risk—helps legal professionals respond appropriately. Orders of protection provide one tool but aren’t complete solutions.
Workplace Implications
Stalkers often target victims at workplaces—a predictable location. Employers should understand stalking dynamics to protect both targeted employees and workplace safety more broadly. Security measures and support protocols can help.
Technology Evolution
Since this 2007 review, technology has transformed stalking capabilities—GPS tracking, social media monitoring, spyware on devices. While the psychological dynamics remain similar, tactical options have expanded dramatically. Current understanding must account for technological stalking methods.
Prevention Possibilities
Understanding that intimate partner stalking is the dominant form suggests prevention opportunity: early intervention in relationships showing control and possession dynamics, education about stalking warning signs, and support for those ending controlling relationships before stalking develops.
Limitations and Considerations
Review rather than primary research. This paper synthesizes existing literature rather than conducting new research. Conclusions depend on quality of reviewed studies.
Pre-smartphone era. Published in 2007, this review precedes widespread smartphone adoption. Contemporary stalking increasingly involves digital surveillance that this review couldn’t fully address. The psychological patterns remain relevant; tactical specifics have evolved.
Definitional variation. Different studies define stalking differently, making cross-study comparison challenging. Prevalence estimates vary depending on definition used.
Gender dynamics. While women are more often stalked by former partners than men are, male victims of stalking exist and may face additional barriers to recognition and support. The research identifies patterns without suggesting male victims’ experiences are less serious.
How This Research Is Used in the Book
This research is cited in Chapter 20: The Field Guide to document intimate partner stalking patterns:
“Former intimate partners constitute the largest category of stalkers, with patterns persisting for years and sometimes escalating to violence.”
The citation supports the book’s guidance for survivors dealing with narcissistic ex-partners who won’t let go.
Historical Context
The 2007 review appeared after two decades of growing attention to stalking. Anti-stalking laws had emerged in the early 1990s following high-profile cases (Rebecca Schaeffer’s murder by a stalker in 1989 catalyzed California’s first anti-stalking law). Research proliferated attempting to understand this newly-named phenomenon.
Spitzberg and Cupach’s review organized this emerging literature, synthesizing findings across studies and establishing key patterns that continue to inform practice. Their work helped establish stalking as a serious form of interpersonal violence distinct from other forms of harassment, with its own risk factors, patterns, and intervention needs.
The finding that former intimate partners constitute the primary stalking category connected stalking to domestic violence, reframing it from stranger-danger to relationship-embedded threat. This reframing has implications for prevention, intervention, and support—the resources developed for domestic violence survivors are relevant to stalking victims, who often are the same people.
Further Reading
- Mullen, P.E., Pathé, M., & Purcell, R. (2009). Stalkers and Their Victims (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
- Meloy, J.R. (Ed.). (1998). The Psychology of Stalking: Clinical and Forensic Perspectives. Academic Press.
- Logan, T.K., & Walker, R. (2009). Partner stalking: Psychological dominance or “business as usual”? Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 10(3), 247-270.
- Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (1998). Stalking in America: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. National Institute of Justice.
- Davis, K.E., Ace, A., & Andra, M. (2000). Stalking perpetrators and psychological maltreatment of partners: Anger-jealousy, attachment insecurity, need for control, and break-up context. Violence and Victims, 15(4), 407-425.
About the Author
Brian H. Spitzberg, PhD is Professor of Communication at San Diego State University and one of the leading researchers on stalking, obsessive relational intrusion, and unwanted pursuit behaviors. His work has shaped both academic understanding and legal definitions of stalking.
William R. Cupach, PhD is Professor of Communication at Illinois State University, specializing in problematic relationships, conflict, and the "dark side" of interpersonal communication. His collaboration with Spitzberg has produced foundational research on stalking and obsessive pursuit.
Together, they developed influential typologies of stalking behavior and validated measures that have been used in research worldwide, establishing empirical foundations for what had been understood primarily through case studies and clinical observation.
Historical Context
Published in 2007, this review synthesized two decades of rapidly growing stalking research. Anti-stalking laws had emerged in the 1990s following high-profile cases; research followed, attempting to understand prevalence, patterns, and risk factors. This review organized the emerging literature, establishing key findings that continue to inform clinical practice and legal responses to stalking.
Frequently Asked Questions
Research consistently finds that former intimate partners constitute the largest category of stalkers—approximately 50% of female stalking victims and 30% of male victims are stalked by former romantic partners. The intimate knowledge gained through the relationship, combined with rejection that narcissists particularly cannot tolerate, makes post-relationship stalking the most common form.
The mean duration of stalking exceeds two years, with some cases persisting for decades. Unlike the popular image of stalking as brief unwanted attention, research documents remarkable persistence. Narcissistic stalkers in particular may not accept that the relationship is over; their sense of entitlement to your attention can fuel pursuit for years after you've moved on.
The majority of stalkers (approximately 75%) make explicit threats, and a significant minority (approximately 25-40% depending on the study) follow through with physical violence. Threats should be taken seriously—they predict elevated risk. However, even stalkers who don't make threats can escalate to violence, so absence of threats doesn't guarantee safety.
Stalking is driven by the stalker's internal needs, not by the victim's responses. Narcissistic stalkers seek supply, control, and relief from narcissistic injury; your non-response doesn't provide these, but neither does it remove the needs driving the pursuit. The behavior often intensifies when you don't respond—an 'extinction burst' as the stalker escalates to provoke reaction.
Stalking involves repeated, unwanted pursuit that causes fear or would cause fear in a reasonable person. It's not just difficulty accepting a breakup—it's a pattern of behavior including surveillance, unwanted contact, showing up uninvited, monitoring your activities, and refusing to accept your right to end the relationship. The persistence and fear-inducing quality distinguish stalking from ordinary breakup difficulty.
Research on restraining order effectiveness is mixed. Orders provide legal documentation and consequences for violations, which deters some stalkers. However, they don't physically prevent contact, and some stalkers (particularly those with narcissistic or antisocial features) may escalate when orders are issued—viewing them as challenge to their entitlement. Orders are one tool, not a complete solution.
Safety planning should include: documenting all incidents, varying routines, informing workplace and trusted contacts, security measures for home and devices, and considering professional threat assessment. Because stalking is persistent, measures must be sustainable long-term. Support from domestic violence advocates who understand stalking patterns can help develop appropriate plans.
Some do, but treatment success is limited. Stalking often reflects personality patterns (including narcissistic and antisocial features) that are difficult to treat. The stalker must first accept that their behavior is problematic—difficult when narcissism involves inability to see the self as wrong. For victims, the research suggests planning for persistence rather than hoping for change.