Men who use violence: intimate violence versus non-intimate violence profiles

The current study examined the differences between three types of violent men based on Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart's (1994) tripartite typology and a group of non-intimate violent men. First, a cluster analysis was conducted on a sample of 91 domestically violent men, resulting in three clusters that approximated the tripartite model for psychopathology as measured by the MMPI-2, that is, non-pathological, borderline/dysphoric, and antisocial. Based on the violence variables (i.e., severity of violence, family-only violence, and exposure to family of origin violence) only severity of violence approximated what would be expected across the three clusters, that is, the less the psychopathology, the less severe the violence. The other two violence variables had approximate frequencies/percentages of occurrence that would be expected for individual typologies with some but not all three typologies. In comparing the three intimate violent typologies to the non-intimate violent group, the non-intimate and non-pathological groups were within normal limits and did not differ significantly on any of the MMPI-2 scales. These non-intimate and non-pathological groups differed significantly from the antisocial and borderline/dysphoric groups on all the scales that defined the psychopathology of these two groups. On the violence variables, the non-intimate groups reported significantly less severe violence than the borderline/dysphoric and antisocial groups.     

Women and men's use of coercive control in intimate partner violence

This study examined the relationship between coercive control and intimate partner violence (IPV) for men and women and for targets and perpetrators. One hundred and seventy-two participants (85 men, 87 women) recruited from three samples reported on their own and their partner's behavior. IPV was measured using the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2). Coercive control was measured using modified items from the Psychological Maltreatment of Women Inventory (PMWI). Coercive control was associated with IPV, and this relationship was similar for men and women across the three samples. In fact, coercive control was predominantly reciprocal in nature, with women and men reporting both receiving and perpetrating controlling behaviors. Overall, coercive controlling behaviors were characteristic of individuals within violent relationships, regardless of their physical abuse status. The experience of violence, rather than gender, was the best predictor of coercive control.     

Firearm use in intimate partner violence: a brief overview

Readers of this volume are likely to have specific interests in domestic violence or in firearms policy. It is not assumed, however, that the typical reader will know about the interface of the two fields. Thus, the volume begins with a synopsis of the epidemiology of weapon use in intimate partner violence. The purpose of this article is to help readers better understand the nature of the problem, obtain knowledge that will provide a context for the policy, and understand practice implications of the articles that follow.     

Antisociality and intimate partner violence: the facilitating role of shame

Numerous theories classify distinct subtypes of men who perpetrate violence against female partners. These theories contend that a large portion of these men possess antisocial characteristics that may increase risk for violence. Affectively, these men have been found to externalize their emotions, including shame and guilt, and it has been suggested that this process contributes to the perpetration of partner violence. Therefore, this study sought to examine the role of shame and guilt in the association between antisociality and partner violence perpetration (i.e., psychological, physical, and sexual). Based on a sample of 423 undergraduate men, this study found that shame moderated the association between antisociality and partner violence perpetration such that as shame increases, the associations between antisociality and all three types of partner violence perpetration increase. These findings contribute to the theoretical understanding of typological models of partner violence and have clinical implications for batterer intervention programs.     

Youth violence trajectories and proximal characteristics of intimate partner violence

Analyses first examined the developmental course of intimate partner violence (IPV), beginning with trajectories of youth violence. We then examined potential mediators of prior youth violence trajectories in models predicting later IPV perpetration as an outcome. Potential mediators include risks associated with the individual (e.g., current alcohol and drug use and mental health diagnosis), characteristics of a perpetrator's partner (e.g., use of alcohol/drugs and history of antisocial behavior), and aspects of the surrounding community (e.g., neighborhood norms favorable to violence and drug use). Data are from the Seattle Social Development Project, a longitudinal study of over 800 individuals followed from elementary school to young adulthood (age 24). Findings suggest that both chronic and late-increaser patterns of youth violence elevated the likelihood of later IPV perpetration. Partial mediation effects of the relation between youth violence and IPV were found for variables related to one's partner and the surrounding community. Individual characteristics of the perpetrator were not uniquely predictive of IPV when measured as a risk index and modeled along with other risk factors. Findings indicate that the risk of IPV could be lessened by addressing earlier forms of violence and by intervening to reduce risks within and across domains of influence.     

Individual treatment of intimate partner violence perpetrators

This article outlines a rationale for investigating the individual (one-on-one) treatment format and individualized (case-tailored) services for partner abuse perpetrators. Many state standards caution against or prohibit individual services in abuser intervention. However, initial research indicates that motivational interviewing, conducted individually, can increase abusive clients' engagement in the change process. Challenges of using the group format in treatment development are discussed along with potential benefits of individual treatment for this population. Notably, individual treatment can be adapted to the client's stage of change, can address a range of presenting concerns (such as substance abuse and mood disorders) that may influence outcome, and can be used to focus clinical attention on case-specific change targets while avoiding potentially negative and antisocial peer influences in the group format. Nevertheless, individual treatment has been almost entirely ignored to date in clinical research with this population.     

Systemic perspectives on intimate partner violence treatment

This article reviews changes in the research literature on intimate partner violence (IPV) since our earlier review (Stith, Rosen, & McCollum, 2003). A rationale for systemic treatment of IPV has emerged from research that has continued to document the limited effectiveness of single-gender treatment approaches for offenders and that has identified subtypes of abusive relationships, including situational couple violence, which often includes the reciprocal use of violence. Consistent findings from the available outcome research have demonstrated that for carefully screened couples who choose to stay together, systemic interventions decrease incidences of IPV and decrease the risk factors for IPV with no increase in risk. Implications for research and treatment are offered.     

Typology of reactions to intimate partner violence among men and women arrested for partner violence

This study examined behavioral and emotional responses to partner-initiated violence reported by men and women court-ordered to domestic violence counseling. Respondents provided Likert-type ratings of behavioral and emotional responses to their partners' initiated violence. Cluster analysis to determine heterogeneity of emotional and behavioral responses resulted in a three-cluster solution. The profile for Cluster 1, predominantly male, showed no specific behavioral or emotional reaction pattern. Cluster 2 respondents, evenly split between males and females, but comprising a high proportion of all of the female participants, reported frequently doing what the partner wanted and attempting to escape. Emotional responses experienced by Cluster 2 respondents were anger, insult, and fear. Cluster 3, predominantly male, reported a frequent tendency to use force in response and escape when their partners initiated physical violence. Emotionally, Cluster 3 participants reported experiencing high levels of anger and insult, and relatively low levels of fear and low levels of amusement. Implications of these findings for development of gender-based intervention strategies will be discussed.     

Stalking victimization in the context of intimate partner violence

This article is one of the first to extensively compare characteristics of women who do and do not report stalking by a violent partner or ex-partner using a large sample of women with civil protective orders. Specifically, the purpose of this study was to examine similarities and differences in relationship and victimization history characteristics, mental health symptoms, help-seeking, and protective order violations for women who report being stalked in the past year (n = 345) by the partner they received a protective order against compared to women who received a protective order against a violent partner but who report no stalking by that partner ever in the relationship (n = 412). Results indicate that women who report partner stalking have more severe partner violence victimization, histories, increased distress, greater fear, and more protective order violations, suggesting that partner stalking victimization warrants more research and practice attention.     

Patterns of intimate partner violence: correlates and outcomes

Battered women experience different constellations of violence and abusive behavior characterized by various combinations of physical violence, sexual violence, psychological abuse, and stalking. The goals of the current study were to determine whether it was possible to identify empirically derived and meaningful patterns of intimate partner violence (IPV) and to examine correlates and outcomes of the IPV patterns. Three IPV patterns were identified using cluster analysis. Pattern 1 was characterized by moderate levels of physical violence, psychological abuse, and stalking but little sexual violence. Pattern 2 was characterized by high levels of physical violence, psychological abuse, and stalking but low levels of sexual violence. Pattern 3 was characterized by high levels of all violence types. IPV Pattern 3 was associated with the highest prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder and depression, and IPV Pattern 2 had the highest levels of revictimization during the year following recruitment. The clinical and policy implications of the findings are discussed.     

The gender wage gap,weather, and intimate partner violence

Review of Economics of the Household - Two theories of intimate partner violence (IPV) have differing predictions on how women’s bargaining power affects rates of IPV. If an abuser enjoys and...     

Perceptions of motives in intimate partner violence: expressive versus coercive violence

This study examined perceptions of motives in the perpetration of intimate partner violence. Respondents (N = 401) of diverse professions read three vignettes and indicated their perception of the aggressor's motive (from 1 = Exclusively Expressive; 5 = Exclusively Coercive). Half of respondents read vignettes describing male-perpetrated violence against a female partner; the other half, female-perpetrated violence against a male partner. Overall, male-perpetrated aggression was seen as more coercive than female-perpetrated aggression, particularly by shelter workers and victim advocates. Further analyses revealed that men generally gave higher ratings than women, and that women rated female-perpetrated aggression as less coercive than male-perpetrated aggression. In contrast, men did not differ in their ratings of male versus female perpetration. Implications are discussed with respect to the assessment and treatment of partner violence.     

Narratives of aging in intimate partner violence: The double lens of violence and old age

PurposeWith the increase in life expectancy, couples living in intimate partner violence are aging together. The aim of this article is to explore the constructions of aging in intimate partner violence as narratives of couplehood or narratives of old age.Design and methodsThirty individual in-depth interviews with 15 older Israeli couples were tape-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a narrative approach.ResultsThree main domains emerged from the data: health issue narratives, loneliness narratives and relationships with adult offspring narratives. Each of the narratives that emerged from the data analysis consists of a narrative of old age constructing IPV and a narrative of IPV constructing old age.ImplicationsConflictual couplehood dynamics, such as intimate partner violence in old age, is not one-dimensional, but is diverse and complex and this should be taken into consideration.     

Integrating intimate partner violence prevention into daily practice

Research on IPV has mainly focused on the identification of abuse, rather than on evaluating interventions that aim for long-term effects. Until there are well-designed studies to determine which prevention strategies are most effective, nurses can use their counseling and education skills to ensure that women are screened and that resources are made available to those who screen positive. Web-based resources and clinical practice guidelines that nurses can use are presented in the Sidebar.     

The contribution of childhood family violence on later intimate partner violence among robbery victims

This study examined the relative contributions of the three forms of childhood family violence exposure on physical intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization among recent robbery victims and tested a gender-matching modeling prediction for IPV risk. Data from a sample of 103 male and 93 female victims of a robbery were analyzed to investigate the effects of exposure to childhood physical abuse (CPA), childhood sexual abuse (CSA), and witnessing parental violence on the likelihood of IPV in adulthood. As expected, witnessing parental violence was associated with a 2.4-fold increase in IPV for both men and women. Neither CPA nor CSA was significantly associated with IPV after accounting for the effect of witnessing parental violence. There was support for the gender-matching hypothesis with men more likely to report IPV if they had witnessed mother-to-father violence and women more likely to report IPV if they had witnessed father-to-mother violence. Witnessing parental violence is strongly associated with risk for IPV victimization, particularly when the victim is the same-gender parent. Future directions and clinical implications are discussed.     

The gender asymmetric effect of intimate partner violence on relationship satisfaction

Our research examined the association between intimate partner violence and relationship satisfaction among victims. The negative association between victimization and relationship satisfaction was substantially stronger for females than for males. Comparisons between respondents reporting about same-sex relationships with those reporting about opposite-sex relationships provided evidence that the amplified victimization/satisfaction association among female victims is a victim-gender effect rather than an actor-gender effect. In other words, our findings suggest that aggression harms the quality of the intimate partnerships of females much more so than the partnerships of males regardless of whether a male or a female is the perpetrator. We supplemented dialogue about the direct implications of our findings with discussions about how these results may raise conceptual questions about the adequacy of the instruments scholars use to study partner aggression.