A Mixed Method Study of Intimate Partner Violence: How Sex and Severity Impact Perpetrator Prior Involvement, Abnormality, and Responsibility

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 897-918 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew W. Savage ◽  
Jennifer A. Scarduzio ◽  
Kate Lockwood Harris ◽  
Kellie E. Carlyle
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Attribution Theory ◽  
Mixed Method ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Intimate Terrorism ◽  
Male Perpetrators ◽  
Female Perpetrators ◽  
Defensive Attribution Theory ◽  
Method Approach

This study employed a mixed method approach to examine the effects of participant sex, perpetrator sex, and severity of violence on perceptions of intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators. Quantitative participants (n = 449) completed a survey and qualitative participants (n = 31) participated in a focus group or an interview. Participants believed that it was more likely male perpetrators had prior involvement in IPV. Participants rated stories of female perpetrators as more abnormal than stories of male perpetrators. Participants in the weak severity of violence condition had lower evaluations of responsibility than the strong or fatal severity of violence conditions and only women were discerning about perpetrator sex in their ratings of responsibility. Theoretical implications extend intimate terrorism and defensive attribution theory.

Comparison of Impulsive and Premeditated Female Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence

Partner Abuse ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 284-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah L. Lake ◽  
Matthew S. Stanford
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intervention Program ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Female Population ◽  
Male Perpetrators ◽  
Female Perpetrators

A bimodal classification of aggression has been shown to be useful among male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV; Stanford, Houston, & Baldridge, 2008). To extend this research, this study attempts to replicate this result in a female population. The Impulsive/Premeditated Aggression Scale (IPAS) was used to classify (N = 87) females who were convicted of domestic violence and court ordered into an intervention program as being predominately impulsive–aggressive (IA) or predominately premeditated–aggressive (PM). The results of this study demonstrate that female IPV perpetrators (both IA and PM) tend to be similar to male IA batterers, with low psychopathic traits and higher levels of psychopathology. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Suicide ideation in court-referred male perpetrators of intimate partner violence

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin Wolford-Clevenger ◽  
Jeniimarie Febres ◽  
Heather Zapor ◽  
Joanna Elmquist ◽  
Hope Brasfield ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Suicide Ideation ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Male Perpetrators

Factors Distinguishing Reciprocal Versus Nonreciprocal Intimate Partner Violence Across Time and Reporter

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052110014
Author(s):  
Doris F. Pu ◽  
Christina M. Rodriguez ◽  
Marina D. Dimperio
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Transition To Parenthood ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Couple Functioning ◽  
Female Perpetrators ◽  
Over Time

Although intimate partner violence (IPV) is often conceptualized as occurring unilaterally, reciprocal or bidirectional violence is actually the most prevalent form of IPV. The current study assessed physical IPV experiences in couples and evaluated risk and protective factors that may be differentially associated with reciprocal and nonreciprocal IPV concurrently and over time. As part of a multi-wave longitudinal study, women and men reported on the frequency of their IPV perpetration and victimization three times across the transition to parenthood. Participants also reported on risk factors related to personal adjustment, psychosocial resources, attitudes toward gender role egalitarianism, and sociodemographic characteristics at each wave. Participants were classified into one of four IPV groups (reciprocal violence, male perpetrators only, female perpetrators only, and no violence) based on their self-report and based on a combined report, which incorporated both partners’ reports of IPV for a maximum estimate of violence. Women and men were analyzed separately, as both can be perpetrators and/or victims of IPV. Cross-sectional analyses using self-reported IPV data indicated that IPV groups were most consistently distinguished by their levels of couple satisfaction, across gender; psychological distress also appeared to differentiate IPV groups, although somewhat less consistently. When combined reports of IPV were used, sociodemographic risk markers (i.e., age, income, and education) in addition to couple functioning were among the most robust factors differentiating IPV groups concurrently, across gender. In longitudinal analyses, sociodemographic vulnerabilities were again among the most consistent factors differentiating subsequent IPV groups over time. Several gender differences were also found, suggesting that different risk factors (e.g., women’s social support and men’s emotion regulation abilities) may need to be targeted in interventions to identify, prevent, and treat IPV among women and men.

Attribution Theory, Bystander Effect and Willingness to Intervene in Intimate Partner Violence

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052199794
Author(s):  
Clara N. Wijaya ◽  
Lynne D. Roberts ◽  
Robert T. Kane
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Attribution Theory ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Bystander Effect ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Online Questionnaire ◽  
Convenience Sample ◽  
Measurement Models ◽  
Willingness To Intervene

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a crime that is afflicted by a current or previous romantic relationship partner. One in four women has experienced IPV at least once in their lifetime, with physical and psychological consequences. IPV cases tend to go largely unnoticed and under-reported, with low rates of intervention by bystanders. This cross-sectional correlational study investigated whether a combination of attribution theory and the bystander effect could predict the willingness of strangers to intervene in IPV. There were two models tested. The first model examined attitudes towards the victim, while the second one examined attitudes towards the perpetrator. The relationship between perceived responsibility and willingness to intervene was hypothesized to be mediated by sympathy and anger, with the number of bystanders as a moderator to mediating pathways (sympathy towards victim and anger towards perpetrator). A convenience sample of 278 Australian residents aged 18-years and older was presented in a vignette depicting an IPV incident occurring in public. Participants completed measures about the vignette in an online questionnaire. Model testing was conducted using MPlus; confirmatory factor analysis indicated a good fit of the measurement models. After controlling potential covariates, moderated mediation models of victim and perpetrator were analyzed. Attribution theory was a significant predictor in willingness to intervene ( f² = .23, p < .001), but the bystander effect was not. Both attitudes towards victim and perpetrator accounted for unique variance in willingness to intervene in IPV, highlighting the importance of examining both. Findings indicate that psychoeducation campaigns aimed at reducing victim-blaming and promoting intervening behavior could be an effective means of preventing IPV.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document