Self-reported psychopathology profiles of high risk violent men with and without a history of physical intimate partner violence

<p>Although intimate partner violent men have been found to be different from non-violent men on a number of variables, little research has compared partner violent men to men who engage in violence outside of relationships. The present research explored the similarities and differences between men with and without a history of physical partner violence within a sample of high risk violent men who attended New Zealands' High Risk Special Treatment Units. Pre-treatment psychopathology, measured on the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (MCMI-III;Millon, Davis, & Millon, 1997) was compared between these two groups and few differences were found. Comparisons on criminal history, criminal risk and change in dynamic risk also revealed no significant differences between these two groups. This research also explored whether similar or different psychopathology subtypes exist among men with and without a history of intimate partner violence. A latent profile analysis was conducted to examine psychopathology subtypes, and the proportions of men with and without a history of partner violence within each subtype were compared. The results showed that there were similar proportions of men from both groups within each of the subtypes, suggesting that men with and without a history of intimate partner violence share similar psychopathology profiles. The likelihood of reconviction or reimprisonment within 1 year of release from prison was also comapred between men with and without a history of intimate partner violence. The two groups were found to be reconvicted at a similar rate for any offence, violent offences, and were at a similar likelihood of being re-imprisoned. To conclude, the results suggest some similarity between men with and without a history of intimate partner violence, but future research should explore a wider range of factors that may distinguish between these two groups and inform whether men who engage in partner violence are unique from men who engage in other forms of violence.</p>

Self-reported psychopathology profiles of high risk violent men with and without a history of physical intimate partner violence

<p>Although intimate partner violent men have been found to be different from non-violent men on a number of variables, little research has compared partner violent men to men who engage in violence outside of relationships. The present research explored the similarities and differences between men with and without a history of physical partner violence within a sample of high risk violent men who attended New Zealands' High Risk Special Treatment Units. Pre-treatment psychopathology, measured on the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III (MCMI-III;Millon, Davis, & Millon, 1997) was compared between these two groups and few differences were found. Comparisons on criminal history, criminal risk and change in dynamic risk also revealed no significant differences between these two groups. This research also explored whether similar or different psychopathology subtypes exist among men with and without a history of intimate partner violence. A latent profile analysis was conducted to examine psychopathology subtypes, and the proportions of men with and without a history of partner violence within each subtype were compared. The results showed that there were similar proportions of men from both groups within each of the subtypes, suggesting that men with and without a history of intimate partner violence share similar psychopathology profiles. The likelihood of reconviction or reimprisonment within 1 year of release from prison was also comapred between men with and without a history of intimate partner violence. The two groups were found to be reconvicted at a similar rate for any offence, violent offences, and were at a similar likelihood of being re-imprisoned. To conclude, the results suggest some similarity between men with and without a history of intimate partner violence, but future research should explore a wider range of factors that may distinguish between these two groups and inform whether men who engage in partner violence are unique from men who engage in other forms of violence.</p>

Therapeutic Dynamics of Aggression, Readiness to Change, and Recidivism in a Partner Violent Men Typology

The Transtheoretical Model (TTM) of behavior change predicts that patients go through different stages of change prior to changing their problematic behavior. This study aims to evaluate the utility and validity of this model in a sample of 549 court-ordered partner violent men. Three types of perpetrators with respect to their readiness to change were revealed. Those in more advantage stage of change use more processes to change their problem and present with higher levels of intimate partner violence (IPV). Low readiness to change levels and treatment drop-out predict short-term criminal justice recidivism, while treatment drop-out predicts medium and long-term recidivism. Results highlight the applicability of the TTM in IPV and its usefulness in designing behavioral interventions with this population.

Judging the Book by Its Cover: What Comprises a Cognitive Behavioral Intervention Program for Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence?

Substantial literature has examined the effectiveness of intimate partner violence (IPV) interventions, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is noted as the second most common approach used in group interventions for partner violent men. However, as little research has examined how CBT principles are operationalized across program curricula, there is currently insufficient information from which to make recommendations for model CBT approaches in IPV interventions. In the current study, we review the literature to determine a set of core elements for comprehensive CBT interventions and use session-level curriculum data from 10 community-based programs to examine the presence of 14 components reflecting 4 CBT factors. Results suggest heterogeneity in the emphasis on CBT elements across programs, despite almost all managers listing CBT as a theoretical approach. Implications are discussed with a call for evaluators and meta-analysts to code for actual curriculum content as opposed to stated program labels.

Using a General Case Management Tool With Partner-violent Men on Community Supervision in Iowa

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is among the most common acts of violence against women worldwide, making it a major global threat to women’s health and safety. The assessment and management of IPV offenders are therefore vital tasks in criminal justice systems. The current study examined whether the DRAOR, a general case management tool, was useful for supervising 112 male IPV offenders in Iowa, United States. Several risk factors emerged as potentially important treatment targets for partner-violent men, including poor attachment with others, substance abuse, anger/hostility, opportunity/access to victims, and problematic interpersonal relationships. While further research is needed to improve the utility of the DRAOR for predicting IPV recidivism, it assesses several factors that are relevant for supervising IPV cases (e.g., substance abuse, anger/hostility, victim access). This suggests the DRAOR could potentially be used to guide case management in the presence of a validated IPV tool that focuses on static risk factors, such as the ODARA. The use of the DRAOR with IPV offenders may also be warranted if they are found to be generally violent/antisocial rather than as family only offenders.

Effects of Angry Rumination and Distraction in Intimate Partner Violent Men

Although the tendency to ruminate is related to the frequency of intimate partner violent (IPV) perpetration, it is unclear how IPV men react emotionally and physiologically during angry rumination. This study is the first to experimentally manipulate rumination and distraction with violent men. Using the rumination and distraction paradigm developed by Nolen-Hoeksema and Morrow, IPV ( N = 87) and nonviolent (NV; N = 30) men underwent an anger induction and then were randomly assigned to either ruminate or distract. IPV men were hypothesized to experience increased effects of rumination compared to NV men. As predicted, the results demonstrate an increase in heart rate from baseline to postrumination. No change in physiological arousal was observed in the distraction condition over time. Surprisingly, no difference state anger was found between IPV and NV men, and both conditions resulted in an increase in state anger. Implications for battering interventions suggest that distraction strategies, such as taking a time-out, are not sufficient to decrease physiological arousal. Intervention strategies that address mindfulness, physiological soothing, distorted cognitions, and rumination may be more powerful in decreasing negative physiological arousal among IPV men.