A Multilevel Examination of Interpartner Intimate Partner Violence and Psychological Aggression Reporting Concordance (original) (raw)
Related papers
Psychosocial Intervention 29(3) 165-174, 2020
Studies of intimate partner violence (IPV) have generally focused on only one partner. Although this has allowed advances in scientific knowledge on the causes of IPV, currently recent literature is demanding the need to study both members of the couple. Methodologically, the study of dyads requires the use of appropriate statistical techniques to avoid possible systematic biases (for example, type I error due to dependence of observations). We used the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model to study aggression and victimization in 361 heterosexual couples of young adults. The results indicated, on the one hand, that self-reported mutual aggression was found in more than 50% of the couples. On the other hand, we found that participants’ victimization was largely predicted by their own aggressive behavior towards the other member of the couple. While this result suggests the existence of a victim-offender overlap, it may also hide an upwards victimization scores bias: when participants are aggressive toward their partners, they may bias their victimization scores upwards to justify their levels of aggression (“I was aggressive because I felt victimized”).
Attributions of negative partner behavior by men who physically abuse their partners
Journal of family …, 2000
This study investigated the association between family violence and the attributions made for negative partner behaviors in an Australian context. Three groups of men were classified as physically violent (in counseling), nonphysically violent (in counseling), and non-physically violent (in the community). The Relationship Attribution Measure was used to assess the attributional dependent variables of locus, stability, globality, intent, motivation, and blame. Significant differences between violent and nonviolent men on each of the attributional dimensions were found. Physically violent men were more likely than non-physically violent men (counseling) to attribute the negative behavior of their partners to unchangeable, intentional rather than unintentional, selfishly motivated, and blameworthy causes. However, these differences disappeared when marital satisfaction was controlled. The implications of this work for domestic violence intervention programs are discussed, along with a number of methodological issues and directions for future research. KEY WORDS: attributions; spouse abuse; partner behavior; marital satisfaction.
Journal of Family Psychology, 2011
We tested an integrative model of individual and dyadic variables contributing to intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration. Based on the vulnerability-stress-adaptation (VSA) model, we hypothesized that three "enduring vulnerabilities" (i.e., antisocial behavior, hostility, and depressive symptoms) would be associated with a "maladaptive process" (i.e., negative relationship attributions) that would lead to difficulties in couple conflict resolution, thus leading to IPV. Among a community sample of 167 heterosexual couples who were expecting their first child, we used an actor-partner interdependence model to account for the dyadic nature of conflict and IPV, as well as a hurdle count model to improve upon prior methods for modeling IPV data. Study results provided general support for the integrative model, demonstrating the importance of considering couple conflict in the prediction of IPV and showing the relative importance of multiple predictor variables. Gender symmetry was observed for the prediction of IPV occurrence, with gender differences emerging in the prediction of IPV frequency. Relatively speaking, the prediction of IPV frequency appeared to be a function of enduring vulnerabilities among men, but a function of couple conflict among women. Results also revealed important cross-gender effects in the prediction of IPV, reflecting the inherently dyadic nature of IPV, particularly in the case of "common couple violence." Future research using longitudinal designs is necessary to verify the conclusions suggested by the current results.
2011
Romantic relationship satisfaction Externalizing behavior problems Dyadic data Cross-informant data a b s t r a c t This paper illustrates an extension of the APIM technique within a path analysis framework by using cross-informant data on the outcome variable. Data for the current study were derived from a sample of young adult heterosexual couples who had been in a romantic relationship for at least four months (N ¼ 115 couples). The findings from the current study indicate that romantic relationship satisfaction is associated with externalizing behavior problems among both females and males, but that both dyadic data and cross-informant reports are needed to understand this association. Not considering dyadic or cross-informant data may lead to different, and potentially misleading, claims. The findings from the current study provide clear evidence that incorporating cross-informant data in dyadic data analyses provides important new insights into understanding the association between romantic relationship functioning and individual outcomes.
Marital violence, marital distress, and attributions.
1997
Abstract 1. Because empirical associations involving marital distress may be confounded by the presence of marital violence, 2 studies examined the interplay among marital distress, marital violence, and attributions for marital events. Study 1 showed that marital satisfaction was associated with causal and responsibility attributions independently of violence in a sample of 130 husbands.
Psychological Assessment , 2020
Intimate partner aggression (IPA) is a complex construct composed of the means and the motivations by which a person harms his or her intimate partner. Existing measures only assess forms of IPA perpetration while neglecting to measure the motivations for aggressing. The present study sought to fill this lacuna by adapting and validating an existing measure of the forms and functions of adolescent peer aggression to assess IPA perpetration in adults. This new measure-the Forms and Functions of Intimate Partner Aggression (FFIPA)-comprises 4 latent dimensions of IPA (i.e., overt, relational, proactive, and reactive). Participants were 341 heavy-drinking heterosexual couples (N ϭ 682) with a recent history of psychological and/or physical IPA recruited from 2 metropolitan cities in the United States. The FFIPA demonstrated good model fit and internal validity. Unique patterns of convergent and criterion-related validity supported the 4 dimensions of the FFIPA. Results also indicated women perpetrated significantly more overt and relational aggression than men. Findings support the FFIPA as a valid measure of the forms and functions of IPA perpetration. More important, as the only instrument that parses the forms and functions of IPA perpetration, the FFIPA delineates the unique motivations of an aggressive partner separately from the form of his or her aggressive behavior(s). Further replication is needed to generalize this measure to nonconflictual and other types of intimate relationships. Public Significance Statement This study validated a new instrument that measures why and by what means heterosexual adults are aggressive toward their intimate partners. This instrument will allow researchers and practitioners to understand the function of aggressive behavior separate from its form.
Extending the actor–partner interdependence model to include cross-informant data
Journal of Adolescence, 2010
This paper illustrates an extension of the APIM technique within a path analysis framework by using cross-informant data on the outcome variable. Data for the current study were derived from a sample of young adult heterosexual couples who had been in a romantic relationship for at least four months (N = 115 couples). The findings from the current study indicate that romantic relationship satisfaction is associated with externalizing behavior problems among both females and males, but that both dyadic data and cross-informant reports are needed to understand this association. Not considering dyadic or cross-informant data may lead to different, and potentially misleading, claims. The findings from the current study provide clear evidence that incorporating cross-informant data in dyadic data analyses provides important new insights into understanding the association between romantic relationship functioning and individual outcomes.
Occurence of Intimate Partner Violence
This work explored the reasons underlying interpartner disagreement about the occurrence of intimate partner violence (IPV). Research indicates that partners often do not agree about episodes of conflict in their relationship. We conducted interviews with 48 women and men with and without histories of IPV to investigate this lack of agreement. Participant responses were analyzed and themes were identified about why men and women disagree about episodes of conflict. The main results indicate that participants think women and men remember differently; women remember more than men, both choose what they want to remember, and both remember that they were right in the conflict. This work contributes to understanding the disagreement that occurs between partners. Many of these findings have never been suggested by other IPV researchers. The broad-reaching implications of this study include improvement in the accuracy of measuring IPV.