No abstract

No abstract

We examined the role of sexting coercion as a component of the intimate partner abuse (IPA) construct among young adults to determine whether sexting coercion would emerge alongside other forms of partner aggression as a cumulative risk factor for psychological, sexual, and attachment problems. In a sample of 885 undergraduates (301 men and 584 women), 40% had experienced some type of coercion. Although there was some overlap between sexual coercion and sexting coercion (21% of participants had experienced both), some individuals had experienced only sexting coercion (8%) and some only sexual coercion (11%). Women were more likely than men to be coerced into sexting. Both sexting coercion and sexual coercion were significantly and independently related to negative mental health symptoms, sexual problems, and attachment dysfunction, and, notably, sexting coercion was found to be a cumulative risk factor for nearly all of these negative effects. These data support the idea that digital sexual victimization is a new component of IPA polyvictimization, potentially increasing the negative effects experienced by victims of multiple forms of partner aggression.

This study examines personality and situational correlates of self-reported reasons for intimate partner violence (IPV) among women and men court-ordered to batterers' intervention as IPV offenders. Women endorsed self-defense and men retaliation as their primary reasons for IPV. Both also endorsed emotion dysregulation as a reason for much of their violence. Women's partner violence was largely, but not exclusively, situationally motivated. Women's reasons for violence also related significantly to self-reported borderline personality symptomology. Men's reasons for IPV related primarily to their self-reported antisocial and borderline personality traits, not to situational factors. Thus, the IPV of some women and some men may be considered "characterological," in that it reflects something about the individual's character or personality. Control or domination of one's partner was not a primary reason for violence among women or men, despite the assumption on which many batterer intervention programs are based, that IPV is primarily a power and control tactic. Clinical implications and recommendations for future research are provided.

This study tests the immediate impact of two interventions for intimate partner violent (IPV) men in affecting behavioral and emotional change during arguments with their partners. Couples with an abusive male partner (N=100) discussed an area of conflict twice, interrupted by a brief intervention. Men were randomly assigned to receive (a) an editing-out-the-negative skills training, (b) an accepting influence skills training, or (c) a time-out. IPV men in both skills-training conditions showed greater decreases in aggressive feelings than IPV men in the time-out condition based on their self-report and observed affective behavior. Women also reported feeling less aggressive when their husbands were assigned to one of the skills-training conditions as compared to the control (time-out) condition. Results suggest that IPV men can learn to adopt new communication skills and that they do appear to have a positive impact on the emotional tone of their arguments. Clinically, communication skills training may be a useful addition to battering intervention programs, although these skills may need to be taught to both men and women involved in violent relationships.