In the United States, the judicial system response to violence between intimate partners, or intimate partner violence (IPV), typically mandates that adjudicated perpetrators complete a batterer intervention program (BIP). The social science data has found that these programs, on the whole, are only minimally effective in reducing rates of IPV. The authors examined the social science literature on the characteristics and efficacy of BIPs. More than 400 studies were considered, including a sweeping, recently conducted survey of BIP directors across the United States and Canada. Results of this review indicate that the limitations of BIPs are due, in large part, to the limitations of current state standards regulating these programs and, furthermore, that these standards are not grounded in the body of empirical research evidence or best practices. The authors, all of whom have considerable expertise in the area of domestic violence perpetrator treatment, conducted an exhaustive investigation of the following key intervention areas: overall effectiveness of BIPs; length of treatment/length of group sessions; number of group participants and number of facilitators; group format and curriculum; assessment protocol and instruments; victim contact; modality of treatment; differential treatment; working with female perpetrators; working with perpetrators in racial and ethnic minority groups; working with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) perpetrators; perpetrator treatment and practitioner–client relationships; and required practitioner education and training. Recommendations for evidence-based national BIP standards were made based on findings from this review.
Gender-specific men-only interventions for intimate partner violence (IPV) have had limited success beyond the effects of arrest alone. This review outlines current U.S. state-mandated treatments for IPV, acknowledges how conjoint treatment may better address a subtype of IPV that is not motivated by power and control, examines and reviews previously conducted couples-based treatments, and highlights policy implications and future directions. Empirical findings and theoretical support for the Duluth model, cognitive-behavioral approaches, and IPV typologies are presented, followed by a systematic review of selected quasi-and true experimental studies on couplesbased approaches for IPV. U.S. state guidelines that absolutely exclude conjoint approaches are overly restrictive, considering the poor evidence of effectiveness for current gender-specific groups. Further, the theoretical foundations of most men-only groups assume unilateral, male-to-female violence, which does not fit at least one-third of court-involved cases and leaves treatment needs of couples experiencing problematic relationship dynamics unmet. For a carefully screened subset of couples that experience predominantly "situational violence," conjoint communication and relationship skills training groups may be a viable alternative to the Duluth model and cognitivebehavioral men-only groups.
Individuals with borderline personality features may be susceptible to react to situational stressors with negative and interpersonally maladaptive emotionality (e.g., anger) and aggression. The current study attempted to test two moderated mediation models to investigate dispositional risk factors associated with borderline personality features and intimate partner violence (IPV). Results from an experimental rejection induction paradigm were examined using moderated regression to observe contextual reactions to imagined romantic rejection from a current romantic partner among individuals with borderline personality features. An ethnically diverse sample of 218 undergraduates at a large public university in the southwestern United States was recruited. Participants responded to demographic questions and self-report measures, and engaged in an experimental rejection induction paradigm. Borderline personality features was positively associated with rejection sensitivity, physical assault, and psychological aggression. Contrary to initial hypotheses, rejection sensitivity did not serve as a mediator of the relations between borderline personality features and physical assault and psychological aggression. However, trait anger mediated the relation between borderline personality features and psychological aggression. As such, trait anger may be an important explanatory variable in the relation between borderline personality features and psychological aggression specifically. Results of the rejection induction paradigm indicated that, for individuals who were asked to imagine an ambiguous rejection, the relation between borderline personality features and state anger post-rejection was strengthened. For individuals who imagined a critical rejection, there was no significant relation between borderline personality features and state anger post-rejection. Findings suggest that trait anger may be an important dispositional factor in the link between borderline personality features and IPV. In addition, contextual factors, such as ambiguous rejection by an intimate partner, may be especially relevant in activating anger or aggression in individuals with borderline personality features.
Borderline and antisocial personality features relate to multiple externalizing behaviors, including intimate partner violence (IPV). However, not all individuals with borderline and antisocial traits perpetrate IPV. The strength of the personality-IPV link may be related to problematic substance use. We examined borderline and antisocial personality features, problematic substance use, and IPV in a community sample of couples. Positive relations between both borderline and antisocial features and IPV were stronger in conditions of high problematic alcohol use relative to low problematic alcohol use. Alcohol misuse may be an important factor to consider for IPV reduction in men with these personality features.
Borderline and psychopathic features have been linked to unique psychophysiological reactivity profiles. Studies have suggested that levels of psychophysiological reactivity for partner-violent men cannot be attributed to personality features alone. This study tested cognitive and affective empathy as moderators of relations between borderline personality, Factor 1 psychopathy, and psychophysiological reactivity using a community sample of 135 male participants and their female partners. Cognitive empathy moderated the relation between borderline personality features and heart rate reactivity. Affective empathy moderated the relation between Factor 1 psychopathy features and heart rate reactivity. However, directions of these interactions were contrary to original predictions. Understanding unique empathy deficits may be beneficial for identifying ways to minimize relationship conflict, manage arousal, and decrease violence.
Evolutionary theory is the unifying framework and the most powerful explanatory system in the life sciences. The application of evolutionary theory to psychological research has generated tremendous theoretical and empirical progress in the last three decades. These efforts have considerably advanced the understanding of human psychology and behavior, yet there remains considerable potential to utilize this understanding beyond basic research. We have created the first special journal issue on practical applications of evolutionary psychology to encourage efforts informing real-world challenges. These articles cover topics spanning psychopathology and mental health, pressing social issues such as teenage pregnancy, community and neighborhood conditions, mass-market media, and public policy. Interventions and public policy should be informed by science; we hope that this initial effort is just the first of many journal issues that highlight how evolutionary theory can bring practical benefits to individuals and their societies.
This article considers the risks and benefits of couples’ interventions for intimate partner violence (IPV). Because current batterers’ treatment programs have been shown to be largely ineffective in stopping recidivism, there is clearly a need to experiment with novel approaches to establish empirically supported treatments for IPV. Previous studies testing the efficacy of conjoint therapy for couples experiencing situational violence have demonstrated promising results. However, most states mandate prohibiting testing these couples’ interventions in court-mandated samples. In this article, we describe a randomized clinical trial of the Creating Healthy Relationships Program (Cleary Bradley, Friend, & Gottman, 2011) for situationally violent couples in a court-mandated sample and the difficulties in conducting such an experiment within an established coordinated community response.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.