No abstract

How to cite this manuscriptIf you make reference to this version of the manuscript, use the following information:Stith, S. M., Liu, T., Davies, L. C., Boykin, E. L., Alder, M. C., Harris, J. M.,…Dees, J. anger, family conflict and family cohesion). Large effect sizes were also found between child neglect and six risk factors (child social competence, parent-child relationship, parent perceives child as problem, parent's level of stress, parent's level of anger, and parent's self-esteem).

ࡗThe Intergenerational Transmission of Spouse Abuse: A Meta-AnalysisThis study uses meta-analytic procedures to examine the relationship between growing up in a violent home and subsequently becoming part of a violent marital relationship. Our meta-analysis examines published and unpublished research studies that investigate the relationship between witnessing or experiencing family violence in childhood and receiving or perpetrating violence in an adult heterosexual cohabiting or marital relationship. The findings of this meta-analysis suggest there is a weak-to-moderate relationship between growing up in an abusive family and becoming involved in a violent marital relationship. Differential effects of gender and sample type are also discussed.The intergenerational transmission of violence is one of the most often studied explanations of part-Department of Human Development, Virginia Tech, 7054 Haycock Road, Falls Church, VA 22043 (sstith@vt.edu).

Intimate partner homicide (IPH) is a serious problem throughout the world. Research has identified the continued need to examine risk factors for IPH to identify individuals who may be at a greater risk of IPH perpetration or victimization. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis on risk factors for male IPH perpetration and female IPH victimization. This meta-analysis examined results from 17 studies, which included 148 effect sizes used in the analysis. Primary findings from this research suggest the strongest risk factors for IPH were the perpetrator having direct access to a gun, perpetrator's previous nonfatal strangulation, perpetrator's previous rape of the victim, perpetrator's previous threat with a weapon, the perpetrator's demonstration of controlling behaviors, and the perpetrator's previous threats to harm the victim. Implications for law enforcement personnel, medical professionals, victim advocates, mental health professionals, and other professionals who may be in contact with potential IPH perpetrators and victims are discussed.

Objectives: This meta-analysis examines the strength of the link between substance use (e.g., alcohol use vs. drug use) and intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration and victimization. Method: Data from 285 studies (yielding 983 effect sizes (ESs) and a combined sample size of 627,726) were analyzed using random effects. Moderator analyses compared the impact of overall substance abuse, alcohol use, and drug use on IPV perpetration and victimization for males and females. Results: Overall substance use, alcohol use, and drug use were significantly related to IPV perpetration and victimization, with mean ESs ranging from r ϭ .18 to .23. Results indicate that drug use is a significantly stronger correlate with victimization, compared with alcohol use. Problematic alcohol use measures (i.e., abuse, dependence, and drinking problems) were significantly stronger correlates than consumption measures (e.g., alcohol use or frequency) for IPV victimization, but statistically similar for IPV perpetration. Problematic drug use measures were significantly stronger correlates with perpetration than drug consumption measures. Surprisingly, there were no significant differences between the impact of different drug types, and no significant difference between the impact of stimulants versus nonstimulants on IPV perpetration and victimization. Conclusions: This study provides the most comprehensive analysis of the link between substance use and IPV to date. Even if certain drugs are regarded as a lower health risk, clinicians are encouraged to evaluate the impact on their clients' IPV. Future IPV researchers are encouraged to include specific drug types and frequencies of substance use.

No abstract

Objectives: This meta-analysis aimed to explore the relationship between mental health disorders and symptoms of mental health disorders (depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD], antisocial personality disorder [PD], and borderline PD) and physical intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration and victimization for males and females. Method: Data from 207 studies, yielding 511 effect sizes, were analyzed. The overall strength of each correlate for IPV perpetration and victimization was examined. Moderator analyses were used to compare the strength of correlates for IPV victimization versus perpetration, as well as for males versus females. Results: Depression, anxiety, PTSD, antisocial PD, and borderline PD were all significant correlates for both IPV victimization and perpetration. Anxiety and PTSD were significantly stronger correlates for victimization than for perpetration, and borderline PD and antisocial PD were significantly stronger correlates for perpetration than for victimization. For women, borderline PD was a significantly stronger correlate for IPV perpetration than for victimization, and PTSD was a significantly stronger correlate for IPV victimization than perpetration. Depression was a significantly stronger correlate for IPV victimization for women than for men. Conclusions: This study provides a comprehensive examination of mental health disorders and their link to IPV perpetration and victimization. The results suggest that clinicians working with individuals or couples in the context of IPV should assess for and treat mental health problems.

An experimental design was used to determine outcomes of a domestic violence-focused treatment program for couples that choose to stay together after mild-to-moderate violence has occurred. Forty-two couples were randomly assigned to either individual couple or multi-couple group treatment. Nine couples served as the comparison group. Male violence recidivism rates 6 months after treatment were significantly lower for the multi-couple group (25%) than for the comparison group (66%). In contrast, men in the individual couple condition were not significantly less likely to recidivate (43%) than those in the comparison group. In addition, marital satisfaction increased significantly, and both marital aggression and acceptance of wife battering decreased significantly among individuals who participated in multi-couple group therapy, but not among those who participated in individual couple therapy or the comparison group.