Humiliation, Manipulation, and Control: Evidence of Centrality in Domestic Violence Against an Adult Partner

Abstract

This paper describes two related studies. Study 1 is a literature review of existing adult partner domestic violence assessment scales. Results of the review revealed that the scales varied on the available amount of empirical evidence for validity and reliability. More importantly, results showed that the content of the scales focused most heavily on the physical abuse aspects of domestic violence. Study 2 is a factor analysis performed on the results of 64 items taken from the Artemis Intake Questionnaire, a clinically relevant tool constructed by treatment providers used in working with the victims of domestic violence. Results indicate that reported humiliation and blame of the victim accounted for the largest amount of variance, followed by controlling the victim, and then physical violence. Results of this factor analysis suggest that greater emphasis must be put on factors other than physical violence in the construction of future domestic violence scales.KEY WORDS: domestic violence; emotional abuse; assessment; literature review. INTRODUCTIONIn the last 10-15 years, domestic violence against an adult partner (DV) has been identified as a major health and safety concern (Browne & Williams, 1993;Campbell, 1995a;Walker, 1994). Consequently, research in this area has exploded and, as seen in a literature review addressed in this paper, numerous DV assessment scales have been created (e.g., Dutton & Golant, 1995;Dwyer, 1999;Kropp & Hart, 2000;Marshall, 1992;Shepard & Campbell, 1992;Straus et al., 1996). This paper presents two related studies. The overall purpose of these studies is two-fold: (a) to determine the type of psychometric evidence employed in the development of these current domestic violence measurement techniques and the constructs that are commonly incorporated, and (b) to determine whether the constructs of intimidation, power, and control (in addition to physical violence) are supported by victims' responses and should thus be emphasized in future domestic violence scales and models. The first study consisted of a literature review of existing domestic violence scales in order to examine what constructs are commonly incorporated into the scales, and whether they had been psychometrically evaluated. The review focused on two issues: (a) the types of psychometric support used during the development of these scales, and (b) the overall content of these scales to determine what constructs were most heavily represented. There were two general hypotheses. The first hypothesis concerning the review of these scales was that the majority would focus psychometrically on demonstrating construct validity (convergent, divergent, factor analytic), with some providing evidence for content validity and only a few using predictive validity (concurrent and/or future). Further, we expected that the majority of scales (probably greater than 60%) would provide evidence of 340Strauchler, McCloskey, Malloy, Sitaker, Grigsby, and Gillig reliability consisting of internal consistency and/or temporal stability. The ...

Emotional Abuse and Controlling Behaviors in Heterosexual Relationships: The Role of Employment and Alcohol Use for Women and Their Partners

“…The use of nonphysical violence in abusive relationships is well established in the literature (Strauchler et al 2004;Margolin et al 1998;Kaukinen 2004;Felson and Messner 2000;Outlaw 2009;Schwartz 2005). We argue, however, that research on emotional abuse and controlling behaviors can be advanced by simultaneously examining factors such as employment compatibility and alcohol consumption by both the offender and the victim.…”

“…Particularly, scholars of domestic violence have documented the complex nature of abusive relationships, including physical, emotional, and controlling abuse, eco-nomic maltreatment, or any combination of these acts (Strauchler et al 2004;Outlaw 2009). Early studies utilizing the then-newly created Conflict Tactics Scale (Straus 1979) focused on physical violence (i.e., slapping, punching, kicking, etc.…”

Development, Validity, and Reliability Analyses of Beliefs about Relationship Violence against Women Scale and Gender Stereotypes and Beliefs in Nigeria

“…For example, Strauchler et al (2004) conducted a comprehensive review of 21 measures of partner violence and concluded that -results of this factor analysis suggest that greater emphasis must be put on factors other than physical violence in the construction of future domestic violence scales‖ (p. 339). Notably, their review found that limited emphasis was placed on psychological aspects of partner violence such as humiliation, psychological manipulation, and control (Strauchler et al, 2004). Similarly, Schwartz et al (2012) concluded from a comprehensive review of existing measures that none was based -on extant theory of how male socialization specifically contributes to dating violence‖ (p. 1962).…”

“…A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted to identify and develop a preliminary pool of items for inclusion in the scale (e.g., (Burt, 1980;Strauchler et al, 2004)). Of particular relevance was the comprehensive review and compilation of measures of partner violence (Basile et al, 2007;Flood, 2008).…”

Rethinking Custody Evaluation in Cases Involving Domestic Violence

“…Virtually all domestic violence research and intervention is predicated on this model. Among the several dozen domestic violence assessment tools available that have been tested for construct validity, only a handful consider aspects of abuse other than violence (Strauchler et al, 2004;. All are scaled to reflect the array of violent tactics, and=or the frequency of their use, and physical or psychological effects.…”