Impulse Control Difficulties and Hostility Toward Women as Predictors of Relationship Violence Perpetration in an Undergraduate Male Sample

Abstract

Relationship violence in college students continues to be an important social problem. Prior research has identified several risk factors for relationship violence including trauma exposure, impulse control difficulties, and hostility toward women; however, previous research assessing these variables has mainly focused on bivariate relationships, with little work attempting to connect multiple correlates to relationship violence while utilizing a theoretical, interactive approach. The purpose of this study was to simultaneously examine several correlates of relationship violence (i.e., hostility toward women, trauma exposure, and impulse control difficulties), and to examine male perpetration of relationship violence among a sample of male college students using a cross-sectional design. It was hypothesized that among men in this sample, hostility toward women and trauma exposure would moderate the relationship between impulse control difficulties and relationship violence. The findings suggested that college-aged men, who have high impulse control difficulties, high hostility toward women, and who have multiple trauma exposures, may be more likely to perpetrate relationship violence against a female intimate partner than those who are low in impulse control difficulties, report low levels of hostility toward women, or report fewer or no trauma exposures. Thus, the current study suggests that exposure to trauma predisposes men with specific attributes to relationship violence, which may provide a treatment target for future intervention programs.

Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration Among Sexual Minority People and Associated Factors: A Systematic Review of Quantitative Studies

“…In particular, an abusive personality (Landolt & Dutton, 1997), hostility, emotional instability, and a negative worldview (Pepper & Sand, 2015) as well as higher scores on the aggressive (sadistic), antisocial, avoidant, passive-aggressive, self-defeating, borderline, paranoid, and schizotypal personality scale and on the alcohol-dependent, drug-dependent, bipolar (manic syndrome), and delusional clinical syndrome scales (Fortunata & Kohn, 2003) were associated to couple violence perpetration. Although only few studies assessed the association between these variables and other research are needed, these preliminary findings seem to equate those emerged among heterosexual couples (Brasfield, 2014;Brem et al, 2018;Gildner et al, 2021;Spencer et al, 2019), highlighting the need to consider personality traits in clinical settings. Self-esteem was negatively associated to IPV perpetration as well.…”

Emotion Regulation and Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration in Undergraduate Samples: A Review of the Literature

“…Lifetime perpetration of physical IPV ranged from 6% to 51% for men sampled (Caiozzo et al, 2016; Stappenbeck et al, 2016; Watkins et al, 2014) and 13% to 33% for women (Caiozzo et al, 2016; Ortiz et al, 2015). Three studies examined sexual IPV (Caiozzo et al, 2016; Gildner et al, 2018; Shorey, Brasfield, et al, 2011). Only one study reported the proportion of sexual IPV perpetration and found that 4% of men and less than 1% of women perpetrated sexual IPV in the last two months (Caiozzo et al, 2016).…”

“…Notably there was an association between negative affect and physical IPV perpetration when men reported global difficulties in ER (Shorey et al, 2015). Examination of specific facets of ER indicated that impulse-control difficulties, limited access to ER strategies, and difficulties with goal-directed behavior emerged as the most consistent predictors of psychological and physical IPV perpetration, particularly for men’s perpetration of physical IPV (Bliton et al, 2016; Gildner et al, 2018; Shorey, Brasfield, et al, 2011; Stappenbeck et al, 2016; Watkins et al, 2014). Lack of emotional awareness may also be an important domain of ER associated with women’s perpetration of psychological (Shorey, Brasfield, et al, 2011) and physical IPV (Bliton et al, 2016).…”

“…Nine studies utilized a moderation framework to examine the association between ER and IPV perpetration, four of which exclusively examined male undergraduates (Gildner et al, 2018; Harper et al, 2005; Stappenbeck et al, 2016; Watkins et al, 2014) and one of which exclusively examined female undergraduates (Bell et al, 2020). Within this framework, the strength of the association between two variables is contingent upon ER.…”

“…Of these nine studies, one examined psychological IPV only (Harper et al, 2005), three examined both physical and psychological IPV (Bell et al, 2020; Caiozzo et al, 2016; Stappenbeck et al, 2016; Watkins et al, 2014), and two examined psychological, physical, and sexual IPV (Caiozzo et al, 2016; Gildner et al, 2018). However, it is important to note that Caiozzo and colleagues (2016) were unable to examine sexual lPV as an outcome due to low sample rates and Gildner and colleagues (2018) averaged the three types of IPV as their outcome variable.…”