The purpose of the study was to conduct a preliminary evaluation of a batterer intervention program by investigating changes in psychological variables related to abuse (i.e., truthfulness, violence, lethality, control, and stress coping abilities) between pretreatment and posttreatment assessments in a sample of women involuntarily placed in treatment. This study evaluated arrest records for a period of 12 months following treatment completion to determine the association between changes on these psychological variables and recidivism. The study employed a secondary analysis of 26 treatment completers involuntarily referred into treatment for domestic violence offenses. Analysis indicated that treatment completers were less passive/aggressive and less likely to use physical force on their partners at the conclusion of the treatment program. Implications of the findings for social workers providing treatment services to female domestic violence offenders are explored and discussed.
Babcock, J., Green, C., & Robie, C. (in press). Does batterers’ treatment work? A meta-analytic review of domestic violence treatment. Clinical Psychology Review.
2.
Bennett, L., & Williams, O. (2001). Intervention program for men who batter. In C. Renzetti & J. Edleson (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women (pp. 261-277). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3.
Buttell, F. (2002). Levels of moral reasoning among female domestic violence offenders: Evaluating the impact of treatment. Research on Social Work Practice, 12, 349-363.
4.
Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
5.
Carlsten, C. (2002). Literature is biased as studies rarely look at female to male violence. British Medical Journal, 325, 44.
6.
Davis, R., & Taylor, B. (1999). Does batterer treatment reduce violence? A synthesis of the literature. Women and Criminal Justice, 10, 69-93.
7.
Davis, R., Taylor, B., & Maxwell, C. (2000). Does batterer treatment reduce violence? A randomized experiment in Brooklyn. National Institute of Justice final report (No. 180772). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
8.
Dowd, L. (2001). Female perpetrators of partner aggression: Relevant issues and treatment. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, and Trauma, 5, 73-104.
9.
Dunford, F. (2000). The San Diego Navy Experiment: An assessment of interventions for men who assault their wives. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 468-476.
10.
Dutton, D. (1995). A scale for measuring propensity for abusiveness. Journal of Family Violence, 10, 203-221.
11.
Feder, L., & Forde, D. (2000). A test of the efficacy of court-mandated counseling for domestic violence offenders: The Broward experiment. National Institute of Justice final report (No.184752). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
12.
Fiebert, M., & Gonzalez, D. (1997). College women who initiate assaults on their male partners and the reasons offered for such behavior. Psychological Reports, 80, 583-590.
13.
Follingstad, D. R., Bradley, R. G., Laughlin, J. E., & Burke, L. (1999). Risk factors and correlates of dating violence: The relevance of examining frequency and severity levels in a college sample. Violence and Victims, 14(4), 365-380.
14.
Follingstad, D. R., Rutledge, L., McNeill-Harkins, K., & Polek, D. (1988). Factors related to physical violence in dating relationships. Victimology International Journal, 3, 169-182.
15.
Gelles, R. (2001). Standards for programs for men who batter? Not yet. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, and Trauma, 5, 11-20.
16.
Gondolf, E. (1997). Batterer programs: What we know and need to know. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 83-98.
17.
Gondolf, E. (1999). MCMI-III results for batterer program participants in four cities: Less “pathological” than expected. Journal of Family Violence, 14, 1-17.
18.
Gondolf, E. (2001). Limitations of experimental evaluations of batterers programs. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 2, 79-88.
19.
Gottman, J., Jacobson, N., Rushe, R., Shortt, J., Babcock, J., Talliade, J., et al. (1995). The relationship between heart rate reactivity, emotionally aggressive behavior, and general violence in batterers. Journal of Family Psychology, 9, 227-248.
20.
Hamberger, K. (1997). Cognitive-behavioral treatment of men who batter their partners. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 4, 147-169.
21.
Hamberger, K., Lohr, J., & Bonge, D. (1994). Intended function of domestic violence is different for arrested male and female perpetrators. Family Violence and Sexual Assault Bulletin, 10, 40-44.
22.
Hamberger, K., Lohr, J., Bonge, D., & Tolin, D. (1996). A large sample empirical typology of male spouse abusers and its relationship to dimensions of abuse. Violence and Victims, 11, 277-292.
23.
Hamberger, K., & Potente, T. (1994). Counseling heterosexual women arrested for domestic violence: Implications for theory and practice. Violence and Victims, 9, 125-137.
24.
Hinkle, D., Wiersma, W., & Jurs, S. (1994). Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
25.
Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Meehan, J., Herron, K., Rehman, U., & Stuart, G. (2000). Testing the Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart (1994) batterer typology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 1000-1019.
26.
Holtzworth-Munroe, A., & Stuart, G. (1994). Typologies of male batterers: Three subtypes and the differences among them. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 476-497.
27.
Johnson, M. (1995). Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 283-294.
28.
Kroner, D. G., & Weeks, J. R. (1996). Balanced inventory of desirable responding: Factor structure, reliability, and validity with an offender sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 323-333.
29.
Levesque, D. (1999). Violence desistance among battering men: Existing interventions and the application of the transtheoretical model of change. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rhode Island. Kingston, RI.
30.
Martin, M. (1997). Double your trouble: Dual arrest in family violence. Journal of Family Violence, 12, 139-157.
31.
Miller, S. (2001). The paradox of women arrested for domestic violence: Criminal justice professionals and service providers respond. Violence Against Women, 7, 1339-1376.
32.
Morse, B. (1995). Beyond the Conflict Tactics Scale: Assessing gender differences in partner violence. Violence and Victims, 10, 251-272.
33.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
34.
O’Leary, K. D., & Curley, A. D. (1986). Assertion and family violence: Correlates of spouse abuse. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12, 281-289.
35.
Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two component models of social desirability responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598-609.
36.
Ramanaiah, N. V., & Martin, H. J. (1980). On the two-dimensional nature of Marlowe-Crowe Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 44, 507-514.
37.
Rennison, C., & Welchans, S. (2000). Intimate partner violence. Bureau of Justice statistics report (NCJ 178247). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
38.
Rosenbaum, A., & O’Leary, K. D. (1981). Marital violence: Characteristics of abusive couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 63-71.
39.
Saunders, D. (1996). Feminist-cognitive-behavioral and process-psychodynamic treatments for men who batter: Interactions of abuser traits and treatment model. Violence and Victims, 4, 393-414.
40.
Straus, M. (1999). Controversy over domestic violence by women: A methodological, theoretical, and sociology of science analysis. National Institute of Mental Health Report (NCJ 186243). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
41.
Swan, S. (2002). A typology of women’s use of violence in intimate relationships. Violence Against Women, 8, 286-319.
42.
Tweed, R., & Dutton, D. (1998). A comparison of impulsive and instrumental subgroups of batterers. Violence and Victims, 13, 217-230.
43.
Waltz, J., Babcock, J., Jacobson, N., & Gottman, J. (2000). Testing a typology of batterers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 658-669.
