Gregory L. Stuart

Evaluation of a Behavioral Measure of Risk Taking: The Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART)

The present study (N = 86) sought to evaluate a laboratory-based behavioral measure of risk taking (the Balloon Analogue Risk Task; BART) and to test associations between this measure and self-report measures of risk-related constructs as well as self-reported real-world risk behaviors. The BART evidenced sound experimental properties, and riskiness on the BART was correlated with scores on measures of sensation seeking, impulsivity, and deficiencies in behavioral constraint. Also, riskiness on the BART was correlated with the self-reported occurrence of addictive, health, and safety risk behaviors, with the task accounting for variance in these behaviors beyond that accounted for by demographics and self-report measures of risk-related constructs. These results indicate that the BART may be a useful tool in the assessment of risk taking.

Typologies of male batterers: Three subtypes and the differences among them.

Previous typologies of male batterers, including typologies developed by means of rational-deductive and empirical-inductive strategies, are reviewed. On the basis of this review, 3 descriptive dimensions (i.e., severity of marital violence, generality of the violence [toward the wife or toward others], and psychopathology/personality disorders) that consistently have been found to distinguish among subtypes of batterers are identified. These dimensions are used to propose a typology consisting of 3 subtypes of batterers (i.e., family only, dysphoric/borderline, and generally violent/antisocial). A developmental model of marital violence is then presented, and the previous literature is reviewed to examine how each batterer subtype might differ on variables of theoretical interest. Finally, some of the methodological limitations of previous typology research are reviewed, and suggestions for future work are offered.

Testing the Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart 1994 Batterer Typology

A. Holtzworth-Munroe and G. L. Stuart (1994) proposed that 3 subtypes (family only [FO], borderline-dysphoric [BD], and generally violent-antisocial [GVA]) would be identified using 3 descriptive dimensions (i.e., severity of marital violence, generality of violence, psychopathology) and would differ on distal and proximal correlates of violence. Maritally violent men (n = 102) and their wives were recruited from the community, as were 2 comparison groups of nonviolent couples (i.e., maritally distressed and nondistressed). Four clusters of violent men were identified. Three resembled the predicted subtypes and generally differed in the manner predicted (e.g., FO men resembled nonviolent groups: BD men scored highest on measures of dependency and jealousy; GVA men had the most involvement with delinquent peers, substance abuse, and criminal behavior; and both BD and GVA men were impulsive, accepted violence, were hostile toward women, and lacked social skills). The 4th cluster (i.e., low-level antisocial) fell between the FO and GVA clusters on many measures.

Do subtypes of maritally violent men continue to differ over time

In previous batterer typology studies, only 1 study gathered longitudinal data and no research examined whether subtypes continue to differ from one another over time. The present study did so. We predicted that, at 1.5- and 3-year follow-ups, the subtypes identified at Time 1 (A. Holtzworth-Munroe, J. C. Meehan. K. Herron, U. Rehman, G. L. Stuart, 2000; family only, low level antisocial, borderline/dysphoric, and generally violent/antisocial) would continue to differ in level of husband violence and on other relevant variables (e.g., generality of violence, psychopathology, jealousy, impulsivity, attitudes toward violence and women). Although many group differences emerged in the predicted direction, not all reached statistical significance, perhaps because of small sample sizes. Implications of the findings (e.g.. not all marital violence escalates; possible overlap of the borderline/dysphoric and generally violent/antisocial subgroups) are discussed, as are methodological issues (e.g., need for more assessments over time, the instability of violent relationships).

Reasons for Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration Among Arrested Women

There are limited empirical data regarding the reasons or motives for the perpetration of intimate partner violence among women arrested for domestic violence and court referred to violence intervention programs. The present study examined arrested women’s self-report reasons for partner violence perpetration and investigated whether women who were victims of severe intimate partner violence were more likely than were women who were victims of minor partner violence to report self-defense as a reason for their behavior. In all, 87 women in violence intervention programs completed a measure of violence perpetration and victimization and a questionnaire assessing 29 reasons for violence perpetration. Self-defense, poor emotion regulation, provocation by the partner, and retaliation for past abuse were the most common reasons for violence perpetration. Victims of severe partner violence were significantly more likely than were victims of minor partner violence to report self-defense as a reason for their violence perpetration. The clinical implications of these findings are discussed.

Psychopathology in Women Arrested for Domestic Violence

This study examined the prevalence of psychopathology among women arrested for violence and whether the experience of intimate partner violence (IPV) was associated with Axis I psychopathology. Women who were arrested for domestic violence perpetration and court referred to violence intervention programs (N= 103) completed measures of IPV victimization, perpetration, and psychopathology. Results revealed high rates of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), panic disorder, substance use disorders, borderline personality disorder, and antisocial personality disorder. Violence victimization was significantly associated with symptoms of psychopathology. Logistic regression analyses showed that sexual and psychological abuse by partners were associated with the presence of PTSD, depression, and GADdiagnoses. Results highlight the potential importance of the role of violence victimization in psychopathology. Results suggest that Axis I and Axis II psychopathology should routinely be assessed as part of violence intervention programs for women and that intervention programs could be improved by offering adjunct or integrated mental health treatment.

A review of the literature on masculinity and partner violence

There has been increasing interest in examining aspects of masculinity as potential predictors of partner violence. This review critically examined the literature on the relationship between masculinity and partner violence. Four distinct approaches to operationalizing masculinity were identified: trait approach, normative approach, gender role conflict approach, and indirect approach. Results generally supported a relationship between each domain of masculinity and partner violence, with the exception of the trait approach. Implications for future research include the importance of examining socialization processes in the development of masculinity and partner violence, being sensitive to methods for operationalizing masculinity, using a greater proportion of clinical samples of violent men, and testing masculine-related components of interventions to reduce partner violence. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

Demand and withdraw communication among couples experiencing husband violence

Two studies compared marital communication behaviors of violent and nonviolent couples. In Study 1, violent distressed (VD) men reported more husband demand-wife withdraw than did nonviolent men. Distressed men reported less mutual constructive communication and more mutual blame and avoidance than did nondistressed men. Interactions of VD, violent nondistressed (VND), nonviolent distressed (NVD), and nonviolent nondistressed couples were coded in Study 2. VD spouses tended to engage in the most demand and withdraw and the least positive behavior; violent couples had the highest levels of contempt. On some codes, VND couples resembled NVD couples, suggesting that violence without distress may correlate differently with marital communication than violence in combination with distress and that severity of violence is important to consider.

Review of the Association Between Treatment for Substance Misuse and Reductions in Intimate Partner Violence

A substantial body of research supports a strong cross-sectional and longitudinal association between substance misuse and perpetration of intimate partner violence (IPV). This article briefly addresses the theoretical connection between substance use and intimate partner violence and research on the association between substance misuse and IPV. Studies examining the effect of individual and couples-based addiction treatments on IPV are reviewed. The implications of this work and future directions for research are discussed.

Effectiveness of an empirically based treatment for panic disorder delivered in a service clinic setting : 1-year follow-up

The transportability of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for panic disorder to a community mental health center (CMHC) setting at 1-year follow-up was examined by comparing CMHC treatment outcome data with results obtained in controlled efficacy studies. Participants were 81 CMHC clients with a primary diagnosis of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia who completed CBT for panic disorder. Despite differences in settings, clients, and treatment providers, both the magnitude of change from pretreatment to follow-up and the maintenance of change from posttreatment to follow-up in the CMHC sample were comparable with the parallel findings in the efficacy studies. At follow-up, 89% of the CMHC clients were panic free and a substantial proportion of the sample successfully discontinued benzodiazepine use.