Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a widespread global health problem. Despite growing evidence indicating that men and women commit IPV, most traditional interventions focus on male-to-female violence and do not address mutual violence. This circumscribed focus represents one potential reason traditional treatments have had only a modest effect on recidivism. The current study investigated a pilot intervention for mutually violent couples with ethnically diverse, treatment-mandated men and women. Using a longitudinal design, 121 couples were assessed (semistructured clinical interview, Conflict Tactics Scale-Revised [CTS-2]) and mandated to either the pilot intervention or another community agency. Of the 92 couples referred for the 12-week, pilot group intervention (plus 1-2 preparatory, individual sessions), 89% of couples had one or both partners complete. Posttreatment assessments were conducted (CTS-2, satisfaction ratings), anticipating reductions in perpetrated and received IPV among treatment completers. Using 1-year conviction data to assess recidivism (IPV and general violence convictions), it was hypothesized that the lowest recidivism rates would be found when both partners completed, intermediate rates when one partner completed, and the highest rates when neither completed. Consistent with hypotheses, men who completed treatment reported reduced perpetration of physical assault and received less injury, and women who completed reported receiving less physical assault and injury. At 1-year follow-up, couples who completed had lower recidivism rates, with couples in which both partners completed evidencing the best outcomes. Results provide preliminary support for the proposed mutual violence intervention. Clinical implications, including the effect of a thorough assessment and tailored treatment recommendations, are discussed.

At this time, compared with mainstream (Caucasian) youth, cultural minority adolescents experience more severe substance-related consequences and are less likely to receive treatment. While several empirically supported interventions (ESIs), such as motivational interviewing (MI), have been evaluated with mainstream adolescents, fewer published studies have investigated the fit and efficacy of these interventions with cultural minority adolescents. Additionally, many empirical evaluations of ESIs have not explicitly attended to issues of culture, race, and socioeconomic background in their analyses. As a result, there is some question about the external validity of ESIs, particularly in disadvantaged cultural minority populations. This review seeks to take a step towards filling this gap, by addressing how to improve the fit and efficacy of ESIs like MI with cultural minority youth. Specifically, this review presents the existing literature on MI with cultural minority groups (adult and adolescent), proposes two approaches for evaluating and adapting this (or other) behavioral interventions, and elucidates the rationale, strengths, and potential liabilities of each tailoring approach.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious forensic and clinicalproblem throughout the United States. Research aimed at defining and differentiating subgroups of IPV offenders using standardized personality instruments may eventually help with matching treatments to specific individuals to reduce recidivism. The current study used a convenience sample of court-ordered IPV offenders to explore whether the presence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) can reliably differentiate this population in terms of personality characteristics and clinical symptoms. Profile analysis showed meaningful differences between PTSD (n = 22), non-PTSD (n = 43), and nontrauma (n = 13) groups on a variety of Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory and Personality Assessment Inventory personality and clinical scales. The PTSD group reported significantly less IPV than the non-PTSD and nontrauma groups, as well Tim Hoyt is now at Madigan

No abstract

Cognitive bias refers to a well-established finding that individuals who suffer from certain clinical problems (e.g., depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, substance abuse, etc.) selectively attend to, remember, and interpret events relevant to their condition. Although a body of literature exists that has tried to examine this phenomenon, most existing explanations are mentalistic and mediational. In this paper we offer a behavior-analytic account of cognitive bias, its development, and how it may contribute to maintenance of clinical problems. This account is based on establishing operations or motivating events, verbal processes, and relational responding. Clinical and future research implications are also discussed.