No abstract

This paper reviews a cluster analysis of batterer abuse and antisocial variables drawn from intake interviews with battered women in Texas shelters. A substantial portion of severely abusive and extremely antisocial batterers are identified in the cluster solution. A typology, based on cross-tabulations of the clusters and descriptive variables, includes three types of batterers: sociopathic, antisocial, and typical batterers. These findings suggest that research on batterer characteristics needs to direct attention to the differentiation of batterers, and that intervention with especially the sociopathic and antisocial batterers needs to go beyond court-mandated counseling and anger control treatment.

This study partially replicates and expands on a previous study that showed women's perceptions of risk to be a strong predictor of reassault among batterers. The current study employed a larger and multisite sample, a longer follow-up period of 15 months, and multiple outcomes including "repeated reassault" (n = 499). According to the multinomial logistic regressions, women's perceptions of risk improved prediction with risk factors (ROC area under the curve improved by.04 and sensitivity of repeated reassault increased 12 percentage points). In comparison to simulated risk instruments, women's perceptions by themselves were better predictors than the K-SID, similar in predictive ability to the SARA, and almost as strong as the DAS. The best prediction of repeated reassault was obtained using risk markers, including women's perceptions (ROC AUC =.83; 70% sensitivity) or by using the DAS and women's perceptions together (ROC AUC =.73; 64% sensitivity).

Research on men who batter women has recently given a great deal of attention to personality types of batterers. Treatment recommendations for batterer types have relied primarily on aggregated statistical analyses of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI), but may be misleading because the MCMI is designed to be interpreted using individual profiles. The authors employed a profile analysis with MCMI-III results of 100 batterers randomly drawn from 840 men enrolled in four batterer programs. Case examples are used to illustrate the personality profiles and their treatment implications. The profile analysis suggests six major personality groupings that in part reflect previously established types. However, the majority of batterers exhibit narcissistic or avoidant traits that are well suited for the prevailing cognitive-behavioral group treatment approach. A smaller proportion of men evidence personality problems that may warrant adjunctive psychiatric services or individual psychotherapy. In sum, “one size” of treatment appears to fit most.

A comparative multisite evaluation was conducted of four “well-established” batterer programs in geographically distributed cities to assess the pattern of reassault. Eight hundred and forty batterers were recruited and tested at program intake from each site (210 per site). The batterers and their partners were interviewed by phone every 3 months for 15 months after intake with a response rate for the female partners of nearly 70% for the full follow-up. According to initial victims, 31% of the men reassaulted during the follow-up. The reassault rate varies only slightly when adjusting for new partners (32%) or no partner contact (32%), but substantially more when adjusting for reports from the batterers (36%) and batterers plus arrest record (39%). Rates of verbal abuse (70%) and threats (43%) are much higher, but 73% of the women report feeling “very safe.” Nearly half of the men who reassaulted did so within 3 months after program intake. “Voluntary” participants were significantly more likely to reassault (44% vs. 29%), as were program dropouts (40% vs. 28%). The “well-established” batterer programs appear to contribute to a short-term cessation of assault in the majority of batterers. However, a small portion of the men are unaffected by or unresponsive to the intervention.