Objective: Past research has linked posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms to increased risk for intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration. However, little is known about the impact that PTSD may have on treatment engagement or violence recidivism following treatment for IPV. The current study examined whether PTSD predicts treatment engagement and criminal recidivism in a 20-session, community-based, cognitive-behavioral abuse intervention program. Method: Participants (N ϭ 293) completed assessments of PTSD symptoms, depression, drug use, and alcohol problems during agency intake. These variables were examined as predictors of group treatment engagement (session attendance, working alliance, cognitive-behavioral therapy homework compliance, group cohesion, and task orientation) and criminal recidivism during the 2 years after scheduled completion of treatment. Results: Individuals with higher levels of PTSD symptoms at pretreatment had lower homework compliance during treatment. Further, individuals with probable PTSD reported lower task orientation and group cohesion later in treatment. Individuals with a probable PTSD diagnosis at pretreatment had 4 times higher odds of general violence recidivism than those without a probable PTSD diagnosis, and this association remained significant when controlling for substance use and depression. In addition, participants with probable PTSD were more likely to have intimate partner abuse recidivism compared with those without (adjusted odds ratio ϭ 2.5), although this effect was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Trauma symptoms affect violence cessation in IPV treatment, further highlighting the need to address unique clinical issues and underlying mechanisms associated with traumatic stress symptoms in treatments for this population.

The current study investigated the influence of anger problems on partner violent men's long-term response to treatment, as indicated by criminal recidivism during an 8-year period after treatment initiation. Participants were 132 men who presented for treatment services at a community-based domestic violence agency. Results indicated that individuals with extensive anger problems had more charges for general violence (GV) offenses and more ongoing problems with protection orders than did those with Normal Anger (NA) profiles. Examinations of specific anger scales indicated that low Anger Control (LAC) and high Anger Expression predict GV recidivism. These findings indicate that a standard cognitive-behavioral treatment program may not adequately reduce the recidivism risk of partner violent men with pronounced anger problems, stress the importance of further research to understand the role of anger problems in partner violence treatment, and highlight the need to develop and evaluate new intervention approaches for partner violent men with serious anger dysregulation.

The 28-item Multidimensional Measure of Emotional Abuse (MMEA) assesses four common forms of emotional abuse in intimate relationships and has been used extensively to study the development of intimate partner violence (IPV), the consequences of emotional abuse, and the outcomes of IPV interventions. The current study provides psychometric analyses of a shortened version of the MMEA using self-report data from a sample of men receiving treatment at a community-based relationship violence intervention program (RVIP; N = 467) and reports from their relationship partners ( N = 252), and data from a sample of undergraduate students ( N = 194) who reported on their own and their partners’ abusive behavior. Theoretical and statistical considerations, including internal consistency after item deletion, were used to select items for the shortened version. In the clinic sample (for self- and partner reports) and in the undergraduate sample (for self-report only), the 16-item MMEA-Short Form (MMEA-SF) retains the 4-factor structure of the 28-item MMEA. In both samples and across reporting methods (self and partner), the 16-item MMEA-SF has good internal consistency, good concurrent validity with the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2) psychological aggression subscale, and similar correlations with CTS2 physical assault subscale as the original 28-item MMEA version. The MMEA-SF can reduce assessment burden while maintaining good domain coverage and strong psychometric properties and will be an asset to researchers and practitioners who need a brief, multifaceted measure of emotional relationship abuse in both clinic and undergraduate samples.

Purpose: Although individuals who engage in intimate partner violence (IPV) report high rates of trauma exposure, it is unclear whether they perceive a link between trauma exposures and relationship problems, which traumas are seen as most influential, and whether such perceptions accurately reflect their relationship difficulties. Method: Ninety-four men presenting for IPV intervention services reported their exposure to 22 adverse and potentially traumatic events (APTEs), and were asked whether these events had influenced the way that they think, act, or feel in relationships. APTEs were categorized based on whether or not they appeared to represent PTSD Criterion A traumatic events. Additionally, participants completed self-report measures of IPV use, partner injuries, emotional abuse, relationship problems, emotion regulation difficulties, and PTSD symptoms. Results: Nearly half (43.6%) of the sample reported that one or more APTEs had influenced the way they function in relationships. Of the 92 reports of non-Criterion A APTEs, 42.4% were endorsed as relationship-influencing, whereas only 19.7% of the 310 occurrences of Criterion A APTEs were endorsed as relationship-influencing. The number of relationship-influencing APTEs reported was positively correlated with emotional abuse, relationship problems, emotion regulation difficulties, and PTSD symptoms. In contrast, the number of non-relationship-influencing APTEs reported was only correlated with emotional abuse. Conclusions: Findings from this exploratory study (1) demonstrate the ability of clients receiving IPV services to discern which APTEs have relevance to their relationships; (2) suggest the benefits of considering non-Criterion A APTEs; and (3) indicate the need for traumainformed IPV intervention services.

No abstract