Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a persistent problem in our society, and there is strong evidence for the existence of bidirectional violence in heterosexual romantic relationships. Couples' research has long focused on conflict and distressed communication patterns as a source of relationship distress and eventual dissolution. In addition to relationship dissatisfaction, dysfunctional communication also appears to be associated with elevated risk of IPV. In fact, one study found that communication difficulties were one of the most frequently self-reported motivations for committing partner violence in a sample of both males and females arrested for IPV. The current study sought to explore the association between the expression of distressed communication (contempt and anger) during a laboratory conflict discussion and reports of IPV perpetration using a dyadic data analysis method, the Actor Partner Interdependence Model, in a large ethnically diverse sample of heterosexual couples. We found that negative communication in the form of contempt was not only associated with one's own physical assault perpetration, but it was also associated with physical assault perpetration of the other partner. In contrast, anger was only associated with one's own physical assault perpetration. Therefore, our results highlight the potential efficacy of treatments for IPV that target negative communication patterns and affect.

Psychopathy is a personality syndrome comprised of interpersonal, affective, and behavioral features that has emerged as a correlate of intimate partner violence perpetration. One commonly used self-report measure of psychopathy is the Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Short Form. The current study employed a multi-trait, multi-method approach to test convergent and discriminant validity of the measure in partner-violent couples by comparing males’ self-report of psychopathy to the informant report of their female partner (N = 114). It was hypothesized that the female partner-report of the male’s psychopathy would be highly correlated with the male report of his own psychopathy, thus providing evidence for the construct validity and interrater reliability of the PPI-SF. Analyses found that male and female reports were correlated significantly on the two major factors of the PPI-SF. Furthermore, the female-report explained a significant amount of variance over and above men’s self-report on PAI scales designed to indicate antisocial personality traits.

Psychopathy is a personality disorder that has emerged as a correlate of antisocial, impulsive, and violent behavior, including intimate partner violence (IPV). In the current study, we sought to explore the complex relationship between two factors of psychopathy and IPV perpetration. The Fearlessness-Dominance Factor 1 (PPI-I) assesses the affective-interpersonal traits of psychopathy, whereas the Impulsive-Antisociality Factor II (PPI-II) assesses the behavioral-lifestyle traits of psychopathy. Data from 114 couples was utilized in the current study. When using male self-report of IPV, all forms of violence were significantly correlated with PPI-I. No male self-report or female-report of any of the forms of violence were significantly correlated with PPI-II. Hierarchical regression was utilized to study the impact of psychopathy factors in predicting physical violence while controlling for demographic variables. In predicting women's report of men's violence, the addition of psychopathy factors to the model explained significantly more of the variance ( = 2.71; < .05) above and beyond demographic variables. The addition of psychopathy factors to the model predicting men's self-reported physical violence was also significant ( = 4.78, < .001). These results suggest that individuals high in PPI-I may be at higher risk of IPV perpetration compared to those high in PPI-II.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a common problem and men arrested for IPV are typically court‐mandated to attend men‐only groups. These interventions have been found to have only small effect sizes for stopping violence and do not address the abuse perpetrated by women. In the United States, many states mandate against the use of any interventions other than Duluth model men‐only groups. However, there is preliminary theoretical and empirical support for alternative interventions, including new wave and conjoint interventions. These interventions place greater emphasis on treatment‐matching principles and incorporate strategies to address problems such as emotion regulation difficulties, impulsivity, and communication deficits. Given the limited effectiveness of existing interventions and the initial support for alternative interventions, additional experimental studies are needed. However, political barriers continue to hinder the implementation of novel investigations of important treatment targets that may have a greater impact on reducing IPV.

Alcohol use is known to correlate with intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration, yet little research examines how alcohol influences how the violence unfolds. The current study used sequential analysis to examine descriptions of past violent incidents and explore the behaviors that preceded men’s perpetration of IPV. In accordance with the alcohol myopia model of alcohol use, it was hypothesized that intoxicated men would respond violently to a wide range of partner cues, whereas men who were sober would only react violently in response to the most threatening partner cues. Moreover, intoxicated men were expected to demonstrate less inhibition of violence to suppressor cues of the partners’ distress as compared to sober men. Participants were 80 couples reporting male-to-female IPV within the past year. Female partners’ descriptions of two past violent events were coded and entered into sequential analysis. Antecedents to the men’s first violent action were examined. While sober men were likely to react violently to their partner’s physical threat and perceived threat, intoxicate men did not. Sober men were less likely to become violent after their partners displayed distress cues, whereas there was no suppressor effect of women’s distress for intoxicated men. The precursors of the violence of intoxicated men appears to be indiscriminate and unpredictable. Clinical interventions that rely on behavioral strategies or communication skills training are unlikely to be effective for those who have an unmanaged alcohol use disorder.