Are Generalist Batterers Different from Generally Extra-Family Violent Men? A Study among Imprisoned Male Violent Offenders

Abstract

A B S T R A C TResearch on male batterers has found that in some cases of severe intimate partner violence (IPV) against women, male aggressors were also generally violent beyond the family realm. These findings have been used by researchers to illustrate the common etiology of both general and IPV. Using data from imprisoned male violent offenders, we analyzed the individual, family, and community characteristics of two groups of violent offenders: generalist batterers (GB) and generally extra-family violent men (GEVM). GB offenders had a judicial sentence on IPV-related offenses (gender violence according to the Spanish legislation), while GEVM offenders did not have any IPV-related judicial sentence. The sample includes 153 imprisoned male violent offenders of the Penitentiary Center of Villabona (Asturias, Spain). Sociodemographic measures, and criminal and justice official records of participants are available. Two groups of participants (GB and GEVM) distinction was done based on official records. Multivariate analyses of covariance (MANCOVA) was carried out to study differences between each group of participants in self-reported measures of personal, family, and community context variables. MANCOVA showed no statistical differences among the individual, family, and community characteristics of these two groups, giving empirical support to the theoretical view that general violence and IPV might share a common etiology. These results are discussed in light of the debate about the potentially common etiology of these two types of violence.

Considering the Effect of Sexism on Psychological Intimate Partner Violence: A Study with Imprisoned Men

“…Given that the mixed results in the literature indicate that not all men who endorse sexist attitudes against women will perpetrate IPV, it is also important to identify the mechanisms that help explain the association between sexist attitudes and IPV perpetration. For example, prison inmates who report past IPV (batterers) do not differ in levels of sexist attitudes from those who do not report past IPV (non-batterers;Juarros-Basterretxea et al, 2018). A key mechanism why sexist attitudes may lead to greater IPV is the fact that hostile sexist attitudes should promote positive attitudes toward the use of violence toward women.…”

“…Thus, an ecological approach extends understanding regarding the relevance of specific predictors in the context of a range of influential variables that contribute to violence risk (see Dahlberg & Krug, 2002). In particular, some researchers have pointed out that antecedents of IPV are probably also antecedents of the use of violence in general (Dutton, 1988;Felson, 2006;Felson & Lane, 2010;Juarros-Basterretxea et al, 2018;Moffit, Krueger, Caspi, & Fagan, 2000;Sjödin, Wallinius, Billstedt, Hofvander, & Nilsson, 2017). Thus, it is possible that the association between hostile sexism, attitudes toward violence toward women, and IPV are simply the result of broader factors that contribute to greater violence.…”

Concordancia en la percepción de conductas violentas en parejas adolescentes

“…Los investigadores de conflictos familiares han entendido que tanto varones como mujeres pueden comportarse como víctimas y agresores de las diferentes tipologías de violencia; por contrario, los investigadores feministas, como se les denomina en algunas ocasiones, basan su argumentación en que son las mujeres las únicas víctimas de este tipo de abuso (Archer, 2000;Dobash & Dobash, 2004;Ferrer-Pérez & Bosch, 2019;Hanson, 2000;Nowinski & Bowen, 2012;Rivera-156 Concordancia en la percepción de conductas violentas en parejas Rivera et al, 2007). Estas dos corrientes han recibido multitud de críticas que han suscitado un intenso debate y el surgimiento de posiciones encontradas en la explicación de las particularidades, que defienden cada una de las posturas: así se han establecido nuevas tipologías de violencia de pareja (Brownridge, 2010;Dobash & Dobash, 2004;Johnson, 2006;Juarros-Basterretxea, Herrero, Fernández-Suárez, Pérez & Rodríguez-Díaz, 2018), se han recabado nuevos datos (O'Leary, 2000;Rusell & Oswald, 2002;Straus, 2006;Straus, 2008;Rubio-Garay, López-González, Saúl & Sánchez-Elvira, 2012;Graña & Cuenca, 2014) y una variedad de explicaciones sobre las motivaciones de los intervinientes (Graham-Kevan, & Archer, 2005;Muñoz-Rivas et al, 2007;Straus, 2008), para contribuir a la clarificación del fenómeno de la bidireccionalidad en la violencia de pareja (Straus, 2016).…”

Propiedades psicométricas del Inventario de Estilos de Resolución de Conflictos en jóvenes mexicanos

“…Se ha venido documentando que el conflicto en las relaciones interpersonales de los y las jóvenes tiene implicaciones importantes para la salud psicológica y física, así como para el bienestar general (Alarcón, Pérez-Luco, Wenger, Salvo, y Chesta, 2018;Gallegos-Guajardo, Ruvalcaba-Romero, Castillo-López, y Ayala-Díaz, 2016;Juarros-Basterretxea, Herrero, Fernández-Suárez, Pérez, y Rodríguez-Díaz, 2018). Además, existe una creciente evidencia de que el conflicto y su gestión, así como la subsiguiente disolución de nuestras relaciones interpersonales, están implicados en los problemas sociales, emocionales y de comportamiento que afectan al bienestar de las personas (González-Villalobos, y Marrero, 2017;Ruvalcaba-Romero, Murrieta-Cummings, y Artega-Velazquez, 2016).…”