Differences in treatment adherence, program completion, and recidivism among batterer subtypes

Abstract

The present study aimed to cross-validate Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart's typology in a Spanish sample of court-referred intimate partner violence batterers. The study also analyzed the typology's capability to predict treatment attendance, completion, and IPV recidivism two years after the treatment. The sample consisted of 210 batterers court referred to a batterer intervention program. Using cluster analysis, three batterer subtypes were identified in accordance with the original typology: family-only batterers, borderline/dysphoric, and generally violent-antisocial. The typology predicted program attendance, completion, and recidivism. Batterers from the generally violent-antisocial group attended a significantly lower number of sessions, presented the highest dropout levels, and had the highest recidivism rate followed by borderline/dysphoric and family-only batterers. These findings suggest that in order to increase the effectiveness of batterer intervention programs, batterers' different needs and risk profiles should be taken into account.

Measuring Acceptability of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women: Development and Validation of the A-IPVAW Scale

“…In this regard, the A-IPVAW scale can be used as a forensic tool that can detect cases of higher risk of IPVAW perpetration, as it can differentiate accurately between participants with low and high acceptability estimates (Andreu-Rodríguez, Peña-Fernández, & Loza, 2016). It can also be used as an evaluation instrument for intervention programs with IPVAW perpetrators, monitoring attitudinal changes during and after the intervention (Carbajosa, Catalá-Miñana, Lila, & Gracia, 2017;Ferrer-Perez, Ferreiro-Basurto, Navarro-Guzmán, & Bosch-Fiol, 2016;Lila, Oliver, Galiana, & Gracia, 2013).…”

Risk Factors of Female Intimate Partner and Non-Intimate Partner Homicides

“…Only the antisocial subtype is characterized by generalized violence (non-specialization), criminal record, prior convictions, and a criminal career, all of these associated with a higher risk of recidivism (Carbajosa, Catalá-Miñana, Lila & Gracia, 2017;Cunha & Gonçalvez, 2013;Hilton, & Eke, 2016;LlorEsteban, García-Jiménez, Ruiz-Hernández, & Godoy-Fernández, 2016;Loinaz, 2014;Petersson, Strand, & Selenius, 2016;Ruiz-Hernández, García-Jiménez, Llor-Esteban, & Godoy-Fernández, 2015). Subtyping IPV offenders and matching risk to management strategies is still an ongoing research and practice target, mainly between antisocial and family-only offenders (Loinaz, 2014;Petersson et al, 2016), although available research suggest that typologies are not used in practice because of their complexity (Ali, Dhingra, & McGarry, 2016).…”

The importance of impulsivity and attention switching deficits in perpetrators convicted for intimate partner violence

“…The final sample was composed of 128 men who participated voluntarily in the study: 89 volunteers with a history of IPV who were recruited from the participants in the CONTEXTO psycho-educational and community-based treatment program run by the Department of Social Psychology, at the University of Valencia, and 39 individuals with no history of violence and matched on socio-demographic characteristics as the control group. IPV perpetrators had been sentenced to less than 2 years in prison but had no previous criminal record, and hence they had their sentence suspended on the condition that they attend an intervention like the CONTEXTO program (Carbajosa, Catalá-Miñana, Lila, & Gracia, 2017;Lila, Catalá-Miñana, & Gracia, 2018;Rodriguez, Gracia, & Lila, 2016).…”

“…Furthermore, high impulsivity and inattention symptoms have been related to high levels of emotion decoding and cognitive flexibility impairments in violent populations (Buitelaar et al, 2014;Saylor & Amann, 2016;Wymbs et al, 2017). IPV perpetrators had been sentenced to less than 2 years in prison but had no previous criminal record, and hence they had their sentence suspended on the condition that they attend an intervention like the CONTEXTO program (Carbajosa, Catalá-Miñana, Lila, & Gracia, 2017;Lila, Catalá-Miñana, & Gracia, 2018;Rodriguez, Gracia, & Lila, 2016). Moreover, we expected that the relationship between emotion decoding and cognitive flexibility deficits would be stronger with inattention than trait impulsivity in both populations, as previously suggested (Gamboz, Borella, & Brandimonte, 2009;.…”