Effects of Men’s Subtle and Overt Psychological Abuse on Low-Income Women

Abstract

Asocial influence approach to the psychological abuse of women (Marshall, 1994; 1996) was expanded and tested. Distinctions are made between obvious acts (e.g., verbal aggression, controlling behaviors), overt acts which are easily recognized and described, and subtle acts which are least likely to be recognized as psychologically abusive. Men’s violence and sexual aggression, and overt (dominating acts, indifference, monitoring, discrediting) and subtle (undermining, discounting, isolating) psychological abuse were examined as they related to women’s psychological and emotional state and perceptions of their relationship. Results of regression equations with 834 low-income women in long-term heterosexual relationships are reported. In general, subtle psychological abuse had stronger and more consistent associations with women’s state and relationship perceptions than did their partners’ overt psychological abuse, violence, or sexual aggression. The importance of extending research beyond obvious acts was underscored by findings showing that subtle psychological abuse accounted for a small but significant proportion of the variance in outcome variables even after the effects of violence and sexual aggression (Step 1) and overt psychological abuse (Step 2) were controlled in eight of the nine regression equations. In contrast, when subtle and overt psychological abuse were entered first (in Steps 1 and 2, respectively), violence and sexual aggression (Step 3) made significant contributions in only two of the nine equations.

Marital psychological and physical aggression and children's mental and physical health: Direct, mediated, and moderated effects.

“…Mothers and fathers also completed the Subtle and Overt Psychological Abuse of Women and Men Scale (SOPAS; Marshall, 2001), a 35-item scale that assesses psychological abuse. Participants rated how often their spouse had used a list of behaviors in either a loving, joking, or serious manner on a scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (a great many times).…”

Taxonomy and hierarchy of psychological abuse strategies in intimate partner relation-ships. [Taxonomía y jerarquización de las estrategias de abuso psicológico en la violencia de pareja]

“…There is also a link to the category of control established by Vázquez et al, (2008), to that of external control proposed by , to Ward's environment control (2000), and to the category of isolation control activity suggested by Wolfson (2002). The category of isolation finds its counterpart in the isolating category put forward by Jones et al (2005) and Marshall (1999), as well as in the description of isolation proposed by Sonkin, Martin and Walker (1985) and Vázquez et al (2008), in Kasian and Painter's isolation and control (1992), in Tolman's domination/isolation (1989), and in Walker's social isolation (1979). The strategy of imposing one's own thinking has been less widely considered by other researchers and their classifications cover less ground than the category proposed here.…”

“…The categories covering the control and manipulation of information and control of personal life bear a certain connection to those overt actions (Marshall, 1999) whose aim is to supervise the behaviour of women, as well as to the abuse of control exercised by the abuser over his victim, a category reflected in the work of Pitzner and Drummond (1997). There is also a link to the category of control established by Vázquez et al, (2008), to that of external control proposed by , to Ward's environment control (2000), and to the category of isolation control activity suggested by Wolfson (2002).…”

Self-efficacy in the context of psychological abuse: a model of efficacy erosion.

“…All definitions of psychological abuse incorporate at least one form of negative verbal messaging directed at a partner. Victims of psychological abuse are commonly criticized (Marshall, 2001;0' Leary & Jouriles, 1994), called names, intentionally made to feel inadequate (Marshall, 2001;Outlaw, 2009), have their abilities undermined (Marshall, 2001), and are deliberately humiliated or diminished (O'Leary & Jouriles, 1994;Saltzman et aI., 2002) by an intimate partner. Bandura (1997) also includes indirect or subtle messages of efficacy in his definition of verbal persuasion, as they are often equally clear forms of communication.…”

“…Additional studies have reported similar results Gist, Schwoerer, & Rosen, 1989;Williams, 1982) Social isolation, as an aspect of psychological abuse, limits one's personal territory or freedom by restricting access to friends or family and/or preventing a person from working, going to school, or doing things independently (Maiuro, 2001). Social isolation is included as a core component in multiple conceptual frameworks of psychological abuse (Maiuro, 2001;Marshall, 2001;NiCarthy, 1986;Hoffman, 1984;Russell, 1982;Sonkin, Martin, & Walker, 1985), is assessed by validated measures of IPV (Hegarty, Sheehan, & Schonfeld, 1999;Hudson & McIntosh, 1981;Tolman, 1989Tolman, , 1998, and occurs cross-culturally (Garcia-Moreno, Jansen, Ellsberg, Heise, & Watts,…”