Personality characteristics in specialist and generalist intimate partner violence perpetrators

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is one of the most common types of violence against women. Although personality disorders have been associated with IPV, perpetration research regarding personality according to the classification specialist/generalist IPV perpetrators is scarce. The general aim of this study was to describe personality in a large sample of IPV Spanish male perpetrators considering their classification (specialist vs. generalist). Participants were 1093 men convicted of IPV crimes whose ages ranged from 18 to 76 years old (M = 40.15; SD = 10.32). Of them, 554 men were classified as specialist perpetrators and 539 men were classified as generalist perpetrators. Participants completed questionnaires regarding sociodemographic and violence aspects as well as the Spanish version of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory III. Generalist perpetrators showed higher means in nearly all the personality disorders scales compared to specialist perpetrators. Prevalence rates in the majority of personality disorders were lower than 5%. Higher scores on the avoidant, histrionic, and self‐defeating scales and lower scores on the aggressive, borderline, and drug dependence scales were related to being a specialist perpetrator. This study contributes to a better understanding of personality among generalist and specialist perpetrators.

IPVAW male perpetrators convicted in Spain: a typology and characterization based on latent class analysis

“…Despite having a lower profile overall, compared to the rest of the groups, these men moderately justified the use of interpersonal violence and maintained gender biases. In line with the existing literature, this group coincides with specialist aggressors ( Herrero et al, 2016 ; Teva et al, 2023 ) or those with low levels of physical and psychological aggression ( Cavanaugh and Gelles, 2005 ; Graña et al, 2014 ). It is estimated that most IPVAW perpetrators would be classified in this subtype if samples were recruited from clinical and community samples ( Dixon and Browne, 2003 ).…”

“…They are also distinguished by having mental health problems and criminal records. They also correspond to what have been called generalist ( Herrero et al, 2016 ; Teva et al, 2023 ) or high-risk ( Cavanaugh and Gelles, 2005 ; Graña et al, 2014 ) aggressors. The results of our study show that this group presents a high probability of having suffered childhood abuse and IPVAW experiences in their family of origin.…”

“…In this taxonomic effort there are numerous recent studies that, also based on risk variables or on the level of the risk of violence have established different typologies that include two ( Loinaz et al, 2010 ; Loinaz, 2014 ; Teva et al, 2023 ), three ( Babcock et al, 2000 ; Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al, 2000 ; Waltz et al, 2000 ; Stoops et al, 2010 ; Graña et al, 2014 ), four ( Eckhardt et al, 2008 ; Thijssen and de Ruiter, 2011 ; Weber and Bouman, 2020 ; González-Álvarez et al, 2022 ), or up to five types of abusers ( Chiffriller and Hennessy, 2010 ). However, there seems to be a high degree of consensus on the existence of the three types of violent men initially noted, especially with regard to GV and FO abusers ( Weber et al, 2019 ), there being, generally speaking, a temporal stability of abusers in their corresponding classification ( Cavanaugh and Gelles, 2005 ).…”

A Developmental and Life-Course Approach to Further Understanding of the Nature and Causes of Intimate Partner Violence and Femicide

“…Moffitt’s chronic offender typology provides a framework for distinguishing between IPV offenders, particularly severe and ongoing IPV committed by men within a typology of intimate terrorism that includes physical aggression and escalation, sustained and severe injuries, and emotionally abusive and controlling behaviors of men against their women partners (Johnson, 1999). This type of chronic offending is also consistent with work on the role of personality disorders in predicting escalating levels of IPV (Teva et al, 2023).…”

“…It is challenging to see how the pandemic and subsequent short-term lockdown would create a large-scale impact on these existing mental health and neurological conditions among IPV perpetrators and those with these conditions with no previous engagement in IPV perpetration (though we admit it could have exacerbated it among some individuals if they did not have access to doctors, medicines, etc.). Moffitt’s chronic offender typology and the research literature on chronic IPV offending and psychopathology among IPV perpetrators (Collison & Lynam, 2021; Shorey et al, 2012; Teva et al, 2023) both note the relative stability of these traits over time. Johnston et al (2024, p. 63) differentiation of male perpetrators into chronic criminal abusers and the mentally disturbed and the risk of femicide during the pandemic led them to conclude that femicide “flourishes and sustains in different ways dependent on the fiscal, judicial and social attitudes of different cultural contexts” and changes in the risk of offending is largely independent of temporary, situational context.…”