Psychopathology and anger in interpersonal violence offenders

Greene, Anthony F.; Coles, Charlton J.; Johnson, Ernest H.

doi:10.1002/1097-4679(199411)50:6<906::aid-jclp2270500615>3.0.co;2-j

Cited by 38 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is especially important for those victims who wish not to separate from their violent spouse and for families who show both spouse abuse and child abuse. 2) Greene, Coles & Johnson (1994) 3) Gottman et al (1995) 4) Hamberger et al (1996) 5) Rothschild et al (1997) 6) Greene, Lynch & Decker (1997) HR = heart rate: APD = antisocial personality disorder: BPO = borderline personality organisation: DNV = distressed nonviolent:…..NDNV = non distressed non violent: MCMI-= Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (Millon 1983), MCMI-II (Millon 1987), MCMI-III (Millon 1994) MMPI = Minesota Mulktiphasiac Personality Inventory: (Graham, 1987;Hathaway & Mckinley, 1967) STAXI = State-Trait Anxiety Expression Inventory (Spielberger 1988) BDI = Beck Depression Inventory (Beck et al 1961) …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is no reason to suggest that all domestic violent men are alike, indeed Huss et al (2000) asserts that researchers have increasingly concluded that there is not a unitary profile for violent men in domestic settings. Recent research has demonstrated that spouse abusers are not a homogenous group, efforts to conceptualise the aetiology of domestic violence have resulted in the production of typologies of domestic violent men (Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart 1994;Hamberger 1996;White and Gondolf 2000;Greene, Coles and Johnson 1994;Monson and Langhinnchsen-Rohling 1998). The categorisation of spouse abusers into subgroups will increase the understanding of the domain.…”

Section: Table 1 About Herementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, there is no guarantee that the controls are non-violent. Greene, Coles and Johnson (1994) explored the notion that there are different subtypes of anger expression among varying types of domestic violent offenders. A four-cluster solution resulted.…”

Section: Review Of Research 1994-2001mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Multivariate statistical analysis revealed a main effect of personality cluster type on anger expression. Greene et al (1994) suggest that normal and disturbed clusters (having the highest anger expression mean score) were best characterised by uncontrolled violence, who according to Megaree (1966) respond with aggression to frustration and provocation with little inhibition. However the small sample size limits the power and external validity of the study, and no attempt to validate the clusters with external criteria variables has been attempted.…”

Section: Review Of Research 1994-2001mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The heterogeneity of spouse abuse: a review

Dixon

Browne

2003

Aggression and Violent Behavior

143

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research suggests that spouse abusers are not a homogenous group. Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994) propose three types of domestic violent men; Family Only, Generally Violent/Antisocial and Dysphoric/ Borderline Personality. This theoretical classification is compared to nine empirical research studies and two hypothetical studies, which can be found in the literature dated from 1994 onwards. The review provides support for the three-fold typology. The total averages of offenders classified by Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuarts (1994) typology across the studies were 50%, 30% and 20% respectively. However, when sample type was considered a significant difference between court referrals and volunteers was found for the men's distribution across the three types, with court referred men being less likely to be categorised into the Family Only group.All research to date is criticised for its narrow focus on the offender and its lack of a scientific profiling approach. Other factors such as the context, triggers for violence and the behavioural actions of the victim need to be considered. A more holistic family focused typology is suggested to be more appropriate for those victims who do not want to separate from their violent spouse.Key Words: Family Violence, Spouse Abuse, Typologies, ProfilingThe Heterogeneity of Spouse Abuse: A Review.Violence within the family is a common phenomenon of modern society, occurring across most cultures (Levinson, 1989). In 1996, The World Health Assembly adopted resolution WHA49.25 that declared violence as a priority in public health, together with resolution WHA5019, which called upon member states of the United Nations to eliminate violence against women and children. Hence a science-based public health approach to preventing violence was adopted by The World Health Organisation Task Force on Violence and Health (2000). They recommended four major objectives: The first to define and characterise different types of violence and assess their consequences. The second to understand the causes of violence and identify risk factors for aggressive behaviour. The third to identify best practice and evaluate interventions aimed at preventing violence. The fourth to strengthen the capacity of the health and social systems to disseminate knowledge and implement programs to reduce violence in society, especially that directed at women and children.One of the greatest areas of public health concern is violence in the context of the family. 'People are more likely to be killed, physically assaulted, hit, beaten up, slapped or spanked in their own homes by other family members than anywhere else, or by anyone else in our society ' (Gelles and Cornell, 1990: 11). The Home office (1992) reported that domestic violence accounted for between 42 -49% of all female homicides in the UK.Survey data compiled by the United Nations Statistical Office (2000) disclosed that in the U.S, 28% of women had been physically attacked by an intimate partner in the last year, whilst 25% of women in ...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Table 1 About Herementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Research 1994-2001mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Review Of Research 1994-2001mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The heterogeneity of spouse abuse: a review

Dixon

Browne

2003

Aggression and Violent Behavior

143

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recent theoretical and empirical developments in both the USA and the UK have suggested that spouse abusers are not a homogeneous group (Dixon & Browne, 2003;Gilchrist et al, 2003a,b;Grann & Wedin, 2002;Greene, Coles, & Johnson, 1994;Holtzworth-Munroe, 2000;Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994;Johnson, 1995;Tweed & Dutton, 1998). While the typologies have varied in identifying two, three, or four subgroups, one dimension which is common to all is the distinction between instrumental, planned, or anti-social violence and expressive, impulsive, or angry violence.…”

Section: Angermentioning

confidence: 99%

Anger control and alcohol use: Appropriate interventions for perpetrators of domestic violence?

McMurran

Gilchrist

2008

Psychology, Crime & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper addresses the differences between cultural/feminist and psychological perspectives on domestic violence, with specific reference to the roles of anger and alcohol. Feminist perspectives assume patriarchal control to be at the root of domestic violence, and see anger and alcohol as excuses for abusive behaviour. Psychological approaches identify anger and alcohol as risk factors for violence in some subgroups of offenders. A riskÁneeds model is presented, in which a distinction is drawn between acute and stable dynamic risk factors. Both may be targets of intervention, but addressing stable dynamic risk factors is more likely to effect enduring change. A theoretical understanding is required to identify stable dynamic risk factors, and here we suggest an affective defence approach to anger-related domestic violence and a social problem solving approach to alcohol-related domestic violence. Further developments in risk assessment and treatment matching are recommended.

show abstract

The Forensic Inpatient Observation Scale (FIOS): development, reliability and validity

Timmerman¹,

Vastenburg²,

Emmelkamp

2001

Criminal Behav Ment Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION: Re-offending, as a measure of success in forensic psychiatry, gives no information about other behaviours that may have changed. The development of the Forensic Inpatient Observation Scale (FIOS), an observation instrument to assess the non-offending functioning of forensic patients, is described. STUDY 1: In the first study the development of the initial item pool of the FIOS is described. This resulted in an instrument consisting of 78 items and seven scales. The internal reliability of the scales ranged from 0.78 to 0.91. The inter-rater reliability of the scales varied from 0.50 to 0.85 and the test retest reliability over a period of three weeks was high for most scales, ranging from 0.74 to 0.89. STUDY 2: In the second study the FIOS was developed further in another sample of forensic patients. This time exploratory factor analysis with Varimax rotation and post hoc reliability analysis were applied to determine the factor structure among the items. This resulted in an item pool of 35 items, among which six factors could be distinguished that closely resemble the factor structure of the FIOS in study one: (1) self-care, (2) social behaviour, (3) oppositional behaviour, (4) insight offence/problems, (5) verbal skills and (6) distress. Most items have high loadings on the factor they are assigned; 29 items have a loading of 0.60 or higher. The internal consistency of the scales ranges from 0.73 to 0.91 and the scales appear to be measuring independent constructs. Twenty-five out of the 35 items have an inter-rater correspondence of 90% or higher and 30 out of 35 items have an inter-rater correspondence of 87.5% or higher. The inter-rater reliability on the scale level, however, was somewhat less satisfying with correlations ranging from 0.50 to 0.69. DISCUSSION: It is argued that training the observers on a more regular basis will improve the inter-rater reliability. There is some evidence for the convergent validity of the FIOS. The FIOS has some advantages over existing inpatient scales in that it is developed specifically for forensic patients, it does not particularly focus on axis 1 symptoms but includes oppositional behaviour and attitudes to offending.

show abstract

Psychopathology and anger in interpersonal violence offenders

Cited by 38 publications

References 6 publications

The heterogeneity of spouse abuse: a review

The heterogeneity of spouse abuse: a review

Anger control and alcohol use: Appropriate interventions for perpetrators of domestic violence?

The Forensic Inpatient Observation Scale (FIOS): development, reliability and validity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About