Validation of the Working Alliance Inventory–Observer Short Version with male intimate partner violence offenders

Abstract

The working alliance is a key element to increase intimate partner violence (IPV) offenders’ motivation, adherence to treatment, and active participation in batterer intervention programs (BIPs). The objective of the present study is to assess the psychometric properties and factor structure of the Working Alliance Inventory–Observer Short Version (WAI-O-S) with a sample of IPV offenders. The sample was 140 men convicted for IPV and court-mandated to a community-based BIP. Inter-rater agreement and reliability were evaluated by computing the intraclass correlation coefficient. To test the latent structure a Bayesian confirmatory factor analysis approach was used. To test criterion-related validity, the WAI-O-S factorial scores were correlated to protherapeutic behavior, stage of change and motivation to change. The WAI-O-S showed an adequate reliability. Results from Bayesian confirmatory factor analyses showed two first-order factors (Bond and Agreement), and a second-order factor (General working alliance) explaining the relationship between the first-order factors. Results also support the validity of this instrument. The availability of reliable and valid observational measure of the working alliance provides a useful tool to overcome self-report measurement limitations such as social desirability, deception, and denial among IPV offenders.

Identifying Key Predictors of Recidivism among Offenders Attending a Batterer Intervention Program: A Survival Analysis

“…Clearly, reducing BIP dropout rates remains one of the main challenges in this field. Available research suggests that one of the most promising approaches for achieving this goal are interventions based on motivational strategies (Alexander, Morris, Tracy, & Frye, 2010;Babcock et al, 2016;Crane & Eckhardt, 2013;Eckhardt et al, 2013;Lila et al, 2018;Musser, Semiatin, Taft, & Murphy, 2009;Santirso, Martín-Fernández, Lila, Gracia, & Terreros, 2018). In this regard, one of the main contributions of our study is not only to underline dropout as a key risk factor associated with recidivism, but also the need to reduce it as one of the main priorities in BIPs.…”

Motivational Strategies in Interventions for Intimate Partner Violence Offenders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

“…Also, the outcomes considered (men's self-reported physical and psychological IPV or official recidivism) to report change in behavior or effectiveness could raise concerns about whether we are measuring IPV offender treatment 'success' too narrowly without accurately reflecting relevant changes in any controlling or coercive behaviors, repeating victimization, or whether women/children feel safer (Arbach & Bobbio, 2018;Dobash et al, 1999;Hester & Westmarland, 2005). Also, self-report measures of physical and psychological IPV can be vulnerable to participants' distortions and social desirability biases (Eckhardt et al, 2012;Gracia et al, 2015;Santirso et al, 2018). In addition, methodology of studies presented considerable heterogeneity in terms of duration, intervention format, follow-up duration, or methods used to evaluate outcomes.…”

Improving empathy with motivational strategies in batterer intervention programmes: Results of a randomized controlled trial

“…Because court-ordered interventions for IPV perpetrators are mandatory sentences ordered by a judge, IPV perpetrators' engagement in them tends to be low (Eckhardt, Holtzworth-Munroe, Norlander, Sibley, & Cahill, 2008;Kistenmacher & Weiss, 2008). Therefore, SBIPs incorporating new therapeutic strategies, such as motivational interviewing, retention techniques, 'stages of change' and strength-based theories, could better meet idiosyncratic IPV perpetrators' needs, increasing their adherence to treatment (Crane & Eckhardt, 2013;Kistenmacher & Weiss, 2008;Lila et al, 2018;Murphy, Eckhardt, Clifford, Lamotte, & Meis, 2017;Musser, Semiatin, Taft, & Murphy, 2008;Santirso, Mart ın-Fern andez, Lila, Gracia, & Terreros, 2018). Thus, interventions focused on individual needs may offer interesting opportunities to produce cognitive changes in IPV perpetrators by increasing their intervention engagement.…”