Introduction
In Criminal studies, the concept of psychological observations is given concentration to understand the etiology of crime related behavior and to improve intervention programs. This is to eliminate unrest and social crime from the society. Battering is one such domestic crime prevalent across the globe, where studies on intervention programs observed the recidivism of criminal behavior after some time. Many studies identified recidivism, either after short time or after longtime. The current study tries to identify what makes the interventions for battering successful or fail in the light of literature.
Significance of the study
There is an increasing concern towards prevalence and consequences of domestic violence with considerable debate on the effectiveness of interventions that in turn depend on the origins of battering. During the previous years, many research studies concentrated much on the cause and effect of the battering and the probable interventions under particular conditions. However, the most out coming question from such findings to the psychological studies is to further analyze the effectiveness of the interventions. Therefore, it is important to study the evaluation of such interventions for battering even up to the level of examining the evaluation tools.
Need of the Study
Though treatment for partner aggression is off many folds as do the intervention, the reasons for the reappearance of battering are still non predictable and non controllable.
Many interventions are gender oriented and are not balanced to manage the partner aggression. In addition, the right kind of intervention for a particular kind of seriousness is still not known concerning battering.
Type of approach
The current study proposes to observe “The effectiveness of interventions on men who batter” by way of hybrid method including both qualitative literature review and quantitative methods to understand the cause and effect of the problem and to identify the particulars about effectiveness of intervention.
Purpose of the study
The study proposes to identify the effective interventions on men who batter, basing on the criteria that battering involves two people, where as intervention is given to single person, assuming its need for only one Gender role.
Treatments for partner aggression generally follow a psycho educational format informed by feminist and or cognitive-behavioral conceptualizations of violence and delivered in men only group formats (Mederos, 2002) as cited in Erica M. Woodin & Daniel. As such interventions are purely biased, the current study proposes to consider the interventions where both are involved.
The authors Holtzworth-Munroe and colleagues (Holtzworth-Munroe, Meehan, Herron, Rehman, & Stuart, (2000) as cited in Christopher Eckhardt & et al., observed a set of attitudes of batterers to analyze the psychological concept for their research dimensions.
The four sub types of batterers as observed by the authors are as follows:
- Family-only (FO) batterers: Such type of batterers are found to exercise minimal family violence and engage less in the violence outside the home. But there is no or little observation of psychopathology in such cases.
- Borderline/dysphoric (BD) batterers: Such category people can be identified with moderate. To severe partner assault along with moderate general violence. They also exhibit personality disorders like distress, insecurity, fear and anxiety. The also tend to have dependent personality.
- Generally violent/antisocial (GVA) batterers: This category people engage in moderate to severe partner violence. There is an highest level of observation with outside the home violence. This group also involve in antisocial activity and can be characterized with psychopathic personality traits
- Low-level antisocial (LLA) batterers: These represent the category that show moderate scores for partner violence, outside the home violence and antisocial activities.
From the above classification, the current study draws the point that a combination of violence type and levels are also involved with battering and treatment.
Different interventions
The study of Bryan Hendricks made a literature review to compare the efficacy of different interventions.
Murphy, Musser, and Maton (1998) as cited in Bryan Hendricks found there is a reduced recidivism rate among the offenders who received a court order for counseling. However, a greater reduction in recidivism is observed in the combination of probation and court-ordered counseling.
Babcock and Steiner (1999) as cited in Bryan Hendricks found that 62% of recidivism rate among the offenders who simply incarcerated without any intervention sessions. But among those who received sessions there is only 8% of recidivism and 23% among those who started but could not finish all the sessions.
Domestic Abuse Intervention Program (DAIP) is a combination of mandatory arrest, an educational curriculum and community changes, The impact of the DAIP is assessed by Shepard et al. (2002) as cited in Bryan Hendricks, and found that the Recidivism rates, within 6, 12, and 18 months, decreased after participation in the program. However, the rate of recidivism is high among the offenders who failed to complete the entire program and among those who received court order.
The authors Bryan Hendricks, Todd Werner, Lee Shipway and Greg J. Turinetti observed the efficacy of two community based battering interventions: a program called Stopping Abuse for Everyone (SAFE) and a cognitive restructuring program called Reasoning and Rehabilitation (R&R).
Parallel to this, they explored the usefulness of key variables in the prediction of treatment success or failure. The study observes that even after the above interventions 17.5% cases reflected recidivism during the first 6 months. However, while looking at the effectiveness of above two interventions, the Bryan & et al., observed that the SAFE manifest method has shown lower rates of recidivism (10.6%) than the group of offenders who did not complete the mandated treatment (38.8%). In addition, among some of the high risk clients who are referred to R&R, which is a cognitive restructuring treatment program but the outcome effectiveness of both the programs, show only 23.5%.
The main purpose of Bryan Hendricks’ study is to explore efficacy of the Level of Service Inventory–Revised (Andrews & Bonta, 1995) in predicting recidivism. The authors assume that prediction of recidivism is difficult, and they were able to predict 66% of the outcomes on the LSI-R scores, using a cut score of 11.5.
So it is proposed that current study should use one such measuring scale to predict the effectiveness of interventions.
The Interventions against battering are classified along several dimensions based on their underlying assumptions (Saunders, 1996):
- Social Skills training assumes that people may experience behavioral deficits and behavioral excesses and needs training on coping skills. And such social skill training intervention for offenders is given to model the positive behavior through role models like church leaders or social groups and behavioral rehearsal by members. Such training expects enhancement of relationship skills to replace negative behaviors.
- Cognitive approaches assume that abusive and violent behavior is originated from the faulty patterns of thinking that lead to negative emotions. Prioritizing of anticipations and restructuring of the thoughts can result in reducing the anger, fear and hurt that often underlies battering. Such intervention can help the offenders to get rid of the belief systems developed in childhood on gender roles and prominences.
- Sex role resocialization helps men to consider gender equality by enlightening them on the negative consequences of constricted male roles and the benefits of gender equality (Saunders, 1984). As a result, the offenders begin to perceive male dominance as a rigid socialization.
- Coping mechanism and methods help men to control their intentions to show authority to control others (Pence & Paymar, 1993). The terms like isolation, demeaning language, control of finances, and other means of control are also considered as abuse in these methods. The offenders under these interventions are allowed to build their empathy for victims besides acknowledging the negative effect of abuse.
- Family systems theory is based on a set of common assumption that couples unwittingly engage in repeated cycles of interaction that may culminate in abuse (e.g., Neidig & Friedman, 1984). This intervention can only given in a men’s only group as it includes the analysis of family dynamics and developing communication by bringing up new insights and skills to the “half of the couple” in the group.
- Trauma-based approaches and interventions are based on the assumption that the childhood traumas play roe on men who batters. Such trauma can be caused by witnessing parental violence and while receiving physical abuse from parents (Browne, Saunders, & Staecker, 1997). So such interventions try to cure the trauma and other coping techniques.
The above methods are used solely or in combination. For example, the EMERGE program uses the combination of ‘awareness of abusive behaviors with cognitive restructuring’. The “Duluth model” (Pence & Paymar, 1993) emphasizes on combating and controlling techniques for violent and nonviolent activities. Family system method is prone to controversy, as it holds the victim responsible for the abuse.
There are studies conducted on interventions including different groups like – couples groups and men’s groups. Brannen and Rubin (1996) as cited in Saunders observed the effectiveness of battering interventions on court-ordered, intact couples who wanted to remain together. The response of recidivism is same both in the gender specific and in couple’s group treatment even after 12 sessions. Still the study observed a less recidivism with alcohol abuse in the couples group.
Morrel, Elliott, Murphy, and Taft (2003) as cited in Saunders conducted a comparative study between interventions on cognitive–behavioral group and Yalom-style supportive therapeutic group. Their study did not find any difference with criminal recidivism in reports at 6 months and 2–3 years intervals in the groups subjected to two interventions. However, there is a decline observed in psychological aggression, and physical assault and an increase in self-esteem in both the groups after intervention. In addition, their study found that the supportive group has gained negotiation skills to combat the verbal aggression.
There is another study on court order treatment conducted by Davis, Taylor, and Maxwell (2000) as cited in Saunders along with a community service control condition. The study found that the longer the treatment more is its effectiveness as it is observed in group that received treatment for 26 weeks than the group trained in 8-week.
Also according to Begun et al., 2003, the “transtheoretical approach assumes that matching interventions to the motivational stage of the offender is more important for treatment effectiveness than any particular theoretical approach”.
So the current study takes the court ordered offenders as observation group for the study to identify the effectiveness of interventions in combinations.
The research of Christopher Eckhardt & et al., while assessing the criminal recidivism used the parameter Self- or Partner-Reported Partner Violence Recidivism besides BIP attendance and arrest history.
So the current study also tries to asses the effectiveness of interventions through partner reported battering recidivism in men.
Hypothesis
The current study tries to observe the effectiveness of interventions on men who batter by considering the transtheoretical approach for the interventions.
Methodology
As highlighted by Honey and Mumford (1986) all learning styles have their advantages, disadvantages, and therefore no single style can be considered the best method to undertake. Therefore, the current research study adopts the usage of hybrid method of using both quantitative as well as qualitative to identify the hypothesis.
The study enquires in to the scenario of cause and effects of battering in two ways: one is qualitative literature review and the other is quantitative survey method.
The current scope of the research compels the researcher to adopt a combination of approach in using quantitative and qualitative techniques. Cook (1995) confirms the usage of this hybrid methodology. In his opinion, both quantitative and qualitative methods contribute to all aspects of evaluative enquiries and can be successfully used together (e.g. Cook 1995). Many researches that cannot validate the outcome through any single methodology will have an approach to this hybrid way. It is most important to derive the answer to hypothesis, rather than restraining to use the methodology.
Qualitative method
Qualitative method is used to collect the secondary data to evaluate the preliminary facts of interventions. Qualitative research methods are described as naturalistic, anthropological, and ethnographic and can be used through interpretive paradigm in the current research.
The quantitative research method is proposed to observe through the Survey questionnaire to gather opinion on effectiveness of intervention on men who batter. This data is further compiled on analyze and to suggest the further course of intervention activities.
A survey is a systematic procedure for collecting information to describe, compare, or explain attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions. Surveys involve setting objectives for designing research for data collection. This involves devising an instrument for data collection on different opinions and scoring the instrument, analyzing data, and reporting the results.
Alex Heckert and Gondolf assumes that effective efforts to identify the violence risk makers will not only help to plan the interventions, but the batter prediction will also help the women to plan their safety measures to seek help when encountered with men who batter severely. (Gondolf, 1997).
So Alex Heckert and Gondolf picks up a consistent list of risk markers that are in use in battering from the previous studies like DeMaris & Jackson, 1987, Saunders, 1995 and Tolman & Bennett, 1990. They are – Excessive and alcohol drug abuse, prior assault and criminal activities, neglect or abuse in childhood, personality or psychological disorders are some of the factors considered by the above authors. So the current study proposes to use such risk markers to be included in the survey to further analyze the effectiveness of interventions.
The data produced from the survey produced a clear form of representation against the factors involved taking the consensus. The further interpretation of results through quantitative analysis can help in identifying the effectiveness of intervention on men who batter.
Rationale for Deductive Approach
The current study proposes to observe a deductive approach as it starts the research with a more generalized concept and runs toward a specific observation. The observation of effectiveness of intervention against battering is found out through logical argument and analysis of various theories and examples from literature. This approach can be termed as “top-down” approach. The research begins with a concept or theory then narrows down the search to specific hypotheses to test further. The approach further narrows its scope while observing to address the hypothesis. Finally, the study narrows down the process of observation by further testing the hypothesis to confirm the validity of the data concerning the original theory and hypothesis. Deductive approach seems narrower at the beginning and is concerned with testing or confirming hypotheses.
Proposed Data collection method(s)
The Data collection proposes to follow in two ways. Primary method of data collection uses obtaining the results using survey questionnaire. And as secondary method of data collection, a thorough review of literature, journals, documents, articles, news collection and statistical reports etc., is proposed.
Target Population
The study proposes to survey the intervention methods by taking the population of offenders who have received the any above intervention methods during the receive of court order. The study proposes to survey 100 females who are partners of the men who received the intervention against battering after 2 year of training to observe the recidivism of battering.
Proposed Sampling
There should be a stratified sampling in choosing the population, to include observations form the target population so that every member of the population has a known chance participating and giving opinion on the effectiveness of intervention. To have a good opinion poll, the study proposes to conduct with a total sample size of 100, by considering only those respondents who are willing to participate in the study.
Proposed analysis
The survey results will be collect manually to record the opinion of partners on the behavioral outcome of the offenders after the intervention towards battering. The results will then coded to computer using Excel Software to present them for further analysis.
As the current hypothesis involves the results in the form of huge numerical data as an outcome of survey, a correlation analysis is proposed to conduct on the data to prove the effectiveness of intervention methods on men who batter. The correlation analysis of the study should be conducted using excel or SPSS software.
The resulted data should be subject to ANOVA test to find out the variance levels. Then the results of survey will be observed for the effect of independent variables like different interventions on the dependent variable – effectiveness in dealing the battering or recidivism. ANOVA is proposed to test the impact of different intervention methods on the recidivism of battering in men.
Significance
The current proposed research tends to yield the knowledge on the trans theoretical implications on the effectiveness of interventions on men who batter. This helps to the body of knowledge in reducing the criminal rates in violence area. Besides reducing the gender inequality, such study explores the means and ways to develop the healthy and happy family relations in the society.
As the method is proposed to intimate the purpose and process of the survey method to the participants well before, the study maintains the ethical practice of research and is not exploiting any behavioral aspects of the offenders.
References
Bryan Hendricks, Todd Werner, Lee Shipway and Greg J. Turinetti, Recidivism Among Spousal Abusers: Predictions and Program Evaluation, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2006.
Christopher Eckhardt , Amy Holtzworth-Munroe , Bradley Norlander, Ashley Sibley & Melissa Cahill, Readiness to Change, Partner Violence Subtypes, and Treatment Outcomes Among Men in Treatment for Partner Assault, Violence and Victims, Volume 23, Number 4, 2008.
Daniel G. Saunders & Ann Arbor, Group Interventions for Men Who Batter: A Summary of Program Descriptions and Research, Violence and Victims, Volume 23, Number 2, 2008.
Heckert A & Gondolf E, “Do Multiple outcomes and conditional Factors Improve Prediciton of Batterer Reassault?.” Violence and Victims, Volume 20, Number 1, 2005.
Woodin Erica M & Daniel O’Leary, Partner Aggression Severity as a Risk Marker for Male and Female, Journal of Marital and Family Therapy; Vol 32, 2006. pg: 283-296.