|
Abstract
|
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
The aim of this study by Stith et al. was to develop a typology describing students who use violence in their dating relationships. It was thought that by looking at the group who uses violence as heterogeneous, differences within the group and patterns would emerge. Specifically examined were characteristics such as attitude and behavior and the identified resources employed to resolve conflict within the relationship. Variables used to develop the typology came from resource theory which states that individuals will use violence as a resource to resolve conflict when other nonviolent resources have failed or are perceived to have failed.
METHODOLOGY:
The authors employed a quasi-experimental design using a non- probability sample from a college-aged dating population. The authors commented on the available research which distinguishes between typologies in marital violence, and available research which exams the heterogenicity of the violent dating population. This study sought to establish empirically based typologies to address the differences in the dating population that differ from those within the married population. Resource measurements such as coping strategies, negotiating styles, and the relationship dimensions of love, maintenance, conflict, and ambivalence were used to develop this study's typology. This study was conducted in two-parts at a mid-Atlantic university using a questionnaire format. The first part involved distributing 600 questionnaires through the mail to first-year students living in residence halls. The response rate was 401. From these respondents, only 280 were selected which represented those who were presently involved in serious dating relationships. The sample was representative of the residence hall with 156 females (56%) and 124 males (44%) of which 94% were white and 96% were 18 or 19 years old. The second aspect of the data collection sought to increase representation and sample size. This second sample was gathered using a social science class with a total of 245 questionnaires. From this sample, 199 were in a serious dating relationship, 142 female (71%), 57 male (29%), and 91% were 19 to 22 years of age. While some slight differences were found with respect to age, length of relationship, and father's level of education, no significant differences were found between groups on levels of violence, race, income, or mother' education, and the two groups were combined making a sample of 479 students in a serious dating relationship. This sample was further reduced, using only students reporting violence in their current relationship, making the final sample 166 respondents, 97 female and 69 males. The following instruments were used to assess the sample. The Relationship Dimensions Scale which used 25 items and explored love, maintenance, conflict and ambivalence. Alpha reliability coefficients for these subscales were all within acceptable ranges. The Power and Strategies Scale was used to assess negotiation styles. Twenty one strategies were factored to identify four styles of negotiation. Alpha coefficients were included for direct appeal at.64, bargaining/compromise at.72, indirect appeal at.59, emotional appeal at.65, and emotional abuse at.80. The Ways of Coping Inventory was used to measure coping strategies of 41 items. These results were factored to identify 8 factors and their alpha coefficients of denial/distancing at.79, accepting responsibility at.81, problem-solving at.72, confrontation at.67, social support at.65, spiritual belief/fantasy at.57, self-control at.54, and escape/avoidance at.47. The Conflict Tactics Scale's (CTS) physical violence subscale, was used to measure level of violence. Reliability for this scale was reported at.90. The CTS data was further classified into two levels of severity, that of minor or severe violence. Minor acts included being pushed, shoved, grabbed, wrestled or pinned down, hit with a flying object, clawed/scratched, and bit or slapped. Severe acts included being punched with a fist, hit with an object, kicked, strangled, and harmed with a lethal weapon. Rosenburg's 10-item Self-Esteem Scale assess self-esteem with a coefficient alpha reliability of.93. The amount of control experienced by students in their lives was measured using the 7-item Mastery Scale with an alpha of.80. Analyses in this paper included cluster analysis using Ward's 1963 minimum sum of squares clustering procedure and the SPSSx computer cluster program to determine similarity between subject's profiles. Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) was used to determine significant differences between clusters on most of the resource variables. Other variables included in the MANOVA procedure included emotional abuse, severe physical violence, minor physical violence, self-esteem, mastery, gender, age, and length of relationship. Post hoc univariate tests were conducted to determine significant differences between cluster groups.
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
The results of this study revealed four clusters in defining a typology of violence in dating relationships. The first cluster was defined as "Stable Minimizer". This partner stayed in the relationship the longest (2.3 years) and coped by avoiding the conflict in the relationship. They reported moderate feelings of love and ambivalence, moderate use of maintenance and they used all types of negotiation styles. They experienced mid-range levels of conflict, used self-control during conflict, and often coped by denying and avoiding their problems. Violence and emotional abuse was used less often in this cluster than in the other three groups. The second cluster was defined as "Hostile Disengaged". This partner stayed in the relationship the shortest amount of time (1.3 years), did not use direct coping strategies or negotiating styles, and used minor and severe violence to solve the high level of conflict. The Hostile Disengaged type felt the least love for his/her partner, had the lowest maintenance level, displayed the highest level of conflict, and his/her feelings of ambivalence were the strongest of all three groups. This type also used violence more often than the other three groups. The third type was defined as "Hostile Pursuers". This partner relied on a variety of direct and indirect coping strategies and negotiation styles to deal with their highly volatile relationship. Although they reported a high ambivalence level about remaining in their relationship, they also indicated a high level of energy in maintenance activities. This type had the highest level of conflict and the most frequent use of emotional abuse than the other three groups. The fourth group was defined as "Secure Lovers". This partner had been in the relationship for longer periods of time (2.2 years) and used direct coping and negotiating styles with their partners. The secure lover was more often a female and reported the most feelings of love for her partner. They were involved in the highest amount of maintenance activities, and they displayed the lowest conflict and ambivalence levels compared to the other three groups. These partners used self-control and problem solving when faced with conflict. Use of violence was rare and less severe in this relationship type, as was the use of emotional abuse. This partner also reported the highest level of self-esteem and mastery when compared to the other three groups. These findings substantiate the assertions that cluster groups do exist in dating relationships. These groups differ by the resource measures of coping strategies, love, conflict, negotiation styles, ambivalence, maintenance, and with use of emotional or physical abuse. In addition, they differ by esteem, mastery, age, and length of their relationships. While other studies have distinguished differences between partners in violent versus nonviolent dating relationship, this study has presented four typologies amongst those in the dating population who are involved in violent relationships. AUTHORS' RECOMMENDATIONS:
The authors recommended replicating this study using larger sample sizes, and cross-validating results with other samples. Longitudinal studies are needed to compare outcomes for each relationship type. Qualitative studies are needed to help explain the meaning given to violence among partners in their relationship. The authors pointed out that even though females are more likely to be the victims of violence in dating relationships, women too, are capable of using violence against their partners. The authors addressed the implications for college personnel when dealing with dating violence on campus. They recommended that those who address this issue, take the time necessary to assess the resources available to the student. This may help the student better understand their situation and the interventions needed to eliminate violence in the students' relationships. (CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado)
KW - College Student Research
KW - Dating Violence Offender
KW - Young Adult
KW - Dating Violence Causes
KW - Adult Offender
KW - Adult Violence
KW - Offender Characteristics
KW - Offender Attitudes
KW - Offender Typology
KW - Adult Female
KW - Adult Male
KW - Male Offender
KW - Male Violence
KW - Female Offender
KW - Female Violence
KW - Violence Against Women
KW - Partner Violence |