In this study, survival analysis is used to examine time to rearrest for both domestic violence and nondomestic violence crimes among a cohort of domestic violence offenders (N = 286) over a 10-year period. In addition, risk factors for rearrest such as demographic, offending history, and batterer treatment variables are examined to determine their influence on domestic and nondomestic violence recidivism. Overall, the results suggest that approximately half of domestic violence offenders are rearrested. Furthermore, among those who are rearrested, they are rearrested fairly quickly and for generalized (both domestic and nondomestic violence offenses) versus specialized offending. Risk factors associated with both types of rearrest included age, marriage, and domestic violence offense history. Several additional risk factors were unique to rearrest type. Study limitations are explicitly stated and policy implications are discussed.

Recent concerns have been expressed that youths are an increasingly violent segment of U.S. society. This report explores such claims by presenting alternative dimensions with which trends in youth violence can be interpreted. Using Uniform Crime Reports and U.S. Bureau of the Census data for 1958-1993, rates of arrests for murder, taken to represent absolute levels of involvement in this form of violence, are analyzed for trends among 15- to 19-year-olds. Relative involvement, operationalized as the ratio of arrest rates for those aged 15-19 to those of the remainder of the population, is also analyzed for trends. A pronounced upward trend since the mid-1980s in both rates and ratios of arrests for murder is found for ages 15-19, resulting in this group now having the highest levels of absolute and relative involvement in murder arrests of any age category, a distinct departure from previous years. As a context for interpreting these levels, the involvement of current 15- to 19-year-olds is shown to exceed by a considerable margin the involvement of similarly aged cohorts of baby boomers, a youth group formerly the object of considerable public concern. Research is encouraged that addresses the multifaceted sources contributing to this dramatic societal shift in age-related patterns of arrests for murder and, by assumption, involvement in homicide offending.

Previous studies have demonstrated a connection between intimate partner violence (IPV) and a child’s alienation from the abused parent, but little is known about the relationships between the type of IPV, aspects, and severity of a child’s alienation, and the target parent’s gender. This study assessed the presence of an IPV history (verbal and physical aspects) among parents who identify as targets of their children’s unreasonable rejection. Also investigated were associations between the form of IPV and manifestations of a child’s alienated behavior, parent’s gender and type of IPV, and parents’ gender and degree of the child’s alienation. Self-identified alienated parents (n = 842) completed an online survey that included an IPV screening measurement (Hurts, Insults, Screams, Threatens screening tool) and a measure of the parent’s perception of their child’s alienated behaviors (Rowlands Parental Alienation Scale). The majority identified as IPV victims and reported a higher level of verbal than physical abuse. More mothers than fathers identified themselves as IPV victims. As a group, IPV victims rated their child as more severely alienated than did non-IPV alienated parents. Mothers were more likely than fathers to report physical aggression by the other parent and more likely than fathers to assess their child’s alienated behaviors as more severe. Victims of physical violence reported their children were less likely to withhold positive affection from them. This knowledge may assist in earlier identification of the alienation process and greater recognition, legitimacy, funding, and opportunities for enhanced collaboration among stakeholders. This, in turn, may lead to improvements in prevention, intervention, and accountability, thus helping to interrupt alienation processes.

The present study examines the controversial issue of whether women and men are equally abused in dating relationships. Undergraduate and graduate students (n = 874) completed a survey about their experiences and perpetration of psychological, sexual, and physical aggression within dating relationships. To enable a more contextualized understanding of these phenomena, motives for and outcomes of dating violence were also assessed. Women and men reported comparable amounts of overall aggression from dating partners, but differed in the types of violence experienced. Women were more likely to experience sexual victimization, whereas men were more often the victims of psychological aggression; rates of physical violence were similar across genders. Contrary to hypotheses, women were not more likely to use physical violence in self-defense than men. However, although both genders experienced similar amounts of aggressive acts from dating partners, the impact of such violence is more severe for women than men.

Dealing with hostile interpersonal relationships at work has been the topic of many popular books and workshops. Yet, with the exception of sexual harassment, there is surprisingly little mention in the organizational research literature on the nature, extent, and costs of abusive work interactions. These more frequent, more tolerated, and, thus, more damaging interpersonal interactions involve hostile verbal and nonverbal nonphysical behaviors directed by one or more persons towards another. The primary aim is to undermine the other to ensure compliance. In this study, we examined the extent to which students experienced nonsexual nonphysical abusive behavior on their jobs, the impact of this experience on job satisfaction, the characteristics of the actor and target, and responses to these behaviors, particularly turnover. The results indicate that although most of the students had very positive interactions at work, exposure to abusive behavior was familiar, was relatively frequent, and had a negative impact on the targets. The actors tended to be bosses and older than the targets. The quality of the interpersonal relationships at work was related to job satisfaction and intention to leave. The implications of these results are discussed with respect to individual, situational, and organizational factors that may be related to the presence and impact of abusive interpersonal interactions. Avenues for research on the nature, extent, and impact of these behaviors at both the individual and organizational levels are identified.

This study adds to the available literature on female-perpetrated intimate abuse by examining Dutton’s (2007) theory of the abusive personality (AP) in a sample of 914 women who had been involved in dating relationships. Consistent with the AP, recalled parental rejection, borderline personality organization (BPO), anger, and trauma symptoms all demonstrated moderate-to-strong relationships with women’s self-reported intimate psychological abuse perpetration. Fearful attachment style demonstrated a weak-to-moderate relationship with psychological abuse perpetration. A potential model for explaining the interrelationships between the elements of the AP was tested using structural equation modeling (SEM). Consistent with the proposed model, recalled parental rejection demonstrated relationships with BPO, trauma symptoms, and fearful attachment. Similarly consistent with the model, trauma symptoms demonstrated a relationship with anger; and BPO demonstrated strong relationships with trauma symptoms, fearful attachment, and anger. Additionally, anger itself had a strong relationship with women’s self-reported perpetration of intimate psychological and physical abuse. Contrary to the proposed model, fearful attachment had a nonsignificant relationship with anger when this relationship was examined using SEM.

The study of men’s violence against their intimate partners is segregated from the study of other forms of violence. Comparing intimate partner violence (IPV) to other violence, however, allows one to examine whether the motivation and the legal response are similar. I examine whether men’s assaults on partners are particularly likely to have a control motive, whether women’s assaults on partners are particularly likely to be motivated by self-defense, and whether intimate partner violence is less likely to be reported to the police and legally sanctioned. The evidence casts doubt on the feminist approach, which has dominated the study of IPV. I suggest that a theory of instrumental violence provides a better understanding of IPV. Such an approach recognizes a variety of motives and emphasizes the role of conflict in intimate relationships, sex differences in strength and violence, and the importance of chivalry. Finally, I suggest that social scientists who study IPV should be more careful in their descriptive terminology.