Advertisement

Journal of Family Violence

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 203–228 | Cite as

The measure of wife abuse: Steps toward the development of a comprehensive assessment technique

  • Frances A. Rodenburg
  • John W. Fantuzzo
Article

Abstract

The lack of an adequate assessment tool for wife abuse has hindered empirical research. The Measure of Wife Abuse (MWA) was developed to improve on previously developed instruments, mainly by using empirical methods of construction, which has enabled the MWA to assess a broader range of wife abuse behaviors. The purpose of this study was to determine the factor structure of the MWA items, and to assess its reliability and validity. Confirmatory multiple group factor analyses of the MWA responses of 164 abused women yielded four factors: Physical, Sexual, Psychological, and Verbal Abuse. The MWA was found to possess adequate levels of both reliability, estimated from its internal consistency, and concurrent validity, with the Conflict Tactics Scales as the criterion measure.

Key words

wife abuse assessment factor analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barling, J., O'Leary, K. D., Jouriles, E. N., Vivian, D., and MacEwen, K. E. (1987). Factor similarity of the CTS across samples, spouses, and sites.J. Fam. Viol. 2: 37–54.Google Scholar
  2. Bardis, P. D. (1973). Violence: Theory and quantification.J. Polit. Milit. Sociol. 1: 121–146.Google Scholar
  3. Dobash, R. E., and Dobash, R. P. (1979).Violence Against Wives: A Case Against the Patriarchy, Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Dobash, R. E., and Dobash, R. P. (1981). Social science and social action.J. Fam. Issues 2: 439–470.Google Scholar
  5. Flynn, J. P. (1977). Recent findings related to wife abuse.Social Casework 58: 13–20.Google Scholar
  6. Frieze, I. H. (1983). Investigating the causes and consequences of marital rape.Signs J. Wom. Culture Soc. 8: 532–553.Google Scholar
  7. Ganley, A. L. (1981).Court-Mandated Counseling for Men Who Batter: A Three-Day Workshop for Mental Health Professionals—Participanls' Manual, Center for Women's Policy Studies, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  8. Gaquin, D. A. (1977–1978). Spouse abuse: Data from the National Crime Survey.Victimol. Int. J. 2: 632–643.Google Scholar
  9. Gelles, R. J. (1972).The Violent Home: A Study of Physical Aggression Between Husbands and Wives, Sage, Beverly Hills.Google Scholar
  10. Gelles, R. J. (1980). Violence in the family: A review of research in the seventies.J. Marr. Fam. 42: 873–885.Google Scholar
  11. Gelles, R. J. (1982). Applying research on family violence to clinical practice.J. Marr. Fam. 44: 9–20.Google Scholar
  12. Gelles, R. J. (1987).Family Violence, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.Google Scholar
  13. Gondolf, E. W. (1987). Evaluating programs for men who batter: Problems and prospects. J.Fam. Viol. 2: 95–108.Google Scholar
  14. Gorsuch, R. L. (1983).Factor Analysis (second edition), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  15. Gorsuch, R. L. (1988).UniMult: For Univariate and Multivariate Analysis, UniMult, Altadena, CA.Google Scholar
  16. Hilberman, E., and Munson, K. (1977–1978). Sixty battered women.Victimol. Int. J. 2: 460–470.Google Scholar
  17. Hoffman, P. (1984). Psychological abuse of women by spouses and live-in lovers.Wom. Ther. 3: 37–47.Google Scholar
  18. Hollingshead, A. B. (1975).Four Factor Index of Social Status, Unpublished manuscript, Yale University, Department of Sociology, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
  19. Hornung, C. A., McCullough, B. C., and Sugimoto, T. (1981). Status relationships in marriage: Risk factors in spouse abuse.J Man. Fam. 43: 675–692.Google Scholar
  20. Hudson, W. W., and McIntosh, S. R. (1981). The assessment of spouse abuse: Two quantifiable dimensions.J. Marr. Fam. 43: 873–888.Google Scholar
  21. Kuhl, A. F. (1982). Community responses to battered women.Victim. Int. J. 7: 49–59.Google Scholar
  22. Lambert, L. K., and Fantuzzo, J. W. (1988).Assessing Spousal Abuse: Beyond the Conflict Tactics Scales, Unpublished master's thesis, California State University, Fullerton, CA.Google Scholar
  23. Levinger, G. (1966). Sources of marital dissatisfaction among applicants for divorce.Am. J. Orthopsychiatry 36: 803–807.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Makepeace, J. M. (1981). Courtship violence among college students.Fam. Relat. 30: 97–102.Google Scholar
  25. Martin, D. (1981).Battered Wives (rev. ed.), Volcano Press, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  26. Pagelow, M. D. (1981).Woman-battering: Victims and their experiences, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.Google Scholar
  27. Rhodes, N. R. (1985). The assessment of spousal abuse: An alternative to the Conflict Tactics Scale. (Doctoral dissertation, Fuller Theological Seminary, 1985).Diss. Abstr. Int. 46: 2076B.Google Scholar
  28. Rounsaville, B. J. (1978). Theories in marital violence: Evidence from a study of battered women.Victimol. Int. J. 3: 11–31.Google Scholar
  29. Russell, D. E. H. (1982).Rape in Marriage, MacMillan, New York.Google Scholar
  30. Saunders, D. G. (1986). When battered women use violence: Husband-abuse or self-defense?Viol. Vict. 1: 47–60.Google Scholar
  31. Shields, N. M., and Hanneke, C. R. (1983). Battered wives' reactions to marital rape. In D. Finkelhor, R. J. Gelles, G. T. Hotaling, and M. A. Straus (eds.),The Dark Side of Families: Current Family Violence Research, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp. 131–148.Google Scholar
  32. Snyder, D. K., and Fruchtman, L. A. (1981). Differential patterns of wife abuse: A data-based typology.J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 49: 878–885.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Stacey, W. A., and Shupe, A. S. (1983).The Family Secret: Domestic Violence in America, Beacon Press, Boston.Google Scholar
  34. Straus, M. A. (1974). Leveling, civility, and violence in the family.J. Marr. Fam. 36: 13–29.Google Scholar
  35. Straus, M. A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales.J. Man. Fam.41: 75–88.Google Scholar
  36. Straus, M. A. (1987).The Conflict Tactics Scales: An evaluation and new data on validity, reliability, norms, and scoring methods, Unpublished manuscript, University of New Hampshire, Family Research Laboratory, Durham, NH.Google Scholar
  37. Straus, M. A., and Gelles, R. J. (1986). Societal change and change in family violence from 1975 to 1985 as revealed by two marital surveys.J. Marr. Fam. 48: 465–479.Google Scholar
  38. Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., and Steinmetz, S. K. (1980).Behind Closed Doors, Anchor Press/Doubleday, Garden City, NY.Google Scholar
  39. Tolman, R. M. (1989). The development of a measure of psychological maltreatment of women by their male partners.Viol. Vict. 4: 159–177.Google Scholar
  40. Walker, L. E. A. (1979).The Battered Woman, Harper & Row, New York.Google Scholar
  41. Walker, L. E. A. (1984).The Battered Woman Syndrome, Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  42. Wolfgang, M. E. (1958).Patterns in Criminal Homicide, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frances A. Rodenburg
    • 1
  • John W. Fantuzzo
    • 2
  1. 1.Fuller Graduate School of PsychologyPasedena
  2. 2.University of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphia

Personalised recommendations