Advertisement

Cognitive Therapy and Research

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 201–214 | Cite as

The Role of Perceptions and Attributions in Battered Women's Intentions to Permanently End Their Violent Relationships

  • Karen T. Pape
  • Ileana Arias
Article

Abstract

The purpose of the current investigation was to examine the mediational role of attributions and emotional reactions to partner violence in the relationship between violence severity and frequency, and women's intentions to leave abusive relationships permanently. The results of separate regression analyses indicated that perceived increases in the frequency and severity of violence over time, but not absolute levels of violence, were significantly related to women's attributions for the violence, the severity of nervousness reported subsequent to a violent episode, and the intention to leave the abusive partner permanently. Attributions of partner causality and responsibility for violence were significantly related to nervous reactions and the intention to leave the abusive partner permanently. As predicted by the attributional model tested, the relationship between perceived increases in violence over time and the intention to leave the abusive partner permanently was completely mediated by the extent to which women explained or attributed the causes of the violence to the partner that were stable and global, and attributed blameworthiness, malicious intent, and selfish motivations to the partner for his use of violence.

wife battering attributions relationship termination 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Aguirre, B. E. (1985). Why do they return? Abused women in shelters. Social Work, 30, 350–354.Google Scholar
  2. Arias, I., & Beach, S. R. H. (1987). Evaluations of physical aggression among intimate dyads. Journal of Family Violence, 2, 139–149.Google Scholar
  3. Arias, I., Lyons, C. M., & Street, A. E. (1997). Individual and marital consequences of victimization: Moderating effects of relationship efficacy and spouse support. Journal of Family Violence, 12, 193–210.Google Scholar
  4. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). Themoderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.Google Scholar
  5. Cascardi, M., Langhinrichsen, J., & Vivian, D. (1992). Marital aggression: Impact, injury, and health correlates for husbands and wives. Archives of Internal Medicine, 152, 1178–1184.Google Scholar
  6. Dutton, D. G., & Hemphill, K. J. (1992). Patterns of socially desirable responding among perpetrators and victims of wife assault. Violence and Victims, 7, 29–39.Google Scholar
  7. Ferraro, K. J., & Johnson, J. M. (1983). How women experience battering: The process of victimization. Social Problems, 30, 325–339.Google Scholar
  8. Fincham, F. D., & Bradbury, T. N. (1992). Assessing attributions in marriage: The Relationship Attribution Measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 457–468.Google Scholar
  9. Fincham, F. D., & Bradbury, T. N. (1993). Marital satisfaction, depression, and attributions: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 442–452.Google Scholar
  10. Frieze, I. H. (1979). Perceptions of battered wives. In I. H. Frieze, D. Bar-Tal, & J. S. Carroll (Eds.), New approaches to social problems (pp. 79–108). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  11. Frieze, I. H. (1987). Perceptions of battering by battered women. Paper presented at the Third National Family Violence Research Conference, July 1987, University of New Hampshire.Google Scholar
  12. Gelles, R. J. (1976). Abused wives: Why do they stay? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 659–668.Google Scholar
  13. Gondolf, E. W. (1988). The effect of batterer counseling on shelter outcome. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 3, 275–289.Google Scholar
  14. Herbert, T. B., Silver, R. C., & Ellard, J. H. (1991). Coping with an abusive relationship: How and why do women stay? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 311–325.Google Scholar
  15. Hilberman, E., & Munson, K. (1977-1978). Sixty battered women. Victimology: An International Journal, 2, 460–470.Google Scholar
  16. Hilbert, J. C., & Hilbert, H. C. (1984). Battered women leaving shelters: Which way do they go? A discriminant functional analysis. Journal of Applied Social Sciences, 8, 291–297.Google Scholar
  17. Holtzworth-Munroe, A. (1988). Causal attributions in marriage: Theoretical and methodological issues. Clinical Psychology Review, 8, 331–344.Google Scholar
  18. Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Smutzler, N., & Sandin, E. (1997). A brief review of the research on husband violence. Part II: The psychological effects of husband violence on battered women and their children. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 2, 179–213.Google Scholar
  19. Hotaling, G., & Sugarman, D. (1986). An analysis of risk markers in husband-to-wife violence: The current state of knowledge. Violence and Victims, 1, 101–124.Google Scholar
  20. Hotaling, G., & Sugarman, D. (1990). A risk marker analysis of assaulted wives. Journal of Family Violence, 5, 1–13.Google Scholar
  21. Judd, C. M, & Kenny, D. A. (1981). Process analysis: Estimating mediation in evaluation research. Evaluation Research, 5, 602–619.Google Scholar
  22. Miller, D. T., & Porter, C. A. (1983). Self-blame in victims of violence. Journal of Social Issues, 39, 139–152.Google Scholar
  23. Montgomery, D. C, & Peck, E. A. (1992). Introduction to linear regression analysis, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  24. Pagelow, M. D. (1981). Woman-battering: Victims and their experiences. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Plichta, S. B. (1996). Violence and abuse: Implications for women's health. In M. M. Falik & K. S. Collins (Eds.), Women's health: The Commonwealth Fund Survey (pp. 237–270). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Snyder, D. K., & Scheer, N. S. (1981). Predicting disposition following brief residence at a shelter for battered women. American Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 559–566.Google Scholar
  27. Straus, M. A. (1990). The Conflict Tactics Scales and its critics: An evaluation and new data on validity and reliability. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 49–73). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1986). Societal change and change in family violence from 1975 to 1985 as revealed by two national surveys. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 48, 465–479.Google Scholar
  29. Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. K. (1980). Behind closed doors: violence in the American family. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  30. Strube, M. J. (1988). The decision to leave an abusive relationship: Empirical evidence and theoretical issues. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 236–250.Google Scholar
  31. Strube, M. J., & Barbour, L. S. (1983). The decision to leave an abusive relationship: Economic dependence and psychological commitment. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45, 785–793.Google Scholar
  32. Vivian, D., & Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J. (1994). Are bi-directionally violent couples mutually victimized? A gender-sensitive comparison. Violence and Victims, 9, 107–123.Google Scholar
  33. Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karen T. Pape
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ileana Arias
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyThe University of GeorgiaAthens
  2. 2.Atlanta Addictive Disorders and Psychiatric Medicine Associates, Inc.Atlanta
  3. 3.Department of Psychology and the Institute for Behavioral ResearchThe University of GeorgiaAthens

Personalised recommendations