Journal of Family Violence

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 59–73 | Cite as

Validation of the Propensity for Abusiveness Scale in Diverse Male Populations

  • Donald G. Dutton
  • Monica A. Landolt
  • Andrew Starzomski
  • Mark Bodnarchuk


The Propensity for Abusiveness Scale (PAS; Dutton, 1995) was designed as a self-report perpetrator profile for intimate abusiveness. It was empirically validated through reports of abuse by intimate partners. The original PAS (Dutton, 1995) was given to 144 men in treatment for partner abuse and 44 demographically matched controls. It correlated significantly with partner reports of abusiveness and correctly classified men 82.2% of the time, as one standard deviation above or below the mean partners' report score for abusiveness. In the present study, the PAS was given to clinical outpatients, gay males, male college students, and a group of spousal assaulters. A criterion measure for abusiveness (the Psychological Maltreatment of Women Inventory; Tolman 1989, or the Psychological Maltreatment Inventory; Kasian & Painter, 1992) was collected from intimate partners. In all groups, the PAS correlated significantly with partners' reports of both physical and psychological abusiveness on subscales of the criterion measures: Dominance/Isolation and Emotional Abuse. For the college students and wife-assault groups, a new criterion measure was used: the Severity of Violence Against Women Scale. The PAS correlated significantly with partners' reports of threats and violence measured by this scale. The PAS appears to provide a nonreactive assessment instrument that is a strong predictor of intimate abusiveness across a variety of populations.

Abusiveness Scale self-report spousal violence 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arias, I., and Beach, S. R. (1987). Validity of self-reports of marital violence. J. Fam. Viol. 2(2): 139–150.Google Scholar
  2. Briere, J., and Runtz, M. (1998). The Trauma Symptom Checklist (TSC-33): Early data on a new scale. J. Interpers. Viol. 4(2): 151–163.Google Scholar
  3. Browning, J. J., and Dutton, D. G. (1986). Assessment of wife assault with the Conflict Tactics Scale: Using couple data to quantify the differential reporting effect. J. Marr. Fam. 48: 375–379.Google Scholar
  4. Check, J., and Malamuth, N. (1985). The Hostility TowardWomen Scale. Paper presented at the International Society for Research on Aggression, Victoria, BC.Google Scholar
  5. Choca, J. P., Shanley, L. A., and Van Denburg, E. (1992). Interpretative Guide to the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory. Washington, DC: APA Press.Google Scholar
  6. Crowne, D. P., and Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. J. Cons. Psychol. 24: 349–354.Google Scholar
  7. Dutton, D. G. (1993). William Head Project: Research Report #1. Ottawa, Correctional Service of Canada.Google Scholar
  8. Dutton, D. G. (1994a). Behavioral and affective correlates of Borderline Personality Organization in wife assaulters. Intern. J. Law Psych. 17(3): 265–277.Google Scholar
  9. Dutton, D. G. (1994b). The origin and structure of the abusive personality. J. Person. Disord. 8(3): 181–191.Google Scholar
  10. Dutton, D. G. (1995). Trauma symptoms and PTSD-like profiles in perpetrators of intimate abuse. J. Traum. Stress 8(2): 299–315.Google Scholar
  11. Dutton, D. G. (1998a). The Abusive Personality. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  12. Dutton, D. G. (1998b) Risk Assessment for Domestic Violence Recidivism: L. A. County Probation Department, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  13. Dutton, D. G., and Hemphill, K. J. (1992). Patterns of socially desirable responding among perpetrators and victims of wife assault. Viol. Vict. 7(1): 29–40.Google Scholar
  14. Dutton, D. G., and Ryan, L. (1992). Antecedents of borderline personality organization in wife assaulters. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  15. Dutton, D. G., and Starzomski, A. J. (1993). Borderline personality in perpetrators of psychological and physical abuse. Viol. Vict. 8(4): 327–337.Google Scholar
  16. Dutton, D. G., Saunders, K., Starzomski, A., and Bartholomew, K. (1994). Intimacy-anger and insecure attachment as precursors of abuse in intimate relationships. J. Appl. Soc. Psych. 24(15): 1367–1386.Google Scholar
  17. Dutton, D. G., and Starzomski, A. J. (1994). Psychological differences between court-referred self-referred wife assaulters. Crim. Just. Behav. 21(2): 203–222.Google Scholar
  18. Dutton, D. G., Starzomski, A. J., and van Ginkel, C. (1995). The role of shame and guilt in the intergenerational transmission of abusiveness. Viol. Vict. 10(2): 121–131.Google Scholar
  19. Dutton, D. G., and Starzomski, A. (1997). Personality predictors of the Minnesota Power and Control Wheel. J. Interpers. Viol. 12(1): 70–82.Google Scholar
  20. Gerslma, C., Emmelkamp, P. M. G., and Arrindell, W. A. (1990). Anxiety, depression and perception of early parenting: A meta-analysis. Clin. Psych. Rev. 10: 251–277.Google Scholar
  21. Gunderson, J. G. (1984). Borderline Personality Disorder. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  22. Kasian, M., and Painter, S. (1992). Frequency and severity of psychological abuse in a dating population. J. Interpers. Viol. 7(3): 350–364.Google Scholar
  23. Landolt, M. A., and Dutton, D. G. (1997). Power and personality: An analysis of gay male intimate abuse. Sex Roles 37(5/6): 335–359Google Scholar
  24. Marshall, L. (1992). Development of the severity of violence against women scales. J. Fam. Viol. 7(2): 103–121.Google Scholar
  25. Paulhus, D. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. J. Personal. Soc. Psych. 46: 598–609.Google Scholar
  26. Pence, E. (1989). Batterer programs: Shifting from community collusion to community confrontation. In Caesar, P. L., and Hamberger, L. K. (eds.), Treating Men Who Batter. Duluth, MN: Minnesota Program Development, Inc.Google Scholar
  27. Roehl, J., and Guertin, K. (1998). Current Use of Dangerousness Assessments in Sentencing Domestic Offenders. Pacific Grove, CA, Justice Research Center.Google Scholar
  28. Saunders, D. (1991). Procedures for adjusting self-reports of violence for social desirability bias. J. Interpers. Viol. 6(3): 336–344.Google Scholar
  29. Siegel, J. M. (1986). The multidimensional anger inventory. J. Personal. Soc. Psych. 51(1): 191–200.Google Scholar
  30. Starzomski, A. J. (1999) Responsibility and Conflict Inefficacy as Correlates of Self Reported Abusiveness in males. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
  31. Straus, M. A. (1979). Measuring family conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics Scale. J. Marr. Fam. 41: 75–88.Google Scholar
  32. Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., and Steinmetz, S. (1980). Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family. Garden City, NY: Anchor/Doubleday.Google Scholar
  33. Straus, M. A., and Gelles, R. J. (1992). Physical Violence in American Families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishing.Google Scholar
  34. Tolman, R. M. (1989). The development of a measure of psychological maltreatment of women by their male partners. Viol. Vict. 4(3): 159–177.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Donald G. Dutton
    • 1
  • Monica A. Landolt
    • 1
  • Andrew Starzomski
    • 1
  • Mark Bodnarchuk
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations