In the last 20 years, various assessments of spouse abuse were developed. However, as Gelles criticizes, most of them lack adequate and consistent nominal and operational definition (1980, 1982, 1987; as cited in Rodenburg & Fantuzzo, 1993). In response to the criticisms of the previous measurements, more adequate assessments were developed. Today, the Measure of Wife Abuse (MWA) (Rodenburg & Fantuzzo, 1993) and the Audio-Record Observation (Margolin, John, & Gleberman, 1988) are the most adequate assessments of spouse abuse. In this paper, I will review these two assessments, and the research dealing with the measurements.

The Measure of Wife Abuse (MWA) is a type of self-report including a 60-item device designed to assess the type of abuse directed by a man toward his wife. The MWA was developed to improve the weaknesses of previous measures, such as the Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS). The CTS is not capable of including broad categories of spouse abuse. It contains only two categories of actions: Verbal Aggression and Physical Aggression. Furthermore, the CTS fails to measure the consequences of the violent act, such as emotional trauma and physical injury. However, the MWA categories include more types of wife abuse than the CTS. The MWA consists of four factors: physical, verbal, psychological, and sexual abuse. The sexual and psychological abuses are new items which are beyond the scope of the Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS). The MWA measures the frequency of abuse, which is the number of times acts of abuse occurred in the couple’s relationship within a 6-month period, the emotional consequences experienced by the victim as a measure of the severity of abuse (Rodenburg & Fantuzzo, 1993).

Rodenburg and Fantuzzo’s study (1993) showed that the MWA is a very reliable assessment for wife abuse. They conducted a study to assess its reliability and validity and to determine the factor structure of the MWA items. One hundred sixty four abused women were asked to complete a questionnaires, both the 52-item MWA and 18-item CTS. The CTS was used to test the concurrent validity of the MWA (Rodenburg & Fantuzzo, 1993).

The results revealed that the total MWA scale reliability was higher than the total CTS scale reliability. The results also showed that the MWA possesses concurrent validity. Although the validity coefficients calculated for the MWA and the CTS were moderate, two of the MWA scales, physical and verbal abuse, showed high concurrent validity (p<.01). The factor structure of the MWA items was more adequate than that of the CTS. MWA includes a broad range of categories compared to CTS; therefore, MWA can identify abused women more readily in clinical settings. The sexual and psychological abuse which is included on the MWA is quite important. According to clinical observation, psychological abuse occurs frequently in marital relationships almost as much as physical abuse, and when physical abuse accompanies psychological abuse, the effects of psychological abuse may be more intense. Furthermore, with the increase of sexual abuse in recent years, the assessment of husband’s sexual abuse of their wives is needed At present, the MWA is considered an adequate and informative assessment of wife abuse (Rodenburg & Fantuzzo, 1993).

Audio-Recorded Observation

The Audio-Recorded Observation is often used as another assessment for spouse abuse. The Audio-Recorded Observation allows experimenters to record the spouses’ behaviors. After recording, the audio data is coded. The experimenters break down the behaviors observed into a sequence of behavioral codes based on certain dimensions such as supportiveness, withdrawal, or positiveness (Weiss & Heyman, 1990).

Margolin, John, and Gleberman (1988) used the Audio-Recorded Observation to compare the affective responses to conflictual discussions in violent and nonviolent couples. The subjects were 78 couples who wished to participate in an extensive study of marital conflict. The subjects were classified into 4 types of groups based on self-reports’ scores, such as the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) and the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS). The 4 groups included physically abusive (PA), verbally abusive (VA), withdrawing (WI), and nondistressed/nonabusive (ND).

The 78 couples were asked to discuss two out of three problematic topics which the experimenters presented, for 10 minutes. For each discussion, the spouse spent the first 5 minutes defining the problem and the second 5 minutes solving the problem. The discussions were videotaped for later coding Affect coding was used to interpret the spouses’ discussions. The video tapess were assessed every 15 seconds for the duration of two 10 minute discussion. Wives and husbands were analyzed separately(Margolin, John, & Gleberman, 1988).

PA spouses were compared with other conflictual but non-violent spouses: ND spouses, WI spouses, and VA spouses. The result revealed that PA husbands expressed more negative behaviors and negative voices than VA husbands and WI husbands. The PA wives differed from wives in the other conflict groups by their higher escalation of negative affect (Margolin, John, & Gleberman, 1988).

In contrast to a self-report, observational assessment is objective and less likely to fall into a one-sided view. Coding shows reciprocity clearly; therefore, experimenters are likely to get the spouse relationship and the cause of spouse abuse. However, observational findings can be biased because "coding can result in different pictures of marital interaction depending on the ‘richness’ or ‘surplus’ meaning of the codes used" (Weiss, 1989; as cited in Weiss & Heyman, 1990). On the other hand, a self-report is cost effective and time consuming; however, the results are more likely to be subjective.

I reviewed the Measure of Wife Abuse (MWA) and the Audio-Recorded Observation. Both of them have advantages and disadvantages. In future research, quasiobservational methods, which are a cross between a self-report and behavioral observation, are expected.

                                                         Reference

      Rodenburg, A. F., & Fantuzzo, W. J. (1993). The measure of wife abuse: Step toward the
          development of a comprehensive assessment technique. Journal of Family Violence. Vol. 8. (3),
           203-228.

       Weiss, R. L. & Heyman, R. E. (1990). Observation of marital interaction. In F. D. Finchman
                 and T. N. Bardbury (Eds.), The psychology of marriage: basic issues and applications.
                 (pp.87-117). NY: Guilfold.

                       Assessment of Spousal Abuse

                                                Bobbi Jo Haney

   When attempting to assess spouse abuse clinicians can look at both self-report measures and behavioral observation measures. Each of these techniques possess their own strengths and weaknesses. Self- report measures are important in that they provide inside information, which cannot be furnished by anyone other than those within the relationship. They allow for the opinions and notions of those whom are most invested in the relationship to be attended to. While this information is significant it is not often the most accurate representation of fact. One can never assure the quality of these reports (Christensen, 1987). Behavioral observation, on the other hand, as it is generally executed by outside affiliates whom are not invested nor have any interest in the relationship, is usually a more precise manner for collecting data. Trained observers who agree on operationalized definitions of key behaviors often provide a more sound depiction of the given situation. While unbiased, concrete data is always desired, the rigidity of this observation consequently prohibits other considerable factors. As was
mentioned above, both of these techniques merit worthy appreciation yet both call for understanding of their defects. In order to develop a complete conceptualization of the problem of spouse abuse it is imperative to consider each approach.

Self- Report Measures. There are three primary self-report methods that exist for the assessment of abusive behavior. They are the open-ended interview, the structured interview (or scenario method), and the questionnaire method. Each of these strategies are important in their own accord however when used in conjunction with one another, collectively the three provide a more detailed, comprehensive appraisal as the information ascertained by each is somewhat different.

The open-ended interview is a tool often used during initial sessions to begin assessment. This technique involves inviting the patient to provide "her story" leaving her free to present the incidents in her situation in her own manner, one in which she feels comfortable. Allowing
the patient to structure her recollection in her own format generally serves as a way to initiate the information-exchange process. Once the patient begins sharing details the therapist may then begin to ask questions which will prompt a more precise description of the situation.
While this is an important method, often this type of summary account will not provide sufficient criteria for assessment. The patient likely will
not provide completely accurate detail of the violence towards her nor will she report every instance of abuse. To obtain information in greater
detail a more direct method of assessment (such as the following) must be administered (M.A. Dutton, 1992).

The open-ended interview allows the therapist to begin to understand the abuse from the point of view of the victim. Once this is established more structured methods of assessment may be applied such as the structured interview (or scenario method) involves asking the patient to
provide a vivid description of a particular instance where abuse occurred. Often the therapist may ask the patient to recall the first, worst, or last violent episode. This direct and poignant, moment-to-moment approach generally draws a more specific account from the patient. The
clinician is able to pursue individual events. This reduces any distortion or variance from the actual incidence. The clinician can then conclude from these accounts the pattern of abuse and evaluate over the change in severity over time, the consistency of abusive behavior, and the pattern of the woman’s response (M.A. Dutton, 1992).

Another method of assessment of spousal abuse is through the use of questionnaires. Like the structured interview method, the questionnaire method is a direct approach to eliciting details of spousal abuse. One drawback of the structured interview method which is accounted for by a questionnaire strategy is that during free recall sessions patients may be apprehensive about revealing certain details as they attempt to avoid or deny the occurrence of the abuse. Recognition of abusive behavior on an item list may trigger a memory of a particular instance of abuse.

There are several questionnaire measures that are used to assess spousal abuse. The most well known spousal abuse assessment inventory is the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) (Straus, M.A., 1979). The CTS lists distinct actions generally used during disputes and asks the respondent to rate the frequency each of the actions had been used within the past year (D.G. Dutton, 1992). The CTS is useful for assessing abuse
situations however it does have its limitations. The CTS alone is inadequate as it does not include all possible abusive behaviors. It excludes sexual and psychological abuse. It includes no measure of injury, and it fails to assess control patterns of the batterer (M.A. Dutton, 1992). Despite these shortcomings, the CTS is a valid measure of assessment when supplemented by other measures which can compensate for what it lacks.

Another measure for assessing spousal abuse is the Index of Spouse Abuse (ISA) (Hudson & McIntosh, 1981). The ISA is a useful instrument for predicting severity of wife abuse (Saunders, 1995). The ISA is a self- report scale designed to be administered to the female victim. It assesses the verbal, emotional, sexual and physical aggression. The ISA assigns a severity of physical abuse score (ISA-P) and also a severity of non- physical abuse score (ISA-NP) (Hudson & McIntosh, 1981). Because the ISA accounts for both psychological and sexual abuse and because it provides a measure of injury (ISA-P), both factors that are missing in the CTS, it is a compatible measure to couple with the CTS for
evaluation purposes.

Behavioral Observation Measures. During behavioral observation, trained observers are brought into a situation to give a neutral evaluation of the events occurring. The goal of behavioral observation is to examine the exchange of events between the subjects within the situation.
    The observers are looking for patterns- recurring events in time, which can aid in understanding and predicting future events. There are several ways of looking for patterns within situations. Generally observers are given operationalized definitions of the events they are to be investigating. Understanding these definitions they are asked to observe the situation and record each time the events occur. There are many
ways of recording and interpreting the data these observers acquire.

Data stream analysis is one way events are recorded and analyzed. Data stream analysis involves recording the exchange of events as it occurs. It is a literal depiction of the events as they unfold. Data stream is useful in analyzing the order that events occur, which events lead to other events, and which events provoke which responses. Applying data stream analysis to spouse abuse might help recognize maladaptive behavioral patterns within the batterer that lead to hostile, aggressive outcomes.

Base rates analysis is another way that events in a situation are recognized. The base rate is the observed rate of which an event occurs and is recorded divided by the total time allowed. In applying base rate to the issue of spouse abuse one might investigate how often within a period of time violent or aggressive acts occurred. This could help to determine the occurrence and severity of the problem. Knowledge of this information could contribute to the development of appropriate treatment programs.

Yet another method of behavioral observation analysis is Sequential analysis. Sequential analysis describes unfolding patterns which retain and repeat a sequence of events, each event dependant on the preceding event. It demonstrates which events occurred first and the effect
those events had on the remainder of the circumstances. This method is similar to Data Stream analysis and can be applied in the same way. This method one would expect would be extremely predictive.

Finally, an important concept to understand within behavior analysis is that of reciprocity. Reciprocity is the exchange of events, if one event occurs than another event occurs (if A does something, than B does something). This exchange of events and the measure of A to B
sequences is phenomenal in understanding how one partners actions correlate with the other partners responses.

As you can see, both self- report measures and behavioral observation measures can contribute a great deal to the comprehension of abuse situations and the adequate assessment of spousal abuse. Proper understanding of the circumstances is necessary in order to evaluate risk of a condition and also to predict future events and develop appropriate treatment strategies. The best way to completely realize all aspects of the abuse situation is to assimilate both of these methods in your assessment.

                                            References

Christensen, A. (1987). Assessment of Behavior. In K.D. O’Leary (Ed.) Assessment of    
      Marital Discord (pp. 130-57). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dutton, D. (1992). Theoretical & Empirical Perspectives on the Etiology & Prevention of
      Wife Assault. In R.D. Peters, R.J. Mc Mahon, V.L. Quinsey (Eds.) Aggression &
      Violence Throughout the Life Span (pp.192-221). Newbury Park: Sage.

Dutton, M.A. (1992). A Model for Assessment & Intervention: Empowering and Healing
       the Battered Woman. New York: Springer.

Hudson, W.W. & Mc Intosh S.R. (1981). The Assessment of Spouse Abuse: Two
      quantifiable dimensions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 11, 873-88.

Saunders, D.G. (1995). Prediction of Wife Assault. In J.C. Campbell (Ed.) Assessing
       Dangerousness: Violence by Sexual Offenders, Batterers and Child Abusers. (pp.
        192-221). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Straus, M.A. (1979). Measuring Intrafamily Conflict & Violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT)
       Scales. Journal of Marriage and Family, 41: 75-88.

---

 

Return to 473