Misconceptions about intimate aggression have been found to have serious consequences (Kamphius et al., 2005; Robinson, 2005). These beliefs serve to minimize the crime and blame the victim which can cause individuals to not take the crime seriously (Kamphius, et al., 2005; Sinclair, in press). Initial work combined and updated Sinclair's (2010) Stalking Myths Scale and McKeon's unpublished Stalking Attitudes Questionnaire, but further psychometric analysis is needed (Lyndon, Sinclair, & Martin, 2011). I surveyed 1,200 undergraduates using the Stalking Myth Scale –Revised (SMS – R), a modified version of the Obsessive Relational Intrusion Inventory – Short Form (ORI - SF; Cupach & Spitzberg, 2004), and three intimate partner aggression myth scales. My findings replicated the factor structure of the previous pilot and attitudes regarding stalking were found to be predictors of the likelihood to engage in, the perceived normativity of, and the perceived motivation behind stalking.

<p>Objective: Acute alcohol intoxication has been clearly identified as a risk factor for intimate partner aggression (IPA). There is a critical need for effective IPA interventions that can be applied during episodes of acute intoxication. A self-awareness intervention for general aggression that was designed to be applied during acute intoxication could fill this gap. This intervention is grounded in objective self-awareness and alcohol myopia theories, with the main premise being that intoxicated individuals who are exposed to self-awareness cues should focus on standards of correct behavior, which will serve to inhibit aggression. The purpose of the current study was to apply this intervention to alcohol-facilitated IPA and to examine potential moderators of this effect in order to determine for whom the intervention may be most effective. Method: Participants in the current study included 133 heterosexual community couples with a history of heavy drinking and IPA. Participants took part in a two-session laboratory study investigating the efficacy of this self-awareness intervention. Participants were randomly assigned to the intervention (<i>n</i> = 71) or control (<i>n</i> = 62) condition. During the study, they consumed alcohol and participated in an aggression task ostensibly against their romantic partner. Results: Findings were inconsistent with hypotheses. There was no between-group difference in laboratory aggression, and the moderators investigated in this study did not have an impact on the intervention’s efficacy. Conclusions: Present findings suggest that the self-awareness intervention may be ineffective for reducing alcohol-facilitated IPA. Potential explanations for this finding and implications for future research are discussed. </p>

The purpose of this study was to examine how modality and exposure to intimate partner aggression (IPA) impact Marriage and Family Therapists' (MFTs) recognition of IPA, identification of perpetrator(s), and risk assessment in a case example among 37 MFTs. It was hypothesized that participants who received the male unilateral modality and who had previous IPA exposure would be more likely to recognize the IPA, correctly identify the perpetrator(s), and indicate risk of future harm in their given case example. Logistic regression analyses did not reveal any significant relationships between the variables. However, it was found that 91.9% of MFTs recognized the IPA in their case example, 78.4% correctly identified the perpetrator(s), and 89.2% indicated the potential for future harm. This study emphasizes the importance of the rates reaching 100% because until that occurs some couples experiencing IPA will be overlooked and subsequently provided with inadequate treatment.

Women’s use of aggression in intimate partner relationships is consistently debated by researchers of intimate partner aggression. One tenet suggests women use aggression within intimate relationships at similar rates as men. Conversely, a second tenet acknowledges women’s use of aggression but suggests that the meaning and consequences associated with women’s aggression is not coercive or severely injurious, which are typical characteristics of men’s use of aggression. The current study evaluated incarcerated women in order to build upon an integrative approach that suggests that women’s use of aggression is related to the relationship dynamics generated from variations in coercive and conflictual behaviors. Further, the current study evaluated the moderating relation of childhood abuse history and posttraumatic stress symptoms between relationship dynamics and women’s use of aggression. Ninety-six women, who participated in a larger research project that investigated incarcerated women’s life experience, reported on the dynamics of their most recent abusive heterosexual relationship, their own use of aggression (minor and severe) and childhood abuse history and posttraumatic stress symptoms. Findings suggest that incarcerated women involved in intimate relationships characterized as highly conflictual use significantly more minor and severe aggression toward their partners than women involved in relationships with low levels of conflicts. The finding is significant regardless of the level of coercion present in the relationship. Lastly, neither childhood abuse history nor posttraumatic symptoms moderated the relation between intimate partner relationship dynamics and women’s use of aggression. Various reasons for the lack of support for the moderating effect of history on women’s use of aggression are discussed.

<p>Both basic personality traits and clinical personality disorders have been studied in the context of a wide range of behaviors, including antisocial behavior and aggression. Although the five-factor model (FFM) has been examined in relation to several types of non-partner aggression, relatively few studies have assessed the relations between FFM traits and intimate partner aggression perpetration. Additionally, some work has suggested that there may be differential personality correlates of intimate partner aggression versus other forms of aggression, but none has directly compared these types of aggression in terms of their personality trait profiles. The present study, reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board, sought to answer those questions as well as critically evaluate the potential mediating role of basic traits in the relation between personality disorder (PD) symptoms and outcomes related to aggression and antisocial behavior. A total of 307 participants, recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), completed a number of questionnaires assessing personality traits, PD symptoms, and various types of aggressive and antisocial behavior. Findings suggest that traits related to Agreeableness and Conscientiousness generally demonstrated the strongest and most consistent (negative) relations across all measures of aggression and antisocial behavior; however, Neuroticism-related traits also demonstrated moderate (positive) correlations with certain types of aggression. PD symptoms almost all predicted aggressive and antisocial behavior, and although ASPD and BPD were two of the most robust PD symptom correlates across aggression and antisocial behavior outcomes, they were not always the strongest PD symptom correlate for each behavior. Personality profiles were moderately similar across aggression subtypes, but some showed more convergence than others. Finally, relations between PD symptom counts and aggressive and antisocial behavior were largely accounted for by more basic personality traits.</p>