1. College Women’s Perpetration of Adulthood Animal Abuse
and its Relationship to Dating Violence Perpetration
Jeniimarie Febres, Hope Brasfield, JoAnna Elmquist, Heather Zapor, Ryan C. Shorey, & Gregory L. Stuart
University of Tennessee
Introduction
There has been a growing empirical literature demonstrating a relationship between intimate partner violence (IPV) and adulthood animal abuse (AAA).
Up to 75% of female victims of IPV who own pets report that their pets were threatened or harmed by their intimate partners (Flynn, 2011).
Research using reports from IPV perpetrators confirms the association between AAA and IPV.
Women with a history of perpetrating AAA have been found to perpetrate more frequent and more severe psychological and physical IPV in their relationships than women who did not abuse animals (Febres et al., 2012).
No research exists on the co-occurrence of AAA and IPV perpetration among college women, despite the high prevalence of dating violence in college samples and evidence of the bidirectional nature of such violence.
Investigating the relationship between AAA and dating violence (DV) among college women will help to determine whether previous findings in clinical samples are applicable to non-clinical groups.
Results
Thirteen (12.7%) of the 102 women reported committing at least one act of
animal abuse since the age of 18.
On average, these women perpetrated 1.9 acts of animal abuse (SD= 1.3).
Adulthood animal abuse was significantly correlated with physical assault
perpetration.
No statistically significant differences in frequency of DV perpetration (psychological and physical) between the women who perpetrated animal
abuse and the women who did not abuse animals.
There was a statistical trend for women who perpetrated animal abuse
to report a higher frequency of psychological aggression (p=.06) and physical assault (p=.05) perpetration relative to women who did not endorse AAA
Effect sizes were in the expected direction with animal abusers reporting
more frequent psychological aggression (d= 0.58) and physical assault
(d= 0.77) than non-animal abusers.
No statistically significant differences in frequency of severe DV perpetration
(psychological and physical) between women who abused animals and women who did not.
more frequent severe physical assault (d= 0.65) than non-animal abusers.
Table 2
Frequency of Psychological Aggression and Physical Assault Perpetration Among Perpetrators and Non-perpetrators of Adulthood Animal Abuse
Adulthood Animal Abuse
Endorsed
n= 13
Denied
n= 89
M (SD) df t p
Psychological Aggression Perpetration
21.00 (18.73)
13.13 (20.22)
100
1.93
0.06
Physical Assault Perpetration
11.38 (17.89)
1.79 (5.71)
3.46
0.05
Severe Psychological Aggression Perpetration
1.31 (2.46)
1.10 (3.46)
0.82
0.42
Severe Physical Assault Perpetration
3.00 (7.20)
0.27 (0.83)
3.43
0.11
Study Aim
To examine the prevalence of adulthood animal abuse perpetration and its relationship to DV perpetration in college women.
Discussion
In contrast to the 0.28% prevalence rate of animal abuse by women in the general public (Vaughn et al., 2009), adulthood animal abuse was overrepresented (12.7%) in this sample of college women. This is consistent with the overrepresentation of animal abuse reported by clinical samples of women court-referred to batterer intervention programs (Febres et al., 2012) and provides additional evidence that aggression may be pervasive for some women who perpetrate IPV. Future research should continue to examine the prevalence of AAA in college-aged samples as this may provide additional insight into the aggressive tendencies possessed by some women who commit IPV.
Our results suggest that adulthood animal abuse may be a marker for the presence of more frequent and/or severe DV perpetration in college women, which is also consistent with findings in clinical samples. Replications are needed to confirm this relationship, as well as to examine why these associations may exist. It may be that AAA and IPV are linked by underlying difficulties with, for example, emotion regulation, which shows an independent association with animal abuse and IPV in the literature (Stuart, Moore, Hellmuth, Ramsey, & Kahler, 2006; Vaughn et al., 2009). Understanding this relationship may inform DV intervention programs as to relevant targetable factors.
Some limitations to consider include: relatively small sample size, sample with relatively low variance for endorsement of animal abuse and low internal consistency of the measure, use of a brief inventory of animal abuse that did not account for such potentially important details as access to animals, type of animal, or when the abuse occurred, and reporter bias due to impression management.
Continued research on the nature of aggression in the lives of women who perpetrate IPV is greatly needed in order to better inform interventions aimed at reducing aggression.
Table 1
Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviations among Study Variables 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
1. Psychological Aggression Perpetration
---
2. Physical Assault Perpetration
.44**
3. Severe Psychological Aggression Perpetration
.65**
.33**
4. Severe Physical Assault Perpetration
.25*
.73**
.08
5. ATAS
.07
.23*
-.04
.15 M
14.14
3.04
1.13
0.62
0.25 SD
20.12
8.81
3.34
2.77
0.79
Note. *p <.05, **p <.01
ATAS= Aggression Towards Animals Scale
Method
Participants
102 female undergraduates who earned course credit in their psychology
courses
Recruited online from a human subjects research pool at the University of
Tennessee
Eligibility: ≥ 18 years of age & in a current dating relationship of at least 1
month
Age: M= 19.2 years, SD= 1.5
Freshmen-59 (57.8%), Sophomores-20 (19.6%)
Juniors-14 (13.7%), Seniors-8 (7.8 %), Other 1 (1.0%)
White/Caucasian-87 (85.3%), Black/African-American-1 (1.0%),
Asian/American-7 (6.9%), Other -7 (6.9%)
Measures
Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2; Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy, & Sugarman, 1996). Dating violence was measured with the psychological aggression (α = .78) and physical assault (α = .81) subscales. Items were classified into minor and severe acts (Straus et al., 1996).
Aggression Toward Animal Scale (ATAS; Gupta & Beach, 2001). Frequency of animal abuse (threats, neglect, and physical aggression) committed since the age of 18 was assessed with this 13-item scale (α =.43). Frequency was rated on a 7-point scale (0= never, 6= more than 20 times).
For Further Information and References
Please contact Jeniimarie Febres at