1. Dr Nicola Graham-Kevan University of Central Lancashire
Does Gender Matter?
Dr Nicola Graham-Kevan
University of Central Lancashire

2. Overview Do men differentially target women?
Is patriarchy the cause on male IPV
What are the risk factors for male IPV
Are men more ‘controlling’ than women
Longitudinal research on risk factors for IPV in men & women

3. Do Men Target Women?
Women are less likely than men to be victims of violence & most violence against women is not IPV (BSC, 2006/07)
When men (and women) aggress their victims are typically MEN not women
Some analysis suggests that a man is less likely to use violence against his wife during a conflict than he is to use it against a stranger (Felson, 2002)
Internationally, rates for violence against women are much lower than rates of violence against men, although they do correlate r=.88 (Dijk, Mayhew & Killias, 1990; WHO, 1995)

4. Evidence for Sex-Similarity
Archer (2000) Meta-analysis use of IPV
82 studies (approx 65,000 men & women)
Women > to use one or more act of physical aggression & to use frequently
Men > to inflict injury (62% of those injured were women)
Archer (2006) cross-national meta-analysis
Longitudinal studies (see Dutton, 2007, for review)
Fiebert’s 2007 bibliography > 200 studies
Counter evidence? Sample on your DV e.g. Dobash & Dobash (2004)

5. Men’s IPV & Patriarchy
Little support for relationship between patriarchy & IPV (Sugarman & Frankel, 1996)
“The contribution of hostile talk [about women] to later [partner] aggression was relatively small when concurrent antisocial behaviour was controlled” (Capaldi et al., 2001: 70)

6. Oregon Youth Study (Capaldi et al., 2001)

8. Stith et al (2004) Exosystem risk factors: Moderate: Life stress
Weak: Age: SES, Unemployed, low income
Microsystem risk factors:
Strong: Use of emotional abuse; forced sex
Moderate: Past history of violence; marital satisfaction
Weak: Jealousy
Ontogentic risk factors:
Strong: Illicit drug use; approval of use violence
Moderate: Traditional sex-role ideology, anger/hostility, alcohol abuse, depression
“…This meta-analysis provides support for the importance of examining intimate partner violence from a multifactorial perspective”.

9. Behavioural Control & IPV
Women with partners who exhibit patriarchal dominance (through preventing access to the family income, for example) have far higher odds of IPV (Brownridge, 2002)
Stark (2007) “…the pattern of intimidation, isolation and control… is unique to men’s abuse of women” (p.102)
Johnson’s typology
Graham-Kevan & Archer (2003a; 2003b), Johnson (1999; Johnson & Leone, 2000)
Limitations of previous studies: “Sampling on the DV” Felson (2006)

10. Gender Symmetry in Controlling Behaviours
Graham-Kevan & Archer (2005) 399 men & 951 women: Gender symmetry even with same profile as 2003 study
Replicated: Bates & Graham-Kevan (2007) men & women
Meta-analysis of controlling behaviour (Graham-Kevan, Archer & Coyne, in preparation)
Controlling behaviours & BIP members (Graham-Kevan & Hamel, in preparation)
Controlling behaviour & male victims (Graham-Kevan et al., ongoing study)

11. Control: Emergence of the Next Explanation?
If no sex-differences…
Then the use of controlling behaviours must be ‘different’ for men and women? (e.g. Dasgupta, 1999)
IPV literature men’s controlling behaviours co-occur with: beliefs about aggression, hostility, personality disorder (e.g. Dixon & Browne, 2003: Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994)

12. Control & Beliefs about Aggression (Archer & Graham-Kevan, 2003)
IPV perpetrators: 57 men & 58 women EXPAGG, CBS-R
Control similarly related to instrumental beliefs in both men & women

13. Control & Reactive/Proactive Aggression (Knight & Graham-Kevan, 2007)
142 men & women
Raine et al Proactive/Reactive Aggression Scale
Control related to reactive IPV & proactive IPV
Rs between .55 & .50

14. Entitlement (Tottle & Graham-Kevan, 2005)
50 men & 50 women
CBS, Interpersonal dependency (Hirschfield et al 1997), Entitlement Attitudes Scale (Nadkarni et al 1989)
Control related to Dependency, entitlement: particularly narcissistic expectations/self promotion

15. Trait Aggression (Hall & Graham-Kevan, 2004)
54 women and 46 men
CTS, CBS, B-D AQ
Control strongly related to assault, indirect aggression, irritability, negativity, resentment, suspiciousness, verbal hostility & guilt (r’s between .50 and .81)

16. Control, IPV & PD (Graham-Kevan, 2007b)
100 men & 175 women
IPDE-SQ, CBS, CTS
Control related to IPV, paranoid, borderline (men only), antisocial, narcissistic, histrionic (women only)
rs between .77 & .28

17. Longitudinal Studies & IPV
Longitudinal studies (e.g. Daly et al., 2000; Ehrensaft et al. 2004; 2006; Giordano, et al., 1999; Moffitt et al., 2001; Serbin, et al., 2004)
“… individuals (men & women) who go on to perpetrate partner violence are more stably impulsive, angry, self-centered and experience greater affective instability” (Ehrensaft, et al., 2006: 480)

18. Conclusions
Lack of sex-differences in IPV, control or IPV/Control typology
Control related to proactive/instrumental aggression, hostile beliefs, trait aggression & personality disorder traits
Suggests those who use Control & IPV have similar profiles to other aggressive offenders
Not all IPV is the same: Functional Analysis
Interventions should be based on risk factors (Gilchrist, Johnson, Takriti, Weston, Beech & Kebbell, 2003)