Search

Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and International Classification of Diseases-11th Revision (ICD-11; proposed) now include criteria for clinically significant (a) intimate partner violence (IPV) and neglect and (b) child abuse and neglect. However, existing measures of IPV and child abuse do not allow for assessment of established criteria. The current study examines the convergent and response process validity of the Family Maltreatment (FM) measure of clinically significant physical and psychological IPV and child abuse. Participants (N = 126) completed the FM via computer and measures of IPV (Revised Conflict Tactics Scale; Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy, & Sugarman, 1996) and child abuse (Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scale; Straus, Hamby, Finkelhor, Moore, & Runyan, 1998) via paper-and-pencil. Participants who endorsed acts of aggression on the FM completed an audio-recorded computerized interview recounting the 2 most severe incidents. Verbalized incidents (n = 138) were coded for clinically significant family maltreatment. Results largely supported the convergent validity of the FM. Agreement of acts endorsed on the FM with those endorsed on convergent measures was excellent for IPV and physical child abuse, yet poor for psychological child abuse. Further, in support of the response process validity of the FM, comparison with observer ratings of interviews indicated few "false positives" and no "false negatives" on the FM across the examined types of clinically significant IPV and child abuse. In summary, the FM is a promising measure for the assessment of clinically significant physical and psychological abuse as defined in the DSM-5 and ICD-11 (proposed). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant public health concern. To date, risk factor research has not differentiated physical violence that leads to injury and/or fear (i.e., clinically significant IPV; CS-IPV) from general physical IPV. Isolating risk relations is necessary to best inform prevention and treatment efforts. The current study used an ecological framework and evaluated relations of likely risk factors within individual, family, workplace, and community levels with both CS-IPV and general IPV to determine whether they were related to one type of IPV, both, or neither for both men and women. Probable risk and promotive factors from multiple ecological levels of influence were selected from the literature and assessed, along with CS-IPV and general IPV, via an anonymous, web-based survey. The sample comprised US Air Force (AF) active duty members and civilian spouses (total N = 36,861 men; 24,331 women) from 82 sites worldwide. Relationship satisfaction, age, and alcohol problems were identified as unique risk factors (in the context of the 23 other risk factors examined) across IPV and CS-IPV for men and women. Other unique risk factors were identified that differed in prediction of IPV and CS-IPV. The results suggest a variety of both established and novel potential foci for indirectly targeting partner aggression and clinically-significant IPV by improving people's risk profiles at the individual, family, workplace, and community levels. Aggr. Behav. 41:227-241, 2015. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)