THE REVISED CONFLICT TACTICS SCALES: ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL By BLANCA IDALIA CARO A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Educational Leadership, Sport Studies, & Educational/Counseling Psychology JULY 2017 © Copyright by BLANCA IDALIA CARO, 2017 All Rights Reserved © Copyright by BLANCA IDALIA CARO, 2017 All Rights Reserved To the Faculty of Washington State University: The members of the Committee appointed to examine the dissertation of BLANCA IDALIA CARO find it satisfactory and recommend that it be accepted. ___________________________________________ Phyllis Erdman, Ph.D., Chair ___________________________________________ Jennifer Lebeau, Ph.D. ___________________________________________ Pamela Bettis, Ph.D. ___________________________________________ Kira Carbonneau, Ph.D. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT First and foremost, I want to thank every person who has helped me throughout this long and arduous journey. I feel grateful to have been guided, supported, and mentored by strong women who encouraged me to actualize my potential. This includes my friends who have supported me through rough patches in this journey. I want to thank you all for helping me grow and persevere. Gracias papa (Thanks dad), for all the support you provided from afar throughout my graduate career. Thank you for listening, for the words of encouragement, and for supporting me through every step of this journey. I still remember being 12 or 13 and riding in the car with you as we drove past Angelo State University. You pointed at the university and told me “¡Algún día vas a estudiar allí!” (One day, you’ll study there!). I have always felt that you believed I could do anything that I set my mind to — you also held me accountable when I began to doubt myself. Te quiero mucho (I love you very much). I would also like to thank my mentor Koun for all the support, advice, and wisdom she provided during the most challenging part of my academic career. Koun, I feel grateful that our paths crossed because you encouraged me to recognize my personal and clinical potential. Thank you for always being available when I needed your support. I truly appreciate you. Lastly, I would like to thank Nahal for teaching me the true meaning of friendship. I could not have made it without your unwavering support, pep talks, and love. I feel lucky that you chose me to be your friend. Thank you for not giving up on me or our friendship and for your many words of encouragement. Te quiero mucho amiga (Friend, I love you very much). iii THE REVISED CONFLICT TACTICS SCALES: ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL Abstract by Blanca Idalia Caro, Ph.D. Washington State University July 2017 Chair: Phyllis Erdman Intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization and perpetration has many clinical and research implications as high stakes decisions are made using data collected with IPV measures. Because of these implications, it is of utmost importance that the construct of interest is accurately measured – especially when instruments are adopted as universal assessments of violence. In the current study, the psychometric properties of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2; Straus et al., 1996), a measure of IPV, were evaluated. The CTS2’s five-factor model (i.e., Straus' theory of violence) was also tested by imposing it upon data collected from American men and women experiencing IPV. Consequently, the data was evaluated through confirmatory and measurement invariance tests. A 10-factor model of violence, IPV perpetration and victimization, was used to conduct the confirmatory factor analyses. The results revealed that the data was a poor fit with the model across gender and type of violence experienced. Measurement invariance tests were also conducted on this data; the results indicate that gendered comparisons in this sample will be inaccurate. The study’s findings support the need to take a more critical approach toward the assessment of IPV across genders. iv Table of Contents Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................................................. iii ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................ vii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... viii CHAPTER I .................................................................................................................................... 1 1. THE PROBLEM ..................................................................................................... 3 2. THE RESEARCH QUESTION AND PURPOSE .................................................. 6 3. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY........................................................................ 8 4. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .......................................................................... 9 5. DEFINITION OF TERMS ................................................................................... 11 6. SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 12 CHAPTER II ................................................................................................................................. 14 1. THE CONFLICT TACTICS SCALES: CONTROVERSIES SURROUNDING GENDERED VIOLENCE .................................................................................... 18 2. FEMINIST EMPIRICISM .................................................................................... 23 3. THE CONFLICT TACTICS SCALES: HISTORY AND CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................................................. ..30 4. THE CONFLICT TACTICS SCALES: CRITICISMS AND LIMITATIONS .... 42 5. ABANDONING THE ONE SIZE APPROACH TO IPV ASSESSMENT: CONTEXTUALIZING VIOLENCE AGAINST AND BY WOMEN ................ 53 6. GENDER ASYMMETRY: INTIMATE PARTNER HOMICIDE ...................... 56 7. INTIMATE PARTNER FEMICIDE .................................................................... 57 8. THE FEMALE HOMICIDE OFFENDER ........................................................... 59 9. THE MALE HOMIDICE OFFENDER ................................................................ 71 10. MALE AND FEMALE HOMICIDE OFFENDERS: COMPARING APPLES TO ORANGES ............................................................................................................ 87 v 11. SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 88 CHAPTER III ............................................................................................................................... 89 1. PARTICIPANTS .................................................................................................. 89 2. MEASURE ........................................................................................................... 90 3. ANALYSES .......................................................................................................... 91 CHAPTER IV ............................................................................................................................... 97 1. CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSES ........................................................ 97 2. MEASUREMENT INVARIANCE .................................................................... 108 CHAPTER V .............................................................................................................................. 109 1. THE LIMITATIONS .......................................................................................... 111 2. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ..................................... 113 3. CONCLUSION ………………………………………………………………………115 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 117 vi LIST OF TABLES 1. Table 1: Demographic Information …………………………………………….……… 96 2. Table 2: Factor Structure of the CTS2 …………………………………………….…… 99 3. Table 3: Factor Means and Standard Deviations ……………………………………... 100 4. Table 4: Standardized Regression Weights ……………………………………….… 101 5. Table 5: Comparison of Fit Indices Across Gender ………………………………… 103 vii LIST OF FIGURES 1. Figure 1: The Five-Factor Model of Perpetration and Victimization …………………. 95 2. Figure 2: Modified Female Model …………………………………………………. 105 3. Figure 3: Modified Male Model …………………………….…………….…….……. 107 viii Chapter I: Introduction Intimate partner violence (IPV) assessments provide clinicians and researchers the ability to collect information regarding the experiences of perpetrators and victims of intimate partner violence. The data gathered from IPV assessments provides researchers with the ability to better understand the type, severity, and frequency of violence perpetration and victimization. Additionally, the data also shed light on gender differences. However, findings in the intimate partner violence literature created controversy as results were markedly different. Some research demonstrated that women were found to be more violent (Carney, Buttell, & Dutton, 2006), less violent (Miller & Melloy, 2006), while other research asserted that women