Last week I introduced the Dunedin study a 30+ year look at the lives, behaviors and personalities of a group of New Zealanders born in 1972. We learned that a small percentage of males and females in the study population were responsible for a high percentage of the antisocial acts reported by the group. Next week, I will discuss the personalities and early histories of this group of people.
This week I want to tell you about the one exception to the observation that men were more antisocial than women. In the realm of intimate partner violence, women were as antisocial as men. Furthermore, a general tendency to be antisocial was found in both men and women who were violent toward their partners.
The results of the study support the contention that sociopathy leads to intimate partner violence.
At age 21 participants reported about partner violence over the past year (83%) or as part of their dating experience (8%). They were assessed by a structured interview that included questions about perpetration and victimization. The researchers also conducted identical interviews with partners of the study participants. They used the:
• Physical Abuse Scale- 13 items
— Physical twisted arm
— Pushed grabbed or shoved
— Slapped
— Physically forced sex
— Shake
— Throw
— Thrown object at
— Chocked or strangled
— Kicked, bit, hit with fist
— Hit with something
— Beat up
— Threaten with gun or knife
— Use of gun or knife
The study found that 8% of couples had clinical level of IPV. In the 30 cases that involved justice system, 80% of the abuse lead to injuries. Both male and female perpetrators were involved. Women with a history of conduct problems were more likely to become involved in a relationship with an abusive man; being involved with an abusive man contributed significantly to woman’s perpetration. However, even after controlling or partners’ physical abuse, women with a history of conduct problems were still likely to commit violence.
The researchers also found that these aspects of the antisocial propensity contributed to intimate partner aggression in both men and women:
— Approval of the use of violence
— Excessive jealousy and suspiciousness
— Intense and rapid negative emotions
— Poor self-control
They concluded, “Among men and women IPV perpetration is but another expression of an earlier-emerging antisocial propensity.”
There were other studies my class and I read that concluded men more frequently perpetrated domestic violence. The authors of these studies suggested that dominance motives on the part of men were important. My class and I then set about to search for other research regarding dominance motives and intimate partner violence. We found a paper that explains it all, Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations by Murray A. Straus, Ph.D. of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire.
This paper addressed three questions:
1. Is partner violence primarily perpetrated by men, as compared to women, and as compared to both partners engaging in physical violence?
2. To what extent is dominance by the male partner associated with partner violence, as compared to dominance by the female partner?
3. In short is the risk factor male dominance or dominance by one partner, regardless of whether it is the male female partner?
Their first finding was that female university students around the world more frequently perpetrated partner violence, the gender gap was about 30%. They then set out to examine whether male or female dominance in the relationship was related to IPV.
Dominance by the partner who completed the survey was measured by the Dominance scale of the Personal and Relationships Profile. Examples of the items are “I generally have the final say when my partner and I disagree” and “My partner needs to remember that I am in charge.” The response categories are 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, and 4 = Strongly Agree. The scale score is the mean of nine items.
The nation with the highest score for Dominance by male partners was Tanzania, which is also the least modernized of the 32 nations in this study. The four national settings which are the next most male dominant are Russia, Iran, Taiwan and mainland China. The national setting in which male students have the lowest average dominance score is Sweden, which is a nation that has led the way in steps to promote gender equality. The other four of the five least male dominant national settings are Netherlands, Canada, Switzerland, and Malta.
In relationships where only men were violent. Male dominance increased the odds of violence by 2.29. Each increase of one point on the four point Dominance scale increased the probability of violence by male students 2.29 times. Interestingly, of the other four variables in the Male-Only panel, only one—length of the relationship—is significantly related to Male-Only violence.
In relationships where only women were violent, male dominance increased the risk of Female-only violence by 1.96 times. Again for each one point increase in the male dominance scale Female —Only violence increased 1.96 times. The only other significant relationship in the Female-Only panel shows that the longer the relationship the higher the odds of Female-Only violence.
What about male dominance and bidirectional violence (relationships where both partners are violent)? First, dominance by the male partner is associated with a three-fold increase in the probability of both partners being violent. This is larger than the increase in the probability of Male-Only or Female-Only violence. That is, dominance by a male partner is more strongly associated with bidirectional violence than with Male-Only violence.
Now comes the most interesting part”¦ dominance by women. This is for all you great guys out there who know that women are not always sweet, lovely, submissive creatures. Female dominance was actually common in relationships around the world!
Overall, the Dominance scale scores are higher for women than for men in 24 of the 32 nations, and in all 12 of the nations with the lowest scores for male dominance. Although the differences are small, they are not consistent with the large body of evidence showing greater male power in intimate relationships in most societies. But keep in mind the subjects of this study were university men and women.
Female dominance as reported by women is associated with about a two and half times greater probability of the Male-Only pattern of IPV. The probability of Male-Only violence increases by 3% for each additional month the relationship has been in effect.
Female dominance is much more strongly linked to Female-Only violence than was shown for the relation of male dominance to Female-Only violence. That is, when there is dominance by either partner, it increases the odds of Female-Only violence, but the increase is much greater for female dominance.
Female dominance also increased bi-directional violence, but the effect of female dominance on the odds of bidirectional violence tends to be greater than the effect of male dominance. Age is related to a decrease in the odds of bidirectional violence, and the longer the relationship the greater the odds of bidirectional violence.
I think the research in IPV gives us very important messages about love and life. First sociopaths who are obsessed with power and dominance are not good relationship partners. Secondly, although the human dominance drive is there to energize us to compete and better ourselves, this drive if out of balance, can be very destructive.
What say you?
My mother was a psychopath and my upbringing was not pleasant to say the least. Yet I do not have PTSD or other issues related to that.
WHY do some go on to thrive and why not others?
There is no one single answer to that question. However here is one answer that applies to some. How we view events or perception. What I mean by that is this. Two people have the exact same traumatic event. One falls to pieces and one does not. Why? The one that fell to pieces told themselves, along with others telling them, this is so awful, the worst thing ever, be scarred for life, basically overblown catastrophizing and once the person believes it it really is/becomes that bad. The other person views it in a different way and so does not suffer as much or as long.
A few lines from the Manual for Living by Epictetus (who was Nero’s administrative secretaries slave):
When something happens , the only thing in your power is your attitude toward it; you can either accept it or resent it.
What really frightens and dismays us is not external events themselves, but the way in which we think about them. It is not things that disturb us, but our interpretation of their significance.
Things and people are not what we wish them to be or what they seem to be. They are what they are.
Things themselves don’t hurt or hinder us. Nor do other people. How we view these things is another matter. It is our attitudes and reactions that give us trouble.
We cannot choose our external circumstances, but we can always choose how to respond to them.
BloggerT –
Something else I thought of… when we (my sister and myself) were with my mom first several years of our lives and then later during court ordered visitations out of state, my sister would often be on the receiving end of my moms “issues” – often favoring me, or allowing me to be much further removed (so to speak) from her most odd/dysfunctional behaviors. From insisting my sister swallow pills to “calm her down” to cutting her hair off to severe punishments, etc. So while I can see we were in the same house together, same parents, under same roof – – I cannot say that we shared the exact same experiences.
I think its blessing and gift that you have no PTSD or related issues with regard to your unpleasant childhood experience with an S parent. CHERISH THAT 🙂
And the book sounds very interesting… but do the exerpts from the book relate more to when actually involved in an abusive dysfunctional relationship ?? or more relating to the aftermath and healing, moving on.
but I would add when something happens, there is also the power to deny it or block it out as well as accept or resent it!
learnedthelesson:
I had a similar upbringing to yours — wildly disparate treatment by my parents among their children. When my siblings talk, it is clear that we all experienced things very differently.
I’ve often wondered how the hell I got where I am. I think on some level I had an amazing ability to compartmentalize. While I think my whole life is a failure, I also know that professionally I have been successful — it’s my personal life that has been a thunderous disaster.
BloggerT7165,
These things are true. At the end of the day, it’s the truth that one always needs, regardless of how painful one may perceive that truth to be. But these tips from Epictetus are easier said by some, easier done by others. And the correct knowledge and wisdom for each situation is so important, yet can be hard to come by at the moment they’re needed. If I could go back in time to most any situation, including dealing with those S’s, things would be different.
My sister was always a tough minded bonehead. She’d observe me being shooed away by my father, watching me go away to figure out a solution for myself. She had much lesser creative abilities but a much higher tolerance for conflict. So she would persist demandingly, sometimes with threats that she’d tell his parents or others if he didn’t teach her how to ride a bicycle, etc… So she learned some skills about getting what she wanted. Being highly competitive she didn’t tell me her secret until many years later, as I’d been too self-absorbed to figure out this simple thing for myself.
And I was supposed to be the smarter one.
SOS if mI could go back in time I still would change nothing in my life that happened to me. The good, the bad, all of it because I am who I am, what I am and where I am today because of all of it.
And you are right in that for some it is easier to do. I had a class do a tiny experiment to demonstrate change and how it is different for everyone. It had to do with shoes and how we tie them. Most people can tie their shoes without even looking at them and without conscious thought. So the experiment was for them to tie them reverse (right over left instead left over right etc)of how they do now until they could do it as easily as they do now. Now this was a minor change that was totally uinimportant. Some got it quickly with little distress but some had a lot of distress, frustration and anxiety and often slipped back to the previous behavior (meaning tied it the old way) and a few just gave up. Most of them viewed “change” in a somewhat different light after that.
Learn,
They apply to life across the board. A doctor friend of mine once said that we all are going to experience pain in our lives and there is nothing we can do about that. How much we suffer is something we can control though. And in most cases I find he is right.
The one thing that bugged my wife the most about me (well according to her anyway) was that things seemed to roll off me so easily. It took me about 10 years until she finally understood that part of me. If a dog bites me I do not get mad at the dog. It is the dog’s fault and I may take corrective measures but the dog was just being what it is. Things are what they are. This helped me to obtain very little stress and what little there is is usually short term along with the good stress.
Blogger – I now believe how much I suffer is something I can control. Its a choice and a mindset. As well as a choice to remove myself from circumstances that are not healthy or lending toward my own personal growth and learning.
Learning to be more rational vs emotional too, will benefit me. But I like the gift of having being an emotional being as well 🙂 But its all about balance. A little bit of this and a little bit of that…. And situational – but I agree across the board how much we suffer is omething we can control – unless at the hands of some very sick disordered souls or we ourselves have checked-out of self…
BloggerT7165,
Thanks for giving me a nervous breakdown. lol It took me THREE tries just to tie the shoe lace period for time #1–and that was with going back and REVIEWING the old way and applying it to the new way. (ok, I’m laughing like crazy at this and moving on to the back of the class!) 😉
Matt – I never knew how much of ME, deep down inside was not complete. I blocked out so much as a kid and young adult, I just “existed” at home as a kid and got up went to school and thrived/excelled – came home – and I know I ate dinner, showered there,etc. and functioned, but there are some huge blanks for me, memory loses that my sister and father are amazed and stunned by my inability to recollect my childhood, including the good people around me in my childhood and helping to raise me. But in the outside world – I rose to the occassion and became very successful professionally. The outlet probably saved my life – or at least allowed me to find some semblance of being able to refer to myself as a functioning adult.
And i had my first PTSD episode (went through about 8 months of hell) in my early thirties…out of the blue…my 1st of what now is 2 bouts of depression. First time was mixed with panic attacks/anxiety…did brief therapy…and got through it. But never had I ever experienced the roller coaster/chaotic ride Ive been on the past several years – I HELD ON – DRAGGED ON – IN A DYSFUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIP – Cant figure it out for the life of me, except that you dont start to heal until you absolutely hit rock bottom. I hit it. And I hit it hard.
NEVER AGAIN. I WANT TO CHANGE MY FLAWS AND I WANT TO BE A RESPONSIBLE ADULT WHOS CONFIDENT IN MY CHOICES BECAUSE I LOVE MYSELF, RESPECT, TRUST, HONOR MYSELF – I THINK IT WILL ACTUALLY BE FUN TO SEE WHAT I CAN DO FOR ME AND MY OWN HAPPINESS. IF ANYONE WANTS TO JOIN ME DOWN THE ROAD HE WILL HAVE TO EARN MY TRUST, RESPECT, LOVE, FRIENDSHIP – CUZ I WILL NEVER GIVE IT AWAY AGAIN. I KNOW THE RED FLAGS – I SWEAR I CAN SMELL THEM NOW!!!!!!
YOU CAN DO THIS TOO!! WE ALL CAN