This article seeks to explore the relationship among three individual-level trait measures of masculinity and two aspects of intimate partner violence (IPV), physical violence and coercive control, in a sample of 137 heterosexual men court mandated to a batterers' treatment program. Results indicate that aspects of masculinity, specifically restrictiveness and hostile sexism, may contribute to the use of coercively controlling tactics in intimate relationships. Furthermore, implications from these findings suggest that failure to achieve desired control may lead to the use of physical violence. With inconsistent past findings and the limited study of clinical populations, further examination of these concepts provides increased understanding of the mechanisms behind IPV perpetration. Results provide a greater understanding of the complexity of this violence to better assist individuals experiencing IPV.
AndersonKL, UmbersonD. (2001). Gendering violence: Masculinity and power in men's accounts of domestic violence. Gender Soc. 15, 358–380.
3.
AnsaraDL, HindinMJ. (2010). Formal and informal help-seeking associated with women's and men's experiences of intimate partner violence in Canada. Soc Sci Med. 70, 1011–1018.
4.
ArcherJ. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychol Bull. 126, 651–680.
5.
BeckCJA, MenkeJM, O'Hara-BrewsterK, FigueredoAJ. (2009). Validation of a measure of intimate partner abuse with couples participating in divorce mediation. J Divorce Remarriage. 50, 295–308.
6.
BeckCJ, RaghavanC. (2010). Intimate partner abuse screening in custody mediation: The importance of assessing coercive control. Fam Court Rev. 48, 555–565.
7.
BerkelLA, VandiverBJ, BahnerAD. (2004). Gender role attitudes, religion, and spirituality as predictors of domestic violence attitudes in white college students. J Coll Student Dev. 45, 119–133.
8.
BuzawaES, BuzawaCG, StarkE. (2015). Responding to Domestic Violence: The Integration of Criminal Justice and Human Services. (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.)
CheckJV. (1985). The hostility toward women scale. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45.
11.
CheckJV. (1988). Hostility toward women: Some theoretical considerations. In Violence in Intimate Relationships. RussellGW, ed. (PMA Publishing Corporation, Costa Mesa, CA.), pp. 29–42.
12.
DownsWR, RindelsB, AtkinsonC. (2007). Women's use of physical and nonphysical self-defense strategies during incidents of partner violence. Violence Against Women. 13, 28–45.
13.
DuttonMA, GoodmanLA. (2005). Coercion in intimate partner violence: Toward a new conceptualization. Sex Roles. 52, 743–757.
14.
EadesRA. (2003). Ambivalent Sexism as a Predictor of Severity of Domestic Violence by Male Offenders. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Memphis, Memphis, TN.
ForbesGB, Adams-CurtisLE, WhiteKB. (2004). First-and second-generation measures of sexism, rape myths and related beliefs, and hostility towards women. Violence Against Women. 10, 236–261.
17.
ForbesGB, CollinsworthLL, JobeRL, et al. (2007). Sexism, hostility toward women, and endorsement of beauty ideals and practices: Are beauty ideals associated with oppressive beliefs?. Sex Roles. 56, 265–273.
18.
ForbesGB, JobeRL, WhiteKB, et al. (2005). Perceptions of dating violence following a sexual or nonsexual betrayal of trust: Effects of gender, sexism, acceptance of rape myths, and vengeance motivation. Sex Roles. 52, 165–173.
19.
GlickP, FiskeST. (1996). The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. J Pers Soc Psychol. 70, 491–512.
20.
GlickP, Sakalli-UgurluN, FerreriaMC, Aguiar de SouzaM. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes towards wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychol Women Quart. 26, 292–297.
HeiseL. (1998). Violence against women: An integrated, ecological framework. Violence Against Women. 4, 262–290.
23.
KellyJB, JohnsonMP. (2008). Differentiation among types of intimate partner violence: Research update and implications for interventions. Fam Court Rev. 46, 476–499.
24.
LehmannP, SimmonsCA, PillaiVK. (2012). The validation of the Checklist of Controlling Behaviors (CCB) assessing coercive control in abusive r elationships. Violence Against Women, 18, 913–933.
25.
LevantRF, RichmondK. (2007). A review of research on masculinity ideologies using the Male Role Norms Inventory. J Men's Stud. 15, 130–146.
26.
LisakD, RothS. (1990). Motives and psychodynamics of self-reported, unincarcerated rapists. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 60, 268–280.
27.
MalamuthNM, ScokloskiRJ, KossMP, TanakaJS. (1991). Characteristics of aggressors against women: Testing a model using a national sample of college students. J Consult Clin Psychol. 59, 670–681.
28.
MarshallWL, HambleyLS. (1996). Intimacy and loneliness, and their relationship to rape myth acceptance and hostility toward women among rapists. J Interpers Violence. 11, 586–592.
29.
MarshallWL, MouldenH. (2001). Hostility toward women and victim empathy in rapists. Sexual Abuse J Res Treat. 13, 249–255.
30.
MillerTQ, SmithTW, TurnerCW, et al. (1996). Meta-analytic review of research on hostility and physical health. Psychol Bull., 119, 322.
31.
RossJM, BabcockJC. (2009). Gender differences in partner violence in context: Deconstructing Johnson's (2001) control-based typology of violent couples. J Aggress Maltreat Trauma. 18, 604–622.
32.
SakalliN. (2001). Beliefs about wife beating among Turkish college students: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and sex differences. Sex Roles. 44, 599–610.
33.
StarkE. (2006). Commentary on Johnson's “Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence.”. Violence Against Women. 12, 1019–1025.
34.
StarkE. (2007). Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life. New York: Oxford University Press.
35.
StrausMA. (2008). Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations. Child Youth Serv Rev. 30, 252–275.
36.
StrausMA. (2011). Gender symmetry and mutuality in perpetration of clinical-level partner violence: Empirical evidence and implications for prevention and treatment. Aggres Violent Behav. 16, 279–288.
37.
StrausMA, RamirezIL. (2004). Criminal history and assault of dating partners: The role of type of prior crime, age of onset, and gender. Violence Victims. 19, 413–434.
38.
TanhaM, BeckCJA, FigueredoAJ, RaghavanC. (2010). Sex differences in intimate partner violence and the use of control as a motivational factor for intimate partner violence. J Interpers Violence. 25, 1836–1854.
39.
TeheeM, BeckCJA, AndersonER. (2013). Sex differences in intimate partner abuse victimization. In Domestic Violence: Methodologies in Dialogue. RaghavanC, CohenSJ, eds. (Northeastern University Press, Boston, MA), pp. 233–253.
40.
WhitakerMP. (2013). Centrality of control-seeking in men's intimate partner violence perpetration. Prev Sci. 14, 513–523.
