Una de las estrategias preventivas recomendadas en el ámbito de la violencia contra la mujer en las relaciones de pareja, es la valoración del riesgo de reincidencia. Sin embargo, es escasa la investigación en torno a qué variables se relacionan con la valoración de riesgo realizada por los profesionales. En este trabajo, a partir de la información obtenida de 291 hombres penados por violencia de género, se analizaron las relaciones de diversas variables psicológicas, actitudinales y sociales, con dos medidas posibles de valoración de riesgo que pueden obtenerse a partir del SARA (Spousal Assault Risk Assessment); el Sumatorio de Factores de Riesgo de Reincidencia y la Valoración Global de Riesgo. El modelo de ecuaciones estructurales estimado mostró que las variables actitudinales y psicológicas utilizadas en el estudio se relacionaban significativamente con el Sumatorio de Factores de Riesgo, mientras que únicamente la impulsividad y las variables sociales se relacionaron significativamente con la Valoración Global de Riesgo. En la discusión se subraya la importancia del apoyo social y comunitario en la evaluación del riesgo de reincidencia.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AgoffC.HerreraC.CastroR. (2007). The weakness of family ties and their perpetuating effects on gender violence: A qualitative study in Mexico. Violence Against Women, 13, 1206–1220. doi: 10.1177/1077801207307800
2.
Andrés-pueyoA. (2009). La predicción de la violencia contra la pareja. EnEcheburúaE.Fernández-montalvoJ.de CorralP. (Eds.), Predicción del riesgo de homicidio y de violencia grave en la relación de pareja (pp. 21–56). Valencia: Centro Reina Sofía.
3.
Andrés-pueyoA.EcheburúaE. (2010). Valoración del riesgo de violencia: instrumentos disponibles e indicaciones de aplicación. Psicothema, 22, 403–409.
4.
Andres-PueyoA.LopezS. (2005). Manual para la valoración del riesgo de violencia contra la pareja.Barcelona: Publicacions i Edicions de la Universitat de Barcelona.
5.
AndrewsD. A.DowdenC. (2006). Risk principle of case classification in correctional treatment: A meta-analytic investigation. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50, 88–100. doi: 10.1177/0306624X05282556
6.
BeebleM. L.BybeeD.SullivanC. M.AdamsA. E. (2009). Main, mediating, and moderating effects of social support on the well-being of survivors of intimate partner violence across 2 years. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 718–729. doi: 10.1037/a0016140
7.
BennettL.WilliamsO. (2001). Controversies and recent studies of batterer intervention program effectiveness. Harrisburg, PA: National Resource Center on Domestic Violence/Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Retrieved from: http://www.vawnet.org
8.
BentlerP. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.107.2.238
9.
BentlerP. M.WuE. J. C. (1995). EQS for Macintosh user's guide.Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.
10.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equation modelling with latent variables.Nueva York: Wiley.
11.
CaetanoR.VaethP. A. C.Ramisetty-MiklerS. (2008). Intimate partner violence victim and perpetrator characteristics among couples in the United States. Journal of Family Violence, 23, 507–518. doi: 10.1007/s10896-008-9178-3
12.
CalafatA.MantecónA.JuanM.Adrover-RoigD.BlayN.RosalF. (2011). Violent behaviour, drunkenness, drug use, and social capital in nigthlife contexts. Psychosocial Intervention, 20, 45–51. doi: 10.5093/in2011v20n1a5
13.
CampbellJ. C. (1995). Assessing dangerousness. Violence by sexual offenders, batterers, and child abusers.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
14.
DuttonD. G. (1995). A scale for measuring propensity for abusiveness. Journal of Family Violence, 10, 203–221. doi: 10.1007/BF02110600
15.
DuttonD. G.KroppR. R. (2000). A review of domestic violence risk instruments. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 1, 171–181. doi: 10.1177/1524838000001002004
16.
EcheburúaE.AmorP. J.LoinazI.De CorralP. (2010). Escala de predicción del riesgo de violencia grave contra la pareja—revisada—(EPV-R). Psicothema, 22, 1054–1060.
17.
EcheburúaE.Fernández-montalvoJ.CorralP.López-goñiJ. J. (2009). Assessing risk markers in intimate partner femicide and severe violence. A new assessment instrument. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 925–939. doi: 10.1177/0886260508319370
18.
ElbogenE. B.MercadoC. C.ScaloraM. J.TomkinsA. J. (2002). Percieved relevance of factors for violence risk assessment: A survey of clinicians. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 1, 37–47.
19.
EsbecE. (1994). La evaluación de la personalidad en psiquiatría forense. EnDelgadoS. (Ed.), Psiquiatría legal y forense (pp. 637–746). Madrid: Colex.
20.
EsbecE.FernándezO. (2003). Valoración de la peligrosidad criminal (riesgo-violencia) en psicología forense. Instrumentos de evaluación y perspectivas. Psicopatología Clínica Legal y Forense, 3, 65–90.
21.
FloodM.PeaseB. (2009). Factors influencing attitudes to violence against women. Trauma, Violence and Abuse, 10, 125–142. doi: 10.1177/1524838009334131
22.
García-morenoC.WattsC. (2011). Violence against women: an urgent public health priority. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 89, 2.
23.
GARCÍA-PABLOS (2009). Prólogo. EnEcheburúaE.Fernández-montalvoJ.de CorralP. (Eds.), Predicción del riesgo de homicidio y de violencia grave en la relación de pareja (pp. 13–20). Valencia: Centro Reina Sofía.
24.
GraciaE.HerreroJ. (2006). La comunidad como fuente de apoyo social: Evaluación e implicaciones en los ámbitos individual y comunitario. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 38, 327–342.
25.
GraciaE.LilaM. (2008). Los profesionales de la salud y la prevención de la violencia doméstica contra la mujer. Revista Médica de Chile, 136, 394–400. doi: 10.4067/S0034-98872008000300017
26.
GraciaE.HerreroJ.LilaM.FuenteA. (2009). Perceived neighborhood social disorder and attitudes toward domestic violence against women among Latin-American immigrants. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 1, 25–43.
27.
GraciaE.HerreroJ.LilaM.FuenteA. (2010). Percepciones y actitudes hacia la violencia de pareja contra la mujer en inmigrantes latinoamericanos en España. Psychosocial Intervention, 19, 135–144.
28.
GraciaE.GarcíaF.LilaM. (2008). Police involvement in cases of intimate partner violence against women: The influence of perceived severity and personal responsibility. Violence Against Women, 14, 697–714. doi: 10.1177/1077801208317288
29.
GraciaE.GarcíaF.LilaM. (2009). Public responses to intimate partner violence against women: The influence of perceived severity and personal responsibility. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 12, 648–656.
30.
GrannM.WedinI. (2002). Risk factors for recidivism among spousal assault and spousal homicide offenders. Psychology, Crime & Law, 8, 5–23. doi: 10.1080/10683160208401806
31.
HaydukL. A. (1987). Structural equation modeling using LISREL: essentials and advances.Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
32.
HeiseL. (1998). Violence against women: An integrated, ecological framework. Violence Against Women, 4, 262–291. doi: 10.1177/1077801298004003002
33.
HenningK.HoldfordR. (2006). Minimization, denial, and victim blaming by batterers: How much does the truth matter?Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 110–130. doi: 10.1177/0093854805282322
34.
HerreroJ.GraciaE. (2007). Una medida breve de la sintomatología depresiva (CES-D 7). Salud Mental, 30, 40–46.
35.
HiltonN. ZHarrisG. T.RiceM. E.LangC.CormierC. A.LinesK. J. (2004). A brief actuarial assessment for the prediction of wife assault recidivism: The Ontario domestic assault risk assessment. Psychological Assessment, 16, 267–275. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.16.3.267
36.
HiltonN. Z.HarrisG. T. (2005). Predicting wife assault: A critical review and implications for policy and practice. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 6, 3–23. doi: 10.1177/1524838004272463
37.
HuL.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
38.
KerryG. (1998). Risk assessment of male batterers in a community setting.Toronto: Professional Development Workshop.
39.
KlineR. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling.Nueva York: Guilford.
40.
KroppP. R.HartS. D. (2000). The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA) Guide: Reliability and validity in adult male offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 24, 101–118. doi: 10.1023/A:1005430904495
41.
KroppP. D.HartS.WebsterC.EavesD. (1995). The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide.Vancouver: BCAFV.
42.
KrugE. G.DahlbergL. L.MercyJ. A.ZwiA. B.LozanoR. (2002). World report on violence and health.Ginebra: World Health Organization.
43.
LanierC.MaumeM. O. (2009). Intimate partner violence and social isolation across the rural/urban divide. Violence Against Women, 15, 1311–1330. doi: 10.1177/1077801209346711
44.
LilaM.CataláA.ConchellR.GarcíaA.LorenzoM. V.PedrónV.TerrerosE. (2010). Una experiencia de investigación, formación e intervención con hombres penados por violencia contra la mujer en la Universidad de Valencia: Programa Contexto. Psychosocial Intervention, 19, 167–179.
45.
LilaM.GraciaE.GarcíaF. (2010). Actitudes de la policía ante la intervención en casos de violencia contra la mujer en las relaciones de pareja: influencia del sexismo y la empatia. Revista de Psicología Social, 25, 313–323.
46.
LilaM.OliverA.GalianaL.GraciaE. (2013). Predicting success indicators of an intervention programme for convicted intimate partner violence offenders: The Contexto Programme. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 5, 73–95.
47.
LoehlinJ. C. (1987). Latent variable models.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
48.
MerloJ. (2011). Contextual influences on the individual life course: Building a research framework for social epidemiology. Psychosocial Intervention, 20, 75–94.
49.
MoffittT. E.CaspiA.KrugerR.MagdolL.MargolinG.SilvaP.SydneyR. (1997). Do partners agree about abuse in the relationship? A psychometric evaluation of interpartner agreement. Psychological Assessment, 9, 47–56. doi: 10.1037//1040-3590.9.1.47
50.
NorlanderB.EckhardtC. (2005). Anger, hostility, and male perpetrators of intimate partner violence: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 25, 119–152. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2004.10.001
51.
ORGANIZACIÓN MUNDIAL DE LA SALUD (2002). World report on violence and health.Ginebra: Organización Mundial de la Salud.
52.
PlutchikR.Van PraggH. (1989). The measurement of suicidality, aggressivity and impulsivity. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology Biological Psychiatry, 13, 23–34.
53.
RadloffL. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385–401. doi: 10.1177/014662167700100306
54.
SaundersD. G. (1992). Woman battering. EnAmmermanR. T.HersenM. (Eds.), Assessment of family violence: A clinical and legal sourcebook (pp. 208–235). Nueva York: Wiley.
55.
SaundersD. G. (1993). Husbands who assault: Multiple profiles requiring multiple responses. EnHiltonN. Z. (Ed.), Legal responses to wife assault: Current trends and evaluation (pp. 9–34). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
56.
SchwartzM. D. (2005). The past and future of violence against women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20, 7–11. doi: 10.1177/0886260504268087
57.
SonkinD.LiebertD. (2002). The assessment of domestic violence. Journal of Trauma, Aggression and Maltreatment, 6, 3–36.
58.
SpielbergerC. D. (1988). Manual for the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI).Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
59.
SpielbergerC. D. (2001). Manual Inventario de Expresión de Ira Estado-Rasgo.Madrid: Tea ediciones.
60.
SteigerJ. H.LindC. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presentado en el Annual meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City, IA.
61.
StetsJ. E.StrausM. A. (1990). The marriage license as a hitting license: A comparison of assaults in dating, cohabiting and married couples. EnStrausM. A.GellesR. J. (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 227–245). New Brunswick: Transaction.
62.
StithS. M.SmithD. B.PennC. E.WardD. B.TrittD. (2004). Intimate partner physical abuse perpetration and victimization risk factors: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 10, 65–98. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2003.09.001
63.
TanakaJ. S. (1993). Multifaceted conceptions of fit in structural equation models. EnBollenK. A. (Ed.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 10–39). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
64.
TjadenP.ThoennesN. (2000). Extent, nature, and consequences of intimate partner violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs.
65.
UllmanJ. B. (1996). Structural equation modeling. EnTabachnickB.FidellL. (Eds.), Using multivariate statistics (3a ed., pp. 709–812). Nueva York: HarperCollins.
66.
Valor-SeguraI.ExpósitoF.MoyaM. (2008). Atribución del comportamiento del agresor y consejo a la víctima en un caso de violencia doméstica. Revista de Psicología Social, 23, 171–180. doi: 10.1174/021347408784135896
67.
Vigil-ColetA.Morales-VivesF.TousJ. (2008). The relationships between functional and dysfunctional impulsivity and aggression across different samples. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 11, 480–487.
