Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2018-3
Evaluation of European Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programmes: Toward a Model for Designing and Reporting Evaluations Related to Perpetrator Treatment Interventions
This article is based on a review of 60 evaluations (published and unpublished) relating to European domestic violence perpetrator programmes, involving 7,212 programme participants across 12 countries. The purpose of the review, part of the “IMPACT: Evaluation of European Perpetrator Programmes” project funded by the European Commission (Daphne III Programme), was to provide detailed knowledge about the range of European evaluation studies with particular emphasis on the design, methods, input, output, and outcome measures used in order to identify the possibilities and challenges of a multicountry, Europe-wide evaluation methodology that could be used to assess perpetrator programmes in the future. We provide a model to standardise the reporting of evaluation studies and to ensure attention is paid to what information is being collected at different time points so as to understand what and how the behaviour and attitudes of perpetrators might change throughout the course of the programme.
ADVA and Sue Penna Associates. (2009). REPAIR (Resolve to End the Perpetration of Abuse in Relationships): A community- and whole-family-based intervention programme targeting perpetrators of domestic violence and abuse in Devon. An evaluation of a three-year Invest to Save (ISB) PROJECT. Exeter, UK: Devon County Council. Retrieved from http://www.devon.gov.uk/adva_repair_summary.pdf
2.
AkoensiT. D.KoehlerJ. A.LöselF.HumphreysD. K. (2013). Domestic violence perpetrator programs in Europe, Part II: A systematic review of the state of evidence. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 57, 1206-1225.
3.
AldarondoE.SugarmanD. B. (1996). Risk marker analysis of the cessation and persistence of wife assault. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 1010-1019.
4.
AriasE.ArceR.VilarinoM. (2013). Batterer intervention programmes: A meta-analytic review of effectiveness. Psychosocial Intervention, 22, 153-160.
5.
BabcockJ. C.GreenC. E.RobieC. (2004). Does batterer’s treatment work? A meta-analytic review of domestic violence treatment. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1023-1053.
6.
BarzM.HelfferichC. (2006). Ending domestic violence. Behavioural change of perpetrators as a focus. Landesstiftung Baden-Württemberg.
7.
BeckmannS.Hagemann-WhiteC. (2004). Working with offenders in the context of intervention projects against domestic violence Accompanying research of intervention projects against DV. Germany: Universität Osnabrück.
8.
BennettL.WilliamsO. (2011). Batterer intervention programmes. In RenzettiC. M.EdlesonJ. L.BergenR. K. (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women (pp. 261-277). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9.
BoiraS.Lόpez del HoyoY.Tomás-AragonésL.GasparA. (2013) Efficiacy of different treatment modalities in men convicted of imtimate partner violence. Anales de Psicologia, 29, 19-28.
10.
BowenE.GilchristE.BeechA. R. (2005). An examination of the impact of community-based rehabilitation on the offending behaviour of male domestic violence offenders and the characteristics associated with recidivism. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 10, 189-209.
11.
BowenE.GilchristE.BeechA. R. (2008) Change in treatment has no relationship with subsequent re-offending in U.K. domestic violence sample: A preliminary study. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 52, 598-614.
12.
CalvoI.LecumberriM.BursetF. (2011) Analysis of Recidivism in Perpetrators of Domestic Violence, 2011. Official report. Barcelona: Ambit Social I Criminologic.
13.
DanielsJ. W.MurphyC. M. (1997). Stages and processes of change in batterers’ treatment. Cognitive and Behavioural Practice, 4, 123-145.
14.
DiranzoR.MurilloM.MinanaA. (2012). Psychosocial changes in an intervention program with intimate partner violence offenders. Revista de Psicología, 21, 159-186.
15.
DobashR. P.DobashR. E.CavanaghK.LewisR. (1999). A research evaluation of British programmes for violent men. Journal of Social Policy, 28, 205-233.
16.
EchauriJ.Fernández-MontalvoJ.MartínezM.AzkarateJ. (2013). Effectiveness of a treatment programme for immigrants who committed gender-based violence against their partners. Psicothema, 25, 49-54.
17.
Echauri TijerasJ. (2010). Efficacy of psychological treatment for domestic violent men: Psychopathological characteristics and therapeutic results (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Departamento de Psicología y Pedagogía, Universidad Pública de Navarra, Pamplona-Iruña, Spain.
18.
EcheburúaE.Fernández-MontalvoJ. (2009). Evaluation of a prison treatment programme for men convicted of severe partner violence. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 9, 5-20.
19.
EcheburúaE.Fernández-MontalvoJ.AmorP. (2006). Psychological treatment of men convicted of gender violence: A pilot study in Spanish prisons. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 50, 57-70.
20.
EckhardtC.Holtzworth-MunroeA.NorlanderB.SibleyA.CahillM. (2008). Readiness to change, partner violence subtypes, and treatment outcomes among men in treatment for partner assault. Violence and Victims, 23, 446-475.
21.
FederG.HesterM.WilliamsonE.DunnD. (2008). Behavioural interventions to reduce intimate partner violence against women. In: TraftonJ. A.WilliamG. P. (Eds.), Best practices in behavioural management of health from pre-conception to adolescence (pp. 522-567). Los Altos, CA. Institute for Disease Management/Institute for Brain Potential.
22.
GabrielG.von WolffersdorffC.für SozialesS.S. (2006). “It just happened.” Domestic violence and work with perpetrators. Leipzig, Germany: University of Leipzig.
23.
GaddD. (2004). Evidence-led policy or policy-led evidence? Cognitive behavioural programmes for men who are violent towards women. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 4, 173-197.
24.
GarfieldS. (2005). Psychotherapeutic process in domestic abuse intervention groups. London, England: South Bank University.
GondolfE. W. (2002). Batterer intervention systems: Issues, outcomes and recommendations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
HesterM.LilleyS.-J. (2014). Domestic and sexual violence perpetrator programmes: Article 16 of the Istanbul Convention. A collection of papers on the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.
HesterM.WestmarlandN. (2005). Tackling domestic violence: Effective interventions and approaches. London, England: Home Office.
30.
HesterM.WestmarlandN.GangoliG.WilikinsonM.O’KellyC.KentA.DiamondA. (2006). Domestic violence perpetrators: Identifying needs to inform early intervention (Northern Rock Foundation/Home Office, 2006). Bristol, UK: University of Bristol.
31.
HofingerV.NeumannA. (2008). Legal biographies of clients of NEUSTART. Legal probation after the restorative justice interventions: Settlement, charitable work, and probation. Vienna: Institute for Criminal Sociology.
32.
HolmaJ.PartanenT.WahlstromJ.LaitilaA.SeikkulaJ. (2006). Narratives and discourses in groups for male batterers. In LipshitzM. (Ed.), Domestic violence reverberations (pp. 59-83). New York, NY: Nova Science.
33.
KellyL.WestmarlandN. (2015). Domestic violence perpetrator programmes: Steps towards change (Project Mirabal Final Report). London, England: London Metropolitan University and Durham University.
34.
KraanenF.VedelE.ScholingA.EmmelkampP. (2013). The comparative effectiveness of Integrated treatment for substance abuse and partner violence (I-StoP) and substance abuse treatment alone: A randomised controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry, 13, Article 189.
35.
KrausH. K. (2012). Trainingsprogramm zur Beendigung von gewalttatigem Verhalten in Paarbeziehungen [Training program to stop violence in couple relationships. Internal Evaluation] (1999-2012). Unpublished manuscript [can be obtained from the author].
36.
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.
37.
LorenzS.BiglerP. (2013). Accountability and unveiling: the role of a program for men perpetrators of violence within the couple. Pensée plurielle, 2013/1 n°, 32, 115-127.
38.
MacMillanH. L.WathenC. N. (2001, September). Prevention and treatment of violence against women: Systematic review and recommendations (CTFPHC Technical Report No. 01-04). London, Ontario: Canadian Task Force.
39.
MilnerJ.SingletonT. (2008). Domestic violence: Solution-focused practice with men and women who are violent. Journal of Family Therapy, 30, 29-53.
40.
MullenderA.BurtonS. (2000). Reducing domestic violence . . . What works? Perpetrator programmes (Home Office Crime Reduction Research Series). London, England: Home Office.
41.
MurphyC.MaiuroR. (Eds.). (2009). Motivational interviewing and stages of change in intimate partner violence. New York, NY: Springer.
42.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. (2014). Domestic violence and abuse: How services can respond effectively. Local Government Briefing LGB20. Retrieved from https://www.nice.org.uk/advice/lgb20/chapter/Introduction
43.
NovoM.FariñaF.SeijoM.ArceR. (2012). Assessment of a community rehabilitation programme in convicted male intimate-partner violence offenders. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 12, 219-234
44.
PartanenT. (2008). Interaction and therapeutic interventions in treatment groups for intimately violent men (Jyväskylä Studies in Education, Psychology and Social Research 332). Jyväskylä, Finland: University of Jyväskylä.
45.
PenceE.PaymarM. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth model. New York, NY: Springer.
46.
Perez RamírezM.Giménez-Salinas FramisA.de Juan EspinosaM. (2013) Efficacy of an intervention programme for court-ordered intimate partner offenders. Psychosocial Intervention, 22, 105-114.
47.
PowerM.ClarkeS. (n.d.). Domestic violence: The men and their treatment, support to women partners and the outcome. Dartington, UK: Centre for Social Policy.
48.
PriceP.RajagopalanV.DonaghyP. (2009). Domestic violence intervention project—Improving women and children’ safety: Report and evaluation of the East London domestic violence service (January2007-September2008). London: DVIP.
49.
QuintasJ.FonsecaE.SousaH.SerraA. (2012). Program for Perpetrators of Domestic Violence: Experimental Implementation of Impact Assessment (2010-2011). Revista de Reinsecao Social e Prova, 12, 9-26.
50.
Rodríguez-EspartalN.Lopez-ZafraE. (2013). Emotional program for inmates imprisoned for gender violence (PREMOVIGE): Effectiveness in cognitive and behavioral variables. Psychosocial Intervention, 22, 115-123.
SheehanK. A.ThakorS.StewartD. E. (2013). Turning points for perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 13, 30-40.
53.
SimmonsC. A.LehmannP.CobbN. (2008). A comparison of women versus men charged with intimate partner violence: General risk factors, attitudes regarding using violence, and readiness to change. Violence and Victims, 23, 571-585.
Subirana-MalaretM.Andres-PueyoA. (2013). Proactive retention and therapeutic adherence in programs for male perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Psychosocial Intervention, 22, 95-104.
56.
TejerinaB.MartínezM. (2011). Evaluation of the implementation of re-education interventions for perpetrators of gender based violence. Leioa, Spain: Centro de Estudios sobre la Identidad Colectiva, Universidad Pais Vasco.
57.
WestmarlandN.KellyL.Chalder-MillsJ. (2010). Domestic violence perpetrator programmes: What counts as success?London, England: Respect.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
