Cumulative Recall Across Frequent Brief Assessments of Interpersonal Violence: Reliability and Validity

Abstract

Frequent brief assessments (FBAs) of intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration and victimization, as well as other related forms of interpersonal violence, might be preferable to typical survey assessments asking respondents to reflect over longer periods of time. In this article, we examine the extent to which FBAs of psychological and physical IPV, stalking, and nonconsensual sexual contact perpetration and victimization possessed convergent and lagged convergent validity with more typical, longer measures of the phenomena over a 6-month recall period. We also examined whether FBA-based measures of these phenomena could account for additional variance in indicators of individual (i.e., PTSD symptoms, problematic substance, and depressive symptoms) and relationship (e.g., relationship satisfaction, flooding, and coercion) functioning after controlling for the same phenomena as assessed in a retrospective survey. A representative sampling frame was used to recruit a sample of young adults as they were transitioning out of high school. As part of a larger project, after completing an enrollment survey, some participants were randomly assigned to complete FBAs of interpersonal violence perpetration and victimization. All participants were asked to complete a second, longer assessment that asked participants to report interpersonal violence over the previous 6 months, along with measures of individual and relationship functioning. Cumulative FBA measures showed excellent convergent validity, good lagged convergent validity, and some instances of significant incremental validity, especially with respect to IPV and relationship functioning. FBAs might be an important alternative approach to standard surveys to understand fluctuations in interpersonal violence perpetration and victimization.