The “Evaluation of the Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) curriculum for domestic violence offenders” illustrates the methodological issues associated with interpreting program evaluations and applying them to policy. Despite the “preliminary” evidence, the authors promote ACTV as more effective in terms of recidivism compared with DU/CBT (cognitive-behavioral therapy) programming. A more critical consideration of the research, however, exposes further limitations that counter the initial speculations and interpretations of the study outcome. Consequently, the effectiveness of ACTV over the DU/CBT option remains in question and raises the need for a broader discourse on program effectiveness.
Batterer Intervention Services Coalition of Michigan. (2009, November). The reality, research and results behind the judicial oversight demonstration initiative. Annual BSIC-MI Conference, Battle Creek, MI.
2.
BennettL.StoopsC.CallC.FlettH. (2007). Program completion and re-arrest in a batterer intervention system. Research on Social Work Practice, 17, 42-54.
3.
BlumsteinA.LarsonR. C. (1971). Problems in modeling and measuring recidivism. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 8, 124-132.
4.
California State Auditor. (2006). Batterer intervention programs: County probation departments, the courts and program compliance. Sacramento, CA: Bureau of State Audits.
5.
CarterL. (2010). Doing the work and measuring the progress: A report on the December 2009 Experts Roundtable. San Francisco, CA: Family Violence Prevention Fund.
6.
CorvoK.DuttonD.ChenW. (2008). Toward evidence-based practice with domestic violence perpetrators. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, and Trauma, 16, 111-130.
7.
DobashR. E.DobashR. P. (2000). Evaluating criminal justice interventions for domestic violence. Crime and Delinquency, 46, 252-271.
8.
FaisalK. (2017, February13). Internet Aquila Listserv communication. Urbandale: Director of Training and Technical Assistance, Iowa Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
GondolfE. (2001b). Limitations of experimental evaluations of batterer programs. Trauma, Violence, and Abuse, 2, 79-88.
11.
GondolfE. (2007). Theoretical and research support for the Duluth Model: A reply to Dutton and Corvo. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12, 644-657.
12.
GondolfE. (2010). The contributions of Ellen Pence to batterer programs [Special issue]. Violence Against Women, 16, 992-1006.
13.
GondolfE. (2011). Weak evidence for alternative approaches to batterer intervention. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16, 347-353.
14.
GondolfE. (2012). The future of batterer programs: Reassessing evidence-based practice. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
15.
GondolfE. (2015). Gender-based perspectives on batterer programs: Program leaders on history, approach, development and research. New York: Lexington Books.
16.
JonesA.D’AgostinoR.GondolfE.HeckertA. (2004). Assessing the effect of batterer program completion on reassault using propensity scores. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 1002-1020.
17.
JonesA.GondolfE. (2002). Assessing the effect of batterer program completion on reassault: An instrumental variables analysis. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18, 71-98.
LandenbergerN.LipseyM. (2005). The positive effects of cognitive–behavioral programs for offenders: A meta-analysis of factors associated with effective treatment. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 451-476.
20.
MaltzM. (1984). Recidivism. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
21.
MurphyC.TingL. (2010). Interventions for perpetrators of intimate partner violence: A review of efficacy research and recent trends. Partner Abuse, 1, 26-44.
22.
OstL. G. (2008). Efficacy of the third wave of behavioral therapies: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 46, 296-321.
23.
PaymarM. (2015). Violent no more: Helping men end domestic violence. Alameda, CA: Hunter House.
24.
RempelM. (2014). Evidence-based strategies for working with offenders. New York: Center for Court Innovation.
25.
SaundersD. (2008). Group interventions for men who batter: A summary of program descriptions and research. Violence and Victims, 23, 156-172.
26.
SmedslundG.DalsboT.SteiroA.WinsvoldA.Clench-AasJ. (2007). Cognitive behavioural therapy for men who physically abuse their female partner. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (3), CD006048.
27.
VisherC.HarrellA.YahnerJ. (2008). Reducing intimate partner violence: An evaluation of a comprehensive justice system-community collaboration. Criminology and Public Policy, 7, 495-523.
28.
WilsonD.BouffardL.MacKenzieD. (2005). A quantitative review of structured group-oriented, cognitive–behavioral programs for offenders. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 172–204.
29.
ZarlingA.BannonS.BertaM. (2017). Evaluation of acceptance and commitment therapy for domestic violence offenders. Psychology of Violence. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/vio0000097
