Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Effectiveness of Risk-Needs-Responsivity-Based Family Violence Programs with Male Offenders

  • VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAMS
  • Published:
Journal of Family Violence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 17 April 2015

Abstract

The following presents the outcome of an evaluation of family violence prevention programs for male offenders. The moderate and high intensity programs were designed and implemented to conform to the Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) principles. Results showed that program participation significantly reduced attitudes that supported violence against women and improved pro-social skills related to non-abusive relationships; treatment effects were moderate to high. Parole officer feedback generally reported positive changes in behavior and attitude associated with treatment. A post-release follow-up indicated that program completion significantly reduced spousal violence and general violent recidivism. Program participation did not, however, have a significant impact on non-violent crime. Results indicate that domestic violence programs respecting the RNR principles may be effective in reducing partner violence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Preliminary analyses indicated that there were no differences in recidivism rates between those who had received no treatment and those who had dropped out of treatment. Therefore, we chose to combine these offenders into the group labelled “Untreated Offenders” in order to increase the sample size for subsequent analyses. The reasons for dropping out of treatment varied: of the 51 who dropped out of either the moderate or high program, about 30 % did so because they were transferred to another institution, had a conflict with scheduling, or had problems understanding the language of instruction, variables that are not theoretically linked to risk to reoffend).

References

  • American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

  • Andrews, D., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). Cincinnati, Ohio: Anderson Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babcock, J. C., Green, C. E., & Robie, C. (2004). Does batterers’ treatment work? A meta-analytic review of domestic violence treatment outcome research. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1023–1053.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Babcock, J. C., Canady, B., Graham, K. H., & Schart, L. (2007). The evolution of battering interventions: From the dark ages into the scientific Age. In J. Hamel & T. Nicholls (Eds.), Family interventions in domestic violence: A handbook of gender-inclusive theory and treatment (pp. 215–244). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, L. W., Stoops, C., Call, C., & Flett, H. (2007). Program completion and re-arrest in a batterer intervention system. Research on Social Work Practice, 17(1), 42–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, R., & Fawcett, D. J. (1999). The Antisocial Personality Questionnaire (APQ): An inventory for assessing personality deviation in offenders. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 15, 14–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, E. (2011). The rehabilitation of partner-violent men. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, E., Gilchrist, E. A., & Beech, A. 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(5), 598–614.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, S. (2009). Violent victimization of Aboriginal women in the Canadian provinces. Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85-002-X. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2011001/article/11439-eng.htm

  • Brown, S. L., & Motiuk, L. L. (2005). The Dynamic Factors Identification and Analysis (DFIA) component of the Offender Intake Assessment (OIA) process: A meta-analytic, psychometric and consultative review. Research report R-164. Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttell, F. P., & Carney, M. M. (2006). A large sample evaluation of a court-mandated batterer intervention program: Investigating differential program effect for African American and Caucasian men. Research on Social Work Practice, 16(2), 121–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, M. M., & Buttell, F. (2006). Exploring the relevance of interpersonal dependency as a treatment issue in batterer intervention. Research on Social Work Practice, 16(3), 276–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavanaugh, M. M., & Gelles, R. J. (2005). The utility of male domestic violence offender typologies: New directions for research, policy, and practice. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20(2), 155–166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, W. M., Conway, K. P., Stinson, F. S., Colliver, J. D., & Grant, B. F. (2005). Prevalence, correlates, and comorbidity of DSM-IV antisocial personality syndromes and specific drug use disorders in the united states: Results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66, 677–685.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Connors, A. D., Mills, J. F., & Gray, A. L. (2012). An evaluation of intimate partner violence intervention with incarcerated offenders. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 1176–1196. doi:10.1177/0886260511424499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Correctional Service Canada (2001). Assessment manual for the moderate and high intensity family violence prevention programs. Ottawa, ON: Reintegration Programs Division. Revised 2006.

  • Daly, J. E., Power, T. G., & Gondolf, E. W. (2001). Predictors of batterer program attendance. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16(10), 971–991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R. C., & Taylor, B. G. (1999). Does batterer treatment reduce violence? A synthesis of the literature. Women and Criminal Justice, 10(2), 69–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R., Taylor, B., & Maxwell, C. (1998). Does batterer treatment reduce violence? A randomized experiment in Brooklyn (Rep. No. 94-IJ-CX-0047). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, A., Chung, D., O’Leary, P., & Carson, E. (2009). Programs for men who perpetrate domestic violence: An examination of the issues underlying the effectiveness of intervention programs. Journal of Family Violence, 24(3), 203–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunford, F. (2000). The San Diego Navy Experiment: An assessment of interventions for men who assault their wives. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(3), 468–476.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, D. G. (1995). The domestic assault of women. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, D. G., & Corco, K. (2006). Transforming a flawed policy: A call to revive psychology and science in domestic violence research and practice. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11(5), 457–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, D. G., & Haring, M. (1995). Perpetrator personality effects on post-separation victim reactions in abusive relationships. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, D. G., & Hart, S. D. (1992). Risk markers for family violence in a federally incarcerated population. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 15, 101–112.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Feder, L., & Dugan, L. (2002). A test of the efficacy of court-mandated counseling for domestic violence offenders: The Broward experiment. Justice Quarterly, 19(2), 343–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feder, L., & Wilson, D. B. (2005). A meta-analytic review of court-mandated batterer intervention programs: Can courts affect abusers’ behavior? Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1(2), 239–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feder, L., Wilson, D. B., & Austin, S. (2008). Court-mandated interventions for individuals convicted of domestic violence: Campbell Systematic Reviews 2008:12, The Campbell Corporation.

  • Ferguson, L. M. (2004). Assessing the Correctional Service of Canada High Intensity Family Violence Prevention Program. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Department of Psychology Saskatoon: University of Saskatchewan. http://ecommons.usask.ca/handle/10388/etd-05272004-060720. Accessed 20 Jan 2014.

  • Gendreau, P. (1996). The principles of effective intervention with offenders. In A. T. Harland (Ed.), Choosing correctional options that work: Defining the demand and evaluating the supply (pp. 117–130). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gondolf, E. W. (1999). A comparison of reassault rates in four batterer programs: Do court referral, program length and services matter? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(1), 41–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gondolf, E. W., & Jones, A. (2001). The program effect of batterer programs in three cities. Violence and Victims, 16(6), 693–704.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, J. A., & Moriarty, L. J. (2003). The effects of domestic violence batterer treatment on domestic violence recidivism: The Chesterfield County experience. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 30(1), 118–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, K., & Wallace-Capretta, S. (2000). Predicting recidivism among male batterers. Research report 2000–06. Ottawa, ON: Department of the Solicitor General Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, G. T., Hilton, N. Z., & Rice, M. E. (2011). Explaining the frequency of intimate partner violence by male perpetrators: Do attitude, relationship, and neighborhood variables add to antisociality? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 38(4), 309–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holtzworth-Munroe, A., & Meehan, J. C. (2004). Typologies of men who are maritally violent: Scientific and clinical implications. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(12), 369–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hupka, R. B., & Rusch, P. A. (2001). Interpersonal relationship scale. In B. F. Perlmutter, J. Touliatos, & G. W. Holden (Eds.), Handbook of family measurement techniques: Instruments & index (Vol. 3, pp. 148–150). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jewell, I. M., & Wormith, S. J. (2010). Variables associated with attrition from domestic violence treatment programs targeting male batterers: A meta-analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(10), 1086–1113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., D’Agostino, R., Gondolf, E., & Heckert, A. (2004). Assessing the effect of batterer program completion on reassault using propensity scores. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(9), 1002–1020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kroner, D. G., & Weekes, J. R. (1996). Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding: Factor structure, reliability, and validity with an offender sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 323–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kropp, P. R., & Hart, S. D. (2000). The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA) Guide: Reliability and validity in adult male offenders. Law and Human Behavior, 24(1), 101–118.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kropp, P. R., Hart, S. D., Webster, C. D., & Eaves, D. (1999). Manual for the spousal assault risk assessment guide (2nd ed.). Toronto: Multi-Health Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanyon, R. I., & Carle, A. C. (2007). Internal and external validity scores on the balanced inventory of desirable responding and the paulhus deception scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 859–876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levesque, D., Gelles, R., & Velicer, W. (2000). Development and validation of a stages of change measure for men in batterer treatment. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24(2), 175–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, C. D., Davis, R. C., & Taylor, B. G. (2010). The impact of length of domestic violence treatment on the patterns of subsequent intimate partner violence. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 6, 475–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, S., & Nesius, A. (2003). Findings from an evidence-based review of batterer prevention and intervention programs. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Family Violence, San Diego, CA.

  • Motiuk, L. L. (1997). Classification for correctional programming: The Offender Intake Assessment (OIA) process. Forum on Corrections Research, 9(1), 18–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Motiuk, L. L., & Porporino, F. J. (1991). The prevalence, nature and severity of mental health problems among federal male inmates in Canadian penitentiaries. Report-24, Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.

  • Nafekh, M., & Motiuk, L. L. (2002). The Statistical Information on Recidivism - Revised 1 (SIR- R1) Scale: A Psychometric. Report R-126, Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.

  • Nuffield, J. (1982). Parole decision making in Canada: Research towards decisions guidelines. Ottawa: Department of the Solicitor General Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oldham, J., Clarkin, J., Applebaum, A., Carr, A., Kernberg, P., Lottermen, A., & Haas, G. (1985). A self-report instrument for Borderline Personality Organization. In T. H. McGlashan (Ed.), The Borderline: Current empirical research. The progress in psychiatry series (pp. 3–18). Washington, D.C: American Psychiatric Press, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olver, M. E., Stockdale, K. C., & Wormith, J. S. (2011). A meta-analysis of predictors of offender treatment attrition and its relationship to recidivism. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79(1), 6–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, S. E., Brown, R. A., & Barrera, M. E. (1992). Group treatment program for abusive husbands: Long-term evaluation. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 62(2), 276–283.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (1990). Measurement and control response bias. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measurement of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 37–41). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipley, W. C. (1967). Shipley Institute of Living Scale. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services. Revised by Zachary, R. A. (1991).

  • Statistics Canada (2011). Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile. Catalogue no. 85–224-X.

  • Stewart, L. A., Gabora, N., Kropp, P. R., & Lee, Z. (2005). Family violence programming: Treatment outcome for Canadian federally sentenced offenders. Research Report R-174. Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, L. A., Power, J., & Cousineau, C. (2011). Profile and programming needs of federal offenders with histories of intimate partner violence. Research Report R-265. Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stover, C. S., Meadows, A., & Kaufman, J. (2009). Interventions for intimate partner violence: Review and directions for evidence based practice. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40(3), 223–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart, R. B. (2005). Treatment for partner abuse: Time for a paradigm shift. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36(3), 254–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B. G., Davis, R. C., & Maxwell, C. D. (2001). The effects of a group batterer treatment program: A randomized experiment in Brooklyn. Justice Quarterly, 18(1), 171–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usher, A., & Stewart, L. A. (2011). Validation of the Generic Program Performance Measure (GPPM). Research Report R-255. Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wexler, A. (2000). Can typologies of male batterers be generalised to populations of federal inmates? Unpublished Masters Thesis. Ottawa: Carleton University. http://catalogue.library.carleton.ca/search~S9?/aWexler+a/awexler+a/1%2C4%2C4%2CB/frameset&FF=awexler+audrey+f+audrey+francoise+1972&1%2C1%2C. Accessed 20 Jan 2014.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lynn A. Stewart.

Additional information

This report is in partial fulfillment of contract 21120-02-7743-INH-00 between the BC Institute Against Family Violence (BCIFV) and the Correctional Service of Canada. Funding for the project was provided by the Department of Justice, Canada and Health Canada. The following individuals made valuable contributions to this project: Jessica Ius and Melanie Bania assisted with the parole officer interviews; Katherine Rossiter and Dayna Medveduke were responsible for coding recidivism data; Stephen Hart, Ph.D., provided consultation on statistical analyses.

The views and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and should not be construed to represent the views of the Correctional Service of Canada or the Canadian government.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stewart, L.A., Gabora, N., Kropp, P.R. et al. Effectiveness of Risk-Needs-Responsivity-Based Family Violence Programs with Male Offenders. J Fam Viol 29, 151–164 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-013-9575-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-013-9575-0

Keywords

Navigation