41 research outputs found

    Posttraumatic Growth in Students, Crime Survivors and Trauma Workers Exposed to Adversity

    Get PDF
    Generalised models of positive change following adversity do not fully account for differences in adjustment among populations who experience posttraumatic growth (PTG). The contributions of event intentionality, frequency of the adversity types, age at serious event, spirituality/religiousness, active coping, PTSD symptoms and social support were explored as predictors of PTG across three samples of university students (N = 101; Study 1), survivors of violent crime recruited from support services (N = 71; Study 2) and those working with survivors of adversity (N = 96; Study 3). The results of Study 1 revealed that age at serious event, active coping, PTSD symptoms and social support positively predicted PTG. Within Study 2, spirituality/religiousness, active coping and social support were the significant positive predictors of PTG. Finally in Study 3, spirituality/religiousness, active coping and social support were the significant positive predictors of PTG. Across all studies, event intentionality and frequency of adversity types did not determine PTG. These results indicate that while participants within each of the populations have the ability to experience PTG, different factors predicted whether PTG was observed. The findings offer greater insight into the multifarious nature of adjustment following adversity

    Predictors of engagement with support services in a sample of UK victims of violent crime

    Get PDF
    Research suggests that engagement with support services after criminal victimisation is low. With this in mind, this study investigated predictors of engagement with Victim Support, in a sample of victims of violent crime. All violent crimes recorded by Lancashire Constabulary for two postcode areas (PR1 and PR2), who were referred to Victim Support (Preston) between April 2013 and September 2013 (n=869) were assessed, with a followup undertaken in 2014. Two percent of victims booked or attended a face-to-face meeting with Victim Support, and just over one fifth engaged over the telephone on at least one occasion across a range of support options at the initial data collection point. Engagement with Victim Support was not significantly related to future victimisation. When revictimisation since the first data collection period was inspected against demographic and crime-related variables, previous victimisation, regardless of the type of crime experienced, was the strongest predictor of being victimised again. This was despite the fact that such victims were more likely to be identified as high risk, and actively engaged with Victim Support at the initial time of victimisation. Suggestions for further research are made in light of the changes generally to victim services in the UK

    Controlling behavior, power relations within intimate relationships and intimate partner physical and sexual violence against women in Nigeria

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Controlling behavior is more common and can be equally or more threatening than physical or sexual violence. This study sought to determine the role of husband/partner controlling behavior and power relations within intimate relationships in the lifetime risk of physical and sexual violence in Nigeria.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This study used secondary data from a cross-sectional nationally-representative survey collected by face-to-face interviews from women aged 15 - 49 years in the 2008 Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey. Utilizing a stratified two-stage cluster sample design, data was collected frrm 19 216 eligible with the DHS domestic violence module, which is based on the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the role of husband/partner controlling behavior in the risk of ever experiencing physical and sexual violence among 2877 women aged 15 - 49 years who were currently or formerly married or cohabiting with a male partner.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Women who reported controlling behavior by husband/partner had a higher likelihood of experiencing physical violence (RR = 3.04; 95% CI: 2.50 - 3.69), and women resident in rural areas and working in low status occupations had increased likelihood of experiencing physical IPV. Controlling behavior by husband/partner was associated with higher likelihood of experiencing physical violence (RR = 4.01; 95% CI: 2.54 - 6.34). In addition, women who justified wife beating and earned more than their husband/partner were at higher likelihood of experiencing physical and sexual violence. In contrast, women who had decision-making autonomy had lower likelihood of experiencing physical and sexual violence.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Controlling behavior by husband/partner significantly increases the likelihood of physical and sexual IPV, thus acting as a precursor to violence. Findings emphasize the need to adopt a proactive integrated approach to controlling behavior and intimate partner violence within the society.</p

    ADVANCE integrated group intervention to address both substance use and intimate partner abuse perpetration by men in substance use treatment: a feasibility randomised controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Substance use is a risk factor for intimate partner abuse (IPA) perpetration. Delivering perpetrator interventions concurrently with substance use treatment shows promise. Methods: The feasibility of conducting an efficacy and cost-effectiveness trial of the ADVANCE 16-week intervention to reduce IPA by men in substance use treatment was explored. A multicentre, parallel group individually randomised controlled feasibility trial and formative evaluation was conducted. Over three temporal cycles, 104 men who had perpetrated IPA towards a female (ex) partner in the past year were randomly allocated to receive the ADVANCE intervention + substance use treatment as usual (TAU) (n = 54) or TAU only (n = 50) and assessed 16-weeks post-randomisation. Participants’ (ex) partners were offered support and 27 provided outcome data. Thirty-one staff and 12 men who attended the intervention participated in focus groups or interviews that were analysed using the framework approach. Pre-specified criteria assessed the feasibility of progression to a definitive trial: 1) ≥ 60% of eligible male participants recruited; 2) intervention acceptable to staff and male participants; 3) ≥ 70% of participants followed-up and 4) levels of substance use and 5) IPA perpetrated by men in the intervention arm did not increase from average baseline level at 16-weeks post-randomisation. Results: 70.7% (104/147) of eligible men were recruited. The formative evaluation confirmed the intervention’s acceptability. Therapeutic alliance and session satisfaction were rated highly. The overall median rate of intervention session attendance (of 14 compulsory sessions) was 28.6% (range 14.3–64.3% by the third cycle). 49.0% (51/104) of men and 63.0% (17/27) of their (ex) partners were followed-up 16-weeks post-randomisation. This increased to 100% of men and women by cycle three. At follow-up, neither substance use nor IPA perpetration had worsened for men in the intervention arm. Conclusions: It was feasible to deliver the ADVANCE intervention in substance use treatment services, although it proved difficult to collect data from female (ex)partners. While some progression criteria were met, others were not, although improvements were demonstrated by the third cycle. Lessons learned will be implemented into the study design for a definitive trial of the ADVANCE intervention

    Intimate terrorism and common couple violence: A test of Johnson’s predictions in four British samples

    No full text
    This study sought to both replicate and considerably extend the findings of Johnson (1999) that there are two distinct subgroups of physical aggression within relation-ships: intimate terrorism and commoncouple violence. The present sample consisted of women residing at Women’s Aid shelters and their partners (N = 86), male and female students (N=208),men attendingmale treatment programs for domestic vio-lence and their partners (N = 8), and male prisoners and their partners (N = 192). Respondents completedmeasures on physical aggression, injuries sustained, escala-tion of physical aggression, and controlling behaviors. Cluster analysis was employed to categorize relationships as either intimate terrorism or common couple violence. Frequency analysis showed broad support for Johnson’s findings
    corecore