Male and Female Perpetrated Partner Abuse: Testing a Diathesis-Stress Model 
by Reena Sommer


Table of Contents

Chapter 4

Chapter 5 Part 2

Chapter 6


CHAPTER FIVE (part 1)

                   RESULTS OF WAVE 2 DATA

                   Examining the Data

     Reliability of Scales

     Prior to addressing the hypotheses set out in the previous
     chapter, two tests of reliability were performed on the independent
     and dependent measures in Wave 2 data.  The first assessed the degree
     of internal consistency of the measures using Cronbach's Alpha, and
     the second assessed the stability of the measures across time by way
     of Test-Retest Reliability.  Lack of internal consistency as well as
     instability of measures limit the generalizability of research
     findings (Cronbach, Gleser, Nanda & Rajaratnam, 1972).

     Internal consistency of the measures.  Cronbach's Alpha coefficients
     assess the proportion of variance due to common factors among scale
     items.  More specifically, the alpha coefficient is the ratio of the
     universe-score variance to actual observed score variance.  In other
     words, the alpha coefficient indicates how accurately one can
     generalize from an observed score with several modes of responses and
     a fixed situation, to the universe score for that situation over all
     modes of responses (Cronbach et al., 1972).

          According to Kerlinger (1973), a reliability coefficient of .60
     or better would be needed to meet a moderate standard of reliability.
     Listed below are the scale characteristics and reliability
     coefficients for measures put to this test.  The following measures
     were assessed using this technique: (1) the EPQ-R (EPQN, EPQP, EPQL,
     EPQE), (2) the Barron-Ego Strength Scale, (3) the MacAndrew Scale,
     (4) the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, (5) the Spielberger Trait
     Anxiety Scale, (6) the Alcohol Dependence Data Schedule, and (7) the
     Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS). The remaining alcohol measures
     (Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test and the Diagnostic Interview
     Schedule) were not subjected to tests of reliability since they
     provide multidimensional indicators of alcohol related behaviour.

     1) The Eysenck Personality Questionnaire - Revised (EPQ-R). The EPQ-R
     is composed of the following four subscales: psychoticism (EPQP),
     neuroticism (EPQN), extraversion (EPQE) and a validity or lie scale
     (EPQL).  For the purposes of these analyses, the long version of this
     measure was employed.  Respondents were asked to answer "YES" or "NO"
     to all subscale items.

          A. The EPQP is composed of 32 items.  The scale range was 0-14
          for males and 0-12.38 for females with means of 3.78 (S.D.=
          2.59) and 3.25 (2.39), respectively.  The EPQP provided Alpha
          levels of .58 for males and .54 for females.

          B. The EPQN is composed of 24 items.  The scale range was 0-24
          for both males and females with means of 7.76 (S.D.=5.16) and
          10.17 (S.D.=5.25), respectively.  The EPQN provided Alpha levels
          of .87 for both males and females.

          C. The EPQE is composed of 22 items.  The scale range was 0-23
          for both males and females with means of 13.53 (S.D.=5.29) and
          13.45 (S.D.=4.63), respectively.  The EPQE provided Alpha levels
          of .86 for males and .82 for females.

          D. The EPQL is also considered to be a measure of social
          conformity (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985).  It is composed of 21
          items. The scale range was 0-20 for males and 0-21 for females
          with means of 9.33 (S.D.=4.48) and 10.48 (S.D.=4.49),
          respectively.  The EPQL provided Alpha levels of.82 for males
          and .83 for females.
 

     2. Barron Ego Strength Scale.

     The Barron Ego Strength Scale is composed of 67 items.  Respondents
     were asked to answer "TRUE" or "FALSE" to each of the scale items.
     The scale range was 25-58 for males and 24-59 for females with means
     of 47.41 (S.D.=5.41) and 43.85 (S.D.=5.68), respectively.  The Barron
     Ego Strength Scale provided Alpha levels of .63 for males and .60 for
     females.

     3. The MacAndrew Scale.

     The MacAndrew Scale (MAC) is composed of 49 items. As with the Barron
     Ego Strength Scale, respondents were asked to answer "TRUE" or
     "FALSE" to the scale items. The scale range was 10-34 for males and
     10.42-32 for females with means of 22.05 (S.D.= 3.80) and 20.05
     (S.D.=3.49), respectively. The MacAndrew Scale provided Alpha levels
     of .33 for males and .25 for females.

     4. Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale.

     The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale is composed of 10 items.  Respondents
     were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed
     with each scale item.  Choices of responses were: (1) strongly agree,
     (2) agree, (3) disagree, and (4) strongly disagree.  When computed,
     high scores indicate high self esteem, whereas low scores indicate
     the opposite.  The scale range was 20-40 for both males and females
     with means of 33.83 (S.D.=4.50) and 33.30 (S.D.=4.49), respectively.
     The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale provided Alpha levels of .85 for both
     males and females.

     5. Spielberger Trait Anxiety Scale.

     The Spielberger Trait Anxiety Scale is composed of 20 items.
     Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they
     experienced scale items.  As was the case with the Rosenberg
     Self-Esteem Scale, this measure was also based on a four point scale.
     The item values were as follows: (1) almost never, (2) sometimes, (3)
     often, and (4) almost always.  The scale range was 20-61 for males
     and 21-71 for females with means of 32.88 (S.D.=7.86) and 34.72
     (S.D.=8.20), respectively.  The Spielberger Trait Anxiety Scale
     provided Alpha levels of .88 for males and .89 for females.

     6. Raistrick's Alcohol Dependence Data Schedule (SADD).

     The SADD is composed of 15 items.  As in the previous scale,
     respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they
     experienced the scale items. Scale values were similar to those of
     the Trait Anxiety Scale and were as follows: (1) never, (2)
     sometimes, (3) often, and (4) nearly always.  The scale range was
     0-13 for males and 0-12 for females with means of 1.15 (S.D.=2.30)
     and .96 (S.D.=2.02), respectively.  The SADD provided Alpha levels of
     .76 for males and .66 for females.

     7. Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS).

     The abridged version of CTS used in this research is composed of 6
     items reflecting the more severe forms of physical abuse.
     Respondents were asked to indicate how often they participated in the
     various forms of conflict resolution strategies reflected by the
     scale items.  The CTS was constructed on the following six point
     scale: (1) never, (2) once a year, (3) two to three times a year, (4)
     often, but less than once a month, (5) about once a month, and (6)
     more than once a month.  The scale range was 6-22 for both males and
     females with means of 6.44 (S.D.=1.53) and 6.70 (S.D.=1.66),
     respectively.  The CTS provided Alpha levels of .83 for males and .74
     females.

          Table 6 provides a summary of Wave 1 and Wave 2 reliability
     coefficients for male and female respondents.  Upon comparing the
     Alpha levels from both sets of data, it appears that for the most
     part, estimates of internal consistency remained relatively stable
     across the two year period between data collection for both males and
     females.  The exceptions are the reliability coefficients provided by
     the MacAndrew Scale (male and female data), the Ego-strength Scale
     (female data), the SADD Scale (male and female data) and the CTS
     (female data).  The source of these differences will be explored in
     an examination of attrition that follow in a later section.
 

     Table 6. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for male and female 
              respondents in Wave 1 and Wave 2.

     Scale                    Wave 1                   Wave 2

                         Males     Females        Males     Females

     EPQ-R
       EPQP               .60        .61           .58        .54
       EPQN               .85        .85           .87        .87
       EPQE               .82        .80           .86        .82
       EPQL               .82        .82           .82        .83

     Ego Strength         .67        .70           .63        .60

     MacAndrew            .43        .54           .33        .25

     Self-Esteem          .83        .86           .85        .85

     Trait Anxiety        .84        .88           .88        .89

     SADD                 .68        .82           .76        .66

     CTS                  .75        .91           .83        .74

     Test-retest reliability of the measures.  One of the objectives of
     this study is to examine the stability of the partner abuse across
     time.  In order to better understand this variable, the stability of
     other independent measures also needs to be explored.  Wave 1 and
     Wave 2 measures were correlated and assessed by Pearson's correlation
     coefficients to determine their test-retest reliability.  Of the 13
     measures tested, six for males, and five for females attained r
     values of .70 or greater. In general, correlations were stronger for
     males compared to females.

     As expected, personality measures were found to be more stable than
     alcohol or spouse abuse measures.  Strongest correlations were
     provided by the EPQE (r=.86) for males, and the EPQL (r=.80) and EPQN
     (r=.80) for females.  Weakest correlations were provided by the MAST
     and the "lifetime diagnosis for alcoholism for both males (r=.47 and
     r=.17, respectively) and females (r=.27 and r=.11, respectively).
     Correlations for the prevalence of partner abuse (CTS) were .59 for
     males and .44 for females. Table 7 summarizes the results of these
     analyses based on male and female respondents who completed
     questionnaires in both Wave 1 and Wave 2.
 

     Table 7. Test-Retest Reliabilities: Pearson Correlation Coefficients 
              on Wave 1 and Wave 2 measures for male and female 
              respondents.

     Measures                                          r
 

                                             Males          Females

     Personality Measures:

     EPQP                                    .63              .64
     EPQE                                    .86              .78
     EPQL                                    .81              .80
     EPQN                                    .82              .80
     MacAndrew                               .65              .60
     Trait Anxiety                           .84              .77
     Ego Strength                            .72              .71
     Self-Esteem                             .72              .68

     Alcohol Measures:

     SADD                                    .61              .60
     Ethanol                                 .60              .65
     Mast                                    .47              .24
     Lifetime Diagnosis for Alcoholism       .17              .11

     Partner Abuse (CTS)                     .59              .44
 
 

     Note: All correlations are significant at the p < .001 level except
     for female's lifetime diagnosis for alcoholism (p < .05).
 

    Rates of Attrition

          It has already been reported that an attrition rate of 21.3
     percent has been experienced by the entire sample.  Of the subsample
     of males and females who were married or remarried, this rate was
     found to be 20.7 percent (21% for males and 20.4% for females).

          T-Tests and Chi-Square analyses were conducted within the
     married and remarried subsample to assess whether systematic
     differences existed between respondents who completed Wave 2 of this
     project and those who did not.  Both male and female dropouts had
     significantly higher MAST scores than male and female completers
     (1.36 v. 1.00 , p < .05 for males, and .58 v. .37,p < .001 for
     females).  Male dropouts alone differed from male completers along
     the following dimensions: male dropouts tended to be nonwhite
     (46.33%, p < .01), belonged to the religious preference category,
     "other" (35.39%, p < .05), had higher EPQP scores (4.66 v. 3.63, p <
     .01), and consumed more alcohol (.74 ounces v. .55 ounces, p < .001).
     Female dropouts on the other hand, were significantly different from
     female completers in that they tended to be older (28.66%, p < .01),
     had higher SADD scores (1.29 v. .79, p < .001), consumed less alcohol
     (.19 ounces v. .28 ounces, p <.001) and had higher scores on the
     "lifetime diagnosis for alcoholism measure" (1.30 v. 1.08, p < .05).

          T-Tests conducted on CTS mean scores (as measured by the
     abridged version of the CTS) did not produce any significant
     differences between dropouts and completers for either male or female
     respondents.  Similarly, the proportion of male and female
     respondents reporting perpetrating partner abuse did not differ
     significantly for either completers or dropouts.  Tables 8 and 9
     provide the results of chi-square and t-test analyses conducted on
     Wave 1 demographic, personality, alcohol, and the prevalence of
     perpetrated partner abuse with respect to participation in this
     project.
 

     Table 8:  Sample attrition by demographic and partner abuse variables 
               for married and remarried, but previously divorced male and 
               female respondents who participated in Wave 1.

     Variable                N        % Attrition        Chi-Square
     Wave 1               M     F      M        F      M          F

     Age Groups
       18-34 yrs         95   135     20.0    17.0     0.08      10.43**
       35-49 yrs        164   160     21.3    15.0
       50 yrs+          188   157     21.3    28.7

     Marital Status
       Married          429   443     21.4    20.5     1.11       0.48
       Remarried         18     9     11.1    11.1

     Educational Status
       Grade school      27    26     37.0    38.5    11.36*      8.85
       Some high sc      93    92     28.0    20.6
       High sc grad      88   110     22.7    20.0
       Some college/    110   115     16.4    20.9
        technical sc
       College degree    73    79     17.8    19.0
       Post grad         56    30     12.5     6.7
        education

     Current Employment Status
       Employed         377   280     21.2    19.6     0.23      0.001
       Unemployed        11    10     27.3    20.0

     Annual Income
       <$10,000/yr.       5     4     40.0    25.0     8.48      4.14
       $10,000-20,000/yr 16    34     43.7    26.5
       $20,000-35,000/yr 88    88     22.7    23.9
       $35,000-50,000/yr127   117     19.7    14.5
       >$50,000/yr.     196   161     16.8    18.6

     Religious Preference
       Catholic         117   143     24.8    24.5   10.97*      7.15
       Protestant       197   205     17.8    20.0
       Jewish            14    11      7.1     0.0
       Other             51    47     35.3    23.4
       No religious      56    46     16.4    10.9
         preference

     Race
       White            417   417     19.4    19.4   9.63**     2.87
       Nonwhite          30    35     43.3    31.4

     CTS
       No abuse         322   273     19.9    23.1   0.18       2.77
       Abuse            115   175     21.7    16.6
 

     Note:* p < .05, ** p < .01
 
 
 

     Table 9.  Personality, alcohol and partner abuse scores by study 
               participation for married and remarried male and female 
               respondents.

     Variable               N         Score Means            F
                 Males Females  Males  Females    Males   Females

     EPQP
       Dropouts          94    92    4.66     3.35     1.51**    1.17
       Completers       350   359    3.63     3.32

     EPQL
       Dropouts          94    92   11.29    11.55     1.22      1.19
       Completers       349   360    9.32    10.39

     EPQE
       Dropouts          94    92   13.66    13.41     1.29      1.05
       Completers       350   359   13.78    13.22

     EPQN
       Dropouts          94    92    8.39    10.68     1.04      1.15
       Completers       352   359    8.93    11.07

     SELF-ESTEEM
       Dropouts          92    92   32.39    32.72     1.27      1.03
       Completers       351   358   33.70    32.65

     TRAIT ANXIETY
       Dropouts          91    92   35.28    36.13     1.07      1.11
       Completers       351   358   33.50    35.22

     EGO-STRENGTH
       Dropouts          93    91   45.14    41.75     1.23      1.08
       Completers       349   359   46.92    43.48

     MACANDREW
       Dropouts          93    91   23.07    20.98     1.15      1.11
       Completers       349   359   22.35    20.29

     SADD
       Dropouts          93    91    1.32     1.27     1.18      5.36***
       Completers       349   359    1.57     0.79

     ETHANOL
       Dropouts          94    92     .74      .19     2.28***   2.89***
       Completers       349   358     .55      .28

     MAST
       Dropouts          94    91    1.36     0.58     1.43*     1.09***
       Completers       350   360    1.00     0.37

                                             Table 9 continued                          Table 9 (continued)
 

                       N         Score Mean            F
     Variable         Males  Females  Males Females   Males    Females
 

     LIFETIME DIAGNOSIS FOR ALCOHOLISM
       Dropouts          94    92    1.45     1.30     1.33      1.38*
       Completers       352   359    1.34     1.08

     CTS
       Dropouts          89    92    6.72     7.11     1.03      1.04
       Completers       348   358    6.60     7.46
 

     Note: * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
         :Not all totals will equal 94 (males) or 92 (females) for
        dropouts or 352 (males) or 360 (females) completers due to missing
        data.

Next: Chapter 5 Part 2



 

Table of Contents

Chapter 4

Chapter 5 Part 2

Chapter 6

References



HTML by Walter H. Schneider

 

___________
Updates:
2001 02 10 (format changes)


Walter H. Schneider
Box 62, Bruderheim, Alberta, Canada  T0B 0S0
    Tel: (780) 796-2306
e-mail: sheep_@telusplanet.net
Website: http://www.fathersforlife.org or http://forever.freeshell.org

Children need Both Parents -- Once a Parent, a Parent for Life
Subscribe to The Liberator, Men's International Unity Magazine,
Published by the Men's Defense Association

You are visitor #    since 2001 06 19
at the Web site of Fathers for Life

© Copyright Information