Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Situational action theory and intimate pertner Violence, Thesis of Criminology

Situational action theory and intimate partner violence: An exploration of morality as the underlying mechanism in the explanation of violent crime.

Typology: Thesis

2021/2022

Uploaded on 03/31/2022

ekaraj
ekaraj 🇺🇸

4.6

(29)

264 documents

1 / 303

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Situational Action Theory and
Intimate Partner Violence:
An Exploration of Morality as the Underlying Mechanism
in the Explanation of Violent Crime
Jennifer Louise Barton-Crosby
Darwin College
Dissertation Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
September 2017
Institute of Criminology
University of Cambridge
Supervised by Professor Per-Olof Wikström
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
pfe
pff
pf12
pf13
pf14
pf15
pf16
pf17
pf18
pf19
pf1a
pf1b
pf1c
pf1d
pf1e
pf1f
pf20
pf21
pf22
pf23
pf24
pf25
pf26
pf27
pf28
pf29
pf2a
pf2b
pf2c
pf2d
pf2e
pf2f
pf30
pf31
pf32
pf33
pf34
pf35
pf36
pf37
pf38
pf39
pf3a
pf3b
pf3c
pf3d
pf3e
pf3f
pf40
pf41
pf42
pf43
pf44
pf45
pf46
pf47
pf48
pf49
pf4a
pf4b
pf4c
pf4d
pf4e
pf4f
pf50
pf51
pf52
pf53
pf54
pf55
pf56
pf57
pf58
pf59
pf5a
pf5b
pf5c
pf5d
pf5e
pf5f
pf60
pf61
pf62
pf63
pf64

Partial preview of the text

Download Situational action theory and intimate pertner Violence and more Thesis Criminology in PDF only on Docsity!

Situational Action Theory and

Intimate Partner Violence:

An Exploration of Morality as the Underlying Mechanism

in the Explanation of Violent Crime

Jennifer Louise Barton-Crosby

Darwin College

Dissertation Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

September 2017

Institute of Criminology

University of Cambridge

Supervised by Professor Per-Olof Wikström

ii

iii

Research Summary

Despite the criminal nature of intimate partner violence, scholars infrequently apply general theories of crime to understanding its causes (Dixon, Archer, & Graham-Kevan, 2012). Indeed, some scholars reject the notion that the causes of intimate partner violence align with the causes of general crime and violence (Dobash, Dobash, Wilson, & Daly, 1992). A second area of contention is whether male and female violence can be explained within the same theoretical framework (Dutton & Nicholls, 2005). In this thesis I argue that as a type of criminal behaviour, understanding the causes of intimate partner violence from a criminological perspective is a valid and necessary research endeavour. Further, guided by the principles of the theoretical framework of this thesis, I submit that both male and female intimate partner violence can be explained within the same general theory of crime. This thesis applies situational action theory, a general theory of crime that places morality at the centre of its explanatory framework, to the understanding and explanation of intimate partner violence. This thesis concentrates on the roles of personal morality and provocation in intimate partner violence perpetration. Partner conflict is defined as the experience of provocation, while friction sensitivity and low partner cohesion are included as key factors leading to partner conflict. Specifically, this thesis examines whether the strength of personal morality influences whether individuals respond to provocation with violence against a partner. To address the aims of the research, this thesis uses data from the Peterborough Adolescent and Young Adult Development Study, a study designed to test situational action theory. Participants are a representative sample of males and females between 24 and 25 years of age. Path analyses using a multiple-group method revealed that high friction sensitivity and low partner cohesion contributed to increased partner violence perpetration by influencing the level of partner conflict. Morality had a significant moderating effect on the path between partner conflict and partner violence perpetration. Namely, individuals with weak morality, and who frequently engaged in partner conflict, were significantly more likely to perpetrate acts of partner violence than individuals with strong morality who engaged in frequent conflict with a partner. These findings were replicated across males and females. The findings of this research illustrate the importance of morality in the explanation of partner violence, and provide evidence that both male and female partner violence can be explained within the framework of situational action theory.

v

Acknowledgments

Thank you to my supervisor, Per-Olof Wikström, who has taught me so much, and to my PhD advisor, Kyle Treiber, for her advice and support over the years. I am grateful to the Economic and Social Research Council for funding this PhD. Thank you to Beth Hardie and Gabriela Roman, you have been both friends and mentors, and I am so grateful for the kindness you have shown me. Thank you to my mum and sister, my kindred spirits, for your love and encouragement. Finally, thank you to Brett for your unconditional love throughout this process. September 2017

vi

viii

ix

Table of Contents

Research Summary ........................................................................................................................ iii Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................... v Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... ix List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... xv List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. xvii Introduction and Thesis Overview .................................................................................................. 1 PART 1: Providing Context ............................................................................................................ 9 1: Situating Intimate Partner Violence as an Issue of Criminological Relevance ................ 11 1.1 Defining Intimate Partner Violence ................................................................................ 12 1.1.1 Why Adopt a Gender Inclusive Approach? A Note on the Gender Debate ............ 13 1.2 The Emergence of Intimate Partner Violence as a Serious Criminal Justice Issue ........ 16 1.3 Criminology and Intimate Partner Violence: A Focus on Policing ................................ 19 1.4 Addressing the Objection and Neglect of Criminological Explanations of Intimate Partner Violence ................................................................................................................................ 22 1.4.1 Studying the Causes of Intimate Partner Violence from A Criminological Perspective: Summarising the Rationale ............................................................................................... 24 1.5 Providing Context: Chapter Summary ............................................................................ 25 PART 2: Theoretical Framework and Review of Pertinent Literature ......................................... 27 2: The Nature and Role of Morality in Situational Action Theory ....................................... 29 2.1 Morality and the Study of Human Behaviour ................................................................. 31 2.1.1 A Brief Review of the Role of Morality in Theories of Crime ................................ 34 2.2 Humans are Rule-Guided Actors .................................................................................... 37 2.3 Defining Crime as Acts of Moral Rule-Breaking ........................................................... 40 2.3.1 Moral Rules and Moral Norms: A Framework for Appropriate Conduct ............... 41

xi 4.3 The Process of Provocation in Situational Action Theory: An Application to Intimate Partner Violence.................................................................................................................... 94 4.3.1 Provocation: The Experience of Anger.................................................................... 95 4.3.2 Provocation: The Role of External Frictions ........................................................... 98 4.3.3 Provocation: Friction Sensitivity ............................................................................. 99 4.3.4 Provocation: The Role of Partner Cohesion .......................................................... 105 4.3.5 Provocation and Intimate Partner Violence: Summary and Specification of Constructs ......................................................................................................................................... 107 4.4 The Provocation Process and Its Application to Intimate Partner Violence: A Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 109 4.4.1 Integrating the Motivation and Causal Processes: Specifying Testable Hypotheses ......................................................................................................................................... 109 PARTS 1 and 2: A Summary ...................................................................................................... 113 PART 3: Method and Analytical Strategy .................................................................................. 115 5: Study Design, Sample, and Data Collection ................................................................... 117 5.1 The Peterborough Adolescent and Young Adult Development Study (PADS+): An Overview ............................................................................................................................. 118 5.2 Sample Characteristics: Sex, Age, Relationship Status, and Sexual Orientation ......... 119 5.3 Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 121 5.4 Measures ....................................................................................................................... 123 5.4.1 Self-Reported IPV Perpetration ............................................................................. 123 5.4.2 Partner Conflict ...................................................................................................... 129 5.4.3 Partner-Specific Friction Sensitivity ...................................................................... 131 5.4.4 Partner Cohesion .................................................................................................... 134 5.4.5 IPV-Specific Moral Rules Scale ............................................................................ 136 5.4.6 IPV-Specific Moral Emotions................................................................................ 138 5.4.7 IPV morality: A Composite of Moral Rules and Moral Emotions ........................ 141

xii

xiv Appendix F.......................................................................................................................... 281 PADS+ IPV-Specific Moral Emotions ........................................................................... 281

xv

List of Figures

Figure 2.1. The moral filter ........................................................................................................... 54 Figure 3.1. The social model of SAT ............................................................................................ 66 Figure 3.2. The perception-choice process ................................................................................... 84 Figure 5.1. Distribution and descriptive statistics for IPV frequency score: All participants who had a partner in the last year ....................................................................................................... 126 Figure 5.2 Distribution and descriptive statistics for IPV frequency score: Participants who reported a prevalence of IPV perpetration in the last year .......................................................... 127 Figure 5.3. Distribution and descriptive statistics for partner conflict frequency score ............. 130 Figure 5.4. Distribution and descriptive statistics for partner-specific friction sensitivity score 133 Figure 5.5. Distribution and descriptive statistics for partner cohesion score ........................... 135 Figure 5.6. Distribution and descriptive statistics for IPV moral rules score ............................. 137 Figure 5.7. Distribution and descriptive statistics for IPV moral emotions score ...................... 140 Figure 5.8. Distribution and descriptive statistics for composite IPV morality score ................ 141 Figure 6.1. The theoretical model to be tested ............................................................................ 144 Figure 7.1. Path model with indirect effects. .............................................................................. 169 Figure 7.2. Male and female multiple-group path model with indirect effects .......................... 172 Figure 7.3. Morality multiple-group path model with indirect effects. ...................................... 179 Figure 7.4. Depiction of the moderation effect of IPV morality on the path between partner conflict and IPV perpetration. .................................................................................................................. 182 Figure 7.5. Combined gender-morality multiple-group path model with indirect effects. ......... 184 Figure 7.6. Depiction of the moderation effect of IPV morality on the path between partner conflict and IPV perpetration for females. ............................................................................................... 188 Figure 7.7. Depiction of the moderation effect of IPV morality on the path between partner conflict and IPV perpetration for males. .................................................................................................. 188 Figure 7.8. Depiction of the effect of strong morality on the path between partner conflict and IPV perpetration for males and females. ............................................................................................ 190 Figure 7.9. Depiction of the effect of weak morality on the path between partner conflict and IPV perpetration for males and females. ............................................................................................ 190

xvii

List of Tables

Table 5.1. Descriptive Statistics for IPV Perpetration Frequency: Comparison of Females and Males ........................................................................................................................................... 128 Table 7.1. Spearman’s Correlations of Key Variables ............................................................... 167 Table 7.2. Spearman’s Correlations for The Strong Morality Group ......................................... 177 Table 7.3. Spearman’s Correlation’s for The Weak Morality Group ......................................... 177 Table 7.4. Morality Multiple-Group Chi-Square Difference ...................................................... 181 Table 7.5. Moderated Mediation: Differences Between Males and Females in The Strength of The Indirect Effects for Strong and Weak Morality Groups.............................................................. 185 Table 7.6. Chi-Square Difference Between Strong and Weak Morality on the Path Between Partner Conflict and IPV Perpetration ..................................................................................................... 186 Table 7.7. Morality Multiple-Group Chi-Square Difference Between Males and Females on the Path Between Partner Conflict and IPV Perpetration ................................................................. 189

xviii