Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Situational action theory and intimate partner violence: An exploration of morality as the underlying mechanism in the explanation of violent crime.
Typology: Thesis
1 / 303
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
ii
iii
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
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
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
xiv Appendix F.......................................................................................................................... 281 PADS+ IPV-Specific Moral Emotions ........................................................................... 281
xv
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
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
