This article was downloaded by: [213.7.125.

152] On: 24 February 2013, At: 07:12 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of GLBT Family Studies

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wgfs20

Stress, Attachment Style, and Partner Violence Among SameSex Couples

Shonda M. Craft MS , Julianne M. Serovich PhD Patrick C. McKenry PhD & Ji-Young Lim MA
a a a a a a

Department of Human Development and Family Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA Version of record first published: 11 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: Shonda M. Craft MS , Julianne M. Serovich PhD , Patrick C. McKenry PhD & Ji-Young Lim MA (2008): Stress, Attachment Style, and Partner Violence Among Same-Sex Couples, Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 4:1, 57-73 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15504280802084456

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/termsand-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages

whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

Stress, Attachment Style, and Partner Violence Among Same-Sex Couples

Shonda M. Craft Julianne M. Serovich Patrick C. McKenry Ji-Young Lim

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

ABSTRACT. Attachment theory has been utilized in studies of relationship violence with heterosexual samples but not with same-sex samples. The purpose of this exploratory study was to compare two nested models of perpetration of violence derived from literature using structural equation modeling procedures. The sample for this study (N = 87) consisted of 46 gay men and 41 lesbians who had recently been in a same-sex intimate relationship, who had perpetrated at least one act of violence within the past year, and who reported experiencing relationship distress. Participants completed measures of stress, attachment, and
Shonda M. Craft, MS, is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Human Development and Family Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH (E-mail: craft.30@ osu.edu). Julianne M. Serovich, PhD, is Professor and Head, Department of Human Development and Family Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. Patrick C. McKenry, PhD, was most recently Professor, Department of Human Development and Family Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. Dr. McKenry passed away prior to the publication of this study. Ji-Young Lim, MA, is also a doctoral candidate in the Department of Human Development and Family Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. This work was funded by a grant from the American Psychological Foundation, Wayne F. Placek Award to the second and third authors. The authors thank the men and women who participated in the study. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, Vol. 4(1) 2008 Available online at http://glbtf.haworthpress.com 2008 by The Haworth Press. All rights reserved. doi:10.1080/15504280802084456

57

58

JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES

violence. Results suggested that the relationships among stress, attachment, and violence are best explained by a mediation model, i.e., the relationship between perceived stress and the perpetration of violence was mediated by an insecure attachment style. A brief discussion and implications for future researchers are included. doi:10.1080/15504280802084456
[Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <docdelivery@haworthpress.com> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> 2008 by The Haworth Press. All rights reserved.]

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

KEYWORDS. Violence, gay men, lesbians, attachment, same-sex couples, mediation model

While there have been no nationally representative surveys of violence in same-sex relationships, rates are hypothesized to be as high as and sometimes higher than those among heterosexuals (Bailey, 1996; Island & Letellier, 1991; National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs, 2003; Renzetti, 1997). Estimates of gay male partner violence have been found to be comparable to that of lesbian partner violence ranging from 12% to 87% (Island & Letellier, 1991; Turrell, 2000; Waldner-Haugrud, Gratch, & Magruder, 1997; Waterman, Dawson, & Bologna, 1989). Researchers investigating physical violence in lesbian relationships have reported lifetime rates ranging from 17% (Loulan, 1987) to 65% (Bernhard, 2000). Notably, few studies of same-sex partner violence have included both gay men and lesbians nor have these studies differentiated between the types of abuse experienced. That is, few investigators have specifically examined emotional and physical abuse as well as sexual coercion (Burke & Follingstad, 1999; Turrell, 2000; Waldner-Haugrud et al., 1997). Increased knowledge of the dynamics of same-sex partner violence has implications for the development, adaptation, and expansion of interventions currently used to treat perpetrators and victims of partner violence. Traditionally, researchers have focused on power imbalances related to gender roles as the underlying factor in partner violence (McConaghy & Zamir, 1995; ONeil, 1992; ONeil & Egan, 1992; Walker, 1999). Recently, theories of disempowerment have focused on differences in economic, physical, and emotional resources. However, such theories may not adequately address the intrapersonal and interpersonal factors that may attribute to relationship stress and violence. Attachment theory

Craft et al.

59

provides an organizing construct that predicts the response to stress and psychological distress (Kemp & Neimeyer, 1999, p. 393). Attachment theory has been utilized in studies of relationship violence with heterosexual samples but not with same-sex samples. ATTACHMENT IN ADULT RELATIONSHIPS Ainsworth and colleagues (1978) demonstrated the presence of three attachment types among infants introduced to the Strange Situation: secure, anxious/ambivalent (or anxious/resistant), and anxious/avoidant. This typology of attachment styles demonstrated the three functions of attachment theorized by Bowlby (1969) who presumed that childhood attachment underlies the later-life capacity to make affectional bonds while lack of success influences a whole range of adult dysfunctions. Hazan and Shaver (1987) built upon the work of Ainsworth to conceptualize adult romantic love relationships as an attachment process. They theorized that in adult relationships, the formation of a secure base is predicted by the perceived availability and responsiveness of the primary attachment figure; in the case of adult relationships, this figure is the sexual partner. Partners who are readily available and responsive to needs are perceived as trustworthy, while those who lack attentive and timely response to needs foster feelings of anger, resentment, disappointment, and confusion. Bartholomew (1990) expanded upon the work of Ainsworth (1979) by conceptualizing adult attachment as internal working models of the self and others. Both dimensions were dichotomized as either positive or negative, thereby providing four types of attachment styles in adult relationships: secure, preoccupied, fearful, and dismissive. Secure individuals display positive models of the self and others, have high feelings of self worth, and are trusting of others. Those with a negative model of self but a positive model of others are classified as preoccupied; these adults are often dependent on others to increase feelings of self worth. Fearful individuals are characterized by negative models of self and others, low feelings of self worth, and avoidance of love relationships. Those with a positive self model and a negative view of others were classified as dismissive. Dismissive persons exhibit high feelings of self worth and are less likely to seek others for fulfillment of their attachment needs. The secure, preoccupied, and fearful styles identified by Bartholomew (1990) correspond to the secure, anxious/ambivalent, and

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

60

JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES

avoidant styles identified by Hazan and Shaver (1987). However, Bartholomew wanted to expand the avoidant style by examining the subjective behaviors and feelings a person might have when choosing not to seek out relationships. For Bartholomew, avoidance was not a singular aspect of attachment. Those who were avoidant in this new typology did not seek love and care from others because they did not feel they were capable of love (fearful) or believed they were capable of fulfilling their love needs on their own (dismissive).
Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

STRESS, ATTACHMENT STYLE AND PARTNER VIOLENCE The relationship between stress and partner violence has traditionally been examined using mediating variables. For example, Straus (1990) reported that degree of marital satisfaction mediated the relationship between stress and violence such that men who perpetrated violence against their wives reported greater stress and lower marital satisfaction compared to nonviolent men. Mental health variables such as depression have also been reported as mediating the correlation between stress and the perpetration of physical partner violence (Cano & Vivian, 2001; Julian & McKenry, 1993). In addition, Cano and Vivian (2003) found that the frequency and impact of life stressors as well as marital satisfaction and depression mediated the associations between stress and violence for men and women. Given the aforementioned research, we posited that the relationship between stress and violence may also be mediated by attachment style in same-sex relationships. Bowlby (1969) believed that attachment behaviors were most evident when a person experienced emotional distress. In times of distress, the main function of attachment behaviors is to maintain proximity to the primary attachment figure. Resultant behaviors may include functional anger or angry behavior that is used to communicate to a primary attachment figure that attachment needs are not currently being met (Kesner, Julian, & McKenry, 1997). According to Kesner and colleagues (1997), males who batter their wives may be utilizing physical violence during times that they perceive an attachment need not being met by their partners (p. 214). Kemp and Neimeyer (1999) found that secure and dismissing individuals experienced lower levels of psychological distress after a stressful event while those classified as preoccupied or fearful experienced higher levels of psychological distress. According to Bartholomews (1990) typology, these results make sense. Individuals with a greater sense of self-worth

Craft et al.

61

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

may be less likely to internalize relationship distress or to equate relationship problems with personal failures. Mens insecure attachment has been found to be related to spouse abuse in heterosexual couples (Collins & Read, 1990; Dutton, 1998; Feeney, Noller, & Callan, 1994; Kesner & McKenry, 1998). In fact, utilizing Bartholomews typology of four attachment styles, some researchers have found that fearful and preoccupied styles were positively associated with mens use of both physical violence and psychological abuse (Dutton, 1994; Dutton, Saunders, Starzomski & Bartholomew, 1994). Some have found that insecurely attached individuals (men and women) tend to be hypersensitive in terms of perceived threats of abandonment (Ceasar, 1988; Kesner & McKenry, 1998; Rosenbaum & OLeary, 1981). Renzetti (1992) also suggested that attachment anxiety may be an important variable in predicting gay/lesbian intimate partner violence. The main purpose of this exploratory study was to examine the impact of attachment style and stress on the perpetration of intimate partner violence among same-sex partners. Nested models, as presented in Figure 1, were derived from the reviewed literature and compared using structural equation modeling procedures. We first hypothesized that: (a) the relationship between stress and violence would be fully mediated by an insecure attachment style (i.e., a mediation model) and; (b) that stress would have both a direct effect and indirect effect on the perpetration of interpersonal violence (i.e., a partial mediation model).
FIGURE 1. Mediation Model

62

JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES

METHOD Participants The sample for this study (N = 87) consisted of 46 gay men and 41 lesbians residing in a large Midwestern metropolitan city. Enrollment was facilitated by referrals from therapists, mental health centers, domestic violence treatment and advocacy groups, and gay/lesbian community organizations as well as responses to advertisements in gay and lesbian newspapers and agency newsletters. In all cases, participants responded to flyers or ads that informed them that they were being sought to participate in a study of conflict between gay and lesbian partners. Participants were asked a series of screening questions in order to assess their eligibility for the study. In order to be eligible for the study, participants needed to: (1) be at least 18 years of age; (2) have recently been in a committed same-sex relationship; (3) have perpetrated at least one act of physical violence in the past year against his/her partner; and (4) report experiences of relationship distress in the past year. Participants were then categorized into two groups based on their experiences of distress and violence: distressed/non-violent and distressed/violent. Advertisements in the gay and lesbian publications yielded the most participants (80%). Participants were offered compensation of $25. Procedures Data were collected in private offices by trained doctoral level graduate student researchers. Interviews began with the administration of a background demographic questionnaire followed by a series of quantitative instruments. Because gender differences can impede understanding and rapport (Williams & Heikes, 1993), male interviewers conducted the interviews with male participants and female interviewers interviewed female participants. All interviewers had advanced graduate and/or clinical training and were thoroughly trained by the principal investigators. Instruments A demographic questionnaire was used to determine age, ethnicity, length of relationship with partner, presence and age of children, and present relationship status. Demographic characteristics of participants

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

Craft et al.

63

are presented in Table 1. There were significant demographic differences by gender in terms of length of relationship, occupational status, and income. That is, males had longer current relationships and higher mean incomes; females had slightly higher status occupations based on the Hollingshead Index (Hollingshead & Redlich, 1958).
TABLE 1. Comparison of Demographic Data by Sexual Orientation Group (N = 87)

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

64

JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES

The following additional instruments were chosen for their psychometric properties. Perpetration of violence was measured with three subscales of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2) (Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy, & Sugarman, 1996). Although the CTS2 is composed of subscales that assess both perpetration and receipt of violence, only those subscales regarding perpetration were employed in the present study given that the purpose was to examine the relationship among perceived stress, attachment, and perpetration of violence. Relevant subscales included psychological aggression (8 items; = .86), physical aggression (12 items; = .91), and sexual coercion (7 items; = .77). Respondents were instructed to indicate the number of times that a particular violent behavior occurred in the past year. The response set ranges from never happened in the past year (0) to more than 20 times in the past year (6). Attachment style was measured using Griffin and Bartholomews (1994) Relationship Scales Questionnaire (RSQ). The RSQ is a 30-item rating scale with four factor dimensions, representing four distinct attachment styles ( = .73). Responses for each item on this scale ranges from not at all like me (1) to very much like me (5). For this study, insecure attachment subscales measuring fearful (4 items), preoccupied (4 items) and dismissive (5 items) styles were used. For this study, relationship stress was conceptualized as a specific reaction to discrete circumstances. Respondents were asked to think of all the pleasures and problems that go into daily life with your partner. When you think of these things, how accurately do the following words describe your feelings? Seven adjectives describing emotions are: bothered, worried, relaxed, frustrated, unhappy, contented, and tense. Scores on each item range from 1 (very) to 4 (not at all). Cronbachs = .88. Three subscales of the Family Inventory of Life Events and Changes (FILE) (McCubbin, Patterson, & Wilson, 1992) were used to measure stress. The FILE was adapted to be appropriate for gay men and lesbians by replacing husband/father and wife/mother with partner. In addition, items regarding conflict with children were not included because our past studies have suggested that the number of men and women with children would be low. Participants were asked if they had experienced stressful events in the past 12 months. The intra-strains subscale consisted of 12 items ( = .82), the finance and business strains subscale consisted of 11 items ( = .61), and the work-family transitions and strains subscale consisted of 9 items ( = .80).

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

Craft et al.

65

RESULTS In this sample, psychological aggression was the most frequently reported form of relationship violence. The majority of lesbians (97.6%) indicated they had participated in psychological aggression, whereas slightly fewer (93.5%) of gay men indicated they had participated in this type of aggression in the past year. On the other hand, 65.2 % of these men and 56.1% of these women reported they perpetrated physical aggression at least once in the past year, and 54.3% of men and 29.3% of women reported they perpetrated in sexual coercion at least one time in the last year. Before conducting the main data analysis, gay mens scores on each indicator was compared with that of lesbians scores by using a series of t-tests. There was no significant mean difference between these gay men and lesbians with the exception of the score on work-family indicator. In terms of the work-family stress, lesbians reported significantly higher levels of stress than gay men. The group means and standard deviations for each indicator are presented in Table 2.

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

TABLE 2. Means and Standard Deviations of All Indicators by Sexual Orientation

66

JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES

Model Specification Structural equation modeling with maximum likelihood estimation was used to test a mediation model and partial mediation model. The data were analyzed with LISREL 8.3 (Jreskog & Srbom, 1993). We began by specifying the mediation model representing the hypothesized relationship among perceived stress, insecure attachment, and perpetration of violence. Then, we tested the partial mediation model including a direct relationship between perceived stress and violence and at the same time, a mediation relationship. A chisquare difference test was used to compare the fit of these nested models. Measurement Model Examination Subscales for relationship stress, intra-familial stress, financial stress, and work-family stress were utilized as indicators for the perceived stress exogenous latent variable. Fearful, preoccupied, and dismissive attachment subscales served as indicators of the insecure attachment endogenous latent variable, and the psychological violence, physical violence, and sexual coercion subscales were employed as indicators of the second endogenous latent variable of perpetration of violence. With these 10 indicators and 3 latent variables, an examination of the measurement model was done in order to pre-examine the structural model. That is, whether the indicators chosen for each latent variable loaded on the prespecified latent variables with the right direction was examined in the measurement model test. The inter-indicators correlation matrices were assessed via Maximum Wishart Likelihood (MWL) iterative method. Then, parameter estimates were calculated for paths and disturbance terms in the model. The examination revealed that all indicators loaded significantly on insecure attachment, stress, and violence latent variable. RMSEA for the model was .035 (90% confidence interval [CI] = .00 to .11). This is considered a close fit, and the NNFI of this model was .98. The chisquare with 15 degree of freedom was 16.60 (p = .034). Other indicators of goodness of fit consistently showed good model fit as anticipated. The goodness-of-fit index (GFI), the comparative fit index (CFI), the Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) were .95, .99, and .89, respectively. Based on these results, subsequent analyses were conducted for the structural model with 10 indicators and 3 latent variables.

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

Craft et al.

67

Substantive Model To test our hypotheses, a covariance matrix of ten indicators was entered as the input matrix. Then, via Maximum Wishart Likelihood (MWL) iterative method, parameter estimates were calculated for paths and disturbance terms in the model. Results indicate that all parameter estimates are significant. The RMSEA for the mediation model was .073 (CI: 0.012, 0.120) which is considered to be a reasonable fit [RMSEA interpretive guidelines: .00 = perfect fit, between .00 and .05 = close fit, between .05 and .08 reasonable fit, and >.10 = unacceptable fit (Browne & Cudeck, 1992)]. The chi-square test of the model fit was significant [2 (32, N = 87) = 45.75, p = .05)], and the value of NNFI indicated good fit (i.e., NNFI = .88) while the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) was .92. Therefore, all fit indices consistently indicated good fit with the exception of the significant chi-square value. However, the chi-square is not a reliable fit index because it is affected by several factors such as model size and distribution of variables. In addition, the confidence interval for the RMSEA value is somewhat narrow despite a relatively small sample size in the present study. An examination of the structural model revealed that all parameter estimates were significant. All standardized parameter estimates are presented in Figure 1. That is, perceived stress was positively associated with insecure attachment ( = 0.42, t = 3.27) and attachment was, in turn, associated with violence ( = 0.66, t = 2.40). Estimated R2 value for violence was .43. Thus, the relationship between perceived stress and violence was mediated by insecure attachment. The RMSEA for the partial mediation model was .068 (CI: 0.00, 0.11) which was also considered a reasonable fit. All standardized parameter estimates are presented in Figure 2. The chi-square test of the model fit was significant [2 (31, N = 87) = 43.39, p = 0.007), the NNFI = .90 and CFI = .93. This structural model revealed that all hypothesized paths were significant (see Figure 1) and estimated R2 for Violence was .36. That is, perceived stress is positively associated with insecure attachment ( = 0.31, t = 1.96) and violence ( = 0.28, t = 2.07), and attachment is in turn associated with violence ( = 0.46, t = 2.62). Although the partial mediation model seemed to have better fit, it was statistically indistinguishable from the more parsimonious model [2(1, N = 87) = 2.63, p = ns]. Therefore, we concluded that the mediation model is the better model to explain the relationships among perceived stress, insecure attachment, and perpetration of violence (see Table 3).

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

68

JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES FIGURE 2. Partial Mediation Model

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

TABLE 3. Fit Statistics of Two Nested Models

DISCUSSION This study represents an initial investigation of the role of attachment and stress in the perpetration of violence in same-sex relationships. As such, it suggests that these relationships function very similarly to what occurs within heterosexual relationships. That is, perceived stress and insecure attachment are positively associated with the perpetration of partner violence. Although both of the proposed models confirmed the hypothesized relationships among stress, attachment style and violence, the mediation model was selected for its parsimony in explaining these relationships. This model also suggested that 43% of the variance in the

Craft et al.

69

perpetration of violence could be explained by the relationship between stress and attachment style for this sample of same-sex couples. The results of this study also suggest that the impact of perceived stress on the perpetration of violence is mediated by an insecure attachment style. This finding supports previous research by Kesner and colleagues (1997) which applied attachment theory to violence in heterosexual relationships. The findings of the present study, however, also provide further quantitative support for Bowlbys (1969) theorized relationship between attachment and distress. These results suggest that insecure individuals would be more emotionally reactive to stress, and that they would also be more likely to use violence to resolve relationship problems. However, Umberson and colleagues (2003) reported that nonviolent men were more emotionally reactive to relationship stress, as well as non-relationship stress, compared to violent men. Negative emotions also tended to increase for nonviolent men who experienced more stress. The aforementioned contradictions suggest that further research is needed for a more comprehensive examination of the associations between attachment and stress. Likewise, more research is needed on the role of attachment style and other potential variables in the perpetration of violence in same-sex relationships. Prior research has suggested that responses to relationship distress and unmet attachment needs may differ by gender. Umberson and colleagues (2003) reported that men expressed their distress behaviorally, while women used more emotional expressions of distress. Renzetti (1988) theorized that dependency, although understudied, may be a key variable to our understanding of gay and lesbian violence. Lockhart and colleagues (1994) found high levels of emotional dependency or over-attachment among lesbian batterers, while others have contended that higher levels of emotional dependency needs were directly related to internalized homophobia, which may in turn place one at risk for interpersonal violence (Diamond & Wilsnack, 1978). Several authors have commented on enmeshed relationships among some lesbians that represent a merger or over-identification with ones partner, sometimes referred to as fusion (Lindenbaum, 1985; Peplau, Veniegas, & Campbell, 1996). Lesbians may be more likely to be overly dependent on each other because of fewer resources compared to gay men (Rutter & Schwartz, 1995). In such cases of fusion, having a different opinion or engaging in a different activity may lead to serious conflict. However, these aspects of insecure attachment have never been empirically investigated within same-sex couples.

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

70

JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES

Limitations The results of this study should be considered in context of its limitations. First, the sample consisted of 87 individuals living in a medium size mid-western city. The values and life-styles of those choosing to live in such areas may be very different from those who chose to reside in larger coastal cities. Furthermore, there may be differential stress and resources in such locations that should be taken into consideration. Second, larger samples are needed to confirm the result of this study. The original purpose of the present study was to explore the relationship among stress, attachment, and violence; however, results and conclusions should be interpreted in a tentative manner due to a relatively small sample size. In addition, larger samples may allow for further testing of these hypotheses by gender. Given that gender differences have been detected in other studies of both heterosexual and same-sex violence such an investigation is warranted and desirable. Third, this study was designed as a concurrent study; therefore, a causal relationship could not be tested here. Understanding the dynamic associations between stress and violence, however, is important for prevention interventions. Future researchers should consider longitudinal study designs whereby the pathway from stress to violence via attachment style can be studied and better understood. Fourth, for this study a heterosexual comparison groups was not included. We believe, however, that such samples should be included in such studies for the sake of better comparison. Finally, for this investigation we sought persons in distressed and/or violent relationships. Such a sampling strategy may have excluded persons who have insecure attachment styles yet under stress do not exhibit violent behaviors. Including these individuals would be important for the next generation of studies. Despite these limitations, we believe this study provides us better understanding of the perpetration of violence among same-sex couples. REFERENCES
Ainsworth M. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. London: Lawrence Erlbaum. Ainsworth, M. S. (1979). Infant-mother attachment. American Psychologist, 34, 932937.

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

Craft et al.

71

Bailey, G. R., Jr. (1996). Treatment of domestic violence in gay and lesbian relationships. Journal of Psychological Practice, 2, 1-8. Bartholomew, K. (1990). Avoidance of intimacy: An attachment perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 147-178. Bernhard, L. A. (2000). Physical and sexual violence experienced by lesbian and heterosexual women. Violence Against Women, 6, 68-79. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods and Research, 21, 230-258. Burke, L. K., & Follingstad, D. R. (1999). Violence in lesbian and gay relationships: Theory, prevalence, and correlational factors. Clinical Psychology Review, 19, 487512. Cano, A., & Vivian, D. (2001). Life stressors and husband-to-wife violence. Aggression & Violent Behavior, 6, 459-480. Cano, A., & Vivian, D. (2003). Are life stressors associated with marital violence? Journal of Family Psychology, 17, 302-314. Ceasar, P. (1988). Exposure to violence in the family of origin among wife abusers and maritally nonviolent men. Violence and Victims, 3, 49-63. Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1990). Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(4), 644-663. Diamond, D. L., & Wilsnack, S. C. (1978). Alcohol abuse among lesbians: A descriptive study. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 123-142. Dutton, D. G. (1994). Patriarchy and wife assault: The ecological fallacy. Violence and Victims, 9(2), 167-182. Dutton, D. G. (1998). The abusive personality: Violence and control in intimate relationships. New York: Guilford. Dutton, D. G., Saunders, K., Starzomski, A., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). Intimacy-anger and insecure attachment as precursors of abuse in intimate relationships. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(15), 1367-1386. Feeney, J. A., Noller, P., & Callan, V. J. (1994). Attachment style, communication and satisfaction in the early years of marriage. In K. Bartholomew & D. Perlman (Eds.), Advances in personal relationships: Vol. 5. Attachment process in adulthood (pp. 269-308). London: Jessica Kingsley. Griffin, D. W., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). The metaphysics of measurement: The case of adult attachment. In K. Bartholomew & D. Perlman (Eds.), Advances in personal relationships: Vol. 5. Attachment processes in adulthood (pp. 17-52). London: Jessica Knightly. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524. Hollingshead, A. B., & Redlich, F. (1958). Social class and mental illness. New York: Wiley. Island, D., & Letellier, P. (1991). Men who beat the men who love them: Battered gay men and domestic violence. Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press. Jreskog, K. G., & Srbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Users Reference Guide. Chicago: Scientific Software.

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

72

JOURNAL OF GLBT FAMILY STUDIES

Julian, T. W., & McKenry, P. C. (1993). Mediators of husband to wife violence toward female intimates. Journal of Family Violence, 8, 39-56. Kemp, M. A., & Neimeyer, G. J. (1999). Interpersonal attachment: Experiencing, expressing and coping with stress. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 388-394. Kesner, J. E., Julian, T., & McKenry, P. C. (1997). Application of attachment theory to male violence toward female intimates. Journal of Family Violence, 12, 211-228. Kesner, J. E., & McKenry, P. C. (1998). Role of attachment factors in predicting male violence toward a female intimate. Journal of Family Violence, 13, 417-432. Lindenbaum, J. (1985). The shattering of an illusion: The problem of competition in lesbian relationships. Feminist Studies, 11(1), 85-103. Lockhart, L. L., White, B. W., Causby, V., & Isaac, A. (1994). Letting out the secret: Violence in lesbian relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9(4), 469-492. Loulan, J. (1987). Lesbian passion: Loving ourselves and each other. San Francisco: Spinsters. McConaghy, N., & Zamir, R. (1995). Heterosexual, homosexual coercion, sexual orientation, and sex roles. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 24, 489-502. McCubbin, H. I., Patterson, J. M., & Wilson, L. R. (1992). Family inventory of life events and change. In D. H. Olson et al. (Eds.), Family inventories (pp. 83-95). St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota. National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs. (2002). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender domestic violence (Preliminary Edition). New York: Author. ONeil, J. M. (1992). A gender role workshop focused on sexism, gender role conflict, and the gender role journey. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut. ONeil, J. M., & Egan, J. (1992). Mens gender role transitions over the life span: Transformations and fears of femininity. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 14(3), 305-324. Peplau, L. A., Veniegas, R. C., & Campbell, S. M. (1996). Gay and lesbian relationships. In R. C. Savin-Williams & K. M. Cohen (Eds.), The lives of lesbians, gays, and bisexuals (pp. 250-273). New York: Harcourt Brace. Renzetti, C. M. (1992). Violent betrayal: Partner abuse in lesbian relationships. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Renzetti, C. M. (1997). Violence in lesbian and gay relationships. In L. L. OToole & J. R. Schiffman (Eds.), Gender violence: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 230266). NY: New York University. Renzetti, C. M. (1988). Violence in lesbian relationships: A preliminary analysis of causal factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 3, 381-399. Rosenbaum, A., & OLeary, K. D. (1981). Marital violence characteristics of abusive couples. Journal of Clinical and Counseling Psychology, 49, 64-71. Rutter, V., & Schwartz, P. (1995). Same-sex couples: Courtship, commitment, and context. In A. E. Auhagen & M. von Salisch (Eds.), The diversity of human relationships. New York: Cambridge. Straus, M. A. (1990). New scoring methods for violence and new norms for the conflict tactics scales. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 535-559). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

Craft et al.

73

Downloaded by [213.7.125.152] at 07:12 24 February 2013

Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283-316. Turrell, S. C. (2000). A descriptive analysis of same-sex relationship violence for a diverse sample. Journal of Family Violence, 15(3), 281-293. Umberson, D., Anderson, K. L., Williams, K., & Chen, M. D. (2003). Relationship dynamics, emotion state, and domestic violence: A stress and masculinities perspective. Journal of Marriage and Family, 65, 233-247. Waldner-Haugrud, L. K., Gratch, L. V., & Magruder, B. (1997). Victimization and perpetration rates of violence in gay and lesbian relationships: Gender issues explored. Violence and Victims, 12, 173-184. Walker, L. E. (1999). Psychology and domestic violence around the world. American Psychologist, 54(1), 21-29. Waterman, C. K., Dawson, L. J., & Bologna, M. J. (1989). Sexual coercion in gay male and lesbian relationships: predictors and implications for support services. Journal of Sex Research, 26, 118-124. Williams, C. L., & Heikes, E. J. (1993). The importance of researchers gender in the in-depth interview: Evidence from two case studies of male nurses. Gender & Society, 7(2), 280-291.

RECEIVED: October 13, 2005 ACCEPTED: November 11, 2005