A brief review of the research on husband violence .1. Maritally violent versus nonviolent men

It is theoretically important to remember that some causes of marital violence exist at a very broad, societal level-we live in a relatively violent and patriarchal society, two factors that may allow violence against women to be tolerated. However, psychologists, given their training in individual differences, are generally interested in why some men raised in our culture physically aggress against their wives while other men, raised in the same culture, do not. In other words, psychologists tend to focus on individual difference variables as possible causes of marital violence. This focus is reflected in our review of the psychological research literature on male batterers. However, it does not preclude one from considering the cultural and societal background in which male violence against women takes place. Another point to be made is the fact that researchers studying male batterers do not randomly choose their variables of interest. Rather, they examine correlates of marital violence that are theoretically proposed to be causes of violence. Thus, for example, it has been assumed that a man's lack of skills or his attitudes towards violence or his anger level are possible causes of violence. However, whether or not these theories will withstand more rigorous methodologies remains to be seen. As discussed above, complex temporal relationships have not yet been examined, much less so the causal relationships between variables of interest and the use of physical aggression towards one's spouse. In the meantime, the current review makes it clear that various correlates of husband violence can be identified by comparing violent and nonviolent men. Violent husbands evidence more psychological distress, more tendencies to personality disorders, more attachment/dependency problems, more anger/hostility, and more alcohol problems than nonviolent men. They also evidence fewer social (e.g., communication) skills, particularly in marital interactions. The role of biological and physical factors has rarely been examined, but the available evidence suggests that at least some men who have head injuries are at risk for marital violence, and initial data suggests a possible role of testosterone. In addition, male batterers may hold attitudes (towards violence and women) and make attributions (regarding both wife behavior and their own violence) that increase their risk for using physical aggression. They may lack resources or feel powerless. Similarly, they may experience more individual stressors than other men, although the data on this variable are mixed. Such factors (e.g., feeling powerless or stressed) may interact with other variables to precipitate the use of violence. Maritally violent men are more likely than nonviolent husbands to have experienced violence in their family of origin. Finally, more recent trends in this research area suggest that such simple statements (i.e., listing the correlates of marital violence) may not prove as useful as other approaches to understanding marital violence. In particular, multivariate studies demonstrate that various risk factors (e.g., hostility, alcohol use, marital satisfaction) interact in complex ways to predict husband aggression. In addition, typology research suggests that comparing violent to nonviolent men on individual variables may be inappropriate, given the heterogeneity within samples of violent husbands. Instead, future researchers should continue to examine the variability among violent husbands and how variables interact to predict husband violence.