Factor structure and validity of the revised conflict tactics scales for Spanish women

Violence Against Women

Volumn 13, Issue 10, 2007, Pages 1072-1087

  Calvete, Esther ^a   Corral, Susana ^a   Estevez, Ana ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DEUSTO   (Spain)

Author keywords

Physical aggression; Psychological aggression; Sexual abuse; Violence

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BATTERED WOMAN; FEMALE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PARTNER VIOLENCE; PSYCHOMETRY; QUESTIONNAIRE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPAIN; STATISTICS; VALIDATION STUDY; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

ADULT; BATTERED WOMEN; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MIDDLE AGED; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPAIN; SPOUSE ABUSE; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

EID: 34748843490     PISSN: 10778012     EISSN: 15528448     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1077801207305933     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Adams, B.N. (1965). Coercion and consensus theories: Some unresolved issues. American Journal of Sociology, 71, 714-716.
2. Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Review, 126, 651-680.
3. Barling, J., O'Leary, K.D., Jouriles, E.N., Vivian, D., & MacEwan, K.E. (1987). Factor similarity of the Conflict Tactics Scales across samples, spouses, and sites: Issues and implications. Journal of Family Violence, 2, 37-54.
4. Borjesson, W., Aarons, G., & Dunn, M. (2003). Development and confirmatory factor analysis of the Abuse Within Intimate Relationships Scale. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 295-309.
5. Byrne, B. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Calvete, E., Corral, S., & Estvez, A. (2005). Desarrollo de un inventario para evaluar el abuso psicolgico en las relaciones de pareja [Development of an inventory to assess emotional abuse in couple relationships]. Clnica y Salud, 16, 203-221.
7. Cascardi, M., Avery-Leaf, S., O'Leary, K.D., & Slep, A.M.S. (1999). Factor structure and convergent validity of the Conflict Tactics Scale in high school students. Psychological Assessment, 11, 546-555.
8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2 nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression- correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Connelly, C.D., Newton, R.R., & Aarons, G.A. (2004, July). A psychometric examination of English and Spanish versions of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales. Paper presented at 15th International Nursing Research Congress, Sigma Theta Tau International, Dublin, Ireland.
11. Cook, S.L. (2002). Self-reports of sexual, physical and nonphysical abuse perpetration: A comparison of three measures. Violence Against Women, 8, 541-565.
12. Corral, S., & Calvete, E. (2006). Evaluacin de la violencia en las relaciones de pareja mediante las Escalas de Tcticas para Conflictos: Estructura Factorial y diferencias de gnero en jvenes [Assessment of violence in intimate relationships by means of the CTS2: Factor structure and gender differences in youngsters]. Psicologa Conductual, 2, 215-234.
13. Dekeseredy, W.S., & Schwartz, M.D. (1998). Measuring the extent of woman abuse in intimate heterosexual relationships: A critique of the Conflict Tactics Scales. Applied Research Forum, National Electronic Network on Violence Against Women. Retrieved April 27, 2006, from htpp:// www.vaw.umn.edu/research. asp
14. Desai, S., & Saltzman, L.E. (2001). Measurement issues for violence against women. In C. M. Renzetti, J. L. Edleson, & R. K. Bergen (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women (pp. 35-52). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Hamby, S.L., & Sugarman, D.B. (1999). Acts of psychological aggression against a partner and their relation to physical assault and gender. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 61, 959-970.
16. Hoyle, R.H., & Panter, A.T. (1995). Writing about structural equation models. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 158-176). London: Sage Ltd.
17. Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424-453.
18. Johnson, M.P. (1995). Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 283-294.
19. Jreskog, K.G., & Srbom, D. (2001). LISREL8 user's reference guide (2 nd ed.). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.
20. Lucente, S.W., Fals-Stewart, W., Richards, H.J., & Goscha, J. (2001). Factor structure and reliability of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales for incarcerated female substance abusers. Journal of Family Violence, 16, 437-450.
21. MacCallum, R., & Hong, S. (1997). Power analysis in covariance structure modeling using GFI and AGFI. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32, 193-210.
22. Mahoney, P., Williams, L.M., & West, C.M. (2001). Violence against women by intimate relationship partners. In C. M. Renzetti, J. L. Edleson, & R. K. Bergen (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women (pp. 143-178). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23. Marshall, L.L. (1992). Development of the Severity of Violence Against Women Scales. Journal of Family Violence, 7, 103-121.
24. Medina-Ariza, J., & Barberet, R. (2003). Intimate partner violence in Spain: Findings from a national survey. Violence Against Women, 9, 302-322.
25. Moraes, C.L., & Reichenheim, M.E. (2002). Cross-cultural measurement equivalence of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2) Portuguese version used to identify violence within couples. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 18, 163-176.
26. Newton, R.R., Connelly, C.D., & Landsverk, J.A. (2001). An examination of measurement characteristics and factorial validity of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61, 317-335.
27. Pan, H.S., Neidig, P.H., & O' Leary, K.D. (1994). Male-female and aggressor-victim differences in the factor structure of the modified Conflict Tactics Scale. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9, 366-382.
28. Regan, K.V., Bartholomew, K., Kwong, M.J., Trinke, S.J., & Henderson, A.J.Z. (2006). The relative severity of acts of physical violence in heterosexual relationships: An items response theory analysis. Personal Relationships, 13, 37-52.
29. Straus, M.A. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics Scales. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 75-88.
30. Straus, M.A. (1990). The Conflict Tactics Scale and its critics: An evaluation and new data on validity and reliability. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 49-73). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
31. Straus, M.A. (2004 a). Bibliography and tabular summary of publications on the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2 and CTSPC). Retrieved January, 2005, from the University of New Hampshire, Family Research Laboratory, http://pubpages.unh.edu/∼mas2
32. Straus, M.A. (2004 b). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales: A study of university student dating couples in 17 nations. Cross-Cultural Research, 38, 407-432.
33. Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (Eds.). (1990). Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
34. Straus, M.A., Hamby, S., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. (1996). The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2). Journal of Family Issues, 17, 283-316.
35. Tuomi Jones, T., Ji, P.N., Beck, M., & Beck, N. (2002). The reliability and validity of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2) in a female incarcerated population. Journal of Family Issues, 23, 441-457.