In need of help with this assignment. Instructions: You will integrate theory with an overall proposal for a group. You will prepare a proposal This proposal will be approximately 10-12 pages. Please

Keywords:counseling=interpersonal problem solving groups; domestic violence intervention; guidance=psycho-educational groups; therapeutic factors Domestic violence is a pervasive and devastating problem in American society. It has been estimated that between 21%and 34% of adult women are assaulted by a man with whom they have an inti- mate relationship (Browne, 1993). According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report on Intimate Partner Violence, 900,000 viol- ent crimes are committed yearly against females in the United States by their current or former partners, and intimate partner violence comprised 22%of violent crimes against women between 1993 and 1998 (Rennison & Welchans, 2000). Approximately 8.7 million married Michael Waldo, Ph.D., is a professor in the Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology at New Mexico State University. Philip A. Kerne IV, Ph.D., is located in Austin, Texas. Valerie Van Horn Kerne, M.A., is a first-year doctoral student in counsel- ing psychology in the Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Texas at Austin. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Michael Waldo, Ph.D., Professor, Counseling and Educational Psychology Department, 205 O’Donnell Hall, College of Education, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003; phone: (505) 646-4095; fax: (505) 646-8035; e-mail: [email protected].

THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK, Vol. 32 No. 4, December 2007, 346–361 DOI: 10.1080/01933920701476672 #2007 ASGW 346 couples experience physical violence every year within their relation- ships (Straus, 1999). In addition to the physical and psychological trauma experienced by the women and men who have been abused (Stark & Flitcraft, 1996), children who witness partner abuse can experience a variety of emotional and social problems (Margolin, 1998). These findings argue for the development of effective interven- tions for stopping abuse (Hage, 2000).

Gondolf (1985) suggested a lack of resources, negative institutional responses, a lack of legal system accountability and a patriarchal hier- archy, systematically trap females in abusive relationships. Largely in response to the women’s movement beginning in the 1970s, efforts to provide women protection from abuse have resulted in the establish- ment of over 1,500 community-based shelters for domestic violence sur- vivors (Stark & Flitcraft, 1996). While sheltering survivors is an important first step, it is the perpetrators of domestic violence who are the source of the problem, and it is the perpetrators who need to change their abusive and violent behaviors (Finn, 1985; Waldo, 1987).

Studies of men who have been abusive have identified a number of characteristics that could potentially be targets for corrective interven- tions (Jasinski & Williams, 1998). Perpetration of abusive behavior has been associated with controlling attitudes toward women (Kaufman- Kantor, Jasinski, & Aldorondo, 1994; Straus & Gelles, 1990; Stith & Farley, 1993), gender role stress (Copenhaver, Lash, & Eisler, 2000; Eisler, Franchina, Morre, Honeycutt, & Rhatigan, 2000), witnessing or experiencing abusive behavior in their families of origin (Dutton, 1998; Gortner, Gollan, & Jacobson, 1997), low self-esteem=self concept (Cantoni, 1981; Murray & Baxter, 1997), restricted emotionality and dif- ficulty relating to other men (Schwartz, Waldo, & Daniel, 2005), and per- sonality disorders (Chase, O’Leary, & Heyman, 2001; Dutton, 1995; Gottman et al., 1995; Holtzworth-Munroe, Meehan, Herron, Rehman, & Stuart, 2000; Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994). Abusive men have been found to be more demanding of their partners, to feel more threatened by their partners’ independence, to feel powerless in their relationships, and to lack the skills to communicate their needs (Babcock, Waltz, Jacobson, & Gottman, 1993; Berns, Jacobson, & Gottman, 1999; Ehrensaft, Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Heyman, O’Leary, & Lawrence, 1999). Substance abuse, particularly alcohol abuse, has been linked to domestic violence (Fagan, 1990; Leonard & Blane, 1992). Gorney (1989) found that 60%to 70%of violent men assault their partners while they are under the influence of alcohol. The wide array of problems associated with abusive behavior suggests that helping perpetrators stop their violence requires robust intervention strategies (Waldo, 1987).

Group work may be particularly well suited for treating men who have engaged in domestic violence because of the therapeutic factors Waldo et al. / THERAPEUTIC FACTORS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GROUPS 347 available in groups (Yalom, 2005). Schwartz and Waldo (2004) ident- ified ways in which group therapeutic factors might counter personal and interpersonal dynamics that may contribute to perpetration of domestic violence. A summary of how therapeutic factors could help group participants overcome abusive patterns is offered in Table 1.

Table 1 Group Therapeutic Factors Impact on the Dynamics of Abuse Therapeutic Factors (Yalom, 2005)Impact on the Dynamics of Abuse (Schwartz & Waldo, 2004) UniversalityParticipants can recognize that they are not the only persons who have engaged in abuse, reducing their denial and defensiveness, and increasing their receptivity to treatment.

Instillation of HopeParticipants learn that despite the often-cataclysmic state of their current lives, they can change. This helps them overcome desperation and engage in the group counseling process.

CatharsisParticipants learn to identify and appropriately express emotions that previously had built up to the point of explosive violent outbursts.

Family ReenactmentParticipants experience healthy interaction in the group that offsets the abusive interaction they may have experienced in their family of origin.

CohesionParticipants experience closeness with other group members. Group cohesion helps clients overcome isolation, reducing their dependence on their partners.

AltruismParticipants help other group members. Helping others raises their self-esteem, and increases the likelihood that they will pursue the counseling goals they are promoting, including non-violence.

Interpersonal LearningParticipants receive corrective feedback from group members on how to improve their style of relating in and outside the group.

InformationParticipants learn about domestic violence, healthy approaches to intimacy, anger management, and non-violent conflict resolution.

ModelingParticipants learn from the group leaders and other members about how they can relate without violence.

Socializing TechniquesParticipants try new ways of relating within the group, and receive reinforcement from the leaders and other members on their interpersonal skills. They can then generalize use of these skills to their intimate relationships outside the group.

Existential FactorsParticipants recognize that they do not control many aspects of the world, including their partners. Participants recognize that they have choices, their choices have consequences, and they are accountable for their choices. 348 THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK / December 2007 While it seems likely that all the therapeutic factors potentially available in groups could counter perpetration of domestic violence, the formats typically employed in domestic violence treatment may not allow members access to all therapeutic factors. Theory (Waldo, 1985) and some evidence (Schwartz & Waldo, 1999) suggest that dif- ferences in group formats and leadership styles could result in group participants experiencing different therapeutic factors. Because gui- dance=psycho-educational (guidance) groups focus on providing infor- mation and skills (Association for Specialists in Group Work, 1992), it seems likely they promote the therapeutic factorsinformation, socia- lizing techniques, hope, andmodeling. Counseling=interpersonal prob- lem solving (counseling) groups focus on the relationships between group members (Association for Specialists in Group Work, 1992). It seems likely that counseling groups promotecohesionandinterperso- nal learning.

Guidance groups are commonly employed in domestic violence treatment programs (Adams, 1994; Gondolf, 1997; Lawson et al., 2001), often focusing on males’ use of power and control in abusive relationships and encouraging men to acknowledge, take responsi- bility for, and change their abusive attitudes and behavior (Pence & Paymer, 1993). Austin and Dankwort (1999) contacted state domestic violence coalitions to review available standards, and learned that group interventions employing psycho-educational approaches, pro- feminist approaches, cognitive-behavioral approaches, or combina- tions of all three, were the preferred treatment formats. The guidance approaches employed in these groups have been shown to promote the therapeutic factors ofinformationandsocializing techniques, but have not been shown to promote other therapeutic factors, likecohesionand interpersonal learning, that could be essential for helping participants who engage in abuse (Schwartz & Waldo, 1999). The limits of the guid- ance approach may therefore be restricting treatment effectiveness.

Gondolf (2000) studied group treatment effectiveness with males arrested for domestic violence. According to the female partners of group members, re-assault rates among male participants were 32% at 15 months and 41%at 30 months. These results suggest there is room for significant improvement in group treatment of men who have perpetrated abuse.

The authors of this article believed that using a counseling approach for one session, instead of the guidance approach which is typically used when leading a group for men who have perpetrated abuse, would result in the men experiencing different therapeutic factors. Specifi- cally, the authors predicted that the traditional guidance approach to addressing domestic violence in groups would result in higher levels ofhope,information,socializing techniques, andmodeling, and that a Waldo et al. / THERAPEUTIC FACTORS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GROUPS 349 counseling leadership approach would promote the therapeutic factors ofuniversality, catharsis,cohesion, altruism, andinterpersonal learn- ing. These predictions arose from the authors’ observations while lead- ing groups and their knowledge of group theory. While the authors did not expect the participants to rate the two group formats differently, this study did explore members’ ratings of how worthwhile they thought the two approaches were.

METHODS Participants Group members were recruited from a domestic violence treatment center in a mid-sized southwestern city after the institutional review board approved the study. On average, approximately 130 to 150 males attend weekly domestic violence intervention groups at the center. Group members were referred to the domestic violence inter- vention groups from municipal and magistrate courts because of dom- estic violence incidents (e.g., battery against a household member and=or having been issued a restraining order). Researchers obtained informed consent for the study from men who were members in six ongoing guidance groups offered at the center. A total of 99 men volun- tarily participated in the study. No group members declined to partici- pate. The average age of the group members was 30.42 years (sd¼8.72), with a range in age from 18 to 56. Group members’ ethnicity was as follows: 75%(n¼74) identified as Hispanic, 15% (n¼15) identified as Anglo, 3%(n¼3) identified as African American, 1%(n¼1) identified as Asian American, 1%(n¼1) identified as Native American, and 1%(n¼1) identified as other. Thirty-seven percent (n¼37) of the participants reported that they were single, 26%(n¼26) reported they were married, 7%(n¼7) reported being divorced, 7%(n¼7) reported that they were separated, and 22% (n¼22) reported that they were living with their partner. The edu- cation levels of the group members were as follows: 29%(n¼29) did not complete high school, 31%(n¼31) graduated from high school, 29%(n¼29) attended some college, and 10 %(n¼10) obtained a minimum of a bachelor’s degree. Eighty-three percent (n¼82) of the group members reported being court mandated to attend the domestic violence intervention program. The average number of group sessions attended prior to participation in the intervention sessions was 12.47 (sd¼7.42) with a range from 1 to 30 sessions attended. Drop out rates from the groups at the center average approximately 33%over the sixth month course of the groups. However, drop out rates were not 350 THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK / December 2007 relevant to the evaluation of the group interventions reported here because the interventions were conducted during only one group session.

No group members dropped out during the sessions that were studied.

Instruments A demographic information sheet was employed to collect data describing the participants by ages, marital status, present or past legal complications, referral sources, number of group sessions attended, education levels, and ethnicities.

The Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ).The Critical Incident Questionnaire (Bloch, Reibstein, Crouch, Holroyd, & Themen, 1979) was employed to assess the therapeutic factors that group members experienced while participating in the group sessions. The question- naire asks participants to write a response to the question: ‘‘What event (incident, interaction) from this session was most helpful to you?

Describe what happened, the feelings you experienced, and how the event was helpful to you.’’ Expert raters then read the participants’ responses and determined which therapeutic factor was predominant in each response. The reliability (inter rater agreement rate) and validity of this method for assessing participants’ experience of thera- peutic factors in groups have been demonstrated in previous studies (Kivlighan & Goldfine, 1991; Wheeler, O’Malley, Waldo, Murphey, & Blanck, 1992), including studies on this population (Schwartz & Waldo, 1999; Schwartz & Waldo, 2003). Reliability of ratings (assessed through inter rater agreement rates) have averaged above 90%. CIQ assessment of therapeutic factors in domestic violence groups has been shown to be related to group format and stage of development, offering evidence regarding the validity of the CIQ for assessing therapeutic factors in these groups (Schwartz & Waldo, 1999; Schwartz & Waldo, 2003).

The Group Experience Rating Form (GERF).The Group Experience Rating Form is a self-report measure developed by the authors to assess the extent to which group members found the group sessions to be worthwhile. Participants rated their experience of group sessions on a scale ranging from 1 (Not Worthwhile) to 5 (Very Worthwhile). No reliability or validity data was available on this measure.

Procedures Group leaders.Three group leaders who led six ongoing domestic violence intervention groups (two groups each) participated in this Waldo et al. / THERAPEUTIC FACTORS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GROUPS 351 study. The three facilitators had received education, training, and supervision in a doctoral level group counseling theory and practicum course as part of their American Psychological Association (APA) accredited doctoral program. The three leaders were training six mas- ters’ students (two students each) who co-led the groups with them (one in each group). The six counselors-in-training were all graduate students pursuing masters’ degrees in a Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) accredited counselor education program. The group leaders implemented both the guidance and the counseling sessions according to protocols pro- vided to them by the researchers.

Guidance sessions.The guidance groups addressing domestic viol- ence in the center are based on the Duluth model (Pence & Paymer, 1993). The Duluth model covers nine different themes: nonviolence, non-threatening behavior, sexual respect, honesty and accountability, support and trust, partnership, respect, negotiation and fairness, and the effects of violence on children. Group leaders educate group mem- bers on the importance of these nine Duluth themes in building healthy, nonviolent relationships.

The nonviolence theme was addressed throughout the guidance ses- sions assessed for this study. Group leaders began the guidance ses- sions by eliciting group members’ thoughts and reactions to the themes of violence and nonviolence. Group members were asked to provide their own definitions of these words in order to assess their understanding. Information (lecture and handouts) was provided to educate group members about violent behaviors. Once group members understood which behaviors were considered violent and aggressive, discussion was directed toward situations where violence is considered justified in our society. Group members were then asked to reflect on the true cause of violence. In accordance with the Duluth model (Pence & Paymer, 1993), group members’ responses that anger, alcohol, jeal- ousy, and losing control cause violence were challenged with the edu- cational message that violence is a choice, even if it happens in a split second. Group leaders instructed participants that violence is not about losing control, but about an individual trying to get control of a person or situation.

Group members were also asked what they thought it took to become a nonviolent individual, along with a discussion of potential impediments to becoming nonviolent. Possible impediments that were explored included pride, fear of disrespect, denial, media influence, and male socialization. The guidance sessions ended with a group dis- cussion on why nonviolence is important in intimate relationships and what happens to intimate relationships when violence and aggression 352 THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK / December 2007 occur. Prior to terminating the session, group members discussed what they had learned from the group.

Counseling sessions.All of the leaders randomly substituted one counseling session for one session of the typical guidance group format they employed in their groups, resulting in a total of six counseling group sessions. The counseling sessions were based on Yalom’s description of ‘‘here and now’’ processing, including member-to-mem- ber feedback. This leadership approach relied on group members’ self-disclosures to assist group members in learning about themselves and each other. Group leaders facilitated examination of relationship challenges and=or successes that group members were currently encountering. Challenges included relationship conflict, legal difficult- ies, relationship separation, and emotional distress. Group members’ successes included disclosures about walking away from conflict instead of resorting to aggression and violence, the use of non-control- ling behaviors such as assertive communication, and healthy conflict resolution styles such as negotiation, compromise, active listening, and assertive communication. Participants described challenges in their current relationships, expressed their thoughts, worries, fears, and concerns, and received feedback from fellow group members regarding their approach to relationships, current options, possible consequences, and best solutions. Group members were encouraged to focus on the present and positive changes that are possible in their lives and relationships, despite the conflicts and challenges that they reported enduring during the prior week. Prior to ending the session, group members discussed what they had learned from other group members.

Study design.This study was conducted in six ongoing domestic violence intervention groups that were all being led in a guidance for- mat. Three group leaders and the co-leaders they were training led two groups each. In order to compare the guidance format to a counsel- ing approach, the leaders replaced a typical guidance session with a counseling session in one of their two groups (selected at random).

At the end of the session, the 31 members attending these group ses- sions completed the Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ) and the Group Experience Rating Form (GERF). That same week, the 30 members attending the sessions of the leaders’ other groups completed the CIQ and GERF at the end of their typical guidance session. The following week, the leaders returned to using the guidance format in both of their groups (all six groups). Two weeks after implementing the counseling approach in one of their groups for one session, the lea- ders led a counseling session in their other group, which had not Waldo et al. / THERAPEUTIC FACTORS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GROUPS 353 experienced the counseling format. The 29 members attending these group sessions completed the CIQ and GERF at the end of the meet- ing. That same week, the 42 members attending the leaders’ other group sessions completed the CIQ and GERF at the end of their typical guidance meeting. Table 2 depicts the random assignment of counsel- ing sessions to replace the ongoing guidance sessions typically offered in the groups.

The procedures described above resulted in 60 group members par- ticipating in the counseling sessions and 72 group members participat- ing in the guidance sessions, with the order in which these different group styles were offered being varied at random. Differences in the numbers of members participating in the two group formats resulted from normal fluctuations in group membership associated with new members entering groups, members graduating, and members mis- sing groups because of illness or other commitments.

Two researchers who had been trained in the CIQ assessment pro- cedure (Bloch et al., 1979) rated group members’ responses on the CIQ.

The raters read participants’ responses on the CIQ and determined which therapeutic factor was predominant in each participant’s description of the incident during the group session that was most helpful to him. The researchers were unaware of which sessions the participants were responding to (guidance or counseling) when rating the participants’ responses. The researchers achieved an inter rater reliability rate of 95%agreement on practice CIQ responses prior to beginning rating CIQs for the study. Seventy-two participants com- pleted the CIQ after attending the guidance sessions (61 were ratable), and 60 participants completed it after attending the counseling sessions (47 were ratable). Twenty four participants’ responses were illegible because of poor handwriting and were not ratable. Inter rater Table 2 Random Assignment of Guidance and Counseling Group Leadership Approaches Weekly Sessions Group Leader Group Session Session Session Session Session Leader A 1 GCGGG 2GGGCG Leader B 3 GGGCG 4GCGGG Leader C 5 GCGGG 6GGGCG G¼Guidance=Psycho-educational. C¼Counseling=Interpersonal problem solving.

Sessions inboldwere assessed using the CIQ and GERF. 354 THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK / December 2007 reliability of the ratings for all of the CIQ ratings was 83.3%, with 100%agreement achieved after a discussion of conflicting ratings.

Participants also completed the Group Experience Rating Form after both the guidance and counseling sessions. This form assessed whether participants believed that the group sessions were worth- while. Two group members failed to complete the Group Experience Rating Form, resulting in 130 responses available for analysis. At-test was computed to compare group members’ ratings of the guidance and counseling group formats.

RESULTS This was a pilot study of therapeutic factors in domestic violence intervention groups utilizing two different group leadership approaches. The authors were interested in comparing group mem- bers’ experience of therapeutic factors in guidance versus counseling group sessions. The authors also checked for differences in group members’ ratings of the extent to which they found the two approaches to be worthwhile. The Critical Incident Questionnaire (CIQ) was used to assess participants’ experience of therapeutic factors. Ratings of the CIQ yield nominal data, with one out of eleven potential therapeutic factors being identified for each response. This fact, coupled with the small sample size in this pilot study, resulted in the data on thera- peutic factors being inappropriate for analysis through inferential statistics. The results do, however, allow for comparisons of the thera- peutic factors experienced by group members in this sample. The therapeutic factor results are presented in Table 3. Some differences between the therapeutic factors members experienced in the two group formats were very small (less than 2%). Other differences ran- ged from 3%to 12%. Differences greater than 3%are highlighted below.

As predicted, participants reported higher percentages of the thera- peutic factors of hope(difference of more than 3%) andinformation (difference of more than 6%) in the guidance group sessions than in the counseling sessions.Modelingwas only slightly more prevalent in the guidance sessions (difference less than 2%).Socializing techni- queswere equally prevalent in both groups. Also as predicted, higher percentages ofuniversality(difference of more than 12%),cohesion (difference of more than 7%) andinterpersonal learning(difference of more than 3%) were identified in the counseling sessions. Minimal differences (difference less than 2%) were found between the two group formats regarding the therapeutic factors ofcatharsisandaltru- ism. No differences were predicted regarding members’ experience of Waldo et al. / THERAPEUTIC FACTORS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GROUPS 355 existential factors, but this factor proved to be more prevalent in the guidance=psycho-educational sessions (difference of more than 12%).

Family reenactmentwas not observed in the CIQs coming from either type of group.

A second question posed in the study was whether group members would rate guidance or counseling sessions as more worthwhile. At- test analysis of the results from the Group Experience Rating Form revealed no significant differences (t¼ 0.31,p>.05,df¼128) between members’ ratings of the two group formats. Results (guidance= psycho-educational,X¼4.04,sd¼1.10 and counseling=interpersonal problem solving,X¼4.10,sd¼1.09) suggest that group members found both leadership approaches to be worthwhile since a rating of 4 on the GERF signified a ‘‘worthwhile’’ rating.

DISCUSSION The use of guidance groups to promote change in men who have engaged in domestic violence has been an important step in preventing future violence (Pence & Paymer, 1993). However, the guidance format may be limited in its ability to provide group members all the thera- peutic experiences they need to acknowledge and change violent and aggressive behaviors. For example, because guidance groups focus on conveying information rather than on the relationships between group members, they may be less likely to fosteruniversality,cohesion, and Table 3 Percentages of Therapeutic Factors in Guidance and Counseling Group Sessions Therapeutic Factor Guidance (n¼61) Counseling (n¼47) Universality 1.64%(1=64)12.77%(6=47) Hope 8.20%(5=64) 4.26%(2=47) Catharsis 6.56%(4=64) 8.51%(4=47) Family Reenactment 0.00%(0=64) 0.00%(0=47) Cohesion 6.56%(4=64)14.89%(7=47) Altruism 4.92%(3=64) 4.26%(2=47) Interpersonal Learning 4.92%(3=64)8.51%(4=47) Information 27.87%(17=64) 21.28%(10=47) Modeling 3.28%(2=64) 2.13%(1=47) Socializing Techniques 21.31%(13=64) 21.28%(10=47) Existential 14.75%(9=64) 2.13%(1=47) (Differences in excess of 3%are indicated inbold.) Percentage differences are in the predicted directions. No prediction was made regarding differences. Percentage difference was not in the predicted direction. 356 THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK / December 2007 interpersonal learning. As suggested in Table 1, each of these thera- peutic factors could be helpful in reducing the propensity for domestic violence. It should be noted that members attended an average of 12.47 group sessions prior to their participation in the study and that the counseling approach replaced only one guidance approach in six ongoing groups. Still, the results suggest that a counseling leadership style could provide group members’ experiences ofuniversality, cohesion, andinterpersonal learning. It is not surprising that counsel- ing sessions, which focus on interaction between members, would foster these therapeutic factors. Providing group members with infor- mation and skills training provides a foundation for group members to believe that change is possible. Therefore, it is not surprising that the guidance sessions promotedhopeandinformation. The findings suggest that group leaders who want to promote specific therapeutic factors may be able to do so by employing specific group leadership approaches (Waldo, 1985).

Theory (Waldo, 1987) and research (Schwartz & Waldo, 1999; Schwartz & Waldo, 2004) suggest that individuals being treated for domestic violence will benefit from experiencinguniversality,cohesion andinterpersonal learning. Although the percentage of differences in therapeutic factors observed in this study were small,universality, cohesion, andinterpersonal learningappears to have been more preva- lent in counseling group sessions than in guidance sessions. If these findings are confirmed by future research, increased use of counseling leadership approaches in domestic violence groups may be warranted.

Increaseduniversality,cohesion, andinterpersonal learningin treat- ment groups could contribute to reduction in group members’ domestic violence recidivism. It is interesting to note that the guidance sessions and the counseling sessions both fostered substantial levels of the therapeutic factorsinformationandsocializing techniques. This find- ing suggests that increased emphasis on counseling in domestic viol- ence group interventions did not significantly decrease members’ experience of acquiring needed information and skills for ending abus- ive and violent behaviors. It is also possible that the substantial level of the therapeutic factorinformationfrom the counseling approach was a carryover from previous guidance sessions. Finally, members rated both guidance and counseling sessions as worthwhile on the Group Experience Rating Form (ratings of both sessions averaged to approxi- mately 4 on a 5 point scale), suggesting they had equally positive responses to the group guidance and group counseling approaches.

It is also interesting to note thataltruismwas nearly equally preva- lent in the guidance session as the counseling session. It is possible that the ‘‘nonviolence’’ theme addressed in the guidance session elicited attempts to provide supportive advice between members. It is also Waldo et al. / THERAPEUTIC FACTORS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GROUPS 357 possible that this topic elicited the high level ofexistential factorsevi- denced in the guidance sessions. The emphasis on choices in regard to violence may have encouraged participants to examine their personal responsibility during violent episodes. These findings may suggest that, in addition to promoting specific therapeutic factors through use of specific group leadership approaches, leaders can increase the likelihood of participants’ experiencing specific therapeutic factors by focusing the group on a theme that will promote those factors. The absence of the therapeutic factor,family reenactment, may also have been a consequence of the theme addressed in the guidance session.

Perhaps an alternative topic, such as the Duluth Model curriculum theme that addresses the effects of violence on children, would have elicited morefamily reenactment.

Limitations There are several limitations inherent in this pilot study which should be taken into account when considering the results. The differ- ences in percentages of therapeutic factors experienced during the two group formats were small. Using a counseling leadership style in only one session is likely to have limited the impact of that approach. Only one session of each of the six ongoing groups was changed from guid- ance to counseling because the researchers did not want to significantly alter the organizational structure and format of the domestic violence group program. However, it is possible that offering several sessions in this format would have resulted in greater distinctions in the thera- peutic factors group members experienced. For example, it may take several group sessions led in a counseling format for large numbers of members to experienceinterpersonal learning. Also, 24 participants provided illegible responses further reducing the sample size.

There are other limitations in this study. The assessment of parti- cipants’ judgments about how worthwhile the group sessions were was based on a single item instrument for which reliability or validity data are not available. The small sample and use of nominal data pre- cludes generalizing research findings to other domestic violence group treatment programs. The members all were from one social service agency in the southwestern part of the country and were predomi- nantly Hispanic and Anglo, further limiting the generalization of the results to other domestic violence intervention programs. Another limitation of this pilot study is that members had already attended an average of 12.47 group sessions prior to participation in the study.

It is possible that the groups’ stages of development may have impac- ted the therapeutic factors participants experienced. Kivlighan and Holmes (2004) hypothesized that affective insight experiences will be 358 THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK / December 2007 predominant in the performing stage of group development. Members with more group experience may have been more comfortable with the counseling approach. Finally, despite following written protocols, the three different group leader pairs may have differed in their leader- ship styles when implementing the two different group treatments, possibly impacting the group members’ experiences and limiting the generalizability of the research findings.

Suggestions for Future Research The trends identified in this pilot study suggest that further research on promoting specific therapeutic factors in domestic violence intervention groups through use of a counseling leadership approach is warranted. The finding that percentage differences in experience of therapeutic factors were in the predicted directions does suggest that comparing therapeutic factors in guidance and counseling groups is a potentially productive direction for future research. Future research with more participants and more counseling formatted sessions could yield findings that can be generalized to other groups and settings.

Longitudinal research that explores the impact of group formats on domestic violence recidivism is needed. Variables that also might be studied in future research include the impact of leader and participant ethnicity, the extent of their experiences in groups, and variations in leaders’ styles. Research focusing on group stages in domestic violence intervention groups and their impact on participants’ experience of therapeutic factors may offer another area for future research.

REFERENCES Adams, D. (1994).Historical timelines of institutional responses to battered women.

Cambridge, MA: Emerge.

Association for Specialists in Group Work (ASGW). (1992). Association for Specialists in Group Work: Professional standards for training of group workers.The Journal for Specialists in Group Work,17, 12–19.

Austin, J. B., & Dankwort, J. (1999). Standards for batterer programs: A review and analysis.Journal of Interpersonal Violence,14(2), 152–168.

Babcock, J. C., Waltz, J., Jacobson, N. S., & Gottman, J. M. (1993). Power and violence:

The relation between communication patterns, power discrepancies, and domestic violence.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Violence,61, 40–50.

Berns, S. B., Jacobson, N. S., & Gottman, J. M. (1999). Demand-withdraw interaction in couples with a violent husband.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,67, 666–674.

Bloch, S., Reibstein, J., Crouch, E., Holroyd, P., & Themen, J. (1979). A method for the study of therapeutic factors in group psychotherapy.British Journal of Psychiatry, 134, 257–263. Waldo et al. / THERAPEUTIC FACTORS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GROUPS 359 Browne, A. (1993). Violence against women by male partners: Prevalence, outcomes, andpolicy implications. American Psychologist ,48 , 1077–1087.

Cantoni, L. (1981). Clinical issues in domestic violence. Social Casework,62 , 3–12.

Chase, K. A., O’Leary, K. D., & Heyman, R. E. (2001). Categorizing partner-violent men within the reactive-proactive typology model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology ,69 , 567–572.

Copenhaver, M. M., Lash, S. J., & Eisler, R. M. (2000). Masculine gender-role stress, anger, and male intimate abusiveness: Implications for men’s relationships. Sex Roles ,42 , 405–414.

Dutton, D. G. (1995). Trauma symptoms and PTSD-like profiles in perpetrators of intimate abuse. Journal of Traumatic Stress ,8, 299–316.

Dutton, D. G. (1998). The abusive personality . New York: Guilford Press.

Ehrensaft, M. K., Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Heyman, R. E., O’Leary, K. D., & Lawrence, E. (1999). Feeling controlled in marriage: A phenomenon specific to physically aggressive couples? Journal of Family Psychology,13 , 20–32.

Eisler, R. M., Franchina, J. J., Morre, T. M., Honeycutt, H. G., & Rhatigan, D. L. (2000). Masculine gender role stress and intimate abuse: Effects of gender relevance of con- flict situations on men’s attributions and affective responses. Psychology of Men and Masculinity ,1, 30–36.

Fagan, J. (1990). Intoxication and aggression. In M. H. Tonry & J. Q. Wilson (Eds.), Drugs and crime (pp. 241–320). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Finn, J. (1985). Men’s domestic violence treatment groups: A statewide survey. Social Work with Groups ,8, 81–94.

Gondolf, E. W. (1985). Men who batter: An integrated approach for stopping wife abuse .

Holmes Beach, FL: Learning Publishers.

Gondolf, E. W. (1997). Batterer programs: What we know and need to know. Journal of Interpersonal Violence ,12 , 83–98 Gondolf, E. W. (2000). A 30-month follow-up of court-referred batterers in four cities. Inter- national Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology ,44 (1), 111–128.

Gorney, B. (1989). Domestic violence and chemical dependency: Dual problems, dual interventions. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs ,21 , 229–238.

Gortner, E. T., Gollan, J. K., & Jacobson, N. S. (1997). Psychological aspects of perpetra- tors of domestic violence and their relationships with the victims. Psychiatric Clinics of North America ,20 , 337–352.

Gottman, J. M., Jacobson, N. S., Rushe, R. H., Shortt, J. W., Babcock, J., La Taillade, J.J., & Waltz, J. (1995). The relationship between heart rate reactivity, emotionally aggressive behavior, and general violence in batterers. Journal of Family Psychology, 9 , 227–248.

Hage, S. M. (2000). The role of counseling psychology in preventing male violence against female intimates. The Counseling Psychologist ,28 , 797–828.

Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Meehan, J. C., Herron, K., Rehman, U., & Stuart, G. L. (2000).

Testing the Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994) batterer typology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology ,68 , 1000–1019.

Holtzworth-Munroe, A., & Stuart, G. L. (1994). Typologies of male batterers: Three sub- types and the differences among them. Psychological Bulletin,116 , 476–497.

Jasinski, J. L., & Williams, L. M. (Eds.), (1998). Partner violence: A comprehensive review of 20 years of research . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kaufman-Kantor, G., Jasinski, J., & Aldorondo, E. (1994). Sociocultural status and incidence of marital violence in Hispanic families. Violence and Victims,9, 207–222.

Kivlighan, D. M., & Goldfine, D. C. (1991). Endorsement of therapeutic factors as a func- tion of stage of group development and participant interpersonal attitudes. Journal of Counseling Psychology ,38 (2), 150–158.

360 THE JOURNAL FOR SPECIALISTS IN GROUP WORK / December 2007 Kivlighan, D. M., & Holmes, S. E. (2004). The importance of therapeutic factors: Atypology of therapeutic factors studies. In J. L. DeLucia-Waack, D. A. Gerrity, C. R.

Kalodner, & M. T. Riva (Eds.), Handbook of group counseling and psychotherapy (pp. 23–36). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Lawson, D. M., Dawson, T. E., Kieffer, K. M., Perez, L. M., Burke, J., & Kier, F. J. (2001). An integrated feminist =cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic group treatment model for women who abuse their partners. Psychology of Men & Masculinity,2, 86–99.

Leonard, K. E., & Blane, H. T. (1992). Alcohol and marital aggression in a national sample of young men. Journal of Interpersonal Violence ,7, 19–30.

Margolin, G. (1998). Effects of domestic violence on children. In P. Trickett & C. Schellenback (Eds.), Violence against children in the family and the community (pp. 57–101). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Murray, C. M., & Baxter, V. A. (1997). Motivating batterers to change in the treatment context. Journal of Interpersonal Violence ,12 , 607–619.

Pence, E., & Paymer, M. (1993). Educational groups for men who batter: The Duluth model . New York: Springer.

Rennison, M., & Welchans, S. (2000). Intimate partner violence. Bureau of Justice Stat- istics Special Report . US Department of Justice: The Office of Justice Programs.

Schwartz, J. P., & Waldo, M. (1999). Therapeutic factors in spouse abuse group treat- ment. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work ,24 , 197–207.

Schwartz, J. P., & Waldo, M. (2003). Reducing gender role conflict among men attending partner abuse prevention groups. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work ,28 , 355–369.

Schwartz, J. P., & Waldo, M. (2004). Group work with men who have committed partner abuse. In J. L. Delucea-Waack, D. A. Gerrity, C. R. Kalodner, & M. T. Riva (Eds.), Handbook of group counseling and psychotherapy (pp. 576–592). London: Sage.

Schwartz, J. P., Waldo, M., & Daniel, D. (2005). Gender role conflict and self-esteem: Predictors of partner abuse in court referred men. Psychology of Men and Mascu- linity ,6, 109–113.

Stark, E., & Flitcraft, A. (1996). Women at risk: Domestic violence and women’s health .

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Stith, S. M., & Farley, S. C. (1993). A predictive model of male spousal violence. Journal of Family Violence ,8, 183–201.

Straus, M. A. (1999). The controversy over domestic violence by women: A methodologi- cal, theoretical, and sociology of science analysis. In X. B. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Violence in intimate relationships (pp. 17–44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1990). Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families . New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Waldo, M. (1985). A curative factor framework for conceptualizing group counseling.

Journal of Counseling and Development ,64 , 52–58.

Waldo, M. (1987). Also victims: Understanding and treating men arrested for spouse abuse. Journal of Counseling and Development ,64 , 52–58.

Wheeler, I., O’Malley, K., Waldo, M., Murphey, J., & Blanck, C. (1992). Participants’ perception of therapeutic factors in groups for incest survivors. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work ,17 , 89–95.

Yalom, I. D. (2005). The theory and practice of group psychotherapy (5th ed.). New York:

Basic Books.

Waldo et al. / THERAPEUTIC FACTORS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE GROUPS 361