Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma

ISSN: 1092-6771 (Print) 1545-083X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wamt20

Adult Male Perpetrators’ Perspectives on What

Prevention Approaches Work Best for Young
Boys at Risk of Future Intimate Partner Violence
Perpetration

Penelope K. Morrison, Elizabeth P. Miller, Jessica Burke, Patricia Cluss,

Rhonda Fleming, Lynn Hawker, Donna George, Terry Bicehouse, Kalem
Wright & Judy C. Chang

To cite this article: Penelope K. Morrison, Elizabeth P. Miller, Jessica Burke, Patricia Cluss,
Rhonda Fleming, Lynn Hawker, Donna George, Terry Bicehouse, Kalem Wright & Judy C. Chang
(2018) Adult Male Perpetrators’ Perspectives on What Prevention Approaches Work Best for Young
Boys at Risk of Future Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration, Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment
& Trauma, 27:2, 179-198, DOI: 10.1080/10926771.2017.1320346

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2017.1320346

Published online: 23 Jun 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 103

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wamt20
JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA
2018, VOL. 27, NO. 2, 179–198
https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2017.1320346

Adult Male Perpetrators’ Perspectives on What Prevention

Approaches Work Best for Young Boys at Risk of Future
Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration
Penelope K. Morrisona, Elizabeth P. Millerb, Jessica Burkec, Patricia Clussd,
Rhonda Fleminge, Lynn Hawkere, Donna Georgef, Terry Bicehousee,
Kalem Wrightg, and Judy C. Changh
a
Department of Biobehavioral Health, Penn State New Kensington, New Kensington, Pennsylvania,
USA; bDivision of Adolescent Medicine, Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, University of
Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; cDepartment of Behavioral and
Community Health Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
USA; dStanding Firm: The Business Case to End Partner Violence, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA;
e
Women’s Center and Shelter of Greater Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; fPennsylvania State
System of Higher Education, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA; gWestern Psychiatric Institute and Clinic of
UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA; hDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences
and General Internal Medicine, Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, University of Pittsburgh School of
Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

As part of a 2-year ethnographic study, 49 adult men who had Received 3 January 2017
been convicted of intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration Revised 22 March 2017
were interviewed on what they thought would have prevented Accepted 6 April 2017
them from engaging in perpetration behaviors, or rather what KEYWORDS
they believed prevention with young boys needed to include Battering; domestic violence;
in order to prevent future IPV perpetration. The authors’ open- exposure to violence;
ended interviews yielded five main themes: (a) messages about intervention; intimate
healthy relationship behaviors, (b) the need to promote partner violence; offender/
respect for women, (c) teaching effective skills for communi- perpetrator; prevention
cating and managing anger, (d) programs that provide role
models and are school-based, and (e) addressing the impact of
experiencing violence as a child. The authors conclude that
prevention efforts focused on changing both attitudes regard-
ing IPV and behaviors might be most effective for reducing
perpetration, and that greater attention needs to be paid
towards prevention among youth most at risk of IPV perpetra-
tion, those experiencing violence in their homes.

Introduction
Perpetration of an intimate partner often starts during the adolescent years as
young people begin to explore romantic relationships (Simon, Miller,
Gorman-Smith, Orpinas, & Sullivan, 2010; Swahn, Simon, Arias, &
Bossarte, 2008). Research on dating violence among adolescents has shown
that a number of factors are associated with perpetration, including other

CONTACT Penelope K. Morrison pkm20@psu.edu Department of Biobehavioral Health, Penn State New
Kensington, 3550 7th St., New Kensington, PA 15068.
© 2018 Taylor & Francis
180 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

aggressive behaviors during adolescence (e.g., bullying), gender inequitable

beliefs, and permissive attitudes toward violence (Capaldi, Dishion,
Stoolmiller, & Yoerger, 2001; Espelage & Holt, 2007; Falb et al., 2011;
Foshee et al., 2014; Reed, 2008; Reyes, Foshee, Niolon, Reidy, & Hall,
2016). Moreover, there is mounting evidence that supports the association
between perpetration behaviors and the exposure to violence in the home
(Wood & Sommers, 2011). In particular, boys who witness parental violence
or community violence, and/or who have been the victims of maltreatment,
sexual or physical abuse as children are especially at risk for intimate partner
violence (IPV) perpetration (Miller et al., 2011; Smith, Greenman,
Thornberry, Henry, & Ireland, 2015; Temple, Shorey, Tortolero, Wolfe, &
Stuart, 2013; Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2008).
Recognizing that some young boys and men may have particular needs,
experts have recommended more intensive primary prevention programs
that are designed to specifically target risk factors (Pepler et al., 2006;
Williams, Connolly, Pepler, Craig, & Laporte, 2008; Wolfe et al., 2003).
Youth who are experiencing or witnessing violence at home, or within
their peer and early dating relationships, are in particular need of programs
that promote prosocial relationship behaviors and resiliency against perpe-
tration (Pepler et al., 2006; Williams et al., 2008; Wolfe et al., 2003). Most
IPV prevention approaches, however, are not designed to address the specific
needs of youth identified as at risk. Rather, the majority of existing preven-
tion frameworks are universal in their design and use didactic or educational
strategies to deliver messages about healthy relationships to broad popula-
tions of adolescents (e.g., Avery-Leaf, Cascardi, O’Leary, & Cano, 1997; Carr,
Lee, & Morgan, 2005; Florsheim, McArthur, Hudak, Heavin, & Burrow-
Sanchez, 2011; Foshee et al., 1996; Stein, Mennemeier, Russ, & Taylor,
2012). In fact, to date only two prevention programs target at-risk youth
(Meraviglia, Becker, Rosenbluth, Sanchez, & Robertson, 2003; Wolfe et al.,
2003). Furthermore, very little descriptive information exists on what young
men and boys who are at risk for IPV perpetration may need from preven-
tion interventions (Reed et al., 2008).
One avenue for refining primary prevention approaches is through explor-
ing the perspectives of those individuals who have “been there” on what they
believe are important components for prevention efforts. Thus, we solicited
the advice of men, who had been convicted of IPV perpetration as adults, on
what they believed adolescent boys needed to know and learn to prevent
eventual perpetration of IPV against their partners. By asking individuals
who have firsthand experience with IPV perpetration what might have
prevented them from perpetrating abuse, we seek to inform primary preven-
tion approaches for young boys who might be at risk of committing such
acts. Additionally, such information is important for developing new poten-
tial strategies for intervention and can shed light on factors that may help us
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 181

more readily identify those individuals who are at the greatest risk for
perpetrating violence. To our knowledge, this is the first study of its kind
to describe adult male perpetrators’ perspectives regarding what key compo-
nents are necessary for IPV prevention.

Methods
Overview
Between 2013 and 2015, we conducted a 2-year ethnographic study of adult
male perpetrators of IPV in an urban area in the United States (Morrison
et al., 2016a, 2016b). As part of this study, we conducted open-ended, semi-
structured interviews with men who had been court mandated to attend
group counseling for perpetration of IPV, otherwise known as batterer
intervention programs (BIPs). This analysis uses those interviews to examine
what adult male perpetrators of IPV believe would be essential components
of IPV prevention efforts that target adolescent boys, and could have the
potential to prevent future IPV perpetration.

Data collection
Men attending one of two community-based BIPs were eligible to participate
if they were either currently enrolled, or had participated, in the program in
the past year. Men were recruited through site visits and mailers. First, a
member of the research team attended the BIP group sessions to recruit
potential participants. Before beginning each session, the team member
passed out a study flyer with information about the research and a contact
card to all men in attendance. The team member explained the purpose of
the study and how to reach the research staff should the men wish to
participate. Each BIP group participant was also provided with the option
to provide his information to the research team member on a blank index
card. Men were instructed to include only their first name and a telephone
number where they could be safely contacted and a message left if need
be. Second, recruitment letters were sent to men not currently attending one
of the two community-based BIPs, but who had registered for a program in
the past. The BIPs were provided with recruitment letters, which contained
detailed information about the study and instructions on how to participate.
An honest broker was used to mail the letters to all men who had registered
for the program within the past year, regardless of whether or not they
attended.
To ensure safety, confidentiality, and honesty, as well as to minimize the
stigma associated with being labeled a “batterer,” we did not collect any
identifying information or demographic variables from our male BIP
182 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

participants. A total of 152 indicated interest in the study and provided

contact information so that study staff could follow up with them to conduct
the interviews. Of those who indicated interest in the study, 76 completed the
semi-structured interviews (39 from one program, 37 from the other). The
remainder was withdrawn after three attempts to reach the participant were
made with no return contact. Only three individuals refused participation
upon follow-up. Recruitment through mailings was low, with only three
individuals responding, all of whom had previously been present during an
in-group recruitment session.
The semi-structured interview guide broadly explored adult male perpe-
trators’ perceptions of the BIP group experience, facilitators, and process,
what they found helpful, what areas for improvement BIP have, and how
they felt going to the program had impacted their relationships. During the
course of conducting these interviews, many of the men indicated that
interventions and services such as BIPs might have made a difference in
their lives if they had experienced such a program earlier in life. As is
common in ethnographic studies, which utilize an iterative approach, the
interview guide was revised to include questions on what kinds of approaches
the men would have found beneficial as adolescent boys in preventing their
battering behavior.
As the focus of our study was BIPs and not the adult male perpetrators’
own personal histories, we did not wish to threaten their safety by asking
directly about their own childhood experiences. Instead, we added four
questions to the end of our interview guide that asked for suggestions and
advice on preventing dating and relationship violence among boys. The
questions relevant to this analysis are: (1) What do you think boys need to
know about relationships that could help them avoid violence in the future?
(2) What needs in terms of preventing IPV might boys have that we should
address? (3) What messages about IPV would be helpful for boys? (4) What
kinds of programs geared towards non-violence and safety do you think boys
would best respond to? A total of 49 men were interviewed with the revised
guide. The current article presents the sub-analytic results from these
questions.
The same investigator, a PhD trained anthropologist, conducted all of the
interviews in a private space provided by the BIP, or via the telephone. Each
interview lasted between 45 and 90 minutes. Verbal consent for participation
in the study was obtained prior to each interview. The institutional review
board at the University of Pittsburgh approved this study.

Analysis
All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim by a trained
transcriptionist. Interview data were organized in Atlas.ti, a qualitative
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 183

data management program, and a two-coder iterative approach was used

to analyze the data. Analysis focused on content coding of the four key
questions to identify thematic categories and subcategories across all
participant types. The first author and a qualitatively trained research
assistant each independently reviewed the relevant sections of the tran-
scripts line-by-line to identify preliminary codes. The coders then met to
compare codes and refine each, creating hierarchical categories of themes
and sub-themes. Definitions were delineated for each major and minor
theme to assist in the final coding step. The two coders then independently
recoded the transcripts using the codebook, and met once more to recon-
cile any differences if needed. Reported responses are those that arose
consistently across participants.

Results
Our results yielded five main thematic categories: (a) messages about healthy
relationship behaviors, (b) the need to promote respect for women, (c)
teaching effective skills for communicating and managing anger, (d) pro-
grams that provide mentorship and are situated within education, and (e)
addressing the impact of witnessing and experiencing violence victimization
as a child.

Messages about healthy relationship behaviors

In terms of relationships, our participants believed that boys needed to know
four key things: what constitutes a healthy relationship; what behaviors are
dangerous or inappropriate in relationships; that relationships were not easy
all of the time; and that relationships take time to develop.
Our participants believed that boys needed to be taught about healthy
relationships. “I think that people need to be put in their lives to show them
how a healthy relationship is. I think that they need to understand that.”
They felt that prevention aimed at boys needed to provide information on
how individuals in a healthy relationship act. “A relationship builder, there
are not too many programs that will teach you different ways that you can
conduct yourself in a relationship.” Additionally, our participants felt that
boys needed to be taught to recognize unhealthy behaviors in relationships
that could lead to violence. For example, one participant described needing
to recognize persistent conflict as a warning sign that the relationship was
potentially volatile. “I mean if the relationship is about fighting and arguing,
then move on, or get help or something. Don’t keep putting yourself in that
same situation.” Another similarly stated, “If you find yourself in an aggres-
sive, argumentative relationship then obviously you need to look at
184 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

yourself … if that’s not working for you, then you need to leave the relation-
ship. I would say just some information on healthy relationships.”
In particular, however, the men universally identified control as an inap-
propriate and dangerous behavior in relationships. They believed that boys
might not understand that control is a form of abuse. “Controlling is a form
of abuse and a lot of people don’t know, just kind of making them aware of
that because they may not understand that it’s wrong.” Thus, boys needed
guidance in understanding that control was not a part of a healthy relation-
ship. “You can’t control somebody. I’d advise them that ‘Hey man, she’s
going to do what she wants to do. That’s the way it is. You can’t control it.’”
Some framed it from their own personal experiences and the negative con-
sequences they suffered because of their actions:

Whenever I was in a relationship I definitely was controlling. Now, I don’t want to

force anybody into doing stuff they don’t want to do. I think that’s something that
would be helpful is to let them know here’s what happens if you keep doing this.

Another man, reflecting on his own violent behavior that got him arrested,
summarized:

They [boys] can’t control other people. That is the major thing that causes
situations like this to occur. You can’t always have it your way. So, just if you
can teach them early about not being the control of other people that will help out
a lot in my opinion.

Our participants also universally identified the need to help boys under-
stand that relationships were not always easy, and often required work. In
particular, the men felt that portrayals of relationships in the media set up
young boys to enter into relationships with highly romanticized notions of
how relationships work. “Pop culture puts a lot of farfetched ideas into
people’s heads, like fairytales and princesses and knights. I think a lot of
people, including me, go into reltionships having expectations that can’t be
fulfilled.” As such, boys often have a distorted view on relationships.
“Relationships. I think they have to know how they see relationships because
the media and the TV have made it such that they can’t see what is good and
bad.” Therefore, the men felt that boys often missed the work required to
maintain relationships. “They see romantic stuff and all that and that is what
they expect but it goes beyond flowers, dates, and all that. The work you put
into it is what they miss.” In order to promote healthy, long-lasting relation-
ships, boys had to have a realistic understanding of relationships and the
work required to maintain them. Thus, emphasizing that relationships
require work was one of the messages endorsed by our participants. “They
need to know relationships are hard work. If they’re looking for it to be easy,
it’s going to be a disposable relationship.” As another participant summar-
ized, “They need to know that a relationship is not 50/50—its both people
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 185

putting in 100%. They need to know that when you take two imperfect
people and you put them together, you do not get perfection.”
Finally, the men felt that many young people rush into relationships and
do not take the time to get to know their partners, something that has the
potential to lead to conflicts. As one participant stated:
You get caught up in feelings, I know I did, and don’t let your head have enough
time to digest some of the conversations. You overlook things that you don’t like,
hoping your partner will change later on in life. And when it doesn’t happen?
Trouble ensues.

Thus, our participants felt it was also necessary for boys to hear unequi-
vocally that relationships should take time to develop. “Let them know that it
is good to take a long time to get to know each other, really get to know the
person before you get into the relationship.” Another participant added, “Be
careful picking your partner. Don’t be in a rush. See where they are at. Then
decide, yes I want a long term relationship with this person.” Furthermore,
boys needed to know that they had plenty of time to make relationship
choices, and that an emphasis needed to be placed on waiting until they
were emotionally mature. “They need to know to go slow, wait until they
older to get married, to settle down, to have a family. Make sure that they are
ready to settle down.” Another participant summarized:
Don’t jump off into a relationship until you are ready. Young men say I’m ready.
You think you are ready but you don’t know what you are getting into. Get to
know yourself more, get to know the person you are courting more. Learn as much
as you can.

Promoting respect for women

Our participants believed that IPV prevention targeting boys needed to
promote respect and equality for women. At minimum, the men felt that
such programs should endorse a zero-tolerance policy for physical violence
against women. As one man offered, “You tell them you never hit a woman.
That is the number one rule. You never hit a woman. Tell kids you don’t hit
women; you tell them physical contact? There should be none.” Another man
similarly stated, “The first thing to learn. You do not hit a girl. Don’t
physically abuse a girl.” The men recognized how being violent had created
problems in their own lives and therefore felt that boys needed to understand
that violence was not productive. “I would say you got to start out young, you
got to teach them from second grade, teach them that violence against
women, there’s nothing good can come for it.”
Beyond this, however, the men felt primary prevention needed to address
some of the underlying reasons why men might use violence. Some partici-
pants described the need to address messages that men receive from society
186 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

about their presumed dominance. As one man stated, “Society says that men
are the dominant person. It should be 50/50 and if they can learn that early,
that you’re not better than a woman just because you’re a guy, that would be
an opening.” Similarly, another stated, “Society has kind of made it seem that
the man has to be this and that. It’s too easy to get caught in those male
patterns of dominance. I think would be helpful to address that.” Other men
described the need to address general attitudes of disrespect towards women:
Young boys need to know that women are not meat. I’ve noticed that young men
today think that’s what women are—I would like to teach them, ‘Hey look, women
are not meat; they are not to be used. They are not on this planet to serve you and
service you. They are equals.’ Respect them.

Either way, participants felt that these prevailing attitudes made it easy for
men to excuse their behavior; and thus, boys needed to understand that they
were not entitled to be violent. As one man summarized:
I think unfortunately [society] tells young men that they are the dominant one and
they have a right to be violent, they have a right to treat women however they
want. You need to tell them that they don’t have a right to do that. I think that is
the type of message I would try to get through.

Teaching skills for communication and managing anger

Our participants believed that young boys needed to learn effective ways to
communicate and manage anger. In general, they believed that males are not
very effective at communicating feelings, and as such they suppress their
anger and allow their emotions to escalate. “I would talk to them about
handling their problems and not holding it in. When anger builds up and
you hold it in, and it finally comes out, it is worse than you think it is going
to be.” Participants, therefore, felt that boys needed to find ways to positively
express their feelings. One man related this issue back to his own personal
experiences and described the need for positive outlets:
Young boys need an outlet. I know if I had an outlet to get my anger out it would
have been different. I didn’t have any way to get my anger out, so it just built up
and built up until one little thing and “pow!” Then your life is changed.

Another endorsed the need to find ways to verbally express feelings before
they become explosive. “Don’t let your anger build up, find ways to get stuff
off your chest, talk about it, because when you don’t it builds up. And when
you finally blow up, it is like a bomb.” Learning to safely express anger was
therefore seen as vital to preventing violent situations:
Learning to sit down, work things out, say this is what is bothering you and talk
about what you can do differently, that’s how you can change this [violence]. They
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 187

need to learn how to effectively get their point across by talking with someone …
instead of violence.

Teaching boys skills for managing anger was also seen as a key component
of prevention. Some participants felt that boys needed to be taught to identify
the warning signs leading up to volatile situations. “I believe there wouldn’t
be as much domestic violence and just violence in general if they learned
young in their life the signals before you explode and get yourself into a lot of
trouble.” Other men endorsed strategies they had learned through their court
mandated group programs. One man described “taking a time out,” “They
need tools, like the ones that are being taught here. Instead of resorting to
violence, learn to remove yourself from the situation, take a time out, and let
things cool down.” Another described “counting to ten,” “They need to learn
to count to ten and walk away. Don’t try to address the problem when it is
heated because it is too easy to lose your cool. It is too easy to do something
you’ll regret.” Thus, participants felt that boys needed the skills to recognize
anger, heed the warning signs, and deescalate the situation before it turns
violent. One participant, in thinking about his own son, summarized:
I have a son right now of the age of 11 and I think the tools these programs teach
are great because for one, it helps you learn self-control and ways to get through
life without doing stuff that don’t need to be done. If more kids would learn about
like these classes and how to control their tempers now, I believe there wouldn’t be
as much domestic violence and just violence in general.

Mentoring and school programs

Participants offered two suggestions for designing primary prevention pro-
grams: mentoring programs that provided boys with a positive male role
model, and school-based programs that targeted boys as early as possible. In
terms of positive role modeling, our participants drawing from their own
experiences as children asserted that many boys grow up without men in
their lives who can model appropriate behavior. One participant shared his
own experiences growing up without a father and how that shaped his views
on relationships. “The typical upbringing, I never really had even a remote
view of that. My father left immediately after I was born, so I never really got
to see what that kind of [healthy] relationship should look like.” Another
described how, even though his father was present, he still was left without a
positive role model. “My dad never took me aside and told me any of this,
actions speak louder than words, what you see is more of what you’ll do.”
Thus, the men felt boys needed positive mentors who could model appro-
priate relationship behaviors. “Younger kids need an older dude around,
because when dad ain’t around, you start making things up as you go.
Someone around to say, ‘No don’t hit that woman, don’t do this, or that,
188 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

you’re going the wrong route.’” Participants believed that a mentorship style
program could provide boys with role models whom they could emulate.
“Some kind of mentor, something like that, a person, a role model, people to
look up to.” However, they strongly felt that for such a program to be
successful men would need to be involved. “A mentor program for young
boys. Men will have to get involved. Men who are married who can treat
their wives with respect and as an equal. These boys need to see that.” They,
therefore, felt it was important to incorporate the opportunity to connect
with men who could serve as a positive example in programs for boys:
I would like to see a lot more mentorship programs with men of respectability
reaching out to boys and young men, that they can look at them and say they
respect them, he is doing the right thing. I respect his character … mentorship
programming for sure.

Participants also almost universally expressed the belief that if they had
learned about IPV sooner, it would have helped them to avoid their own issues
with violence. As one man expressed, “If I had known, if I had taken that class
before, I would have acted differently. I wish it would be inculcated into school
programs where everyone would have to know it before they graduate.” Thus,
participants believed that one way to reach boys sooner and teach them about
violence was through the school system. Another similarly expressed:
It should be mandatory in high school. It would help to realize at a younger age,
‘Ok, I’m not seeing this woman but I am still trying to control her.’ Nobody was
ever told that. You don’t learn that. I didn’t. I never understood control, that’s
abuse, it would have done me a lot better had I learned this 40 years ago.

Furthermore, participants felt that schools needed to make an effort to

reach boys before they start dating. “I think if they can learn about that [IPV]
at an early age, like getting the information out to them in school before they
are dating, start having something to show them.” Similarly, another parti-
cipant offered, “I would start around 13, if you get them in their life at an
early age it will stick, before they are dating and situations pop-up.” Thus, the
participants felt that some form of school program that targeted boys early
on would be helpful in preventing future violence. As another participant
summarized, “You need to get them at an earlier age. They should teach it in
school. Like downgrade the [program] and teach it in school, what signs to
look for and what not to do.”

Experiencing violence? The unasked question

The purpose of this sub-analysis was to explore the perspectives of men, who
had perpetrated IPV as adults, on what they believed were necessary compo-
nents for primary prevention of IPV perpetration for boys. Thus, we did not
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 189

expressly ask our participants about their own personal experiences with
violence in their childhood homes. However, during our analysis, we none-
theless found a fifth theme in the data that hinted at the possible exposure to
IPV the men in this study may have had as children. To better understand
our results and place their significance in a broader context, a presentation of
this “unasked question” is warranted.
In speaking with the men about violence prevention among boys, many
framed their responses to our questions in terms of their own personal
experiences as adults. More compelling, however, was that participants also
often referenced, either directly or indirectly, experiences as a child witness
or victim of violence, and described how those experiences had shaped their
behaviors. For example, when explaining why he felt putting violence pre-
vention in schools was necessary, one participant stated:

I grew up with a controlling parent and control is a form of abuse. People don’t
know that, so making them aware because they may be experiencing things at
home and not understand that it’s wrong and so school is the only place you are
going to get to people.

Another participant, when asked about what boys needed to know about
relationships, offered, “You see, my dad was a physically and verbally abusive
alcoholic. That is the way I was raised, that is what I thought was normal and
I carried it into my relationship.” When asked why he endorsed programs
that promoted “zero-tolerance,” one man disclosed witnessing his father’s
violence, “I saw my dad beat my mom. I made a promise to myself in the first
grade that I was never gonna do this. I never thought that this would
happen.” Another explained his perspective on why young boys might need
to learn skills to manage and cope with their anger:

I witnessed my stepdad abuse my mom and I ain’t even going to make no excuse
for myself. I can’t take it back. People will argue, it’s how you react to the
argument, that’s what’s going to count. How I chose to react during that argument
is what counts.

Sadly, another participant, in explaining why he felt boys needed positive

role models, described his brutal experiences as a child victim, “I was beat
unmercifully I don’t know how many times. I remember feeling like an
animal. My dad would trap me and I couldn’t get out. He hit all of us. It
was all I knew.”
Other participants did not directly disclose violence in the home; instead,
they framed their responses to our questions about prevention through an
etiological explanation of intimate partner violence. For example, one parti-
cipant, when asked about the messages that boys might need, framed his
response in terms of counteracting what happens in the family, “I think that
as children grow up, if their parents are violent and arguing all the time, I
190 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

think they learn from that. And that’s what they’re gonna do. So I think it
starts with the family home.” Another participant, in explaining why he felt
that learning about healthy relationships was important for boys, stated,
“You have a lot of kids that see domestic [violence] in their house. The
kids grow up with it and they feel like it is ok to do because they’ve seen dad
do this.” Similarly, a different participant explained, “Well young boys see
their parents doing it, so I think is what leads to that situation when they get
older because that’s how they know how to handle a situation.” Thus, the
idea that violence originates in the home was a common one, and it was
repeatedly offered, either directly or indirectly, as a context for our partici-
pants’ responses regarding the prevention of violence among boys.

Discussion
As part of our 2-year ethnographic study of intervention programs for adult
male perpetrators, we utilized our interviews with men convicted of an IPV
crime to explore their perspectives on what primary prevention approaches
would be best suited for boys. They were supportive of approaches that could
help teach boys to develop healthy relationships and learn ways to cope with
their emotions. Additionally, they endorsed the use of role modeling style
programs and programs that could be offered through schools. Our findings
have significance for thinking about what key components of prevention
might be effective for reaching boys, and in particular, for identifying com-
ponents that might be especially salient for young boys most at-risk for
future violence perpetration—those who are experiencing violence in the
home.
Having “been there,” our participants framed their responses in context of
their experiences as adult perpetrators involved in a BIP, and endorsed
approaches that were consistent with some of the knowledge, messages,
and interpersonal skills that such programs promote (Price & Rosenbaum,
2009). First, our participants identified the need for prevention efforts that
educate young boys on how to recognize both healthy and unhealthy (i.e.,
abusive) relationship behaviors. As we have described elsewhere, adult male
perpetrators of IPV report entering into batterer intervention programs with
a limited understanding of IPV and leave having gained a more nuanced
understanding of what constitutes abuse. Our participants endorsing this
particular approach for young boys is therefore not surprising; nonetheless,
this advice being derived from their participation in a BIP is telling. It speaks
to the lack of awareness many young boys, particularly those like our
participants who may be experiencing violence in the home, have in regards
to what a healthy relationship might look like and the continued need for
prevention approaches to address this. Indeed, many prevention programs
include components that address variations on healthy relationships, or
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 191

increasing knowledge of IPV by identifying and defining abusive behaviors

(Foshee et al., 1996; Jones and Levy, 1991; Lavoie, Vézina, Piché, & Boivin,
1995; Miller et al., 2012; Wolfe et al., 2003, 2009). Evaluations of the these
programs have, for the most part, shown promising results in regards to
increased knowledge of IPV (Foshee et al., 1998; Jones et al., 1991; Lavoie
et al., 1995; Macgowan, 1997; Wolfe et al., 2003, 2009). Our study supports
prevention efforts that address IPV knowledge, and provides evidence that
increasing awareness and understanding of IPV may be part of the constella-
tion of program components needed for effective prevention that can reduce
perpetrator behavior.
Second, beyond simply teaching young boys how to identify abusive
behaviors, our participants also identified the societal influences, such as
the media, that help to shape men’s relationship behaviors, as well as their
attitudes and beliefs towards their partners. Many prevention and interven-
tion mechanisms, including BIPs, do address IPV attitudes and beliefs more
generally (Avery-Leaf et al., 1997; Foshee et al., 1996; Jones and Levy, 1991;
Lavoie et al., 1995), and the larger societal messages about gender roles and
gender equity (Avery-Leaf et al., 1997; Foshee et al., 1996; Miller et al., 2012;
Reyes et al., 2016; Wolfe et al., 2003). A growing body of global health
literature on engaging men and boys in stopping violence against women
emphasizes addressing gender equity and power imbalances as a core com-
ponent of IPV prevention (and gender-based violence more broadly; United
Nations Population Fund, 2010; World Health Organization, 2007). While
such ‘gender transformative’ programming is not widespread in the United
States (Katz, Heisterkamp, & Fleming, 2011; Miller et al., 2012), our study
suggests that men recognize that reducing IPV perpetration should involve
not only addressing interpersonal relationship behaviors but should also go
beyond general IPV attitudes and beliefs to address the underlying societal
representations, messages, and culture that shape attitudes about gender,
power, and violence. Our study, therefore, speaks to the potential effective-
ness of ‘gender transformative’ approaches for young boys and men. On the
other hand, there has been relatively little research on how the media
influences beliefs and attitudes on IPV (Manganello, 2008), and virtually
no prevention programs that have specifically targeted media messages in
their approach. Thus, the extent to which such influences are responsible for
shaping young boys and men’s behaviors is unknown. Our study suggests
that intervention programs and prevention research may need to examine the
media as an area of social influence more explicitly.
Yet as Whitaker, Murphy, Eckhardt, Hodges, and Cowart (2013) have
argued, while increasing knowledge and improving attitudes towards IPV is
important, such outcomes do not necessarily translate to long-term beha-
vioral changes. The question then becomes what is needed to promote both
attitude and behavioral change, and effectively minimize the potential for
192 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

IPV perpetration. One avenue for this, as our study suggests, is in the
combination of intervention components that address healthy relationships
and IPV knowledge and attitudes, and skills for conflict resolution, effective
communication, and anger management. Such an approach is common
among BIPs (Dalton, 2007; Price & Rosenbaum, 2009); however, there are
only a handful of prevention programs for young boys that include some
combination of either healthy relationships or IPV knowledge and attitudes,
and skills for conflict resolution, effective communication, or anger manage-
ment (Avery-Leaf et al., 1997; Foshee et al., 1996; Jones et al., 1991; Levy,
1984; Schwartz, Magee, Griffin, & Dupuis, 2004; Taylor et al., 2010). While
almost all of these studies have found positive improvements in IPV knowl-
edge and attitudes, only a couple have rigorously tested for both behavioral
and attitudes, knowledge, and belief outcomes (Foshee et al., 2004; Taylor
et al., 2010); and only the study by Foshee et al. (2004) demonstrated both a
reduction in perpetrator behaviors, and improvements in beliefs regarding
IPV. It is therefore unclear to what extent programs that combine such
components might be more effective for promoting positive behavioral out-
comes; nonetheless this study suggests that a greater emphasis needs to be
paid to devising studies that can test both sets of desired outcomes, and in
particular measures that capture reductions in perpetrator behavior.
Our participants also endorsed approaches that were reflective of their
own experiences as child witnesses, or victims, of violence in the home. They
recommended programs that are school-based and utilize a positive role
model approach, and framed these approaches as ways to counteract what
boys might be learning at home about violent behaviors. School-based
programs for IPV prevention are plentiful (Avery-Leaf et al., 1997; Foshee
et al., 1998; Jaycox et al., 2006; Jones and Levy, 1991; Lavoie et al., 1995;
Taylor et al., 2010; Weisz & Black, 2001; Wolfe et al., 2009). Efficacy of
school-based programs, however, has been mixed (Avery-Leaf et al., 1997;
Jaycox et al., 2006; Jones and Levy, 1991; Macgowan, 1997; Meraviglia et al.,
2003; Taylor et al., 2010; Weisz & Black, 2001), and it is unclear from these
studies if the effect is mediated by the program itself or the location of its
delivery. Our participants noting that schools were one of the only places
where students experiencing violence in their homes might be reached is
telling. It suggests that young boys may view school as a “safe space” in
contrast to the home or community environments they live in, and thus a
place where they may be receptive and willing to engage in prevention.
Schools, therefore, may in fact be a place to reach adolescents most at risk
of violence perpetration before they begin intimate partnerships.
On the other hand, there is limited information on the impact that role
modeling has on IPV perpetration (Reed et al., 2008). In their study of the
socio-environmental contexts of adolescents who have perpetrated IPV, Reed
et al. (2008) found that their participants often cited emulating the negative
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 193

behaviors towards women they witness from their fathers, step-fathers,

brothers, and peers. Likewise, our participants reported that witnessing, or
being the victim of, violence as a child ultimately shaped their behaviors.
Thus, men do often learn IPV behaviors from the other men in their lives.
Currently, however, the most proximate prevention mechanisms to role
modeling style programs are what are known as bystander interventions;
these programs utilize peers and athletic coaches to model prosocial beha-
viors toward dating and sexual violence. While these programs have had
success in reducing perpetration (Coker et al., 2014; Miller et al., 2013; Taylor
et al., 2013), they do not necessarily include the kind of one-on-one role
modeling our participants suggest and may not be appropriate for indivi-
duals, like our participants, who are witnessing, or victimized by, violence in
their daily lives. Therefore, our study suggests that some adolescents, parti-
cularly those experiencing violence in the home, may need more individua-
lized, one-on-one experiences that include a variety of “safe spaces” where
they can access a trustworthy, positive adult from whom they can receive
guidance. Thus, a key finding from our study is that prevention approaches
may need to be tailored to meet the needs of adolescents and their experi-
ences, and to pay particular attention to identifying young people for whom
violence is an everyday occurrence.
Finally, our participants often framed their thoughts on prevention within
an etiological explanation of violence as a behavior learned at home. While
we cannot say for certain that all of our participants were speaking from
personal experiences as child witnesses or victims, there is nonetheless strong
support for their belief that exposure to IPV in the home is associated with
future perpetration (Ehrensaft et al., 2003; Manchikanti Gómez, 2011; Singh,
Tolman, Walton, Chermack, & Cunningham, 2014; Smith et al., 2015).
Currently there is only one prevention program that explicitly is designed
for youth exposed to violence (Rosenbluth, 2002). Preliminary evaluations of
this program have shown some success in terms of increased knowledge of
IPV and healthy relationship skills among participants (Ball, Kerig, &
Rosenbluth, 2009; Ball et al., 2012); however, to what extent this program
has a positive impact on reducing IPV behaviors is still unknown. Our
research suggests that prevention approaches targeting young people need
to address the issue of violence in the home directly, and find ways to work
with children and youth to increase resiliency and to learn healthier inter-
personal interactions.

Limitations
This study has several limitations. First, our participants were solicited for
their thoughts and perceptions on what prevention mechanisms are needed
for young boys in the context of a broader exploration of their opinions on
194 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

BIPs. Thus, it is unknown how participants’ responses would have differed

had they not been participating in a BIP, or had been recruited through a
different context. Nonetheless, that our participants found something mean-
ingful in their time at the BIP and were able to reflect upon that experience as
a learning process suggests that both the components of BIPs and prevention
efforts they endorsed may be those that are particularly salient for individuals
at high risk for perpetration. Next, our study was limited only to men who
had perpetrated IPV against female partners. Thus, our findings may not be
generalizable to other populations’ perspectives on the prevention of perpe-
tration behaviors (e.g., female or LGBTQ perpetrators). This study was also
conducted in a single county, among only two participating community-
based BIPs. Thus, our findings may only be relevant to the social context of
our region. Additionally, it is common in qualitative research for participants
to exhibit social desirability bias in their responses; thus, it is unclear to what
extent our participants’ responded to the interview questions in ways that
would be viewed more positively or socially acceptable. It is also unclear to
what extent those individuals who agreed to participate in the study did so
because they had a positive experience with their program. Thus, our parti-
cipants’ responses may not be reflective of the full range of experiences of
men who attend BIPs. Finally, because we did not collect any identifying
information on our participants, we were not able to compare participants’
responses across race, age, or even socio-economic status. Furthermore, this
limits our research in terms of the ability to compare the characteristics of
our participants to others in similar studies, now or in the future.

Conclusions
Despite these limitations, our findings have implications for primary IPV pre-
vention among young boys. Our participants reported the need for prevention
that addresses attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs about IPV; prosocial skill build-
ing to help young boys learn to positively address and manage their anger; and
promotes IPV education through role modeling and school programs. They
couched their perspectives on prevention through the lens of their own experi-
ences with violence as adults and children, and the need to counteract the
messages about violence boys might be learning at home. These findings suggest
that prevention that utilizes approaches aimed at changing both attitudes
regarding IPV and behaviors might be most effective for reducing perpetration.
Furthermore, prevention efforts need to focus on finding ways to address those
young people most at risk for perpetration and engage them in programs outside
of the home where they can feel safe to explore the challenges occurring in their
daily lives. Finally, greater attention needs to be paid towards prevention among
youth most at risk for IPV, in addition to building and promoting resiliency
among youth experiencing violence in the home.
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 195

Compliance with ethical standards

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible
committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki
Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for
being included in the study.

Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Pennsylvania Coalition against Domestic Violence and
the Women’s Center and Shelter of Greater Pittsburgh for their support.

Funding
Support for this work was made possible by grant funding from the Pennsylvania
Commission on Crime and Delinquency.

References
Avery-Leaf, S., Cascardi, M., O’Leary, K. D., & Cano, A. (1997). Efficacy of a dating violence
prevention program on attitudes justifying aggression. Journal of Adolescent Health, 21(1),
11–17. doi:10.1016/S1054-139X(96)00309-6
Ball, B., Kerig, P. K., & Rosenbluth, B. (2009). Like a family but better because you can
actually trust each other. The expect respect dating violence prevention program for at-risk
youth. Health Promotion Practice, 10(1 suppl), 45S–58S. doi:10.1177/1524839908322115
Ball, B., Tharp, A. T., Noonan, R. K., Valle, L. A., Hamburger, M. E., & Rosenbluth, B. (2012).
Expect respect support groups preliminary evaluation of a dating violence prevention
program for at-risk youth. Violence Against Women, 18(7), 746–762. doi:10.1177/
1077801212455188
Capaldi, D. M., Dishion, T. J., Stoolmiller, M., & Yoerger, K. (2001). Aggression toward
female partners by at-risk young men: The contribution of male adolescent friendships.
Developmental Psychology, 37(1), 61. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.37.1.61
Carr, M., Lee, L., & Morgan, J. (2005). Coaching boys into men playbook. Washington, DC:
Family Violence Prevention Fund.
Coker, A. L., Fisher, B. S., Bush, H. M., Swan, S. C., Williams, C. M., Clear, E. R., & DeGue, S.
(2015). Evaluation of the Green Dot bystander intervention to reduce interpersonal
violence among college students across three campuses. Violence Against Women, 21(12),
1507–1527.
Dalton, B. (2007). What’s going on out there? A survey of batterer intervention programs.
Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 15(1), 59–74. doi:10.1300/
J146v15n01_04
Ehrensaft, M. K., Cohen, P., Brown, J., Smailes, E., Chen, H., & Johnson, J. G. (2003).
Intergenerational transmission of partner violence: A 20-year prospective study. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71(4), 741. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.71.4.741
196 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

Espelage, D. L., & Holt, M. K. (2007). Dating violence and sexual harassment across the
bully-victim continuum among middle and high school students. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 36(6), 799–811. doi:10.1007/s10964-006-9109-7
Falb, K. L., McCauley, H. L., Decker, M. R., Gupta, J., Raj, A., & Silverman, J. G. (2011).
School bullying perpetration and other childhood risk factors as predictors of adult
intimate partner violence perpetration. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 165
(10), 890–894. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2011.91
Florsheim, P., McArthur, L., Hudak, C., Heavin, S., & Burrow-Sanchez, J. (2011). The young
parenthood program: Preventing intimate partner violence between adolescent mothers
and young fathers. Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy, 10(2), 117–134. doi:10.1080/
15332691.2011.562823
Foshee, V., Linder, G., Bauman, K., Langwick, S., Arriaga, X., Heath, J., McMahon, P.; &
Bangdiwala, S. (1996). The Safe Dates Project: Theoretical basis, evaluation design, and
selected baseline findings. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 12(5 Suppl), 39.
Foshee, V. A., Bauman, K. E., Arriaga, X. B., Helms, R. W., Koch, G. G., & Linder, G. F.
(1998). An evaluation of safe dates, an adolescent dating violence prevention program.
American Journal of Public Health, 88(1), 45–50. doi:10.2105/AJPH.88.1.45
Foshee, V. A., Bauman, K. E., Ennett, S. T., Linder, G. F., Benefield, T., & Suchindran, C.
(2004). Assessing the long-term effects of the Safe Dates program and a booster in
preventing and reducing adolescent dating violence victimization and perpetration.
American Journal of Public Health, 94(4), 619–624. doi:10.2105/AJPH.94.4.619
Foshee, V. A., Reyes, H. L. M., Vivolo-Kantor, A. M., Basile, K. C., Chang, L.-Y., Faris, R., &
Ennett, S. T. (2014). Bullying as a longitudinal predictor of adolescent dating violence.
Journal of Adolescent Health, 55(3), 439–444. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.03.004
Jaycox, L. H., McCaffrey, D., Eiseman, B., Aronoff, J., Shelley, G. A., Collins, R. L., &
Marshall, G. N. (2006). Impact of a school-based dating violence prevention program
among Latino teens: Randomized controlled effectiveness trial. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 39(5), 694–704. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.05.002
Jones, L., & Levy, B. (1991). The Minnesota school curriculum project: A statewide domestic
violence prevention project in secondary schools. Dating Violence: Young Women in
Danger, 258–266.
Katz, J., Heisterkamp, H. A., & Fleming, W. M. (2011). The social justice roots of the mentors
in violence prevention model and its application in a high school setting. Violence Against
Women, 17(6), 684–702. doi:10.1177/1077801211409725
Lavoie, F., Vézina, L., Piché, C., & Boivin, M. (1995). Evaluation of a prevention program for
violence in teen dating relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10(4), 516–524.
doi:10.1177/088626095010004009
Levy, B. (1984). Skills for violence-free relationships: Curriculum for young people, ages 13–18.
Santa Monica, CA: The Coalition.
Macgowan, M. J. (1997). An evaluation of a dating violence prevention program for middle
school students. Violence and Victims, 12(3), 223–235.
Manchikanti Gómez, A. (2011). Testing the cycle of violence hypothesis: Child abuse and
adolescent dating violence as predictors of intimate partner violence in young adulthood.
Youth & Society, 43(1), 171–192.
Manganello, J. A. (2008). Teens, Dating Violence, and Media Use A Review of the Literature
and Conceptual Model for Future Research. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 9(1), 3–18.
Meraviglia, M. G., Becker, H., Rosenbluth, B., Sanchez, E., & Robertson, T. (2003). The expect
respect project: Creating a positive elementary school climate. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 18(11), 1347–1360. doi:10.1177/0886260503257457
 JOURNAL OF AGGRESSION, MALTREATMENT & TRAUMA 197

Miller, E., Breslau, J., Chung, W. J., Green, J. G., McLaughlin, K. A., & Kessler, R. C. (2011).
Adverse childhood experiences and risk of physical violence in adolescent dating
relationships. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 65, 1006–1013.
doi:10.1136/jech.2009.105429
Miller, E., Tancredi, D. J., McCauley, H. L., Decker, M. R., Virata, M. C. D., Anderson,
H. A., … Silverman, J. G. (2013). One-year follow-up of a coach-delivered dating violence
prevention program: A cluster randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine, 45(1), 108–112. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.03.007
Miller, E., Tancredi, D. J., McCauley, H. L., Decker, M. R., Virata, M. C. D., Anderson,
H. A., … Silverman, J. G. (2012). “Coaching boys into men”: A cluster-randomized
controlled trial of a dating violence prevention program. Journal of Adolescent Health, 51
(5), 431–438. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.01.018
Morrison, P. K., Cluss, P. A., Miller, E. P., Fleming, R., Hawker, L., Bicehouse, T.,… Chang, J.
(2016a). Elements needed for quality batterer intervention programs: Perspectives of
professionals who deal with intimate partner violence. Journal of Family Violence, 1–11.
Morrison, P. K., Cluss, P. A., Miller, E. P., Fleming, R., Hawker, L., Bicehouse, T.,… Chang, J.
(2016b). The operational challenges for batterer intervention programs results from a
2-year study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 0886260516662307.
Pepler, D. J., Craig, W. M., Connolly, J. A., Yuile, A., McMaster, L., & Jiang, D. (2006). A
developmental perspective on bullying. Aggressive Behavior, 32(4), 376–384. doi:10.1002/
(ISSN)1098-2337
Price, B. J., & Rosenbaum, A. (2009). Batterer intervention programs: A report from the field.
Violence and Victims, 24(6), 757–770. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.24.6.757
Reed, E. (2008). Intimate partner violence: A gender-based issue? American Journal of Public
Health, 98(2), 197. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2007.125765
Reed, E., Silverman, J. G., Raj, A., Rothman, E. F., Decker, M. R., Gottlieb, B. R., … Miller, E.
(2008). Social and environmental contexts of adolescent and young adult male perpetrators
of intimate partner violence: A qualitative study. American Journal of Men’s Health, 2,
260–271. doi:10.1177/1557988308318863
Reyes, H. L. M., Foshee, V. A., Niolon, P. H., Reidy, D. E., & Hall, J. E. (2016). Gender role
attitudes and male adolescent dating violence perpetration: Normative beliefs as
moderators. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45(2), 350–360. doi:10.1007/s10964-015-
0278-0
Rosenbluth, B. (2002). Expect respect: A school-based program promoting safe and healthy
relationships for youth. Austin, TX: SafePlace.
Schwartz, J. P., Magee, M. M., Griffin, L. D., & Dupuis, C. W. (2004). Effects of a group
preventive intervention on risk and protective factors related to dating violence. Group
Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 8(3), 221. doi:10.1037/1089-2699.8.3.221
Simon, T. R., Miller, S., Gorman-Smith, D., Orpinas, P., & Sullivan, T. (2010). Physical dating
violence norms and behavior among sixth-grade students from four US sites. The Journal
of Early Adolescence, 30(3), 395–409. doi:10.1177/0272431609333301
Singh, V., Tolman, R., Walton, M., Chermack, S., & Cunningham, R. (2014). Characteristics
of men who perpetrate intimate partner violence. The Journal of the American Board of
Family Medicine, 27(5), 661–668. doi:10.3122/jabfm.2014.05.130247
Smith, C. A., Greenman, S. J., Thornberry, T. P., Henry, K. L., & Ireland, T. O. (2015).
Adolescent risk for intimate partner violence perpetration. Prevention Science, 16(6),
862–872. doi:10.1007/s11121-015-0560-0
Stein, N. D., Mennemeier, K., Russ, N., & Taylor, B. (2012). Shifting boundaries: Lessons on
relationships for students in middle school. Retrieved from http://www.wcwonline.org/proj/
datingviolence/ShiftingBoundaries.pdf.
198 P. K. MORRISON ET AL.

Swahn, M. H., Simon, T. R., Arias, I., & Bossarte, R. M. (2008). Measuring sex differences in
violence victimization and perpetration within date and same-sex peer relationships.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(8), 1120–1138. doi:10.1177/0886260508314086
Taylor, B., Stein, N., & Burden, F. (2010). The effects of gender violence/harassment preven-
tion programming in middle schools: A randomized experimental evaluation. Violence and
Victims, 25(2), 202–223. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.25.2.202
Taylor, B. G., Stein, N. D., Mumford, E. A., & Woods, D. (2013). Shifting boundaries: An
experimental evaluation of a dating violence prevention program in middle schools.
Prevention Science, 14(1), 64–76. doi:10.1007/s11121-012-0293-2
Temple, J. R., Shorey, R. C., Tortolero, S. R., Wolfe, D. A., & Stuart, G. L. (2013). Importance
of gender and attitudes about violence in the relationship between exposure to interpar-
ental violence and the perpetration of teen dating violence. Child Abuse & Neglect, 37(5),
343–352. doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.02.001
United Nations Population Fund. (2010). Engaging men and boys in gender equality and
health. New York, NY: Promundo.
Weisz, A. N., & Black, B. M. (2001). Evaluating a sexual assault and dating violence preven-
tion program for urban youths. Social Work Research, 25(2), 89–100. doi:10.1093/swr/
25.2.89
Whitaker, D. J., Murphy, C. M., Eckhardt, C. I., Hodges, A. E., & Cowart, M. (2013).
Effectiveness of primary prevention efforts for intimate partner violence. Partner Abuse,
4(2), 175–195. doi:10.1891/1946-6560.4.2.175
Williams, T. S., Connolly, J., Pepler, D., Craig, W., & Laporte, L. (2008). Risk models of
dating aggression across different adolescent relationships: A developmental psychopathol-
ogy approach. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76(4), 622. doi:10.1037/0022-
006X.76.4.622
Wolfe, D. A., Crooks, C., Jaffe, P., Chiodo, D., Hughes, R., Ellis, W., … Donner, A. (2009). A
school-based program to prevent adolescent dating violence: A cluster randomized trial.
Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 163(8), 692–699. doi:10.1001/
archpediatrics.2009.69
Wolfe, D. A., Wekerle, C., Scott, K., Straatman, A.-L., Grasley, C., & Reitzel-Jaffe, D. (2003).
Dating violence prevention with at-risk youth: A controlled outcome evaluation. Journal of
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71(2), 279–291. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.71.2.279
Wolitzky-Taylor, K. B., Ruggiero, K. J., Danielson, C. K., Resnick, H. S., Hanson, R. F., Smith,
D. W., … Kilpatrick, D. G. (2008). Prevalence and correlates of dating violence in a
national sample of adolescents. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent
Psychiatry, 47(7), 755–762. doi:10.1097/CHI.0b013e318172ef5f
Wood, S. L., & Sommers, M. S. (2011). Consequences of intimate partner violence on child
witnesses: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric
Nursing, 24(4), 223–236. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6171.2011.00302.x
World Health Organization. (2007). Engaging men and boys in changing gender-based
inequity in health: Evidence from programme interventions. Geneva, Switzerland: World
Health Organization.