Deconstructing the associations between executive functioning, problematic alcohol use and intimate partner aggression: A dyadic analysis

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Problematic drinking and executive functioning deficits are two known risk factors for intimate partner aggression (IPA). However, executive functioning is a multifaceted construct, and it is not clear whether deficits in specific components of executive functioning are differentially associated with IPA perpetration generally and within the context of problematic alcohol use. To address this question, the present study investigated the effects of problematic drinking and components of executive functioning on physical IPA perpetration within a dyadic framework. DESIGN AND METHODS: Participants were 582 heavy drinking couples (total n = 1164) with a recent history of psychological and/or physical IPA recruited from two metropolitan cities in the USA. Multilevel models were used to examine effects within an actor-partner interdependence framework. RESULTS: The highest levels of physical IPA were observed among actors who reported everyday consequences of executive functioning deficits related to emotional dysregulation whose partners were problematic drinkers. However, the association between executive functioning deficits related to emotional dysregulation and IPA was stronger towards partners who were non-problematic drinkers relative to partners who were problematic drinkers. No such effect was found for executive functioning deficits related to behavioural regulation. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Results provide insight into how problematic drinking and specific executive functioning deficits interact dyadically in relation to physical IPA perpetration. [Parrott DJ, Swartout KM, Eckhardt CI, Subramani OS. Deconstructing the associations between executive functioning, problematic alcohol use and intimate partner aggression: A dyadic analysis. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;36:88-96].

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 23 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.