Validating measures of emotional abuse with behavioral observations during interpersonal conflict

Abstract

Emotional abuse is a form of intimate partner violence that can have detrimental effects on both individual well-being and relationship outcomes. However, differences in definitions and forms of emotional and psychological abuse have led to difficulties in its measurement. The Multi-Dimensional Measure of Emotional Abuse (MMEA) is an emotional abuse index that differentiates several different forms of psychological abuse. The current study sought to validate subscales of the MMEA by examining their relation to emotionally abusive behavior observed during interpersonal conflict. Additionally, the Conflict Tactics Scale Psychological Aggression scale and its severity subscales (CTS-PA) were compared to the MMEA. Heterosexual couples ( N = 167) participated in a conflict discussion task. Conflict discussions were coded for belligerence, contempt, domineering, and stonewalling behavior. Women completed the MMEA and CTS-PA questionnaire about their own and their partners’ emotional abuse perpetration. Results indicated that the total MMEA score for men and women was associated with belligerence, whereas the CTS-PA total score was associated with women’s contempt. The restricted engulfment subscale was associated with men’s dominance and contempt, and woman’s belligerence. The minor CTS-PA scale was associated with men and women’s contempt, and women’s stonewalling. The severe CTS-PA scale was only associated with women’s contempt. Additionally, we found significant associations between men’s stonewalling and contempt and their partner’s MMEA and CTS-PA subscales. For women, stonewalling was associated with their partner’s restricted engulfment. Men’s hostile withdrawal scale was also associated with their partner’s dominance during the conflict. Our results suggest that the MMEA multi-dimensional subscales appear to capture a wider range specific abusive behaviors compared to the CTS-PA’s severity constructs.

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 — 12 citations exist upstream.

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