Abstract

Research directed toward profiling an abuser to develop effective treatment modalities should consider the framework for how batterer subtypes were developed. This article evaluates a seminal work in batterer typology for a review of its method and findings. Findings indicate that the formation of batterer subtypes rely on unstable theory and methods: (a) Variables were not held constant, (b) Theoretical constructs lack clarity, (c) There were unclear boundaries for subtypes. A re-evaluation of this particular line of typology research should address the utility and relevance of these batterer subtypes in an effort to address methodological implications that may help profile and treat abusers.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.