THE REVISED CONFLICT TACTICS SCALES CTS2 and CTSPCSlide 2VARIABLES MEASURED BY THE CTSSlide 4Slide 5Slide 6Slide 7THEORETICAL BASIS CONFLICT VERSUS CONFLICT TACTICS DOES NOT MEASURE CONFLICT, EXCEPT BY INFERENCESlide 9Slide 10Slide 11Slide 12 VALIDITY * HIGH DISCLOSURE RATE * CONTENT VALIDITY * CONCURRENT VALIDITY CORRELATION OF PARTNER REPORTS CORRELATION WITH OTHER INSTRUMENTS * CONSTRUCT VALIDITYCTS RATE IS COMPARISON OF CTS WITH GREATER NATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY 18 TIMES NATIONAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN SURVEY 15 TIMES CLIENTS OF COUPLE AND FAMILY THERAPY 4 TIMES NATIONAL CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT DATA SYSTEM 16 TIMES NATIONAL INCIDENCE STUDY OF CHILD ABUSE 8 TIMESSlide 15Slide 16Slide 17Slide 18Slide 19Slide 20Fig. 6. Couple Symmetry Types By Sex of Respondent (All Assaults)Slide 22Slide 23Slide 24CTS23 Full 1THE REVISED CONFLICT TACTICS SCALESCTS2 and CTSPCWHY IT IS IMPORTANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE CTS• Most widely used instrument in family violence research Much of what we know about FV is based on CTS data• The key instrument of the IDVS• Illustrates the importance of measurement in all the sciences• Help you learn about the concepts of reliability and validity of a measure• Sociology of Science Example Illustrates why telescopes were ` bannedSoc 695 Research On Family Violence In World PerspectiveMurray A. StrausCTS23 Full 2WHAT WILL BE COVERED.1. VARIABLES MEASURED BY THE CTS 2. HISTORY OF THE CTS 3. THEORETICAL BASIS 4. MEASUREMENT STRATEGY 5. RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY 6. USES OF THE CTS 7. CRITICISMS OF THE CTS and ATTEMPTS TO BAN THE CTSCTS23 Full 3VARIABLES MEASURED BY THE CTSCTS2 (FOR MEASURING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN MARRIED OR DATING PARTNERS)•PHYSICAL ASSAULT•INJURY•SEXUAL COERCION•PSYCHOLOGICAL AGGRESSION•NEGOTIATIONCTSPC (FOR MEASURING PARENT-T0-CHILD RELATIONSHIPSNon-Violent DisciplinePhysical AssaultMinor = Corporal Punishment, Severe = Physical AbusePsychological AggressionCTS23 Full 4CTS23 Full 5CTS23 Full 6CTS23 Full 7HISTORY OF THE CTS * QUALITATIVE EXPLORATION (1970-71)ACTS, VOCABULARY, MEANING * FORM A (1971-72)STUDENT RESPONDENT STUDYILLUSTRATES REPLICATION FOR SEVERAL ROLES * FORM N 1975 NATIONAL FAMILY VIOLENCE SURVEY R 1985 NATIONAL FAMILY VIOLENCE SURVEY MANY MODIFICATIONS BY OTHERSREVISED CTS• CTS2, 1996• CTSPC, 1998• ADULT-RECALL/CHILD-REPORT VERSIONS, 1999• SHORT FORMS 2004•MANY STUDIES300+ IN BIBLIOGRAPHY5+ PUBLISHED PER MONTHCTS23 Full 8THEORETICAL BASISCONFLICT VERSUS CONFLICT TACTICSDOES NOT MEASURE CONFLICT, EXCEPT BY INFERENCECTS23 Full 94. MEASUREMENT STRATEGY - * MEASURES BEHAVIOR, NOT ATTITUDES OR MOTIVES* DISTINGUISHES BETWEEN ACTS AND INJURIES* INTENDED FOR USE WITH OTHER INSTRUMENTS* PROVIDES DATA ON MINOR AND SEVERE LEVELS - * MODULAR AND SYMETRICAL ( Analogous to a fully crossed experiment)- -CTS23 Full 10RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY - RELIABILITYINTERNAL CONSISTENCYTEMPORAL - FACTOR STRUCTURECTS23 Full 11CTS23 Full 12CTS23 Full 13 VALIDITY* HIGH DISCLOSURE RATE* CONTENT VALIDITY* CONCURRENT VALIDITY CORRELATION OF PARTNER REPORTSCORRELATION WITH OTHER INSTRUMENTS* CONSTRUCT VALIDITYCTS23 Full 14 CTS RATE ISCOMPARISON OF CTS WITH GREATERNATIONAL CRIME VICTIMIZATION SURVEY 18 TIMES NATIONAL VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN SURVEY 15 TIMESCLIENTS OF COUPLE AND FAMILY THERAPY 4 TIMES NATIONAL CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT DATA SYSTEM 16 TIMESNATIONAL INCIDENCE STUDY OF CHILD ABUSE 8 TIMES HIGH DISCLOSURE RATECTS23 Full 15WHY DOES THE CTS SECUREMORE DISCLOSURE? * CONTEXT OF LEGITIMATION (“WE ALL DO IT” APPROACH) EXCULPATORY INTRODUCTIONHOW MANY TIMES DID YOU DO IT, NOT WHETHER DONEASKS WHAT BOTH RESPONDENT AND PARTNER DID • FAMILY PROBLEMS CONTEXT RATHER THAN SAFETY, INJURY CRIME, OR FEAR • FOCUS IS ON BEHAVIOR RATHER THAN OUTCOMES SUCH AS INJURY (INJURY IS RELATIVELY RARE)• AVOIDS DISPARAGING TERMS SUCH AS ABUSE OR VIOLENCE • ALSO MEASURES NEGOTATION AND PSYCHOLOGICAL AGGRESSION, WHICH CAN JUSTIFY HITTING (TRIED EVERYTHING)• DOES NOT DEPEND ON BEHAVIOR BEING KNOWN OR REPORTED BY OTHERSCTS23 Full 16CTS23 Full 17CTS23 Full 18CTS23 Full 19CTS23 Full 20CTS23 Full 21Male Aggressor Female AggressorBoth AggressMALE RESPONDENTSN=177FEMALE RESPONDENTSN=376ID12 E1aFig. 6. Couple Symmetry Types By Sex of Respondent (All Assaults)Male Aggressor Female AggressorBoth AggressChi-square = 1.803, p .406N for Male Respondents = 177 (Male Aggressor=19, Female Aggressor=28, Both Aggress=130)N for Female Respondents = 376 (Male Aggressor=35, Female Aggressor=77, Both Aggress=264)WHYTELESCOPESWEREBANNEDCTS23 Full 227. CRITICISMS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE CTS PURPORTEDLY FEMINIST CRITICISMS- RESTRICTED TO CONFLICT RELATED VIOLENCE- IGNORES CONTEXT- IGNORES NON-CONFLICT ASSAULTS- DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT SMALLER AVERAGE SIZE OF WOMEN- DOES NOT MEASURE INJURY- EQUATES ACTS THAT DIFFER IN SERIOUSNESS- IGNORES WHO INITIATES THE ASSAULTS OTHER CRITICISMS OF THE CTS- FREQUENCY RESPONSE CATEGORIES ARE UNREALISTIC- ONE YEAR REFERENT PERIOD IS UNREALISTIC- LIMITED SET OF VIOLENT ACTS- CTS2: LONG IF ALL 5 SCALES ARE ASKED FOR RESPONDENT AND PARTNER AS A PARENT-CHILD MEASURE- STILL NOT WELL SUITED TO INFANTS) ONE YEAR REFERENT PERIOD TOO LONG FOR FREQUENT ACTSCTS23 Full 236. USES OF THE CTS RESEARCHPREVALENCE RATESTHEORETICAL RESEARCHPROGRAM OUTCOME EVALUATION RESEARCHSOCIAL CHANGE RESEARCH CLINICAL SCREENINGIDENTIFY CASESPROFILE OF SCORES ON THE FIVE SCALES OTHER USESCODING RECORDSCODING OBSERVATIONSPEER MALTREATMENTCTS23 Full 24POINTS TO BE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND•WHAT THE CTS2 MEASURES•HOW IT MEASURES THESE VARIABLES•RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF A MEASURE•ALPHA COEFFICIENT OF RELIABILITY•EVIDENCE OF VALIDITY OF THE CTS2Disclosure rateConcurrent validityConstruct validity•LIMITATIONS OF THE CTS2•USES OF THE CTS2•WHY THE HEAVY CRITICISM OF THE