• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

将消极意图归因于妻子的行为:婚姻暴力男性与非暴力男性的归因情况。

Attributing negative intent to wife behavior: the attributions of maritally violent versus nonviolent men.

作者信息

Holtzworth-Munroe A, Hutchinson G

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Indiana University, Bloomington 47405.

出版信息

J Abnorm Psychol. 1993 May;102(2):206-11. doi: 10.1037//0021-843x.102.2.206.

DOI:10.1037//0021-843x.102.2.206
PMID:8315133
Abstract

This study compared attributions for negative wife behavior offered by three groups of husbands: 22 maritally violent and distressed, 17 nonviolent but maritally distressed, and 17 nonviolent and nondistressed. Husbands rated wife behaviors presented in nine hypothetical problematic marital situation vignettes. On a measure of responsibility attributions, violent husbands were more likely than nondistressed husbands to attribute negative intentions, selfish motivation, and blame to the wife. On a measure of possible negative wife intentions, violent husbands were more likely than either distressed or nondistressed men to attribute negative intentions to the wife. Exploratory analyses suggested that certain types of marital situations (e.g., jealousy and rejection from wife) were particularly likely to elicit attributions of negative intent from violent husbands.

摘要

本研究比较了三组丈夫对妻子负面行为的归因

22名婚姻中有暴力行为且关系紧张的丈夫、17名无暴力行为但婚姻关系紧张的丈夫,以及17名无暴力行为且婚姻关系不紧张的丈夫。丈夫们对九个假设的婚姻问题情境小插曲中呈现的妻子行为进行了评分。在责任归因方面,有暴力行为的丈夫比婚姻关系不紧张的丈夫更有可能将负面意图、自私动机和责备归咎于妻子。在对妻子可能的负面意图的衡量上,有暴力行为的丈夫比婚姻关系紧张或不紧张的丈夫更有可能将负面意图归咎于妻子。探索性分析表明,某些类型的婚姻情境(例如,妻子的嫉妒和拒绝)特别容易引发有暴力行为的丈夫对负面意图的归因。

相似文献

1
Attributing negative intent to wife behavior: the attributions of maritally violent versus nonviolent men.将消极意图归因于妻子的行为:婚姻暴力男性与非暴力男性的归因情况。
J Abnorm Psychol. 1993 May;102(2):206-11. doi: 10.1037//0021-843x.102.2.206.
2
The competency of responses given by maritally violent versus nonviolent men to problematic marital situations.婚姻暴力男性与非暴力男性对婚姻问题情境所给出反应的能力。
Violence Vict. 1991 Winter;6(4):257-69.
3
Comparing the emotional reactions and behavioral intentions of violent and nonviolent husbands to aggressive, distressed, and other wife behaviors.比较暴力和非暴力丈夫对妻子的攻击性行为、苦恼行为及其他行为的情绪反应和行为意图。
Violence Vict. 1996 Winter;11(4):319-39.
4
Power and violence: the relation between communication patterns, power discrepancies, and domestic violence.权力与暴力:沟通模式、权力差异与家庭暴力之间的关系。
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1993 Feb;61(1):40-50. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.61.1.40.
5
Demand and withdraw communication among couples experiencing husband violence.遭受丈夫暴力的夫妻之间的需求与退缩式沟通。
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1998 Oct;66(5):731-43. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.66.5.731.
6
Affect, verbal content, and psychophysiology in the arguments of couples with a violent husband.有暴力丈夫的夫妻争吵中的情感、言语内容和心理生理学
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1994 Oct;62(5):982-8. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.62.5.982.
7
Exposure to violence in the families-of-origin among wife-abusers and maritally nonviolent men.妻子施暴者和婚姻关系中无暴力行为的男性在原生家庭中遭受暴力的情况。
Violence Vict. 1988 Spring;3(1):49-63.
8
Over- vs. undercontrolled hostility: application of the construct to the classification of maritally violent men.
Violence Vict. 1991 Summer;6(2):151-8.
9
Attributions and behavior in functional and dysfunctional marriages.功能正常与功能失调婚姻中的归因与行为。
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1996 Jun;64(3):569-76. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.64.3.569.
10
Negative reciprocity and communication in couples with a violent husband.有暴力丈夫的夫妻中的消极互惠与沟通
J Abnorm Psychol. 1993 Nov;102(4):559-64. doi: 10.1037//0021-843x.102.4.559.

引用本文的文献

1
Childhood Histories of Family Violence and Adult Intimate Partner Violence Use Among U.S. Military Veterans.美国退伍军人的童年家庭暴力经历与成年亲密伴侣暴力行为
Psychol Violence. 2024;15(2):214-223. doi: 10.1037/vio0000555.
2
Cognitive and Affective Mediators of Alcohol-Facilitated Intimate Partner Aggression.酒精助长的亲密伴侣攻击行为的认知和情感调节因素
Clin Psychol Sci. 2021 May 1;9(3):385-402. doi: 10.1177/2167702620966293. Epub 2021 Mar 19.
3
Where's Dad? The Importance of Integrating Fatherhood and Parenting Programming into Substance Use Treatment for Men.
爸爸在哪儿?将父亲角色与育儿项目纳入男性物质使用障碍治疗的重要性。
Child Abuse Rev. 2018 Jul-Aug;27(4):280-300. doi: 10.1002/car.2528. Epub 2018 Oct 9.
4
A Research Program Testing the Effectiveness of a Preventive Intervention for Couples with a Newborn.一项针对有新生儿的夫妇的预防干预措施有效性的研究计划。
Fam Process. 2019 Sep;58(3):669-684. doi: 10.1111/famp.12428. Epub 2019 Feb 27.
5
A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Impact of the Couple CARE for Parents of Newborns Program on the Prevention of Intimate Partner Violence and Relationship Problems.一项关于“夫妻关爱新生儿父母项目”对预防亲密伴侣暴力和关系问题影响的随机对照试验。
Prev Sci. 2019 Jul;20(5):620-631. doi: 10.1007/s11121-018-0961-y.
6
Predicting Patterns of Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration From Late Adolescence to Young Adulthood.预测从青少年晚期到青年期亲密伴侣暴力行为的模式
J Interpers Violence. 2021 May;36(9-10):NP4679-NP4704. doi: 10.1177/0886260518795173. Epub 2018 Aug 23.
7
Reflections of Men of Mexican Origin: A Grounded Theory Study of Intimate Partner Violence Risk Factors.墨西哥裔男性的反思:亲密伴侣暴力风险因素的扎根理论研究
Am J Mens Health. 2018 Sep;12(5):1784-1798. doi: 10.1177/1557988318787617. Epub 2018 Jul 17.
8
Man enough? Masculine discrepancy stress and intimate partner violence.够男人吗?男性差异压力与亲密伴侣暴力。
Pers Individ Dif. 2014 Oct;68:160-164. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2014.04.021.
9
Chronic Neglect and Services Without Borders: A Guiding Model for Social Service Enhancement to Address the Needs of Parents With Intellectual Disabilities.长期忽视与无国界服务:一种增强社会服务以满足智障父母需求的指导模式。
J Ment Health Res Intellect Disabil. 2012;5(2):130-156. doi: 10.1080/19315864.2011.592238. Epub 2012 Apr 10.
10
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Hostile Cognitions, and Aggression in Iraq/Afghanistan Era Veterans.伊拉克/阿富汗战争时期退伍军人的创伤后应激障碍、敌对认知与攻击行为
Psychiatry. 2016 Spring;79(1):70-84. doi: 10.1080/00332747.2015.1123593.