The Meanings of Violence to Perpetrators: A Proposal for Research

By Jane Gilgun, professor, School of Social Work, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, USA May 2012 This is a proposal I submitted for research on what violence means to perpetrators. I have interviewed persons who have committed interpersonal violence for many years. I would like to share what I have learned with others. The topics and their order were requirements of the funding agency. IMPORTANCE Perpetrators of interpersonal violence risk dire consequences for their actions. The negative consequences for themselves include public disgrace, damaged reputations, loss of families and jobs, jail and prison time, court-ordered treatment, probationary periods that can last for years, and legal expenses. Self-interest alone would appear to be sufficient deterrence. Additional reasons not to be violent are concerns for the effects of their violent actions on their own families and friends and on survivors and survivors families and friends. Desires for a clear conscience and avoidance of guilt are further reasons not to be violent. Yet, violence is surprisingly robust in the United States today. In 2010, more than 3,800,000 violent crimes occurred (National Crime Victimization Survey, http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf). Violent crime includes rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault. Murder accounted for about 13,000 more violent crimes in 2010 (Uniform Crime Reports (http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-inthe-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl01.xls). These daunting figures suggest that perpetrators are thinking of consequences other than the negative when they commit violent acts. They must anticipate something powerful and positive. If concern for negative consequences is no deterrent, the question becomes what does motivate perpetrators of violence? OBJECTIVES The purpose of this proposed research is to test and document a model of interpersonal violence that accounts for the meanings of violence to perpetrators. These meanings must be so powerful that they overcome perpetrator concerns for the risks they take and for the harm their actions cause not only to the people they victimize directly but also to victims family and friends and their own. This research seeks to continue previous research I have conducted on interpersonal violence. In the previous research, I developed a preliminary model of the meanings of violence to perpetrators. The documentation of the preliminary model is fragmentary, appearing in bits and pieces in published articles, draft articles, and conference papers. One of the objectives in this

Project No. 55-024 Page 2 of 17

study is re-code the data Ive already collected in order to formulate and document a formal model of the meanings of violence to perpetrators. I will call this revised model the stage 1 model. For the purposes of this research, a model is a description of how things work (Gilgun, 2005d). In social sciences, models are composed of hypotheses and concepts. Hypotheses are statements of relationships among concepts or variables. Concepts are the components of hypotheses. Descriptive material documents the concepts and hypotheses. Descriptive material is the foundation of model building because researchers build concepts and hypotheses from concrete data. Furthermore, including descriptive materials in models provides audiences with sufficient evidence so that they can make up their own minds about the trustworthiness of the model. In other words, including descriptive material in accounts of models allows others to make their own interpretations that could differ from the model constructors interpretations. For many who build conceptual models, the terms theory and model are interchangeable (Jaccard & Jacoby, 2010). In the present research, I use the term model because I want to show how violence works; that is, what violence means to perpetrators. The models I will develop in theoretical in the broad sense because it will be structured by concepts and hypotheses, but it will also be grounded in descriptive material which makes the model more concrete than theories typically are. Models can be tested qualitatively or quantitatively, and they are subject to revision when there is evidence to do so. The raw materials of models may come from several sources, such as reviews of previous research, open-ended research procedures such as grounded theory methodologies, and observations of phenomena including laboratory experiments and participant observation (Gilgun, 2005d; Jaccard & Jacoby, 2010). As stated, the model to be tested in the present research is based upon previous research I have conducted on perpetrators of interpersonal violence. The types of interpersonal violence that the model will account for are those that the federal government calls violent crime and that I listed earlier: rape, sexual assault, robbery, aggravated assault and murder. Sexual assault includes sexual abuse of children, adolescents, and adults. The documentation and testing of the preliminary model will take place in two stages. Stage 1. To document the fragmentary, preliminary model of violence, I will do a secondary analysis of data that I have already collected through previous research and construct a formal, testable model of interpersonal violence. This is the stage 1 model. In the secondary data analysis, I will identify passages in the data that represent dimensions of the meanings of violence to perpetrators that fit the dimensions I have already identified and are part of the preliminary model. These passages will provide the building blocks and the documentation of the dimensions of the stage 1 model. My analysis may lead me to add new dimensions, drop others, and rename some.

Project No. 55-024 Page 3 of 17

After constructing the stage 1 model, I will review related research and theory in order to situate the components of this elaborated and possibly revised model into current scholarship. Through this literature review, I can evaluate how the stage 1 model is consistent with what is already known, how it adds to what is already known, and how it may challenge what is already known. Stage 2. To test the stage 1 model, I will collect new data on a sample of persons who are known to have committed violent acts. This will result in a revision of the stage 1 model. I will call this revised model the stage 2 model. Model testing involves comparing components of the model to be tested to components of the phenomena of interest that researchers identity in new data (Cressey, 1953; Campbell, 1975; Gilgun, 2005d). The testing of the preliminary model on new data is likely to result in revisions and will also involve additional documentation of the components of the model. In addition, I will do a second review of relevant research and theory to situate this new, stage 2 model in scholarly traditions. The final product will be a tested and revised model of the meanings of violence to perpetrators. This is the final model, at least for the purposes of the present proposed research. It is possible that future research will identify further evidence that leads to additional revisions of the model. I will disseminate the final model through a variety of outlets including books, journal articles, conference presentations, workshops, classroom teaching, trainings, and articles, flyers, and videos available to the general public and professionals on the internet. The following summarizes the goals and objectives of the proposed research. Goal 1. Document and elaborate a stage 1 model of the meanings of interpersonal violence to perpetrators. Objective 1: Do a secondary analysis of data on interpersonal violence that I have already collected to test, revise, and document the preliminary and fragmentary model I presently have. This documented and revised model is the stage 1 model. Objective 2: Situate this documented and revised model within scholarly traditions through a review of the literature. This includes showing how the revised model is consistent with what is known, how it adds to what is known, and how it challenges what is known. Goal 2: Test and elaborate the stage 1 model on new data in order to develop the stage 2 model. Objective 1: Collect new data; Objective 2: Test the stage 1 model through comparison of the components of the stage 1 model with components of the meanings of interpersonal violence that I will identity in the new data; Objective 3: Revise the stage 1 model if data support revisions. This is the stage 2 model;

Project No. 55-024 Page 4 of 17

Objective 4: Conduct a second review of relevant research and theory to situate the stage 2 model in scholarly traditions as specified earlier. This results in the final model; and Objective 5: Disseminate the final model through books, journal articles, conference presentations, trainings, videos, manuals, and internet publications, including articles on social media websites and blogs. As stated earlier, the final product will be a model of the meanings of interpersonal violence to perpetrators that will have been tested and revised on two different samples. Taking the perspectives of those who commit violent acts is well within long-held traditions in social research. Many disciplines emphasize that effective policy, prevention, and practice build upon the experiences and perspectives of person to be served. For example, starting where clients are is a fundamental principle of social work practice (Levin, 2007). As Levins research showed, effective practice is not possible without connecting with service user perspectives. Applied sociologies have come to similarly conclusions, namely that public policy, prevention programs, and interventions are effective when they are based upon the perspectives and experiences of persons who are served (Denzin, 1989; Patton, 2011). The idea that effective practice builds on perspectives and experiences of those served is a bedrock of interactionist and pragmatist thinking, whose foundational ideas extend to nineteenth century German philosophy (Gilgun, 2012). Grasping the perspectives of others can be difficult when their experiences and interpretations are outside the experiences of researchers (Gilgun, 2008a; Levin, 2007). Nonetheless, in the case of violence and other pressing social issues, researchers must make efforts to understand in order to create a more just and caring society. The present proposed research seeks to understand the experiences and perspectives of perpetrators of interpersonal violence in order to contribute to policy, prevention programs, and interventions. In summary, the present proposed research seeks to develop and test a model of the meanings of interpersonal violence to perpetrators. Perpetrators must anticipate positive and powerful outcomes for themselves in order to overcome concerns for the multiple negative consequences of their actions. The final product of this proposed research will be a documented and tested model of the meanings of violence to perpetrators. This model will contribute to effective policies, prevention programs, and interventions. METHODS OF PROCEDURE The proposed research is in two parts: 1) to test and document a preliminary model of the meanings of violence to perpetrators on an existing data set to create a stage 1 model and 2) to collect new data to test and document the stage 1 model and to produce a stage 2 model. Goal 1: Test and Document the Preliminary Model

Project No. 55-024 Page 5 of 17

To achieve objective 1 of goal 1, I will do a secondary analysis of data I have collected on about 130 persons who have committed violent acts. Data were collected through ethnographic life history interviews of persons who were incarcerated in maximum and medium security prisons or were service users in community-based agencies that served persons who had committed a range of violent acts. This sample is primarily male and between the ages of 20 to 65. My purpose is to document and to test a preliminary model of the meanings of violence to perpetrators. As stated, the preliminary model is fragmentary at present and needs to be documented and subjected to testing. The components of the model appear in several different published articles, (Gilgun, 1992, 1995,1994b, 1994 c, 1988, 2002, 2004c, 2008b, 2010a, 2010c; Gilgun & Abrams, 2005; Gilgun & Connor, 1989; Gilgun & McLeod, 1999; Gilgun & Sharma, 2008), conference papers (Gilgun, 1998, 1999), and unpublished articles. These are the component of the preliminary model: violence as emotional gratification, violence as love, violence as exciting, violence as proof of manhood, violence as getting respect, violence as a means of retaliation and revenge, violence as relief, violence as practical and expedient, violence as scaring others into compliance, violence as teaching a lesson, violence as getting what you want, and violence as claiming ownership over other people. These components of the model will serve as preliminary codes that I will use in the secondary data analysis. I will also test these codes for their fit with the dimensions of violence that I identify through the secondary data analysis. I anticipate that some of the names of the codes may change. Some codes may become subcategories under more comprehensive codes. For example, I may find that a broad category of emotional gratification could be shown to include subcategories of violence as a relief and violence as love. I also expect that through this secondary data analysis, I will identify new dimensions of the meanings of violence to perpetrators. Such issues that arise in coding are typical when using pre-established codes (Cressey, 1953; Gilgun 2005d). This method of doing data analysis using a pre-established codes may be surprising to researchers who believe that qualitative analysis begins in open-ended ways and not with pre-established codes. In actuality, this method of data analysis is based on an approach that predates assumptions about open-endedness and that was a method of choice for researchers from the Chicago School of Sociology, who created the foundation for much of the qualitative analysis that takes place today (Bodgan & Biklen, 2007; Bulmer, 1984; Cressey, 1953; Fine, 1995; Gilgun, 2007; 2012; Znaniecki, 1934). This method is called analytic induction. An updated version of analytic induction is called deductive qualitative analysis (Gilgun, 2005d). Deductive qualitative analysis (DQA) involves the development of a conceptual model from many possible sources. In the present proposed research, I developed the model from research interviews. In DQA, researchers test the model, revise it, and elaborate upon it when there is evidence to do so. The final product is a revised model that fits the new evidence. Researchers typically do DQA in order to come up with a better, more accurate and trustworthy model.

Project No. 55-024 Page 6 of 17

While testing and documenting the preliminary model and once it is completed, I will do a review of related research so as to situate the model within scholarly traditions. Doing this involves showing how the model fits with existing knowledge and how it adds to and perhaps undermines what is know, as already discussed. This will fulfill objective 2. Goal 2: Collect New Data and Test and Develop the Stage 1 Model To fulfill goal 2, this continuation study will be based upon interviews with 70 subjects who will be interviewed three times each for a total interview time of about five hours per person. Forty subjects will be men and ten will be women who have been convicted of the serious violent acts listed above: murder, aggravated assault, armed robbery, rape, and sexual assault. Additional participants will be ten women and ten men who are survivors of interpersonal violence but who are not known to have committed violent acts. Men are over-represented in this sample because they account for up to 90% of acts of violence detected through law enforcement reports and national surveys in the United States (Pew Center for the States, 2007.) In addition, men account for 94% of the prison population (Bureau of Prisons, 2012). Gender issues thus are implicated in the perpetration of violent acts. Contrasts and comparisons between the meanings of violence to women and to men are likely to clarify how gender role socialization influences what violence means to women and men who commit it. Persons who are survivors of interpersonal violence and not known to have been convicted of violent acts are included in the sample because they can describe their perceptions of perpetrators actions, statements, and affect. This provides additional, outsider perspective on the meanings of violence to perpetrators. The inclusion of women and men who have perpetrated and survived interpersonal violence provides multiple perspectives on the meanings of violence to perpetrators. Multiple perspectives thickens the description of social phenomena (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007; Geertz, 1973; Gilgun, 2012). Subjects will range in age from 18 to 72. I will seek diverse racial composition that corresponds with the racial and ethnic composition in the United States, which is about 60% White, 16% Hispanic, 12.6 % Black, 5% Asian, and less than 1% each for American Indians and Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders (US Bureau of the Census, 2012). The following table shows the composition of the sample. Table 1. Sample Composition by Gender and Felon-Level Convictions for Violence Women Convicted of Violent Acts No Known Commission of 10 10 Men 40 10

Project No. 55-024 Page 7 of 17

Violent Acts

Recruitment The sample will be recruited from prisons under the supervision of the Minnesota Department of Corrections and from three general types of community-based treatment programs: 1) those that serve survivors and perpetrators of physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence, 2) those that serve survivors and perpetrators of child sexual abuse; and 3) those that serve survivors of various kinds of childhood loss and trauma who are not known to have perpetrated interpersonal violence. The individuals who are incarcerated or who use the services of social service agencies have committed violent acts that range from murder to misdemeanor assaults. Other service users are individuals who are survivors of interpersonal violence who are not known to have committed act of violence. Drawing a sample from diverse settings serves a key strategy in model testing, which is to search for cases modify, elaborate, or undermine the model under development (Cressey, 1953; Gilgun, 2005d, 2012; Lindesmith, 1947). Participants will be in treatment or support groups in order to ensure their emotional safety as they participate in the research interviews. The issues to be discussed may evoke anxiety in subjects who, therefore, also may benefit from the support associated with being connected to groups that can offer them emotional support. Participation in the research will be voluntary. Potential participants will be informed of the risks and benefits to participation and the limits of confidentiality. The recruitment and consent protocol is very detailed and has the approval of the Human Subjects Committee, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities. Ethnographic, Life History Interviews In keeping with the goal of testing and documenting the stage 2 model on new data, I will do ethnographic, life history interviews. Ethnographic research seeks to understand the meanings that individuals attribute to the events in their lives and to make theoretical sense of them (Bodgan & Biklen, 2007; Gilgun, 2007; Patton, 2002). These contexts are interactional, in that persons are in reciprocal and contingent relationship with others, and interpretive, meaning that individuals continually attempt to make meaning of what is going on in their lives (Gilgun, 2012). As a prime research method of the Chicago School of Sociology, life histories are a method of choice not only for understanding individual lives but also the culture in which individuals live (Bulmer, 1984; Gilgun, 2012; Gilgun & McLeod, 1999; Tierney, 2003).

Project No. 55-024 Page 8 of 17

In relationship to the present proposed research, I am interested in examining how larger social forces and ideologies, such as those related to gender, exposure to media influence, and beliefs about violence and entitlements influence, individual human lives and how persons interpret the events in their lives (Bulmer, 1984; Gilgun, 2012; Gilgun & McLeod, 1999; Tierney, 2000). The Chicago School of Sociology and the philosophical traditions on which it is based emphasizes erlebnis, or lived experience, and verstehen, or understanding. The individual in social and cultural context is the unit of analysis, and the life history is the premier method for understanding lived experience in social, historical, and cultural contexts (Gilgun, 2012). Chicago School research is phenomenological in focus and is based upon the work of the German philosophers, Kant, Simmel, and Dilthey (Gilgun, 2012). Phenomenological approaches seek to understand human experience in context. The Chicago School, to which several social workers contributed (Bulmer, 1984; Deegan, 1990; Gilgun, 2012), flourished at the University of Chicago at the end of the nineteenth into the first third of the twentieth centuries (Bulmer, 1984; Faris, 1967). The influence of the Chicago School is widespread today in such research areas as grounded theory approaches (Charmaz, 2006; Corbin & Strauss, 2008), analytic induction and deductive qualitative analysis (Gilgun, 2005d; 2010b) symbolic interactionism (Bodgan & Biklen, 2007; Gilgun, 2012), and multiple method/mixed methods research (Gilgun, 2012). A feature of Chicago research is the extent to which researchers attempted to understand human behavior through the definitions or meanings that individuals give to situations. How individuals define situations becomes the reality through which they perform concrete acts (Thomas & Thomas, 1923). The task of researchers is to understand and interpret the lived experience that compose a life history and to make theoretical sense of it (Dollard, 1949, p. 16). Researchers may or may not concur with researcher informants definitions of situations, as Thomas and Thomas pointed out. They gave an example of a man who murdered others who talked to themselves because the man thought that these others were talking about him. Number of Interviews. Three interviews lasting between one to two hours will be conducted. The interview schedule covers family history, history of romantic relationships, sexual history, histories of violence experienced as well as perpetrated, and relationships with others in such contexts as school, sports, and jobs. I have used this indepth life history interview for more than 30 years and find that three interviews allow sufficient time for participants to share personal details of their lives in an atmosphere of trust and safety. Focus on interpretations of situations. Individual acts take place within specific situations. These situated actions make sense only within the larger context of lives over time. Therefore, in pursuit of the goal of understanding patterns in the development of violent behaviors, I will examine situated interactions and the interpretations individuals have of these interactions within the contexts of the life course of individuals. Interviews that cover the life course are especially helpful in discovering and understanding events that are significant to subjects (Cohler, 1987). These life history accounts are less focused on the verifiable, public facts of persons' lives and more on the

Project No. 55-024 Page 9 of 17

interpretations--which can be quite private--and how persons account for their lives. A significant finding of the my previous related research is that an individual's account can make a great deal of sense to the individual but can be mystifying to outsiders. For instance, a drug dealer said he felt like God when a woman had sex with a dog and others present laughed and hooted. She did so after the dealer told her he she had to do this if she wanted the crack cocaine she had begged for but had no money to buy (Gilgun, 2008, 2009). I remember think that this is not my idea of God. In their accounts, therefore, research participants reveal their taken-for-granted meanings that for outsiders may be illuminating, alien, and shocking. Data Analysis and Interpretation The interviews will be tape recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded. I will write fieldnotes immediately after each interview. The field notes have three parts: descriptions, observer comments, and memos regarding emerging themes and connections to relevant research and theory (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). At least two persons will code the field notes and the transcripts, a strategy that brings multiple perspectives into researcher interpretations. These investigators will discuss their interpretations, do literature searches to help them in their interpretations, as well as to examine whether emerging findings are adding to or suggesting modifications of what is currently known. They also will seek cases that represent exceptions to their emerging interpretations so that they account for the many patterns that likely are to be represented in the interviews. Model Testing and Coding When researchers test and elaborate models, the components of the models to be tested are the sources of preliminary codes. In the present research, the following are the preliminary components of a model and the preliminary codes: violence as emotional gratification, violence as exciting, violence as living up to an image, violence as a means of retaliation and revenge, violence as relief, violence as practical and expedient, violence as scaring others into compliance, violence as getting what you want, violence as claiming ownership of other people. Such pre-established codes are called sensitizing concepts and are an integral part of the Chicago School approach to data analysis (Blumer, 1969; Gilgun, 1999c, 2005d). I expect that in the testing and elaboration of the stage 2 and stage 3 models I will modify some of these codes and identify new ones. Sometimes codes are identified in vivo, meaning that the informants themselves name processes that contribute to analysis and interpretation. (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Deductive qualitative analysis. The procedures of deductive qualitative analysis (DQA) will guide the testing, elaboration, and refinement of the conceptual model. DQA provides guidelines for doing qualitative research that begins with an initial conceptualization that is tested on multiple cases in order to end with a theory that fits the cases examined. DQA is based on an earlier approach to hypothesis testing and theory development called analytic induction (Cressey, 1953; Gilgun, 1995, 1999c, 1999c, 2001a, 2005d, 2009a, 2009b; Lindesmith, 1947; Znaniecki, 1934) and the thinking of philosophers John Dewey (1910) and Karl Popper (1969). The term deduction is more appropriate than induction because researchers begin their studies with pre-established

Project No. 55-024 Page 10 of 17

ideas, sensitizing concepts, and hypotheses, all of which are deductive processes (Gilgun, 2005d). To avoid imposing pre-conceived ideas on data, DQA guides researchers to actively search for exceptions to their emerging ideas so that they can modify their ideas to fit the cases they examine. Poppers (1969) ideas on conjectures, refutations, and reformulations provide a rationale for this focus on seeking to undermine researchers emerging findings and to reformulate them so as to fit findings. The final product of DQA is a set of concepts and inter-related hypotheses that have been subjected to rigorous testing. In the present research, the product will be a theoretical model on patterns in the development of violent behaviors. Researchers typically fold into theoretical models related research and theory that enhance and clarify the meanings and significance of the components of the model. Such a well-documented and well-tested model can be used to guide policy and program. LITERATURE REVIEW SUMMARY AND CITATIONS/PREVIOUS WORK This present study builds upon research I have conducted with male perpetrators of interpersonal violence and men who have risks for violent behaviors but were not known to have committed violent acts (2011a, 2011b, 2010a, 2010c, 2008b, 2006a, 2005a, 2004c, 2004e, 2002a, 2002b, 1999a, 1999c, 1999d, 1996a, 1996b, 1995, 1994b, 1992, 1991b, 1990, 1988a, 1998b; Gilgun & Abrams, 2005, 2002; Gilgun & Sharma, 2008, 2011;Gilgun, Jones, & Rice, 2005; Gilgun & McLeod, 1999; Gilgun & Reiser, 1990; Gilgun & Connor, 1990, 1989; Gilgun, Klein, & Pranis, 2000; Gilgun, Keskinen, Marti, & Rice, 1999; Sharma & Gilgun, 2008). I will be using an approach that I have discussed in detail in several publications that focused primarily on methods and methodologies (Gilgun, in press a & b, 2012, 2010b, 2009a, 2009b, 2008a, 2006b, 2007, 2005a, 2005b, 2005c, 2004a, 2004b, 2004d, 2002, 2001a, 2001b. 1999c, 1994a, 1994c, 1994d, 1992, 1991a; Gilgun & Sands, in press). In this continuation research, I will test and elaborate a model of the meanings of violence to perpetrators. The Chicago School of Sociology has studied the meanings of interpersonal violence and crime to perpetrators almost from its beginnings. Some of the many classic works on interpersonal violence based on Chicago School methodologies include Thrasher (1927), Shaw (1930), Sutherland (1937), Lindesmith (1947), Cressey (1953) McCaghy (1967), Bursik (1984), Sanday (1990), Scully (1990), Van Maanen (1988), Katz (1988), Athens (1997), Lawson (2003), Winlow and Hall (2009) and much of my own research on violence, previously cited. The review of research in this section provides a general overview of the research relevant to the present proposed research. As stated previously, one of the objectives of the proposed research is to do an in-depth review of this literature in order to situate the findings of the proposed research in its scholarly traditions, as well as to identify concepts and theory that might add depth and breadth to the proposed analysis and the resulting model. Acts of violence that mystify outsiders not only make sense but often are compelling to those who perpetrate violence (Gilgun, 2008b; Winlow & Hall, 2009). Lawson (2003), for example, found in her review of qualitative research on sex

Project No. 55-024 Page 11 of 17

offenders views on child sexual abuse that sex with children brought intense emotional gratification, sexual pleasure, and a sense of intimacy and even love. Some offenders reported a powerful and almost overwhelming drive to be sexual with children. Research has identified a sense of entitlement as elements in many forms of violence, such as physical aggression against women, child sexual abuse, rape, murder, and attempted murder (Hearn, 1998; Johnson, 1995, 2008; Stark, 2009). Gilgun and McLeod (1999), for example, found that some that some sex offenders view themselves as entitled to having sex with others without including others in their decisions. Another man, Whats the big deal about rape? I raped my wife all the time (Gilgun, 1998). For instance, a man I interviewed said about his rapes, "if I can't get them this way [through mutual consent] then the other way to get them is, you know, to just grab them" (Gilgun & McLeod, 1999). Drawing from cultural images of "loose" women for whom rape supposedly has no meaning, his account of his rapes is permeated with an ideology of supremacy (Connell, 2005, p. 83) and constructions of women as sexual objects for men (Donaldson, 1993). A desire to control family members to the point of physical aggression and murder is a common experience for perpetrators (Athens, 1992; 1997; Hearn, 2008; Samenow, 2004;Stark, 2009; Websdale, 2010). Violence as a means of gaining respect of violent peers and the fearful respect of those whom they terrorize are other meanings that violence has to perpetrators (Athens, 1992; Johnson, 2008). Katz (1988) identified a sense of righteousness, thrills, enjoyment and satisfaction of getting away with a violent act that was difficult to pull off, being a badass man, and maintaining power and control over others as the meanings that the men he interviewed attributed to the violence they committed. The violence women commit is far less researched then mens. This may be the case first because women appear far less frequently in statistics and news stories about violent acts. In addition, there are beliefs about female non-aggression that may actually foster less violent behaviors as compared to men. On the other hand, women do commit violent acts (Jack, 1999), but often their violence appears to be a function of the socialization as women (Gilgun & Abrams, 2005). For example, Gilgun and Abrams discussed the case of a 32 year-old woman who was a youth minister who had a sexual relationship with a teenage girl who was part of her youth group. The woman said the girl wanted to have sex with her and to turn her away would have hurt the girl. The woman elaborated, I didn't want to abandon her. I will take shit to kingdom come before I will bail out. In some ways that is very, very strong to my religious point of view. It's very strong that you be there for people. It is very strong that that's the spiritual connection and understanding of who Jesus Christ was. He didn't bail out. He didn't go when he, and he didn't maybe have his self protection up either, when it really comes down to the story. And so religiously and morally, it, it, yeah, that's where I'm at (p. 65). Other researchers, too, have noted that meanings that women attribute to their violence are related to a sense of caring, while having no choice because of coercive male partners, self-

Project No. 55-024 Page 12 of 17

defense, and desire to dominate and control being other meanings (Hendin, 2004; Jack, 1999). In summary, related research has demonstrated that the meanings of violence to perpetrators are powerful enough to overcome concerns for victims, for families and friends of victims and their own, and for their own well-being. Common sense and common decency would seem to be sufficient deterrence, but they are not. Finally, violence has many possible meanings to perpetrators and to those who are survivors of violence. Many of these meanings could be connected to gender role socialization and internalized beliefs that are widely held in U.S. culture. Whatever the analysis proposed in this present research might produce in terms of a model of the meanings of violence to perpetrators, the results will make important contributions to effective policies, programs, and interventions. The understanding the meanings of violence to perpetrators is fundamental to prevention and intervention. REFERENCES Adler, Alfred (1930). Individual psychology and crime. Police Journal, 17, reprinted in the Quarterly Journal of Corrections, 1977, 7-13. Athens, Lonnie (1997). Violent criminal acts and actors revisited. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois. Athens, Lonnie (1992). The creation of dangerous, violent criminals. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Bogdan, Robert C. & Sari Knopp Biklen (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed). Boston: Pearson. Bourdieu, Pierre. (2002). The language of place. Cambridge: Polity. Bursik, Robert J. (1984). "Urban Dynamics and Ecological Studies of Delinquency". Social Forces 63: 393-413 Bulmer, Martin (1984). The Chicago School of Sociology: Institutionalization, diversity, and the rise of sociological research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Corbin, J. & Straus, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd. ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cressey, Donald (1953) The criminal violation of financial trust. American Sociological Review, 15(6), 738-743. Campbell, Donald T. (1975). Degrees of freedom and the case study. Comparative Political Studies, 8, 178-193. Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd Ed.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Deegan, Mary Jo (1990). Jane Addams and the men of the Chicago School. 1892-1918. New Brunswick, N. J.: Transaction. Denzin, Norman K. (1989). The research act. New York: McGraw-Hill. Dewey, John (1910). How we think. Amherst, NY: Prometheus. Faris, Robert L. (1967). Chicago Sociology 1920-1932. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of culture. New York: Basic.

Project No. 55-024 Page 13 of 17

Gilgun, Jane F. (in press a) Hand into glove: Grounded theory, deductive qualitative analysis and social work research and practice. Qualitative Methods in Social Work (2nd ed.), William Reid and Ricky Fortune (Eds.). New York: Columbia University Press. Gilgun, Jane F. (in press b). Qualitative family research: Enduring themes and contemporary variations. In Gary F. Peterson & Kevin Bush (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (3rd ed.). New York: Plenum. Gilgun, Jane F. (2012). Enduring themes of qualitative family research. Journal of Family Theory and Review, 4, 80-95. Gilgun, Jane F. (2011a). Children with serious conduct issues: A case study, a NEATS assessment, and case planning. Amazon Kindle. Gilgun, Jane F. (2011b). The NEATS: A child and family assessment. Amazon Kindle. Gilgun, Jane F. (2010a). Child sexual abuse: From harsh realities to hope. Amazon Kindle. Gilgun, Jane F. (2010b). Methods for enhancing theory and knowledge about problems, policies, and practice. In Katherine Briar, Joan Orme, Roy Ruckdeschel, & Ian Shaw, The Sage handbook of social work research (pp. 281-297). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gilgun, Jane F. (2010c). Reflections on 25 years of research on violence. Reflections: Narratives of Professional Helping, 16(4), 50-59. Gilgun, Jane F. (2009a). One being a sh*t: Unkind deeds and cover-ups in everyday life. Amazon Kindle. Gilgun, Jane F. (2009b). Qualitative research and family psychology. In Mark Stanton & James Bray (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of family psychology (pp. 85-99). Oxford: UK: Blackwell. Gilgun, Jane F. (2008a). Deductive qualitative analysis: Theory-Guided qualitative research. Paper was presented at the Midwest Conference on Qualitative Research, Minneapolis, MN, USA, April 18. Gilgun, Jane F. (2008b). Lived experience, reflexivity, and research on perpetrators of interpersonal violence. Qualitative Social Work, 7(2), 181-197. Gilgun, Jane F. (2007, November). The legacy of the Chicago School of Sociology for family theory building. Paper presented at the Pre-Conference Workshop on Theory Construction and Research Methodology, National Council on Family Relations, Pittsburgh, PA, November 7. Gilgun, Jane F. (2006a). Children and adolescents with problematic sexual behaviors: Lessons from research on resilience. In Robert Longo & Dave Prescott (Eds.), Current perspectives on working with sexually aggressive youth and youth with sexual behavior problems (pp. 383-394). Holyoke, MA: Neari Press. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (2006b). The four cornerstones of qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 16(3), 436-443. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (2005a). Evidence-based practice, descriptive research, and the resilienceschema-gender-brain (RSGB) assessment. British Journal of Social Work. 35 (6), 843-862. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (2005b). Grab and good science: Writing up the results of qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 15(2), 256-262. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (2005c). Lighten up! The citation dilemma in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 15(5), 721-724. (R)

Project No. 55-024 Page 14 of 17

Gilgun, Jane F. (2005d). Qualitative research and family psychology. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(1), 40-50. Gilgun, Jane F. (2005e). The four cornerstones of evidence-based practice in social work. Research on Social Work Practice, 15(1), 52-61. Gilgun, Jane F. (2004a). A strengths-based approach to child and family assessment. In Don R. Catheral (Ed.), Handbook of stress, trauma and the family (pp. 307-324). New York: Bruner-Routledge. Gilgun, Jane F. (2004b). Deductive qualitative analysis and family theory-building. In Verne Bengston, Peggye Dillworth Anderson, Katherine Allen, Alan Acock, & David Klein (Eds.). Sourcebook of Family Theory and Methods (pp. 83-84) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gilgun, Jane F. (2004c). Fictionalizing life stories: Yukee the wine thief. Qualitative Inquiry, 10 (5), 691-705. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (2004d). Qualitative methods and the development of clinical assessment tools. Qualitative Health Research, 14 (7), 1008-1019. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (2004e). The 4-D: Strengths-based assessments for youth whove experienced adversities. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 10 (4), 51-73. (R ) Gilgun, Jane F. (2002a). Completing the Circle: American Indian Medicine Wheels and the promotion of resilience in children and youth in care. Journal of Human Behavior and the Social Environment, 6(2), 65-84. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (2002b). Conjectures and refutations: Governmental funding and qualitative research. Qualitative Social Work, 1(3), 359-375. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (2002c). Social work and the assessment of the potential for violence. In Tan Ngoh Tiong & Imelda Dodds (Eds.), Social work around the world II (pp. 58-74). Berne, Switzerland: International Federation of Social Workers. Gilgun, Jane F. (2001a, November). Case study research, analytic induction, and theory development: The future and the past." Paper presented at the 31st Preconference Workshop on Theory Development and Research Methodology, National Conference on Family Relations, Rochester, NY. Gilgun, Jane F. (2001b). Grounded theory, other inductive methods, and social work methods. In Bruce Thyer (Ed.), Handbook of social work research (pp. 345-364). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gilgun, Jane F. (2001c). Case study designs. In Richard Grinnell (Ed.), Social work research and evaluation (6th ed.) (pp. 260-273). Itasca, IL: Peacock. Gilgun, Jane F. (1999).a CASPARS: New tools for assessing client risks and strengths. Families in Society, 80, 450-459. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (1999b). Fingernails painted red: A feminist, semiotic analysis of "hot" text. Qualitative Inquiry, 5, 181-207. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (1999a). Mapping resilience as process among adults maltreated in childhood. In Hamilton I. McCubbin, Elizabeth A. Thompson, Anne I. Thompson, & Jo A. Futrell (Eds.), The dynamics of resilient families. (pp. 41-70). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gilgun, Jane F. (1999c). Methodological pluralism and qualitative family research. In Suzanne K. Steinmetz, Marvin B. Sussman, and Gary W. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of Marriage and the Family (2nd ed.) (pp. 219-261). New York: Plenum. Gilgun, Jane F. (1996a). Human development and adversity in ecological perspective, Part 2: Three patterns. Families in Society, 77, 459-576. (R)

Project No. 55-024 Page 15 of 17

Gilgun, Jane F. (1996b). Human development and adversity in ecological perspective: Part 1: A conceptual framework. Families in Society, 77, 395-402. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (1995). We shared something special: The moral discourse of incest perpetrators. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 265-281. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (1994a). A case for case studies in social work research. Social Work,39, 371-380. Gilgun, Jane F. (1994b). Avengers, conquerors, playmates, and lovers: A continuum of roles played by perpetrators of child sexual abuse. Families in Society, 75, 467-480. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (1994c). Freedom of choice and research interviewing in child sexual abuse. In Beulah G. Compton & Burt Galaway, Social work processes (5th ed.) (pp. 358-368). Chicago: Dorsey. Gilgun, Jane F. (1994d). Hand into glove: Grounded theory and social work practice research. In William Reid & Edmund Sherman (Eds.), Qualitative methods and social work practice research (pp. 115-125). New York: Columbia University Press. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (1992). Hypothesis generation in social work research. Journal of Social Service Research, 15, 113-135. (R) Gilgun, Jane F. (1991a). Discovery-oriented qualitative methods relevant to longitudinal research on child abuse and neglect. In Raymond H. Starr, Jr. & David A. Wolfe (Eds.) The effects of child abuse and neglect: Issues and research. (pp. 144-163). New York: Guilford. Gilgun, Jane F. (1991b). Resilience and the intergenerational transmission of child sexual abuse. In Michael Q. Patton (Ed.), Family sexual abuse: Frontline research and evaluation (pp. 93-105). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Gilgun, Jane F. (l990). Factors mediating the effects of childhood maltreatment. In Mic Hunter (Ed.), The sexually abused male: Prevalence, impact, and treatment (pp. 177-190). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Gilgun, Jane F. (1998a, November). A comprehensive theory of family violence. Paper presented at the Pre-Conference Workshop on Theory Construction and Research Methdology, National Council on Family Relations, Milwaukee, WI. Gilgun, Jane F. (l988b). Self-centeredness and the adult male perpetrator of child sexual abuse. Contemporary Family Therapy, 10, 216-234. Gilgun, Jane F. & Roberta G. Sands (in press). Special issue editorial: The contribution of qualitative approaches to developmental intervention research. Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice. Gilgun, Jane F. & Alankaar Sharma (2011). The uses of humour in case management with high risk Children & their families, British Journal of Social Work, 1-18. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcr070 Gilgun, Jane F., & Alankaar Sharma (2008). Child sexual abuse. In Jeffrey L. Edleson & Claire M. Renzetti (Eds.) Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Violence (pp. 122-125). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gilgun, Jane F., & Laura S. Abrams (2005). Gendered adaptations, resilience, and the perpetration of violence. In Michael Ungar (Ed.), Handbook for working with children and Youth: Pathways to resilience across cultures and context (pp. 5770). Toronto: University of Toronto. Gilgun, Jane F. & Laura Abrams (2002). Commentary on Denzin: The nature and usefulness of qualitative social work research. Qualitative Social Work, 1(1), 39-55.

Project No. 55-024 Page 16 of 17

Gilgun, Jane F. Christian Klein, & Kay Pranis. (2000). The significance of resources in models of risk, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14, 627-646. Gilgun, Jane F., & Laura McLeod (1999). Gendering violence. Studies in Symbolic Interactionism, 22, 167-193. Gilgun, Jane F., Susan Keskinen, Danette Jones Marti, & Kay Rice. (1999). Clinical applications of the CASPARS instruments: Boys who act out sexually. Families in Society, 80, 629-641. Gilgun, Jane F. & Teresa M. Connor (1990). Isolation and the adult male perpetrator of child sexual abuse. In Anne L. Horton, Barry L. Johnson, Lynn M. Roundy, & Doran Williams (Eds.), The incest perpetrator: The family member no one wants to treat (pp. 74 --87). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Gilgun, Jane F., & Elizabeth Reiser. (1990). Sexual identity development among men sexually abused in childhood. Families in Society, 71, 515-523. (R) Gilgun, Jane F., & Teresa M. Connor. (1989). How perpetrators view child sexual abuse. Social Work, 34, 349-351. Hall, S. (1997). Visceral cultures. Theoretical Criminology, 1(4), 453-478. Hendin, Josephine G. (2004). Heartbreakers: Women and violence in contemporary culture and literature. New York: Plagrave Macmillan. Hearn, Jeff (1998). The violences of men. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jaccard, James & Jacob Jacoby (2010). Theory construction and model-building skills: A practical guide for social scientists. New York: Guilford. Jack, Dana Crowley (1999). Behind the mask: Destruction and creativity in womens aggression. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Katz, Jack (1988). The seductions of crime. New York: Basic. Johnson, Michael P. (1995) Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 283294. Johnson, Michael P. (2008). A typology of domestic violence. Boston: University Press of New England. Lawson, Louanne (2003). Isolation, gratification, justification: Offenders' explanations of child molesting. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 24, 695-705. Levin, Irene (2007). Discourses within and about social work. In Lena Dominelli (Ed.). (2007). Revitalizing communities in a globalizing world (pp. 43-66). Burlington, VT: Ashgate. Lindesmith, Alfred R. (l947). Addictions and opiates. Chicago: Aldine. McCaghy, C. (1967). Child molesters: A study of their careers as deviants. In M B. Clinard and R. Quinney (Eds.). Criminal behavior systems: A typology. New York: Holt. Patton, Michael Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Patton, Michael Q. (2011). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. New York: Guilford. Pew Center for the States (2007). One in 100 behind bars in the United States 2008 http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/One%20in%20100.pdf. Popper, K. R. (1969). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Rhodes, Richard. (1999)Why they kill: The discoveries of a maverick sociologist. New York: Vintage.

Project No. 55-024 Page 17 of 17

Samenow, Stanton E. (2004). Inside the criminal mind. New York: Crown. Sanday P. R. (1990). Fraternity gang rape: Sex, brotherhood, and privilege on campus. New York: New York University. Sharma, Alankaar & Jane F. Gilgun (2008). What perpetrators say about child sexual abuse. Indian Journal of Social Work, 69(3), 321-338. Shaw, Clifford (1930). The jack roller. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Stark, Evan (2009). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. New York: Oxford University. Sutherland, Edwin H. (1937). The professional thief. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Thrasher, Frederick (1927) The gang. University of Chicago Press. Tierney, W.G. (2003). Undaunted courage: Life history and the postmodern challenge. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln, Y. (Eds.) Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry (2nd ed.) p. 292-318. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Van Maanen, John (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Websdale, Neil. (2010) Familicidal hearts: The emotional styles of 211 killers. New York: Oxford University Press. Winlow, Simon & Steve Hall (2009). Crime, Media, Culture, 5, 285-304. Ungar, Michael, Marian Brown, Linda Liebenberg, Rasha Othman, Wai Man Kwong, Mary Armstrong, & Jane Gilgun (2007). Unique pathways to resilience across cultures. Adolescence, 42(166), 287-310 US Bureau of the Census (2012). State and Country Quick Facts USA. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html. Znaniecki, Florian (l934). The method of sociology. New York: Farrar & Rinehart.