1 / 28

Descriptive meta-analysis based on 240 studies, representing  265,000 cases/persons

Meta-Analysis:. Descriptive meta-analysis based on 240 studies, representing  265,000 cases/persons. “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D. 2. The State of the Art of Stalking

kanan
Download Presentation

Descriptive meta-analysis based on 240 studies, representing  265,000 cases/persons

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Meta-Analysis: • Descriptive meta-analysis based on 240 studies, representing  265,000 cases/persons “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.2

  2. The State of the Art of Stalking And Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory Brian H. Spitzberg, Ph.D., School of Communication San Diego State University • Descriptive meta-analysis based on 247 studies, representing  265,000 cases/persons “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.3

  3. INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS Stalking Versus ORI: • Stalking: An unwanted and fear-inducing [intentional] pattern of intrusions or communication imposed on another (Mullen et al., 2000) • Obsessive Relational Intrusion: Unwanted pursuit of intimacy through repeated intrusions of privacy (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2001, 2002) Stalking need not seek intimacy ORI need not cause fear or threat IPV STALKING ORI “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.4

  4. Stalking Prevalence: “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.5

  5. Cyber-Stalking Prevalence: “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.6

  6. Sex Differences: • Females are 78% of victims (n=82); • Males are 76% of pursuers (n=72). • Perhaps males are…?: • Pigs? • less fearful of stalking, • less likely to define stalking as stalking, • more embarrassed to report, • more pursuer, & females more ‘gatekeeper’ (Bjerregaard, ’00; Cupach & Spitzberg, ‘00; Davis et al., 2002; Sinclair & Frieze, ’00; Tjaden & Thoennes, ’00; Tjaden et al., ’00) “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.7

  7. Sex Differences: • A meta-analysis of 25 college samples (n > 7,000) mostly SDSU college students, found: • Females find ORI more threatening than males do; • Females find male pursuers as more threatening than males find female pursuers; • Pursuers report perpetrating “unwanted pursuit” on females more than on males; • But female victims do not report more ORI or self-labeled “stalking” than males victims report; • And females and males do not differ in self-attributions of having engaged in “stalking” “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.8

  8. Cautiously progressive Unregulated & Unreciprocated ‘torrent’ Self- Disclosure Displays caring & empathy consistent with stage Excess gifts, notes, calls, tokens, & professions of love Liking & Loving Mutual negotiation of exclusivity Early & unilateral insistence on exclusivity; ‘fated future,’ jealousy Expressions of Commitment Interactional Profile Intimacy ‘Normal’ ORI/Stalking Dimension Relationships Relationships “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.9

  9. Gradual & mutual interpenetration Increasingly non-mutual Interests/ Activities Escalation of comfort intimacy, rapport, rituals, & synchrony P expresses desire & graphic scenarios, increasing ‘strain’ Physical Interaction Progressive but punctuated Hyperactive possessiveness Closeness & Proximity Interactional Profile Intimacy ‘Normal’ ORI/Stalking Dimension Relationships Relationships “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.10

  10. (> 250 tactic labels, study N = 40, Spitzberg, 2002) ORI/Stalking Topography: HYPER-INTIMACY TACTICS MEDIATED CONTACTS INTERACTIONAL CONTACT TACTICS SURVEILLANCE TACTICS INVASION TACTICS HARASSMENT & INTIMIDATION COERCION & THREAT TACTICS AGGRESSION/VIOLENCE TACTICS IX. p P U R R O S X U Y I T “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.11

  11. Violence & Threats: • Threat use: 44% (n=91) • Sexual aggression: 12% (n=47) • Violence: 34% (n=98) • > 50% with prior sexual relationship (Meloy, 2000; Rosenfeld, 2006) • Threats predict violence (r = .37) (n=73, p<.001) • However: • false positive rates = 62% (n = 12) • false negative rates = 16% (n = 10) (C&S, 2004) “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.12

  12. Motives: “The desires of the heart are as crooked as corkscrews” (W.H. Auden, 1937) • INSTRUMENTAL (persecutory1, predatory2, revenge3): • Agenda (issue-based, disputes) • Control (intimidation, isolation, possession) • Instrumental Affect (attention-seeking, harass, humiliate, revenge, jealousy possessiveness, scare) • EXPRESSIVE (amorous1, affective2, love3): • Affective (love, infatuation, jealousy, envy) • Affective (anger, rage, betrayal, grief) • Relational Bid (friendship, escalation, reconciliation) • Sexual Attraction 1=Harmon et al. ‘98; 2=Meloy ‘01; 3=*Rosenfeld ‘00 “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.13

  13. Motives: • “The desires of the heart are as crooked as corkscrews” • (W.H. Auden, 1937) • PERSONALOGICAL: • Incompetence: mental disorder, social incompetence • CONTEXTUAL: • Break-up/separation/divorce • Incidental • Interactional • Interdependence • Nostalgia • Rival 1=Harmon et al. ‘98; 2=Meloy ‘01; 3=*Rosenfeld ‘00 “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.14

  14. Relational Goals Theory RELATIONAL ENTITLEMENT & PROPRIETARINESS SELF-EFFICACY GOAL LINKING RUMIN-ATION DETERM-INATION ORI IDENTITY THREAT COGNITIVE AFFECTIVE HYPER-INTIMACY AGGRES-SION SURVEIL-LANCE SENSI-TIVITY BLAME “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.15

  15. Relational Goals Theory • Kam & Spitzberg (2005): • GOAL LINKAGE(Investment Size, Commitment, Inclusion, Dependence, Relationship Thinking, Goal Linkage) predicted: • REJECTION-BASED AROUSAL(Perceived Rejection, Face Threat, Negative Arousal), which predicted: • RUMINATION ESCALATION(Thought Intrusion, Paradoxical Rebound), which predicted: • OBSESSION(Low CLALT, Obsession), which we hoped would predict: • ORI PERPETRATION • RESULTS: Optimal scaling regression (due to restricted variance of DV) accounted for 28% of the variance in ORI perpetration “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.16

  16. Relational Goals Theory • Cupach, Spitzberg, Younghans, & Gibbons (2006): • GOAL LINKAGE • RUMINATION & ANTICIPATORY EMOTIONS • SELF-EFFICACY • EMOTIONAL FLOODING • RECONCILIATIONPERSISTENCE • ORI PERPETRATION • MODERATOR: Who initiated the breakup • RESULTS: • 59% reconciliation persistence accounted for by linking, rumination, and self-efficacy for those whose partner wanted out (vs. 32% for Ss who wanted out) • 16% ORI accounted for by linking, rumination, and self-efficacy, with no moderation “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.17

  17. 4th ORDER EFFECTS: Law Enforcement Moral Panic Societal Costs Effects/Symptoms: 3rd ORDER EFFECTS: ‘Direct’ Impacts on Children Family Friends Colleagues 2nd ORDER EFFECTS: Relations-Children Relations-Family Relations-Friends Relations-Colleagues 1st ORDER EFFECTS: Physical Psychological Emotional Social Resource “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.18

  18. Effects/Symptoms: GENERAL DISTURBANCE: e.g., injured emotionally or psychologically; personality changed; PTSD; quality of life costs; etc. AFFECTIVE HEALTH: e.g., anger; anxiety, depression, fear, frustration, feeling imprisoned, intimidated, jealousy, paranoia, stress, etc.; COGNITIVE HEALTH: e.g., confusion; distrust, loss of self-esteem, suspiciousness, helplessness/powerlessness; suicide ideation;, etc. BEHAVIORAL DISTURBANCE: e.g., changing behavioral routines, change work/school/residence, etc.; PHYSICAL HEALTH: e.g., alcohol problems; appetite disturbance; cigarette smoking; insomnia; nausea; physical illness; suicide; etc. SOCIAL HEALTH: e.g., avoid certain places/people; cautiousness; relationship deterioration; lifestyle disruption; etc. RESOURCE HEALTH: e.g., disruption of work or school; financial costs; lost time from work; etc. SPIRITUAL HEALTH: e.g., loss of faith, loss of religion, loss of belief in social institutions; etc. RESILIENCE: e.g., develop stronger relationships with family or friends, develop greater self-efficacy/self-concept, etc. “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.19

  19. Moving With A B “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.20

  20. Moving Inward B A “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.21

  21. Moving Against A B B “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.22

  22. Moving Away A B “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.23

  23. Moving Outward A B D E C “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.24

  24. Coping—Prevalence: • RELATIONAL RESPONSES:Prevalence • EXTRA-RELATIONAL RESPONSES: Mean • Moving Against: Attempting to deter/punish pursuer 33% • Moving With: Attempting to negotiate/redirect relationship 25% • Moving Away: Attempting to avoid pursuer 25% • Moving Outward:Mobilizing assistance/input of others 32% • Moving Inward: Working on oneself 17% (> 18 studies, Spitzberg, 2002) “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.25

  25. Law Enforcement: Contacts M N SD % Contact someone 75 8 22 % Friends/family contact 59 14 25 % Contact police 42 41 26 % Police “helpful” 47 7 30 % Police “NOT helpful” † 45 5 15 • Reason for not reporting: 8% “attacker was a police officer” (NVAW, Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000, “Extent…” Ex. 17, n = 16,000) • Reason why police didn’t take action: 6% “offender was police officer” (Suppl. Victimization Survey, Baum et al., 2009, App. 12, n = 65,000) “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.26

  26. Law Enforcement: Protective Orders (PO) M N SD % Sought PO 45 15 36 % POs Violated* 38 24 25 % POs “Made Worse” 17 5 5 * Study of DV PO’s in Arizona indicates even when violated, most women FEEL better for obtaining a protective order (Johnson, Luna & Stein, 2003). “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.27

  27. Further Information: • Brian H. Spitzberg, • Ph.D., SDSU Senate Distinguished Professor • spitz@mail.sdsu.edu • To contribute to the meta-analytic data-base: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=X4GrMTqoMLIjAEujNEs7AQ_3d_3d “The State of the Art of Stalking and Special Focus on the Relational Goal Pursuit Theory” BRIAN H. SPITZBERG, Ph.D.28

More Related