Volume 23, Issue 2 (Summer 2017)                   IJPCP 2017, 23(2): 218-231 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Panaghi L, Ghahari S, Mokhtarnia I, Dasarband B, Nabavian V. Preliminary Study of Psychometric Features of Wife Abuse Questionnaire . IJPCP. 2017; 23 (2) :218-231
URL: http://ijpcp.iums.ac.ir/article-1-2541-en.html
1- MD in Community Medicine, Associate Professor Family Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2- . PhD in Clinical Psychology, Assistant Professor Department of Mental Health, School of Behavioral Sciences and Mental Health (Tehran Institute of Psychiatry), Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 2. Research Center of Psychiatric and Behavioral Sciences,Addiction Institute, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran.
3- PhD Student, Department of Basic Research Family Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran , Email:mokhtarnia66@gmail.com
4- MA Department of Families With Special Needs, Family Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University
Full-Text [PDF 5702 kb]   (473 Downloads)     |   Abstract (HTML)  (1247 Views)
Full-Text:   (157 Views)
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction

Wife abuse is one of the most common phenomena in developing countries which leaves harmful effects on women's mental health  and is considered one of the most important types of domestic violence, and is referred to the violence through which, men exercise their social or physical power on women. Based on research literature, wife abuse is divided into three general categories of abuse including: physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse. Given the importance of identifying, diagnosis, prevention and performing therapeutic interventions in the field of wife abuse, tools are needed to measure and assess wife abuse. In this regard, one of the Iranian made tools is the coercive spouse abuse questionnaire; although this questionnaire has been used in most Iranian studies, however, the psychometric properties of this questionnaire have not been comprehensively addressed in Iran. Therefore, the present study was conducted with the aim of evaluating the psychometric properties of the wife abuse questionnaire in a sample of women in non-clinical group.
2. Method
The method of the present study is an analysis of the correlation type. The statistical population of this study included all the married women of the city of Mashhad . By using available s ampling method, 671 subjects were selected among them which included two groups. The first group included 536 women who did not ask for divorce, and the second group included 141 women who were asking for divorce and had referred to the branches of family courts of the city of Mashhad. Sample inclusion criteria were those not asking for divorce; married, having passed at least one year of marital life, permanent marriage, and having at least completed the third-year of secondary school education. Exclusion criteria were: suffering from a mental disorder, and asking for divorce. Also among the inclusion criteria were asking for divorce, having passed more than one year of married life, permanent marriage, having filed petition for divorce and having completed at least the third year of secondary school education. 
For data analysis the multivariate variance analysis test and Pearson correlation coefficient were used, and confirmatory factor analysis was through the diametric weighted least squares method, which were considered using SPSS21 and Lisrel 8.8 software. The error level of type one was 0.01 and the beta value was considered as 0.2. Meanwhile all ethical principles including the principle of autonomy and the principle of confidentiality were observed in the research. The research tools were coercive spouse abuse questionnaire which was conducted on the sample group along with Sherer Self-efficacy Scale questionnaire and Beck’s Depression Inventory, as the concurrent criterion validity, and conflict resolution tactics questionnaire as convergent validity.  
3. Results
In the first stage, the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) method was used to investigate the unchangeability of spouse abuse questionnaire. Indicators obtained from factor analysis demonstrate that the index value of the square root of the mean squares of the approximate error was less than 0.08 which indicates the optimal fit and desirability of the model (RMSEA=0.031); also the square root value of the mean squares of the standardized remainder was 0.069, in which the value less than 0.08 is considered as acceptable fit. Also, the indicator value of the goodness of fit of the model was 0.99 and the adaptive fit indicator of the model was 1 which indicates the acceptable fit between the three-factor model and the data. Also, the results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that all questions were identified in their own relevant factor and no question was deleted from the questionnaire. 
For examining the concurrent validity, the questionnaire of conflict resolution tactics was used and for assessing the validity of the concurrent criterion, the tools of self-efficacy and depression were used, and the Pearson's correlation coefficients with spouse abuse questionnaire were respectively: 0.60, -0.40, and 0.40, which showed the convergent validity and concurrent criterion of the spouse abuse questionnaire were satisfactory. Also, in examining the validity of the questionnaire’s structure, the correlation coefficients between spouse abuse questionnaire factors were studied and all correlations were significant at the level 0.01. The distinctive validity of spouse abuse questionnaire was performed by using multivariate variance analysis. And by comparing the mean scores of the two groups of married women asking for divorce and married women not asking for divorce, results showed that spouse abuse scores in women asking for divorce were higher than those who were not asking for divorce. In examining the reliability of the questionnaire the results of Cronbach's alpha coefficient in the total scale was 0.95, in the emotional abuse factor was 0.93, in physical abuse factor was 0.88, and in sexual abuse was 0.87, which were satisfactory.
4. Discussion
Based on the results obtained from this study, the coercive spouse abuse questionnaire has proper psychometric characteristics, with the explanation that the results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that the 3 factor model has desirably fit indicators; also all items of the questionnaire had acceptable load factor and were significantly uploaded on the desired factors. Resultantly, no items of any of the three factors: emotional abuse, physical abuse, and sexual abuse of the questionnaire were deleted. On the other hand, the self-efficacy and depression tools were used to examine the validity of the concurrent criterion in the individual performance dimension arising from spouse abuse. 
Results showed that spouse abuse questionnaire has the capacity to anticipate the self-efficacy and depression of women. Therefore, the validity of this questionnaire criterion was also confirmed. In addition to having criterion validity for this questionnaire, the convergent validity was also confirmed and results showed that the spouse abuse questionnaire has also stronger connection with questionnaire similar to it. 
It should be stated that reliability and validity coefficients suitable for this scale, short duration, ease of implementation and assessment of different dimensions of spouse abuse can make this questionnaire a suitable tool to be used for research purposes and for families’ evaluation in family counseling, and It is also suggested to other researchers that, given the importance of this tool in research literature, they should validate these tools for applying them in clinical settings. On the other hand, as the content of this questionnaire assesses the personal and confidential issues of individuals’ life, it is possible that the subjects act in a cautious manner to fill it out; this behavior can undermine the validity of the research, which can be one of the limitations  of the present study.
Acknowledgments
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
 
References
  1. Lachs MS, Pillemer K. Elder abuse. The Lancet. 2004; 364(9441):1263–72. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(4)17144-4
  2. Krug EG, Mercy JA, Dahlberg LL, Zwi AB. The world report on violence and health. Lancet. 2002; 360(9339):1083–8. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(02)11133-0
  3. Dutton DG. The domestic assault of women: Psychological and criminal justice perspectives. British Columbia: University of British Columbia Press; 2011.
  4. Crowell NA, Burgess AW. Understanding violence against women. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association; 1996. doi: 10.1037/10204-000
  5. Richardson J. Identifying domestic violence: cross sectional study in primary care. BMJ. 2002; 324(7332):274. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7332.274
  6. Mulroney J. Australian statistics for domestic violence. Fitzroy North: Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearing House; 2003.
  7. Devries KM, Mak JYT, Garcia-Moreno C, Petzold M, Child JC, Falder G, et al. The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science. 2013; 340(6140):1527–8. doi: 10.1126/science.1240937
  8. Panaghi L, Ghahari S, Ahmadabadi Z, Yoosefi H. [Spouse abuse and mental Health: The role of social support and coping strategies (Persian)]. Journal of Iranian Psychologists. 2008; 5(17):69-79.
  9. Rashti PR, Naderi F. [Descriptive study of domestic violence and its relation with psychological profile of married women (Persian)]. Journal of Women and Culture. 2015; 6(24):51-66.
  10. Ghahari SH, Atef Vahid MK, Yosefi H. [Evaluation of the domestic violence in Azad University of Tonekabon (Persian)]. Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences. 2006; 50(15):83-91.
  11. Shayan A, Masoumi SZ, Kaviani M. [The relationship between wife abuse and mental health in women experiencing domestic violence referred to the forensic medical center of shiraz (Persian)]. Journal of Education and Community Health. 2015; 1(4):51-7.
  12. Albaugh LM, Nauta MM. Career decision self-efficacy, career barriers, and college women’s experiences of intimate partner violence. Journal of Career Assessment. 2005; 13(3):288–306. doi: 10.1177/1069072705274958
  13. Houry D, Kaslow NJ, Thompson MP. Depressive symptoms in women experiencing intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2005; 20(11):1467–77. doi: 10.1177/0886260505278529
  14. Afifi TO, Henriksen CA, Asmundson GJG, Sareen J. Victimization and perpetration of  intimate partner violence and substance use disorders in a nationally representative sample. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 2012; 200(8):684–91. doi: 10.1097/nmd.0b013e3182613f64
  15. Van Hasselt VB, Morrison RL, Bellack AS, Hersen M. Handbook of family violence. New York: Springer; 1988. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-5360-8
  16. Devries KM, Mak JY, Bacchus LJ, Child JC, Falder G, Petzold M, et al. Intimate partner violence and incident depressive symptoms and suicide attempts: A systematic review of longitudinal studies. PLoS Medicine. 2013; 10(5):1001439. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001439
  17. Hekmat Kh, Mortazavi E, Haghighi MH, Farzad Hoseini S. [Survey of prevalence and severity of suicidal ideation in women with spouse abuse referred to Ahvaz Forensic Medicine Center in 2013 (Persian)]. Journal of Zabol University of Medical Sciences and Health Services. 2016; 7(4):1-11.
  18. Rasulian M, Bolhari J, Nojomi M, Habib S, Mirzaei Khoshalani M. [Theories and interventional models of intimate partner violence: Suggesting an interventional model based on primary health care system in Iran (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology. 2015; 21(1):3-16.
  19. McFarlane J, Hughes RB, Nosek MA, Groff JY, Swedlend N, Dolan Mullen P. Abuse assessment screen-disability (AAS-D): Measuring frequency, type, and perpetrator of abuse toward women with physical disabilities. Journal of Women’s Health & Gender-Based Medicine. 2001; 10(9):861–6. doi: 10.1089/152460901753285750
  20. Shepard MF, Campbell JA. The abusive behavior inventory. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 1992; 7(3):291–305. doi: 10.1177/088626092007003001
  21. Straus MA. Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) scales. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1979; 41(1):75-88. doi: 10.2307/351733
  22. Straus MA. The conflict tactics scales and its critics: An evaluation and new data on validity and reliability. Durham: University of New Hampshire Pub; 1987.
  23. Straus MA, Hamby SL, Boney-McCoy S, Sugarman DB. The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2). Journal of Family Issues. 1996; 17(3):283–316. doi: 10.1177/019251396017003001
  24. Panaghi L, Dehghani M, Abbasi M, Mohammadi S, Maleki G. [Investigating reliability, validity and factor structure of the revised conflict tactics scale (Persian)]. Journal of Family Research. 2011; 7(1):103-7.
  25. Panaghi L, Pirouzi D, Shirinbayan M, Ahmadabadi Z. [The role of personality and demographic traits in spouse abuse (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology. 2011; 17(2):126-35.
  26. Navroi S, Omid S, Zeinali S, Khasteganan N. [Relationship between spouse abuse, social support and perceived stress in women with addicted and non-addicted husbands in Rasht city (Persian)]. Journal of Holistic Nursing and Midwifery. 2012; 22(2):25-32.
  27. Hooman H. [Structural equation modeling using Lisrel software (Tehran)]. Tehran: SAMT; 2012
  28. Boomsma A, Hoogland JJ. The robustness of Lisrel modeling revisited. In: Cudeck R, du Toit S, Sorbom D. Structural Equation Models: Present and Future. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International; 2001.
  29. Straus MA. Cross-cultural reliability and validity of the revised conflict tactics scales: A study of university student dating couples in 17 nations. Cross-Cultural Research. 2004; 38(4):407–32. doi: 10.1177/1069397104269543
  30. Sherer M, Maddux JE, Mercandante B, Prentice-Dunn S, Jacobs B, Rogers RW. The self-efficacy scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports. 1982; 51(2):663–71. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1982.51.2.663
  31. Asghar Nejad T, Ahmadi M, Farzad V, Khodapanahi M K. [The psychometric properties of the scale efficacy study (Persian)].  Journal of Psychology. 2006; 3(10); 262-274.
  32. Groth-Marnat G. Handbook of psychological assessment. New Jersi: John Wiley & Sons; 2009.
  33. Beck AT, Steer RA, Carbin MG. Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: Twenty-five years of evaluation. Clinical Psychology Review. 1988; 8(1):77–100. doi: 10.1016/0272-7358(88)90050-5
  34. Goudarzi MA. [The validity and reliability of the Beck Hopelessness Scale in a group of students from Shiraz University (Persian)]. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities of Shiraz University. 2008; 2(18):26-39.
  35. Jöreskog KG, So¨rbom D.  Lisrel 8.7 for Windows [Computer Software]. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International, Inc; 2004.
  36. Li CH. Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods. 2015; 48(3):936–49. doi: 10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7
  37. Meyers LS, Gamst G, Guarino AJ. Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. California: Sage Publications; 2006.
  38. Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist. 1982; 37(2):122–47. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.37.2.122
  39. Iverson KM, Gradus JL, Resick PA, Suvak MK, Smith KF, Monson CM. Cognitive–behavioral therapy for PTSD and depression symptoms reduces risk for future intimate partner violence among interpersonal trauma survivors. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2011; 79(2):193–202. doi: 10.1037/a0022512
  40. Pashasharifi H. Principles of psychometric and psychological testing (Persian)]. Tehran: Roshd; 2012.
  41. Sadrolashrafi M, Khonakdar M, Shamkhani A, Yusefi Afrashteh M. [Pathology of divorce (factors and causes) and solutions to prevent (Persian)]. Journal of Cultural Engineering. 2011; 7(73); 26-53.
  42. George D. SPSS for windows step by step: A simple study guide and reference, 17.0 update, 10/e. Noida: Pearson Education India; 2011.
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: General
Received: 2016/07/20 | Accepted: 2017/01/24 | Published: 2017/07/1

References
1. Lachs MS, Pillemer K. Elder abuse. The Lancet. 2004; 364(9441):1263–72. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(4)17144-4
2. Krug EG, Mercy JA, Dahlberg LL, Zwi AB. The world report on violence and health. Lancet. 2002; 360(9339):1083–8. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(02)11133-0 [DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11133-0]
3. Dutton DG. The domestic assault of women: Psychological and criminal justice perspectives. British Columbia: University of British Columbia Press; 2011.
4. Crowell NA, Burgess AW. Understanding violence against women. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association; 1996. doi: 10.1037/10204-000 [DOI:10.1037/10204-000]
5. Richardson J. Identifying domestic violence: cross sectional study in primary care. BMJ. 2002; 324(7332):274. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7332.274 [DOI:10.1136/bmj.324.7332.274]
6. Mulroney J. Australian statistics for domestic violence. Fitzroy North: Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearing House; 2003.
7. Devries KM, Mak JYT, Garcia-Moreno C, Petzold M, Child JC, Falder G, et al. The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science. 2013; 340(6140):1527–8. doi: 10.1126/science.1240937 [DOI:10.1126/science.1240937]
8. Panaghi L, Ghahari S, Ahmadabadi Z, Yoosefi H. [Spouse abuse and mental Health: The role of social support and coping strategies (Persian)]. Journal of Iranian Psychologists. 2008; 5(17):69-79.
9. Rashti PR, Naderi F. [Descriptive study of domestic violence and its relation with psychological profile of married women (Persian)]. Journal of Women and Culture. 2015; 6(24):51-66.
10. Ghahari SH, Atef Vahid MK, Yosefi H. [Evaluation of the domestic violence in Azad University of Tonekabon (Persian)]. Journal of Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences. 2006; 50(15):83-91.
11. Shayan A, Masoumi SZ, Kaviani M. [The relationship between wife abuse and mental health in women experiencing domestic violence referred to the forensic medical center of shiraz (Persian)]. Journal of Education and Community Health. 2015; 1(4):51-7. [DOI:10.20286/jech-010451]
12. Albaugh LM, Nauta MM. Career decision self-efficacy, career barriers, and college women's experiences of intimate partner violence. Journal of Career Assessment. 2005; 13(3):288–306. doi: 10.1177/1069072705274958 [DOI:10.1177/1069072705274958]
13. Houry D, Kaslow NJ, Thompson MP. Depressive symptoms in women experiencing intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2005; 20(11):1467–77. doi: 10.1177/0886260505278529 [DOI:10.1177/0886260505278529]
14. Afifi TO, Henriksen CA, Asmundson GJG, Sareen J. Victimization and perpetration of intimate partner violence and substance use disorders in a nationally representative sample. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 2012; 200(8):684–91. doi: 10.1097/nmd.0b013e3182613f64 [DOI:10.1097/NMD.0b013e3182613f64]
15. Van Hasselt VB, Morrison RL, Bellack AS, Hersen M. Handbook of family violence. New York: Springer; 1988. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-5360-8 [DOI:10.1007/978-1-4757-5360-8]
16. Devries KM, Mak JY, Bacchus LJ, Child JC, Falder G, Petzold M, et al. Intimate partner violence and incident depressive symptoms and suicide attempts: A systematic review of longitudinal studies. PLoS Medicine. 2013; 10(5):1001439. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001439 [DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001439]
17. Hekmat Kh, Mortazavi E, Haghighi MH, Farzad Hoseini S. [Survey of prevalence and severity of suicidal ideation in women with spouse abuse referred to Ahvaz Forensic Medicine Center in 2013 (Persian)]. Journal of Zabol University of Medical Sciences and Health Services. 2016; 7(4):1-11.
18. Rasulian M, Bolhari J, Nojomi M, Habib S, Mirzaei Khoshalani M. [Theories and interventional models of intimate partner violence: Suggesting an interventional model based on primary health care system in Iran (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology. 2015; 21(1):3-16.
19. McFarlane J, Hughes RB, Nosek MA, Groff JY, Swedlend N, Dolan Mullen P. Abuse assessment screen-disability (AAS-D): Measuring frequency, type, and perpetrator of abuse toward women with physical disabilities. Journal of Women's Health & Gender-Based Medicine. 2001; 10(9):861–6. doi: 10.1089/152460901753285750 [DOI:10.1089/152460901753285750]
20. Shepard MF, Campbell JA. The abusive behavior inventory. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 1992; 7(3):291–305. doi: 10.1177/088626092007003001 [DOI:10.1177/088626092007003001]
21. Straus MA. Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) scales. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1979; 41(1):75-88. doi: 10.2307/351733 [DOI:10.2307/351733]
22. Straus MA. The conflict tactics scales and its critics: An evaluation and new data on validity and reliability. Durham: University of New Hampshire Pub; 1987.
23. Straus MA, Hamby SL, Boney-McCoy S, Sugarman DB. The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2). Journal of Family Issues. 1996; 17(3):283–316. doi: 10.1177/019251396017003001 [DOI:10.1177/019251396017003001]
24. Panaghi L, Dehghani M, Abbasi M, Mohammadi S, Maleki G. [Investigating reliability, validity and factor structure of the revised conflict tactics scale (Persian)]. Journal of Family Research. 2011; 7(1):103-7.
25. Panaghi L, Pirouzi D, Shirinbayan M, Ahmadabadi Z. [The role of personality and demographic traits in spouse abuse (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology. 2011; 17(2):126-35.
26. Navroi S, Omid S, Zeinali S, Khasteganan N. [Relationship between spouse abuse, social support and perceived stress in women with addicted and non-addicted husbands in Rasht city (Persian)]. Journal of Holistic Nursing and Midwifery. 2012; 22(2):25-32.
27. Hooman H. [Structural equation modeling using Lisrel software (Tehran)]. Tehran: SAMT; 2012
28. Boomsma A, Hoogland JJ. The robustness of Lisrel modeling revisited. In: Cudeck R, du Toit S, Sorbom D. Structural Equation Models: Present and Future. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International; 2001.
29. Straus MA. Cross-cultural reliability and validity of the revised conflict tactics scales: A study of university student dating couples in 17 nations. Cross-Cultural Research. 2004; 38(4):407–32. doi: 10.1177/1069397104269543 [DOI:10.1177/1069397104269543]
30. Sherer M, Maddux JE, Mercandante B, Prentice-Dunn S, Jacobs B, Rogers RW. The self-efficacy scale: Construction and validation. Psychological Reports. 1982; 51(2):663–71. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1982.51.2.663 [DOI:10.2466/pr0.1982.51.2.663]
31. Asghar Nejad T, Ahmadi M, Farzad V, Khodapanahi M K. [The psychometric properties of the scale efficacy study (Persian)]. Journal of Psychology. 2006; 3(10); 262-274.
32. Groth-Marnat G. Handbook of psychological assessment. New Jersi: John Wiley & Sons; 2009. [PMID]
33. Beck AT, Steer RA, Carbin MG. Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: Twenty-five years of evaluation. Clinical Psychology Review. 1988; 8(1):77–100. doi: 10.1016/0272-7358(88)90050-5 [DOI:10.1016/0272-7358(88)90050-5]
34. Goudarzi MA. [The validity and reliability of the Beck Hopelessness Scale in a group of students from Shiraz University (Persian)]. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities of Shiraz University. 2008; 2(18):26-39.
35. Jöreskog KG, So¨rbom D. Lisrel 8.7 for Windows [Computer Software]. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International, Inc; 2004.
36. Li CH. Confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data: Comparing robust maximum likelihood and diagonally weighted least squares. Behavior Research Methods. 2015; 48(3):936–49. doi: 10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7 [DOI:10.3758/s13428-015-0619-7]
37. Meyers LS, Gamst G, Guarino AJ. Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. California: Sage Publications; 2006.
38. Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist. 1982; 37(2):122–47. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.37.2.122 [DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122]
39. Iverson KM, Gradus JL, Resick PA, Suvak MK, Smith KF, Monson CM. Cognitive–behavioral therapy for PTSD and depression symptoms reduces risk for future intimate partner violence among interpersonal trauma survivors. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2011; 79(2):193–202. doi: 10.1037/a0022512 [DOI:10.1037/a0022512]
40. Pashasharifi H. Principles of psychometric and psychological testing (Persian)]. Tehran: Roshd; 2012.
41. Sadrolashrafi M, Khonakdar M, Shamkhani A, Yusefi Afrashteh M. [Pathology of divorce (factors and causes) and solutions to prevent (Persian)]. Journal of Cultural Engineering. 2011; 7(73); 26-53.
42. George D. SPSS for windows step by step: A simple study guide and reference, 17.0 update, 10/e. Noida: Pearson Education India; 2011.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
Write the security code in the box

Send email to the article author


© 2018 All Rights Reserved | Iranian Journal of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb