ALCOHOLISM: CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH
Vol. 37, No. 9 September 2013
The Association Between an Abusive Father–Son Relationship, Quantity of Alcohol Consumption, and Male-to-Male Alcohol-Related Aggression Peter Miller, Jessica Hargreaves, Ashlee Curtis, and Lucy Zinkiewicz
Background: While alcohol consumption and heavy episodic (binge) drinking are well-established predictors of male-to-male alcohol-related aggression (MMARA), the role of the father–son relationship in MMARA has yet to be explored. Methods: This study therefore examined whether fathering by the biological father rather than another father figure, negative fathering, and gender role modeled by the father figure were significant predictors of involvement in MMARA, once drinking frequency and quantity and heavy episodic drinking were controlled for. A total of 121 university students aged 18 to 25 years (M = 20.63, SD = 1.77 years) voluntarily completed the online questionnaire. Results: The only significant predictors of perpetration of MMARA were a more abusive paternal relationship and drinking quantity (number of standard drinks usually consumed when drinking). Conclusions: Negative father–son relationships may play a role in fostering young men’s perpetration of MMARA in the barroom context. Key Words: Barroom Aggression, Male-to-Male Alcohol-Related Aggression, Negative Fathering, Alcohol Consumption, University Students.
A
LCOHOL-related aggression is an ever-increasing societal problem (Wells et al., 2011) and is estimated to be involved in half of all assaults globally (World Health Organization, 2005). Estimates in Australia vary, with reports ranging from 23% to as much as 73% of all violence involving alcohol (Morgan and McAtamney, 2009). Further, alcohol-related aggression has been reported to most likely occur among young men and usually at a bar or other licensed venue (Wells et al., 2011). While alcohol consumption and heavy episodic drinking are well-established predictors of male-to-male alcohol-related aggression (MMARA; Wells and Graham, 2003), the role of the father–son relationship in MMARA has yet to be explored. Given this, the present study focuses on predictors of MMARA, specifically the nature of the father–son relationship. Evidence indicates that children who observe or subjected to aggressive behavior in their home environment are much more likely to behave aggressively with their peers (Lisak and Beszterczey, 2007), and this pattern of behavior continues into their adult relationships with their partners and children
From the School of Psychology (PM, JH, AC, LZ), Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia. Received for publication September 19, 2012; accepted January 25, 2013. Reprint requests: Peter Miller, PhD, School of Psychology, Deakin University, Waterfront Campus, 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong, Vic. 3220, Australia; Tel.: +61 (0) 429 024 844; Fax: +61 3 9244 8621; E-mail:
[email protected] Copyright © 2013 by the Research Society on Alcoholism. DOI: 10.1111/acer.12114 Alcohol Clin Exp Res, Vol 37, No 9, 2013: pp 1571–1576
(Dick, 2000; Tutty, 1999). Given that for male children the father is the most natural model for identification (Holman, 1998), it is logical to assume that men who participate in aggressive behavior may be modeling their behavior on that of their immediate father, father figure, or societal representations of the father (Courtenay, 2000; Perry et al., 1990). For men, a relationship with the father that is negative or where the father is physically or psychologically absent is associated with antisocial and aggressive behavior (Garbarino, 1999). Lisak and Beszterczey (2007) suggest that a substantial proportion of men who are severely abused or neglected by their father as children react to the feelings of helplessness and powerlessness instilled in them by grasping onto extreme versions of masculinity in an effort to restore a sense of personal power. Consequently, a type of “violentization” occurs, in which the victim of childhood abuse discovers power in violence (Athens, 1992). In general, evidence indicates that the presence of a father figure, regardless of whether the father is biological or not (e.g., adoptive father, stepfather, other significant male role model), is important in the psychosocial development of the child (Mackey and Coney, 2000). If such a male role model is unavailable, then boys are more prone to engage in deviant or antisocial behavior (Levant, 1992; Mackey and Coney, 2000). Consistent with this, father-absent young men have a far greater likelihood of engaging in delinquent and violent behaviors (Holman, 1998). In regard to the impact of single parents on their children’s behavior, differences have been observed. Hilton and Devall (1998) found that single mothers and fathers of children reported significantly more externalizing behavior in their 1571
1572
children than did married parents. However, single mothers reported more internalizing behaviors in their children compared to single fathers and to married parents. Thus, children raised by a single male parent who is nonabusive and adequate differ from those raised by a single mother and those raised by a single mother are more likely to internalize destructive behavior than those raised by a single father. This finding may be explained by gender differences. Single mothers may be more sensitive to internalized types of behavior problems exhibited by their children than single fathers, leading to higher rates of reporting. Otherwise, single fathers may discourage internalizing behavior as an expression of their children’s distress. As externalizing behavior has been linked to greater aggressiveness, delinquency, and antisocial behavior in general (Bacchini et al., 2011), this is an important distinction as difference in children’s coping strategies may potentially influence the coping strategies utilized as an adult. If those raised by a single father are more likely to externalize destructive behavior as a child, they may use this same strategy in adult life leading to a greater risk of alcoholrelated violence. In general, even if both parents are present and if the father is abusive or inadequate, this can have diverse consequences on the development of an individual (Lisak and Beszterczey, 2007). For example, Dick (2000) found that men who had significantly negative paternal engagement with their father as a child (experiencing such behaviors as shaming and belittling, neglect, spanking, physical punishment, and/or shouting) were more likely to engage in violence toward female intimates. As previously mentioned, fathers play an important role in shaping sons’ sense of masculinity and manhood (Dick, 2004a) and in modeling more traditional masculine gender roles or more nontraditional androgynous gender roles. The traditional gender role can be defined by several traditional male role norms: avoiding femininity, restrictive emotionality, seeking achievement and status, self-reliance, aggression, homophobia, and nonrelational attitudes toward sexuality (Levant, 1992). Pleck (1981) proposes that the development of appropriate gender role identity is a failure-prone process, and failure for men to achieve a masculine gender role identity is thought to result in a range of negative beliefs and attitudes, one of the most concerning being the development of hypermasculinity or “hegemonic” masculinity. The term “hegemonic” refers to the typically Western ideal of what is considered masculine, an extremely stereotypical view of maleness which advocates aggressive and dominant behavior, which is enforced through society and cultural representations of masculinity (Courtenay, 2000). Previous research has indicated that societal perceptions of masculinity may play a fundamental role in the exhibition of aggressive or antisocial behavior (Locke and Mahalik, 2005; Wells et al., 2011). Furthermore, society’s expectation of what a man should be is biased toward the hegemonic trend, and as such men are expected to be strong, dominant, and aggressive (Campbell, 2000). Consequently, individuals without a father
MILLER ET AL.
or adequate father figure may use societal representations (e.g., general beliefs and media) to model their behavior, specifically in relation to gender role norms. However, most societal representations of the male role are extremely hypermasculine, leading to a warped perception of gender roles and a greater propensity to participate in antisocial and aggressive behavior (Corneau, 1991). To determine whether the relationship children/adolescents had with their fathers could predict intimate violence toward women in adulthood, Dick (2004a) compared a group of nonviolent men to a group of domestically violent men. Only 1 significant difference was discovered between the groups, which was related to negative paternal engagement. Using logistic regression, witnessing marital violence, paternal child abuse, low self-esteem, and education level correctly classified 86% of the violent men. Furthermore, battering men who grew up in dysfunctional and chaotic homes were more likely to see their fathers drunk and more likely to have seen their fathers hit their mothers (Dick, 2004a). Dick concluded that negative paternal engagement is psychosocially damaging to the child and that those who witness violence often display the same aggressive and antisocial behavior in adulthood. In addition, negative paternal engagement has been associated with an increased risk of delinquent activity and substance abuse, whereas a positive relationship with the father has shown to have the opposite effect (Bronte-Tinkew et al., 2006). In summary, there appears to be an association between a negative and/or absent father–son relationship and aggressive behavior in general. However, no studies have investigated how the father–son relationship relates to perpetration of MMARA in the barroom context, among nonoffenders. Therefore, the primary aim of the present study was to investigate the associations between the father–son relationship, modeling of traditional versus nontraditional gender roles, alcohol use, and MMARA. If a negative or absent father–son relationship creates the potential for later aggressive behavior, it is logical to infer that men who report these types of paternal relationship will show an increased likelihood of participating in MMARA. Further, men subjected to negative fathering, defined as indifference, abuse, and overcontrol from the father or significant male role model, may consequently be more likely to engage in MMARA. As depicted in the literature, the modeling of traditional masculine norms can often lead to the development of an extremely hegemonic belief and attitude system, and as such, it is logical to assume that those exposed to more traditional gender role norms by the father are at higher risk of modeling extremely hegemonic behavior such as aggression and violence and will be more likely to participate in MMARA. The secondary aim of the study was to replicate the research undertaken by Wells and colleagues (2011), which looked at predisposing characteristics and drinking patterns of perpetrators of MMARA within a sample of 2,500 male Canadian tertiary education students. Wells and colleagues
ALCOHOL, AGGRESSION, AND THE FATHER–SON RELATIONSHIP
reported greater frequency and quantity of alcohol use, heavy episodic (binge) drinking, as well as hypermasculinity, to be associated with MMARA. This study investigated whether similar findings emerged in a comparable sample of male Australian university students. MATERIALS AND METHODS Participants A total of 137 male Deakin University students voluntarily completed the online questionnaire. Of these, 11.7% of cases were excluded due to not meeting gender and/or age requirements, having substantial missing data, or providing probable erroneous data regarding drinking behavior. This resulted in a final sample consisting of 121 men aged 18 to 25 years (M = 20.63, SD = 1.77 years). Although the majority of respondents (90.1%) reported being raised by their biological father, 6.6% reported being raised by another significant male figure. Materials The online questionnaire (Beliefs and attitudes toward aggression questionnaire) was based on that devised and utilized by Wells and colleagues (2011) (Data S1). Alcohol Consumption. Three items were used to assess alcohol consumption. Respondents were asked to report how often on average over the previous 12 months did they consume alcoholic drinks, with the response options of every day, 4 to 6 times a week, 2 to 3 times a week, once a week, 1 to 3 times a month, less than once a month, and never. Similarly, respondents reported the number of standard drinks of alcohol usually consumed on days when they were drinking, over the previous 12 months. Last, heavy episodic (binge) drinking was assessed using 3 items. These asked how often they had drunk on a single occasion, during the previous 12 months, 5 to 7 drinks, 8 to 11 drinks, and 12 drinks or more. A composite measure of total heavy episodic drinking over the previous year was created through summing responses to the 3 heavy episodic drinking items. Male Barroom Aggression. Two items measured personal involvement in MMARA in the context of a bar, pub, or club (barroom aggression) in which the respondent initiated the verbal or physical assault, regardless of whether they had been provoked. Respondents first reported the number of times in the previous 12 months they had experienced an incident at a bar, club, or pub in which they had grabbed, pushed, shoved, hit, or kicked someone, or did something else to someone that was physically aggressive. They then reported the number of times in the previous 12 months they had experienced an incident at a bar, club, or pub in which they had insulted, yelled, or shouted at someone, or did something else to someone that was verbally aggressive. Fathering. Respondents were asked whether they were raised by their biological parents and whether they were not, to specify who raised them. The respondents were then asked who the most significant male role model in their life was, their biological father or other, and if other, were asked to specify what relationship this other had to them (e.g., stepfather, grandfather, brother). Gender Roles Modeled by the Father/Father Figure. The Fatherhood Scale (FS) was developed by Dick (2004b) to assess different aspects of fathering and consists of 9 subscales: The Accessible Father, The Androgynous Role, The Gender Role Model, The Good Provider Role, The Moral Father Role, Negative Paternal Engagement, Positive Engagement, Positive Paternal Emotional
1573
Responsiveness, and Responsible Paternal Engagement. The FS and its subscales have been shown to have good construct validity and reliability (Dick, 2004b). For the present study, the Gender Role Model and Androgynous Role subscales were used, to measure fathers’ modeling of traditional male gender role and a more androgynous gender role, respectively. Respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which 13 statements such as “he taught me what it was like to be a man” and “he told me that he loved me” described their father’s behavior as they were growing up, using a 5-point Likert-type response scale (never, rarely, sometimes, often, always). The Androgynous Role items were totaled to give an overall androgynous role score, with the Gender Role Model items totaled to give an overall traditional gender role score. Fathering Style. The Measure of Parental Style was developed by Parker and colleagues (1979) to measure 3 aspects of perceived parenting styles: indifference, abuse, and overcontrol. In general, it is a reliable and valid measure (Parker et al., 1997). Although the scale assesses the perceived relationship with both parents, only the fathering items were used in the analyses. Respondents used a 5-point Likert-type response scale (never, rarely, sometimes, often, always) to indicate the extent to which each of 15 statements such as “he was physically violent or abusive of me” was an appropriate description of their relationship with their father. Scores for relevant items were totaled to produce overall indifference, abuse, and overcontrol scores. Procedure Prior to data collection, ethics approval was obtained for the study from Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee. Names and addresses of 750 male students from Deakin University who were between 18 and 25 years old were randomly selected by staff in the university registrar’s office. The total number of men within this age range at Deakin University is 7,432. These names and addresses were then printed on postcards, which notified the potential participants that they would be receiving an e-mail inviting them to participate in the study, and added that the first 200 respondents would receive a $20 gift voucher for their participation. Postcards were used to make initial contact with potential participants, as initial contact via post rather than e-mail has been shown to improve participation (Dillman et al., 2009). Several days later, an e-mail was sent by the university registrar’s office to the university e-mail addresses of the 750 male students. This again invited potential participants to participate in the study. By following a link contained in the e-mail, participants were directed to the project web site. Potential participants were invited to read through the participant plain language statement, and if they wished to participate, they could begin the questionnaire. An online questionnaire was utilized in this study due to the fact that it is fast, efficient, and less time-consuming than a mail-out questionnaire. Consent was assumed upon completion of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was estimated to take approximately 45 minutes to complete.
RESULTS Data cleaning was undertaken, and due to the small sample size, appropriate variable means were substituted for missing data. However, cases were excluded from analyses where missing data or invalid responses were extensive. For analyses, cases were excluded on a pairwise basis. The mean, standard deviation, range, and Cronbach’s alpha for key variables are given in Table 1. Reliability of all measures was good, with reliability of the traditional gender role scale enhanced with the removal of 1 item on the scale
MILLER ET AL.
1574
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables
Traditional gender role Androgynous role Paternal indifference Paternal abuse Paternal overcontrol Total instances of heavy episodic drinking Usual no. of standard drinks when drinking Frequency of drinking No. of times perpetrated physical aggression No. of times perpetrated verbal aggression No. of times perpetrated any male-to-male alcohol-related aggression
M
SD
Range
a
14.95 24.19 9.29 7.33 9.28 36.06
4.43 5.00 4.40 2.91 3.41 54.76
6 to 30 7 to 35 6 to 30 5 to 25 4 to 20 0 to 365
0.83 0.79 0.93 0.85 0.77 n/a
5.81
3.80
0 to 20
n/a
2.74 0.11
1.21 0.31
0 to 5 0 to 1
n/a n/a
0.17
0.38
0 to 1
n/a
0.20
0.40
0 to 1
n/a
a = Cronbach’s alpha. For frequency of drinking, 0 = never, 1 = less than once a month, 2 = 1 to 3 times a month, 3 = once a week, 4 = 2 to 3 times a week, 5 = 4 to 6 times a week, and 6 = every day. All drinking and aggression variables refer to the previous 12 months.
(“he taught me to fight back”). Due to the infrequent engagement in either physical or verbal aggression, the 2 aggression items were summed to create a total perpetration of MMARA score. Although assumptions of linearity, normality, and homogeneity of variance of continuous variables were generally met, perpetration of MMARA was severely positively skewed and was therefore dichotomized for analyses. Spearman’s rho correlations between gender roles, fathering, alcohol consumption, and engagement of male barroom aggression are presented in Table 2. Only 1 significant correlation between fathering variables and MMARA occurred, which was a weak positive correlation between paternal abuse and any involvement in MMARA (physical or verbal). Usual number of standard drinks consumed when drinking, frequency of drinking, and instances of heavy episodic drinking were all positively correlated with the perpetration of both physical aggression and perpetration of verbal aggression and with any perpetration of MMARA.
Independent-sample t-tests were undertaken to compare means between those who were raised by their biological father and those who were not for the 5 fathering items. These revealed no significant differences between the groups, although men raised by their biological fathers reported less indifference and abuse and more overcontrol, as well as less modeling of traditional male gender roles and more modeling of more androgynous male gender roles, than did men raised by other significant male figures. Means, standard deviations, and t-statistics for fathering variables, for those raised by their biological father compared to those raised by another significant male role model, are given in Table 3. A binary logistic regression analysis predicting perpetration of either physical or verbal MMARA (yes/no) was conducted, with predictors being biological father versus other, traditional gender role, androgynous role, indifference, abuse, overcontrol, instances of heavy episodic drinking, usual number of drinks when drinking, and frequency of drinking. The Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test was nonsignificant (v2 [8, N = 121] = 7.47, p < 0.05), indicating that the level of error was small and the model was a good fit for the data. The variance in perpetration of MMARA accounted for was relatively good, with the model explaining between 29.0% (Cox and Snell R2) and 47.5% (Nagelkerke R2) of variance in the data. Classification was biased in favor of those who reported not perpetrating MMARA, with 98.9% of these predicted correctly, but only 50% of those who had engaged in MMARA correctly identified. Table 4 shows unstandardized regression coefficients, Wald statistics, odds ratios, and 95% confidence intervals for odds ratios for each of the 9 predictors. According to the Wald criterion, only abusive fathering and usual number of drinks consumed when drinking significantly predicted engaging in MMARA. Participants who had been exposed to abusive fathering were more likely to be a perpetrator of MMARA (B = 0.33), as were those reporting a higher number of standard drinks usually consumed when drinking (B = 0.45).
Table 2. Spearman’s Rho Correlations Between Gender Roles, Fathering, Alcohol Consumption, and Aggression Variables
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2
3
4
0.43**
0.19* 0.23*
0.32** 0.62** 0.71**
5 0.09 0.08 0.17 0.14
6 0.22* 0.13 0.03 0.06 0.62**
7 0.08 0.04 0.07 0.10 0.49** 0.65**
8 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.67** 0.39** 0.28**
9 0.05 0.04 0.13 0.08 0.61** 0.41** 0.27** 0.69**
10 0.74** 0.44** 0.19* 0.31** 0.08 0.12 0.01 0.08 0.05
11 0.48** 0.37** 0.24** 0.28** 0.06 0.07 0.03 0.11 0.08 0.30**
*p < 0.05 (2-tailed). **p < 0.01 (2-tailed). 1 = no. of times perpetrated any male-to-male alcohol-related aggression. 2 = usual no. of standard drinks when drinking. 3 = frequency of drinking. 4 = total instances of heavy episodic drinking. 5 = indifference. 6 = abuse. 7 = overcontrol. 8 = traditional gender role. 9 = androgynous gender role. 10 = no. of times perpetrated physical aggression. 11 = no. of times perpetrated verbal aggression.
ALCOHOL, AGGRESSION, AND THE FATHER–SON RELATIONSHIP
1575
Table 3. Means, SDs, and T-Statistics for Fathering Variables by Raised by Biological Father Versus Other Male Group
M
SD
t(112)
Biological father Other male Biological father Other male Biological father Other male Biological father Other male Biological father Other male
9.19 10.00 7.22 8.28 9.19 8.57 14.98 15.57 24.31 24.14
4.30 6.03 2.84 3.86 3.32 3.15 4.24 6.88 4.83 6.77
0.47
Variable Indifference Abuse Overcontrol Traditional gender role Androgynous role
0.94 0.48 0.23 0.09
n = 107 for raised by biological father, n = 7 for raised by other male.
Table 4. Logistic Regression Analysis Predicting Perpetration of Maleto-Male Alcohol-Related Aggression as a Function of Fathering and Alcohol Consumption Variables 95% Confidence interval for odds ratio B Biological father versus other Traditional gender role Androgynous role Paternal indifference Paternal abuse Paternal overcontrol Instances of heavy episodic drinking Usual no. of drinks when drinking Frequency of drinking Constant
Wald v2
Odds ratio
Lower
Upper
0.49
0.11
1.63
0.09
28.71
0.03 0.02 0.14 0.33 0.13 0.01
0.05 0.04 1.42 4.62* 1.22 0.73
0.97 1.02 0.87 1.39 1.14 0.99
0.77 0.82 0.69 1.03 0.90 0.97
1.23 1.27 1.09 1.88 1.43 1.01
0.45
15.98*
1.57
1.26
1.95
0.64 8.96
2.14 5.10
1.90
0.80
4.52
*p < 0.05.
DISCUSSION The current study found that 1 aspect of negative fathering, abuse, was associated with the perpetration of MMARA and that the usual number of alcoholic drinks consumed when drinking significantly predicted participation in MMARA. No significant difference was found in terms of likelihood to perpetrate MMARA through being raised by one’s biological father compared to another male figure. While not significantly differing, the lower means for indifference and abuse reported by those raised by their biological father rather than by another men were consistent with the literature (Carlson and Knoester, 2011; Daly and Wilson, 1999). These findings suggest that poorer quality fathering is more likely to result from male role models who are not the biological father. In addition, neither traditional male gender role modeling nor androgynous gender role modeling was found to be a significant predictor of Maratha results of this study and are consistent with Dick’s (2004a) finding that neither type of
gender role was predictive of violence, although in his study, the violence was against intimate partners rather than other men in a barroom context. It is suggested that items in the Gender Role Model and Androgynous Role subscales of the FS may not tap into aspects of the masculine role that are predictive of aggression. In general, the scale may not be assessing hegemonic masculinity, an extremely stereotypical view of maleness which advocates aggressive and dominant behavior (Courtenay, 2000). In relation to negative fathering, although 3 components of this (indifferent, overcontrolling, and abusive fathering) were assessed, only abusive fathering was a significant predictor of MMARA. This is consistent with research indicating that emotional and/or physical abuse from the father is associated with greater aggression toward childhood peers, intimate partners, and offspring (Bacchini et al., 2011; Dick, 2005; Jouriles and Norwood, 1995; Lisak and Beszterczey, 2007) and is consistent with research into the effects of social learning on aggression (Perry et al., 1990). However, this is the first study to show abusive fathering to be predictive of male-to-male violence by nonoffenders in the barroom context. The usual number of drinks consumed when drinking alcohol was the only alcohol-related variable found to be a significant predictor of MMARA. Several possible mechanisms have been proposed that explain this relationship, with greater aggression associated with alcohol’s effects of reduced anxiety, increased risk taking, heightened emotionality, narrowed perceptual field, and impaired cognitive functioning, including information processing and problem solving (Graham and Homel, 2008). Contrary to Wells and colleagues (2011), the number of instances of heavy episodic drinking was not found to be a unique predictor of perpetration of MMARA. However, this may be due to the present study’s high levels of shared variance between instances of heavy episodic drinking and frequency and quantity of consumption. A possible implication of these results is that those who had experienced an abusive relationship with their father may have been using alcohol as a coping mechanism and that during the times they did consume alcohol they consumed substantial amounts, perhaps as a form of escapism. The key limitation of the current study was the small response rate and sample size, which may have affected the power of the study. Replication of this study with a larger sample size is necessary. Although those invited to participate were randomly chosen from all male Deakin students, the small response rate means that there is substantial room for improvement in terms of gaining a representative sample. Further, due to ethics committee requirements, the research team had no information about the people who were contacted but did not participate in the study and were therefore unable to assess the representativeness of the sample in relation to those contacted. A further limitation is the use of self-report data. Those who participate in MMARA may not want to admit being
MILLER ET AL.
1576
aggressive after consuming alcohol, or they may not recall being involved in some instances due to levels of alcohol consumed. Additionally, the accuracy of self-reporting of levels of alcohol consumption must be questioned. In conclusion, the present study is consistent with previous findings regarding greater alcohol use being associated with greater experience of aggression and the role of the father– son relationship in relation to aggression. Being a victim of abusive fathering and consuming higher levels of alcohol are predictive of the perpetration of MMARA by nonoffenders in the barroom context. The implications that an abusive father–son relationship may be a precipitating factor for being a perpetrator of MMARA in adulthood highlight the importance of more empirical research observing the father– son relationship in general, to help in identifying those at risk of later alcohol-related aggression and violence. REFERENCES Athens LH (1992) The Creation of Dangerous Violent Criminals. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL. Bacchini D, Miranda MC, Affuso G (2011) Effects of parental monitoring and exposure to community violence on antisocial behavior and anxiety/ depression among adolescents. J Interpers Violence 26:269–292. Bronte-Tinkew J, Moore KA, Carrano J (2006) The father-child relationship, parenting styles and adolescent risk behaviors in intact families. J Fam Issues 27:850–881. Campbell H (2000) The glass phallus: pub (lic) masculinity and drinking in rural New Zealand. Rural Sociol 65:562–581. Carlson DL, Knoester C (2011) Family structure and the intergenerational transmission of gender ideology. J Fam Issues 32:709–734. Corneau G (1991) Absent Fathers, Lost Sons. Shambhala Publications, New York, NY. Courtenay WH (2000) Constructions of masculinity and their influence on men’s well-being: a theory of gender and health. Soc Sci Med 50:1385– 1401. Daly M, Wilson M (1999) The Truth About Cinderella: A Darwinian View of Parental Love. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Dick G (2000) The role of paternal involvement in male violence against female intimates. Dissertation Abstract International Section A: Humanities and Social Science 61:36–44. Dick G (2004a) Men’s relationships with their fathers. Journal of Emotional Abuse 4:61–84. Dick G (2004b) The Fatherhood Scale. Res Soc Work Pract 14:79–82. Dick G (2005) Witnessing marital violence as children: men’s perceptions of their fathers. J Soc Serv Res 32:1–25. Dillman D, Smyth J, Christian LM (2009) Internet, Mail and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 3rd ed. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. Garbarino J (1999) Lost Boys: Why Our Sons Turn Violent and How We Can Save Them. Free Press, New York, NY.
Graham K, Homel R (2008) Raising the Bar: Preventing Aggression in and Around Bars, Pubs and Clubs. Willan Publishing, Cullompton. Hilton JM, Devall EL (1998) Comparison of parenting and children’s behavior in single-mother, single-father, and intact families. J Divorce Remarriage 29:23–54. Holman WD (1998) The fatherbook: a document for therapeutic work with father-absent early adolescent boys. Child Adolesc Soc Work J 15:101– 115. Jouriles EN, Norwood WD (1995) Physical aggression toward boys and girls in families characterized by the battering of women. J Fam Psychol 9:69– 78. Levant RF (1992) Toward the reconstruction of masculinity. J Fam Psychol 5:379–402. Lisak D, Beszterczey S (2007) The cycle of violence: the life histories of 43 death row inmates. Psychol Men Masc 8:118–128. Locke BD, Mahalik JR (2005) Examining masculinity norms, problem drinking, and athletic involvement as predictors of sexual aggression in college men. J Couns Psychol 52:279–283. Mackey WC, Coney NS (2000) The enigma of father presence in relationship to sons’ violence and daughters’ mating strategies: empiricism in search of a theory. J Mens Stud 8:349–373. Morgan A, McAtamney A (2009) Key Issues in Alcohol-Related Violence (Research in Practice No. 4). Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra, ACT. Parker G, Roussos J, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Mitchell P, Wilhelm K, Austin MP (1997) The development of a refined measure of dysfunctional parenting and assessment of its relevance in patients with affective disorders. Psychol Med 27:1193–1203. Parker G, Tupling H, Brown LB (1979) A parental bonding instrument. Br J Med Psychol 52:1–10. Perry DG, Perry LC, Boldizar JP (1990) Learning of aggression, in Handbook of Developmental Psychopathology (Lewis MH, Miller SM, eds), pp 135–146. Plenum Press, New York, NY. Pleck JH (1981) The Myth of Masculinity. MIT Press, Cambridge. Tutty LM (1999) Considering emotional abuse in the link between spouse and child abuse: a review and exploratory study. Journal of Emotional Abuse 1:53–80. Wells S, Graham K (2003) Aggression involving alcohol: relationship to drinking patterns and social context. Addiction 98:33–42. Wells S, Graham K, Tremblay PF, Magyarody N (2011) Not just the booze talking: trait aggression and hypermasculinity distinguish perpetrators from victims of male barroom aggression. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 35:1–8. World Health Organization (2005) Interpersonal Violence and Alcohol Policy Briefing. World Health Organization, Geneva.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION Additional Supporting Information may be found in the online version of this article: Data S1. Beliefs and attitudes toward aggression questionnaire.
Copyright of Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research is the property of WileyBlackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
