Conflict Tactics Scales
This item has been on the quality assurance side of the portal sociology entered. This is done in order to bring the quality of the articles on the subject of sociology to an acceptable level. Help eliminate the shortcomings in this article and participate in the discussion . ( Enter article )
The Conflict Tactics Scales (also CTS method ) is an instrument developed by Murray A. Straus in 1972 to systematically record the tactics used by two people during a dispute.
The method
CTS measures retrospectively which tactics (screaming, pushing, hitting, etc.) were used by individuals during a year to resolve conflicts. However, the reasons (e.g. attack or defense) and the consequences (e.g. injury) of the chosen tactic are not recorded. The method is intended to switch off the subjective evaluation of the action by the individual, which means that the researcher cannot evaluate the action when interpreting the numbers.
Questionnaire
The original CTS questionnaire contained a total of 19 questions from three categories on the conflict behavior of individuals. The categories were "arguing" (verbal actions to resolve a conflict through discussion), "verbal aggression" (yelling, insulting, etc.) and "violence" (hitting, slapping, throwing objects, etc.). The items from the different categories were mixed at random when the questionnaire was created. The questions are asked symmetrically, i. H. In each case, your own behavior and the behavior of your partner are queried. Of the studies mentioned today in a political context - especially in the discourse of men's rights activists - by far most are based on this catalog of questions or excerpts from it.
In addition to fundamental criticism, the lack of important issues (e.g. sexual violence) that also belong to the area of domestic violence was criticized in this catalog. Straus subsequently refined the catalog of questions several times and added new questions about sexual violence and the injuries suffered. CTS2, by far the most widely used questionnaire in psychological violence research today, therefore consists of 39 questions from five categories. These are "physical attack", "mental aggression", "negotiation", "injury" and "sexual coercion".
Meta variables
Straus explicitly points out that in addition to the use of CTS, additional examinations are necessary in each case in order to be able to correctly assess the situation (from whom the aggressive act originated and for what reason).
In order to be able to assess the situation, according to Straus, the following variables must be recorded in addition to the CTS questionnaire: gender, age, height and weight, but also the distribution of power within the couple relationship, degree of fear or intimidation, physical injuries (the degree of suffered Injuries were included in the CTS2 questionnaire).
Unlike other methods, CTS measures both sides; H. the same questions are asked about one's own behavior and the behavior of the partner. According to Straus, this has the great advantage of providing a picture of the behavioral interdependence of both parties.
criticism
The figures obtained in this way have repeatedly been used as evidence for the hypothesis that domestic violence between couples is just as likely to be perpetrated by women as by men and that men are just as likely to be victims of domestic violence as women, although Straus also points out that this interpretation without further investigations are not permitted. This hypothesis gave rise to a methodological dispute in social science, criminological and victimological circles, which continues to this day, as the numbers could not be verified with other methods. On the other hand, gender-symmetrical raw data from CTS studies are repeatedly used by political circles to criticize and question the victim protection policies of western countries, which are mainly tailored to women and children.
Web links
- MA Straus, The revised conflict tactics scales (PDF; 1.7 MB)
- Kimmel, Michael S. (2001). Male Victims of Domestic Violence: A Nouns and Methodological Research Review. (PDF; 97 kB)
- Dobash, Russell P., Dobash, R. Emerson, Wilson, Margo, and Martin Daly. (1992) The Myth of Sexual Symmetry in Marital Violence.
Individual evidence
- ↑ MURRAY A. STRAUS, SHERRY L. HAMBY: The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTSZ), 1990 (PDF; 1.7 MB)
- ↑ cf. including: Dobash, Russell P., Dobash, R. Emerson, Wilson, Margo, and Martin Daly. (1992) The Myth of Sexual Symmetry in Marital Violence (1992)
- ↑ Kimmel, Michael S. (2001). Male Victims of Domestic Violence: A Nouns and Methodological Research Review