CHILD

Bugental,MALTREATMENT
Shennum / GENDER
/ FEBRUARY
AND VIOLENCE
2002

Gender, Power, and Violence in the Family

Daphne Blunt Bugental

University of California, Santa Barbara
William Shennum
Five Acres, Altadena, California

Attributions for parent-child relationship outcomes were as- Perceived Power and Maltreatment
sessed as a function of childhood maltreatment history. In
Past research on the role of attributions in child mal-
Study 1, the attributions of maltreated children were compared
treatment has focused on biased maternal attributions.
with those of nonmaltreated children from a similar back-
Those mothers who are more likely to use harsh or abusive
ground. Maltreated girls (but not boys) were found to be more
tactics with their children have been found to attribute
likely than nonmaltreated girls to attribute lower power or con-
higher intentionality, control, and blame to children than
trol to self than to parents. Effects of maltreatment on chil-
to self (e.g., Bradley & Peters, 1991; Bugental, Blue, &
dren’s attributions were found for physical but not sexual
Cruzcosa, 1989; Nix, Pinderhughes, Dodge, & Bates,
abuse. In Study 2, the attributions of parents with a history of
1999). The causal role of such biases is suggested by the
abuse as children were compared with those of parents who had
fact that prebirth attributions of mothers serve to predict
not been abused. Women (but no men) with a history of abuse
subsequent child maltreatment during the first year of the
attributed less power or control to self than to children. Impli-
child’s life (Bugental, 1999).
cations are drawn for gender differences in the role of biased
The attributional patterns that are more characteristic
attributions as a consequence of physical abuse.
of harsh or physically abusive mothers have been concep-
tualized in power terms within Bugental’s program of

Violence in the home is a commonly occurring event. research. Physically abusive mothers tend to view them-
selves as victims and children as blameworthy and power-
In any given year, more than 2 million cases of suspected ful; this interpretation, in turn, promotes their efforts to
child abuse are reported (Daro & McCurdy, 1990). The reestablish power within the relationship (Bugental,
experience of abuse not only fosters a variety of undesired Lewis, Lin, Lyon, & Kopeikin, 2000). The notion of exag-
outcomes in terms of children’s social behavior, cognitive gerated power assertion among those who see themselves
performance, and health, but also influences the possibil- as lacking power is well-supported within the social power
ity that those who are abused will themselves become abu- literature. That is, those who see themselves as lacking
sive as parents (Putallaz, Costanzo, Grimes, & Sherman, control or power are more likely than others to make exag-
1998). In this article, we explore the extent to which a
history of abuse influences the attributions acquired by
children for the relationship between parents and chil-
dren. In particular, we ask whether a history of abuse fos-
ters perceived powerlessness. Do those who have experi-
enced abuse think of themselves as much less powerful
than parents? Our central predictions in this study are for
the effects of physical abuse.

Authors’ Note: This research was supported by National Institute of

Mental Health Grant No. 5 R01 MH 19095 and NSF Grant No. BNS
C CHILD MALTREATMENT, Vol. 7, No. 1, February 2002 55-63
H© 2002 Sage Publications 9021221.

55
56 Bugental, Shennum / GENDER AND VIOLENCE
gerated use of coercive force (e.g., Kipnis, 1976; Raven &
Kruglanski, 1970).
Relatively little is known, however, about the origins
of such power-oriented attributional biases. That is, do
adults acquire such biases as a result of their own early
experiences? The current evidence for this possibility is
indirect. As one suggestive indication, Grusec and
Mammone (1995) found that mothers with an insecure
attachment history (as measured by the Adult Attach-
ment Interview) showed attributional biases (as measured
by Bugental’s Parent Attribution Test). Specifically, they
were more likely to conceptualize their relationships in
terms of power inequities; that is, they were more likely to
see children and parents as having unequal rather than
balanced power. As an another suggestive indication,
Dodge and his colleagues (e.g., Dodge, Pettit, Bates, &
Valente, 1995) have observed that children’s biased attri-
butions partially mediate the relationship between a his-
tory of harsh parenting and their subsequent
aggressiveness.
Although there is abundant evidence to show the neg-
ative affective and cognitive consequences that result
from a history of childhood maltreatment (e.g., Cicchetti
& Toth, 1997; Margolin & Gordis, 2000), less is known
about the various ways in which children respond to this
experience. As suggested by Downey and her colleagues
(e.g., Downey, Feldman, Khuri, & Friedman, 1994), mal-
treatment may have quite different consequences for dif-
ferent children; whereas some children are more likely to
respond to such experiences with aggression, others
respond with depression. In this article, we explore the
possibility that gender may serve as a moderator of the
effects of physical abuse on children’s power-based
attributional patterns.
The domains in which and the means by which males
and females manifest and think about interpersonal power
(including aggression) begin in early childhood (e.g.,
Coie & Dodge, 1998; Ruble & Martin, 1998). Research
on the role of power-based attributions among parents has
generally focused on mothers (Bugental & Johnston,
2000). There are some indications that mothers’ attribu-
tions regarding their competence and power have stron-
ger effects on offspring aggression than do fathers’ attribu-
tions (e.g., Bugental & Martorell, 1999). However,
information on fathers within this literature is sparse.
In the same way, concern with power-based attribu-
tions in children’s peer relations has generally focused on
boys (Coie & Dodge, 1998). The indications are that boys
who experience harsh parenting—and who develop hos-
tile attributional biases—receive subsequent support for
such biases in their peer relationships (Dodge et al.,
1995). When gender comparisons have been made, hos-
tile attributional biases have been found to be more
closely associated with reactive physical aggression
among boys than among girls (Crane-Ross, Tisak, &
Tisak, 1998; Egan, Monson, & Perry, 1998; Steinberg &
Dodge, 1983). Little evidence has been found for a rela-
tionship between girls’ experience of harsh parenting,
their subsequent cognitive biases, and later instances of
physically aggressive behavior with peers. Girls typically
lack the contextual support for redirecting aggression to
peers.
Relatively little is known concerning the sequelae of
child maltreatment on children’s attributions regarding
parent-child relationships. As suggestive support,
Fincham, Beach, Arias and Brody (1998) found an associ-
ation between parent-child conflict and the presence of
conflict-promoting attributions among the children
themselves. However, the differential effect of maltreat-
ment on the attributional biases of boys and girls remains
an open question.
Research Questions
The research presented here asks whether those who
have been abused as children hold distinctive
attributional patterns concerning the causes of caregiving
conflict. It also asks whether there are gender differences
in the power-based attributional biases shown by males
and females in response to a history of harsh or abusive
parenting. Within our program of research, “low power”
attributions have been defined in terms of the individuals’
belief that negative events are under the control of others
and outside the control of self. Such attributions are pre-
dicted—and have consistently been found—to be related
to high efforts to exercise power in contexts that allow
such responses and submissiveness and withdrawal in con-
texts that constrain such responses. For example, those
with low perceived power show high power assertion in
interaction with those who pose no threat and low power
assertion with those who do pose a threat (see Bugental &
Goodnow, 1998; Bugental et al., 2000; and Bugental &
Johnston, 2000, for summaries of this program of
research).
We assessed gender differences in attributions in two
different settings. We initially explored the attributions
made by maltreated versus nonmaltreated children. We
then went on to explore the attributions made by parents
who had experienced maltreatment in their own
childhood.
STUDY 1
Method
Research Participants
The study involved 22 physically abused and 28
nonabused children from similar demographic back-
grounds. The abused children in this study had been
CHILD MALTREATMENT / FEBRUARY 2002

removed from their homes or previous placements and
were subsequently relocated in a residential treatment
center for maltreated children.
The nonabused children were recruited from a low-
income neighborhood; their ethnic and socioeconomic
characteristics were similar to those of children within the
residential facility. Flyers were placed in public locations
in a low-income area of Santa Barbara, California. The
flyers, which included both English and Spanish text,
were placed in such locations as grocery store bulletin
boards, laundry room bulletin boards, and the unemploy-
ment office. As far as possible, families were matched for
ethnicity and education of mother. They were also
matched for gender and age of child. The sample of
nonabused children is viewed as a comparison group
drawn from a demographically similar background rather
than as a fully matched group.
The abused group included 15 boys and 7 girls; the
nonabused sample included 18 boys and 7 girls. Within
the abused sample, 14 children were White, Anglo chil-
dren and 8 children were Latino. Within the nonabused
sample, 10 children were White, Anglo children, and 8
children were Latino. The mean age in both groups was
9.0 years (range = 7 to 11 years). The mean education of
mothers in the abused group was 11.5 years; the mean edu-
cation of mothers in the nonabused sample was 13.0 years.
Within the abused group, 51% of the children (58% of
boys and 44% of girls) had experienced only physical
abuse, 11% (11% of boys and 11% of girls) only sexual
abuse, 27% (20% of boys and 44% of girls) both physical
and sexual abuse, and 11% (11% of boys and 11% of girls)
neither sexual or physical abused but neglect. The gender
differences in abuse history did not approach significance.
Within the abused group, 13% had been removed from
a home environment that included at least one biological
parent, 41% had been removed from a foster home, 13%
had been removed from a group home, 17% had been
removed from a juvenile detention facility, and 17% had
been removed from a psychiatric facility. There were no
differential gender patterns in children’s prior residence.
Because of the extremity of the past experiences of chil-
dren within the abused group, the nonabused group must
be considered as imperfectly matched with the abused
group. That is, the abused group is atypical in ways other
than their abuse history.
Procedure
The Picture Attribution Test. Children were given the
Picture Attribution Test (PIXAT) (Bugental, Cortez, &
Blue, 1992). The test was administered by undergraduate
assistants with both samples. Examiners watched video-
taped instructions on test administration and were given
practice in all procedures. Examiners for the
nonmaltreated group were blind to children’s history. Ex-
CHILD MALTREATMENT / FEBRUARY 2002
Bugental, Shennum / GENDER AND VIOLENCE 57
aminers for the maltreated group were blind to children’s
specific history but necessarily were aware that children
were living in a residential facility for maltreated children.
The PIXAT’s interview format involves questions
concerning the causes of conflictual interaction between
parents and children. Children are presented with car-
toon pictures that depict a problem in a family followed by
cartoon pictures that depict a solution. Two problems
involve a mother or father who is shown as angry with a
child, and two involve a mother or father who is shown
spanking a child. The sex of the child in the pictures was
matched with the sex of the research participant.
The children’s task was to tell a story about events
leading up to the problem and the solution. In doing so,
they were asked to select from an array of pictures; they
were told that they may use as many or as few pictures as
they wish. Coding of children’s picture selection was,
however, limited to their first three choices.
Our past work has revealed significant effects only for
children’s attributions for problems (Bugental &
Martorell, 1999; Bugental et al., 1992). Thus, analyses in
the present study were limited to children’s attributions
for negative events.
Perceived power was defined by the proportion of pic-
tures the child selected in which the child—as opposed to
other people—was depicted as the primary causal agent in
the story. Test-retest reliability of PIXAT scores is .71
(Cortez & Bugental, 1994). Those children who have low
perceived power, as measured by the PIXAT, have been
found to be highly reactive to potential social threat. For
example, they are attentionally avoidant and show perfor-
mance errors when confronted with potential threat from
an adult (Bugental, Lin, & Susskind, 1995; Cortez &
Bugental, 1994). In contrast, they have been found to
show high levels of verbal aggression when placed in com-
petitive settings with peers (Bugental & Martorell, 1999).
The combination of avoidance (when they lack veridical
control) and aggression (when they have an equal level of
power with others) is consistent with the response pat-
terns shown by adults with low perceived power (dis-
cussed in Study 2).
Results and Discussion
Preliminary analyses were conducted to determine
whether children’s attributional responses were influ-
enced by maternal education or child ethnicity. No signif-
icant relationship was found between maternal education
and child PIXAT scores (r = –.01). No significant rela-
tionship was found between children’s minority or
nonminority status and their PIXAT scores (t < 1).
Children’s attributional responses were analyzed in a 2
× 2 factorial ANOVA. Grouping variables were gender
and maltreatment history (presence or absence). The
dependent variable was perceived power (i.e., the propor-
58 Bugental, Shennum / GENDER AND VIOLENCE
tion of pictures selected in which the child was depicted as
agentic).
An interaction was found between gender and mal-
treatment history, F(1, 55) = 4.41, p = .04. As shown in
Table 1, compared to nonmaltreated girls, maltreated girls
depicted themselves as having significantly less power (or
as less causal). In contrast, maltreated boys depicted
themselves as having slightly greater power than did
nonmaltreated boys; however, this difference did not
reach statistical significance.
Follow-up analyses were conducted separately within
the two samples (maltreated versus nonmaltreated chil-
dren). An initial analysis was conducted within the
nonmaltreated sample to test for gender effects. No signif-
icant effects or trends were found (F < 1).
A second analysis was conducted within the mal-
treated sample to test for the effects of type of abuse. The
first ANOVA included gender and physical abuse as
grouping variables; placement history (direct removal
from a home environment versus prior placement in
another institution), sexual abuse (presence or absence),
and neglect (presence or absence) were introduced as
covariates. A significant effect was found for gender, F(1,
84) = 4.84, p = .039. As shown in Table 1, girls in the mal-
treated population showed lower levels of perceived
power than did boys. In addition, the effect of physical
abuse approached significance, F(1, 21) = 4.22, p = .053.
All children who had been physically abused showed
lower levels of perceived power (mean PIXAT score =
.22) than did children who had not been physically
abused (mean PIXAT score = .54). A second ANOVA
included gender and sexual abuse as grouping variables;
placement history, physical abuse, and neglect were intro-
duced as covariates. History of sexual abuse (as a main
effect or interaction) produced no significant effects or
trends; however, the main effect of gender continued to be
significant, F(1, 21) = 7.99, p = .01.
A third analysis was conducted in which a test was
made of institutional history. That is, children who had
been placed in the current facility directly from a home
environment were compared with children who had been
moved to the current facility from another institutional
setting. Perceived power was tested as a combined effect of
gender and institutional history. No significant effects or
trends were found as a function of institutional history.
As a general pattern, it appears that boys and girls
respond in different ways to victimization in childhood.
Abused girls were significantly more likely than boys to
respond with depressed levels of self-perceived power in
relationships with adults. Maltreated boys did not reveal
any significant differences in their attributions as a func-
tion of abuse history. The observed trend for maltreated
boys (very high perception of self-perceived power) will
require further support before it can be safely interpreted.
TABLE 1: Power-Biased Attributions of Boys and Girls as a Func-
tion of Maltreatment History
Perceived Power
(PIXAT scores)
Maltreatment
History Gender n M SD
Yes Males 19 .39 22
Females 9 .22a 15
No Males 20 .34 18
Females 11 .39a 15
NOTE: Scores represent the proportion of pictures in which the “con-
troller” of a bad event is the child. Means followed by shared subscripts
are significantly different at better than the .05 level of confidence.
It is important to recognize the special nature of this
population. Children with extreme early histories are very
likely to have experienced multiple types of victimization,
and reporting history is not entirely reliable. To the
extent reporting is accurate, it should be recognized that
physical abuse was by far the most commonly reported
type of maltreatment; that is, 78% of children within this
sample were known to have been physically abused. In
addition, only physical maltreatment was associated with
generally low levels of perceived power among abused
children. Therefore, it is likely that findings are more
applicable to a history of physical abuse and cannot be
applied to children who have been sexually abused.
STUDY 2
The next question then becomes: Does the experience
of maltreatment in childhood carry forward to influence
the power-based attributional biases made by parents with
respect to their own children? Do women who experi-
enced abuse as children show a pattern of perceived pow-
erlessness with their own children? In the same way, do
men who experienced abuse as children show a pattern of
exceptionally high perceived power with their own
children?
To answer these questions, we assessed gender differ-
ences among adults as a function of maltreatment history.
This analysis was part of a larger longitudinal study that
assessed prebirth parental predictors of infant maltreat-
ment during the first year of the child’s life (Bugental,
1999). Our specific concern here was with parents’ own
recollected history of abuse as a child and the extent to
which this history predicts caregiver attributions as adults.
In addition, we asked whether men and women differed in
the attributions they revealed as a function of their own
childhood history.
CHILD MALTREATMENT / FEBRUARY 2002

Method
Sample
The sample included 39 couples identified as at risk to
become abusive with their children. Couples were drawn
from a larger sample that also included single parents. Par-
ticipants were recruited through local clinics and obstetri-
cians. The Family Stress Checklist (FSC) (Murphy,
Orkow, & Nikola, 1985) was used as a screening instru-
ment. Kempe’s FSC provides an indication of the level of
difficulty families are experiencing. A score of 0 to 20
indicates low risk (for child maltreatment), a score of 25
or more indicates moderate risk, and a score of more than
40 has been correlated with a high potential for abuse.
Those families who scored as being at moderate risk for
abuse (scores between 20 and 40) were invited to partici-
pate. About 37% of parents who have scores in this range
have been found to abuse their children early in life.
All research participants were Latino. Our analysis was
restricted to partnered couples to ensure that any gender
differences did not reflect (a) differences reflecting pres-
ence or absence of a partner (54% of our total sample
included single mothers) or (b) differences in marital his-
tory (e.g., spousal violence frequently preceded the depar-
ture of a male partner; thus, single mothers had a more
extensive history of spousal battery).
Measures
Parent Attribution Test (PAT). Prospective parents
were administered the PAT at the point of intake to the
study. The PAT (Bugental & Shennum, 1984; Bugental
et al., 1989) was developed to assess the attributions adults
make for the causes of their successful and unsuccessful in-
teractions with children. Respondents rate the relative
importance they would assign (on 7-point scales) to po-
tential causes of caregiving outcomes. For example, they
rate the importance they assign to such factors as child
stubbornness, child mood, or adult lack of parenting skill
as causes of an unsuccessful interaction. PAT items were
initially selected on the basis of free responses given by
mothers in reply to questions concerning the causes of
caregiving success and failure.
Based on the results of a multidimensional scaling
analysis and a subsequent factor analyses, PAT scales were
developed that measure the perceived controllability of
caregiving outcomes by the self and by children. The des-
ignated meaning of scales was based on judgments of a
group of mothers; that is, an item was coded as controlla-
ble if the cause presented was generally seen as controlla-
ble by adults. For negative caregiving outcomes, the two
dimensions identified were Adult Control over Failure
(ACF) and Child Control over Failure (CCF). So, for
example, rating “using the wrong strategy” as an impor-
tant cause of caregiving failure contributed to a high ACF
CHILD MALTREATMENT / FEBRUARY 2002
Bugental, Shennum / GENDER AND VIOLENCE 59
score whereas rating “being sick” as an important cause of
caregiving failure contributed to a low ACF score; rating
“child stubbornness” as very important for caregiving fail-
ure contributed to a high CCF score and rating “child
being tired” as very important for caregiving failure con-
tributed to a low CCF score.
The two scales that measure attributions for caregiving
failure (ACF and CCF) are orthogonal. They are usually
combined to provide a “perceived control over failure”
(PCF) scale. The scale should be conceptualized as mea-
suring the amount of power or control that is attributed to
adult caregivers versus the amount of control that is
attributed to dependent children. That is, an adult who
attributes high power to adults and low power to the child
has the highest possible perceived balance of power or
control (high PCF) in the relationship. Conversely, an
adult who attributes high power to children and low
power to adults has the lowest possible perceived balance
of power in the relationship. Our choice of terms has been
conceptually driven by the social power literature. As
noted earlier, some of the most punitive social responses
have been found for those individuals who see themselves
as at a “power disadvantage,” that is, they see others as
more powerful than they are themselves (e.g., Kipnis,
1976; Raven & Kruglanski, 1970). The concept of bal-
ance of power is dyadic in nature. As discussed in Bugental
and Johnston’s (2000) review of this literature, increasing
attention is being given to dyadic constructs within the
parent cognition literature.
Extensive testing of the validity of the PAT (perceived
balance of power) has been made during the past 15 years,
both in our own research program and in other programs
focused on parent-child relationships (Bugental,
Johnston, New, & Silvester, 1998). Women with a low
perceived balance of power have been found to react neg-
atively to potential challenge or threat within caregiving
relationships. When caregiver challenge is combined
with a high veridical level of adult control, adults with low
perceived power often show exaggerated efforts to assert
control (e.g., Bradley & Peters, 1991; Bugental et al.,
1989; Bugental, Blue, & Lewis, 1990; Bugental &
Happaney, 2000; Bugental & Lewis, 1998; Bugental,
Lewis, Lin, et al., 2000; Lewis, Bugental, & Fleck, 1991;
Mills, 1998). In contrast, when adults with low perceived
power are confronted with caregiving challenge com-
bined with lack of veridical control, they are often submis-
sive and show high levels of false positivity (Bugental,
Brown, & Reiss, 1996; Bugental & Lewis, 1998; Bugental
& Shennum, 1984). Adults with low perceived power also
show elevations in autonomic mobilization in response to
caregiving challenge (e.g., Bugental et al., 1993, 2000).
Despite their vigilance for possible caregiving threat, par-
ents with low perceived power show deficits in their abil-
ity to make fine-grained distinctions in children’s behav-
60 Bugental, Shennum / GENDER AND VIOLENCE

ior and to respond adaptively to these distinctions Results

(Lovejoy, Polewko, & Harrison, 1996). When paired with
Participants’ scores on the PCF scale were compared in
“easy,” responsive children, however, the responses of low
a 2 × 2 ANOVA. The two grouping variables were gender1
power parents are indistinguishable from those of other
and maltreatment history. The analysis yielded a signifi-
parents.
cant gender effect, F(1, 71) = 7.68, p = .007, and a signifi-
In short, the construct of balance of power operates to
cant interaction between gender and maltreatment his-
produce conditional responses to caregiving situations; it
tory, F(1, 71) = 7.66, p = .04. As shown in Table 2,
serves to activate defensive responses when the caregiving
prospective mothers with a history of maltreatment
situation can be seen as a challenge or threat. Thus, it is
scored lower on the PCF scale than did prospective moth-
important to note that perceived power imbalance, as
ers without such a history. In contrast, prospective fathers
measured by the PAT, is related to insecure attachment
with a history of maltreatment scored higher on the PCF
categories on the Adult Attachment Interview (Grusec,
than did prospective fathers without such a history. How-
Adam, & Mammone, 1993; Grusec & Mammone, 1995).
ever, this difference did not reach significance.
Besides showing excellent construct validity, PAT
scores have been found to have good convergent and In summary, maltreated women, like maltreated girls,
divergent validity. For example, perceived balance of showed a pattern of perceived powerlessness. Just as mal-
power has been found to be unrelated to individual mea- treated girls saw themselves as having low power relative
sures of perceived control (as opposed to balance of con- to parental adults, maltreated women saw themselves as
trol within a dyad) or affective measures (Lovejoy, Verda, having low power relative to dependent children. In con-
& Hays, 1997). At the same time, low power scores on the trast, males with a history of maltreatment as children
PAT have been found to be significantly correlated with revealed trends suggesting the possibility that abuse his-
high attributions to powerful others (a scale on tory is associated with very high levels of perceived power.
Levenson’s Locus of Control Test, 1974) (Bugental &
Shennum, 1984). GENERAL DISCUSSION
Test-retest reliability (after 1 week) of PCF scores was
measured in two samples: a sample of undergraduate So what can we conclude? The attributional biases
women (N = 55) and a sample of mothers (N = 57). A reli- shown in response to childhood maltreatment appear to
ability coefficient (r) of .63 was obtained for mothers, and differ for males and females. Females who experienced
a coefficient of .61 was obtained for undergraduate maltreatment as children revealed a pattern of perceived
women. powerlessness. This same attributional bias was shown
both by girls who had recently been abused and by women
History of abuse. Participants’ own history of abuse as a
who reported themselves as having been abused as chil-
child was measured on the basis of an adapted version of
dren. In addition, the observed bias transcends means of
the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) (Straus, 1979). The
assessing abuse. Among children, abuse history was based
CTS asks for frequency of occurrence of different ways of
on the reports of social workers. Among parents, abuse
responding to family conflict. The instrument can be used
history was based on self-report. The attributional pattern
either in a questionnaire or interview format. Reliability
found for abused females is also consistent with the
coefficients of the CTS are .62 for the use of violent tactics
attributional pattern that has been found for women who
and .77 for verbal aggression for parent-child conflicts.
are physically abusive with their own children (Bugental
Among couples, the percentage of agreement is 77% for
et al., 1989).
husband’s violence and 80% for wife’s violence (Straus &
No significant effects were found for males as a func-
Gelles, 1990). It represents the most commonly used mea-
tion of abuse history. However, there was a consistent
sure of family violence, and it has been extensively used to
trend indicating the possibility that maltreated males are
assess prevalence rates of child maltreatment and spousal
more likely to show exaggerated perceptions of power. As
battery (Straus, Hamby, Finkelhor, & Moore, 1998).
these results did not reach significance nor were they pre-
CTS items were revised here to reflect participants’
dicted, it will be important to replicate this finding before
own history. Thus, participants were asked whether their
any conclusions can be drawn.
parents had ever used specific conflict tactics with them.
Whenever a respondent reported any instance of abusive Gender, Maltreatment History, and Attributional
tactics (e.g., being beat up by a parent), that individual Biases
was categorized as having been abused.
The observed gender differences in attributions may be
thought of as reflecting different accommodations to the
experience of parental maltreatment. Females’
attributional biases are congruent with their history. That

CHILD MALTREATMENT / FEBRUARY 2002


TABLE 2: Perceived Balance of Power Among Adults With Mal-
treatment History
Perceived Balance
of Power
(PAT scores)
Maltreatment
History Gender n M
Yes Males 17 77a
Females 27 –02ab
No Males 31 39
Females 21 39b
NOTE: Scores range from –200 (low balance of power) to 200 (high bal-
ance of power). Means followed by shared subscripts are significantly dif-
ferent at better than the .05 level of confidence.
is, those who have been maltreated by their parents reveal
a pattern of low perceived power. In general, there is less
contextual support for direct power assertion among girls
than among boys (Maccoby, 1990). As a result, they may
be more likely to construct relationship schemas that are
consistent with their history as victims of power assertion.
That is, they develop power schemas in which they see
themselves as occupying a position of low power relative
to the power of others.
These findings suggest the congruence between fe-
males’ perceived powerlessness and both (a) their own
history of abuse and (b) their subsequent risk for abusive-
ness with dependent others. When they themselves as-
sume a position of power with respect to their own
children, their biased attributions may lead not only to
negative interpretations of the behaviors of the young, but
also to direct reactive aggression against the presumed
challenges of the young. As suggested by Egan et al.
(1998),
2 limitations in physical power and contextual support at
Perhaps these children (those who are victimized but do
not retaliate) should be considered “latent aggressors”—
people who are prone to behave aggressively when situa-
tional constraints are relaxed, as when one is confronted
with an opportunity to aggress covertly or one is frustrated
by a weaker, younger, defenseless person (including, in
later years, a defenseless child). (p. 1003)
Limitations
The findings obtained here can be generalized only to
physical abuse. Although no attributional effects were
found as a function of children’s history of sexual abuse,
there were a relatively small number of sexually abused
children within that sample. As a limitation, no informa-
tion was available on sexual abuse history of adult respon-
dents. Therefore, the possibility must still be considered
that gender differences may reflect the greater likelihood
of a combined history of physical abuse and sexual abuse
among females.
CHILD MALTREATMENT / FEBRUARY 2002
Bugental, Shennum / GENDER AND VIOLENCE 61
As a second cautionary note, it should be pointed out
that both child and adult samples involved high-risk par-
ticipants from homes with relatively low education. Both
groups also included a large representation of Latino par-
ticipants. However, in Study 1 (a sample that included
greater ethnic and educational variability than did the
SD
sample employed in Study 2), neither education or eth-
57 nicity was found to qualify the observed effects. As an
86 additional caution, full information on trauma history was
40 only available for respondents in Study 2.
46
As a major limitation of the study, findings are based
on small samples. At the same time, the consistency of the
observed effects suggests the possibility that effects for
males might be significant in larger samples.
Implications for Future Risk for Aggression
The different attributional biases shown by males and
females in response to a childhood history of physical
abuse can be seen to have implications for subsequent risk
for aggression. Although the cognitive maintenance of
peer aggression is more pronounced among males than
females, the cognitive maintenance of aggression in par-
ent-child relations appears to be stronger among females
than males. Supporting this notion, we have observed
that power-biased attributions serve to predict physical
abuse of infants among mothers but not fathers (Bugental,
1999). For women, the perceived powerlessness that fol-
lows from a history of abuse may be thought of as defensive
in nature. That is, women with a low perceived balance of
power are easily triggered to the possibility that depend-
ent children pose a threat—to which they respond “in
kind” with use of physical force. Although constrained by
younger ages, mothers have both the veridical power
(physical strength) and the legitimate power (authority
role) to exert physical power against the young.
Implications may also be drawn for remediation efforts.
In other ongoing research, we have made use of these find-
ings in an attributionally based child abuse prevention
program (Bugental, 1999). That is, we designed a program
directed to reducing the extent to which mothers frame
their interaction with children as a power contest. In
doing so, we were able to demonstrate reductions in the
prevalence of child maltreatment. Thus, interventions
that direct causal explanations away from interpersonal
power have benefits for adaptive conflict resolution
within the family.
NOTES
1. Inclusion of both parents in the same analysis was viewed
as justified in the absence of any association between the PCF
scores of husbands and wives.
62 Bugental, Shennum / GENDER AND VIOLENCE
2. Egan et al. were referring specifically to boys with hostile
biases who had been victimized by peers and subsequently re-
duced their aggression. However, the same principle is more
broadly applicable.
REFERENCES
Bradley, E. J., & Peters, R. D. (1991). Physically abusive and nonabusive
mothers’ perceptions of parenting and child behavior. American
Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61, 455-460.
Bugental, D. B. (1999, October). Power-oriented cognitions as predictors of
family violence. Paper presented at the meetings of the Society for
Experimental Social Psychology, St. Louis, MO.
Bugental, D. B., Blue, J., Cortez, V., Fleck, K., Kopeikin, H., Lewis, J., &
Lyon, J. (1993). Social cognitions as organizers of autonomic and
affective responses to social challenge. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 64, 94-103.
Bugental, D. B., Blue, J. B., & Cruzcosa, M. (1989). Perceived control
over caregiving outcomes: Implications for child abuse. Developmen-
tal Psychology, 25, 532-539.
Bugental, D. B., Blue, J., & Lewis, J. (1990). Caregiver beliefs and
dysphoric affect to difficult children. Developmental Psychology, 26,
631-638.
Bugental, D. B., Brown, M., & Reiss, C. (1996). Cognitive representa-
tions of power in caregiving relationships: Biasing effects on inter-
personal interaction and information-processing. Journal of Family
Psychology, 10, 397-407.
Bugental, D. B., Cortez, V., & Blue, J. (1992). Children’s affective
responses to the expressive cues of others. In N. Eisenberg & R.
Fabes (Eds.), New directions in child development (pp. 75-90). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bugental, D. B., & Goodnow, J. G. (1998) Socialization processes. In N.
Eisenberg (Volume Ed.). Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social,
emotional, and personality development (pp. 389-462). New York: John
Wiley.
Bugental, D. B., & Happaney, K., (2000). Parent-child interaction as a
power contest. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21, 267-
282.
Bugental, D. B., & Johnston, C. (2000). Parental and child cognitions in
the context of the family. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 315-344.
Bugental, D. B., Johnston, C., New, M., & Silvester, J. (1998). Mea-
suring parental attributions: Conceptual and methodological issues.
Journal of Family Psychology, 12, 459-480.
Bugental, D. B., & Lewis, J. (1998). Interpersonal power repair in
response to threats to control from dependent others. In M. Kofta, G.
Weary, & G. Sedek (Eds.), Personal control in action: Cognitive and
motivational mechanisms (pp. 341-362). New York: Plenum.
Bugental, D. B., Lewis, J. C., Lin, E., Lyon, J., & Kopeikin, H. (2000). In
charge but not in control: The management of authority-based rela-
tionships by those with low perceived power. Developmental Psychol-
ogy, 35, 1367-1378.
Bugental, D. B., Lin, E. K., & Susskind, J. E. (1995). Influences of affect
on cognitive processes at different ages: Why the change? In N.
Eisenberg (Ed.), Social development (Review of Personality and Social
Psychology, Vol. 15, pp. 159-184). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bugental, D. B., & Martorell, G. (1999). Competition between friends:
The joint influence of self, friends, and parents. Journal of Family Psy-
chology, 13, 1-14.
Bugental, D. B., & Shennum, W. A. (1984). “Difficult” children as
elicitors and targets of adult communication patterns: An
attributional-behavioral transactional analysis. Monographs of the
Society for Research in Child Development, 39(No. 1).
Cicchetti, D., & Toth, S. L. (Eds.). (1997). Developmental perspectives on
trauma: Theory, research, and intervention. Rochester, NY: University
of Rochester Press.
Coie, J. D., & Dodge, K. A. (1998). Aggression and antisocial behavior.
In N. Eisenberg (Volume Ed). Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3.
Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 779-862). New
York: John Wiley.
Cortez, V., & Bugental, D. B. (1994). Children’s visual avoidance of
threat: A strategy associated with low social control, Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly (Special issue on Emotion Regulation), 40, 82-97.
Crane-Ross, D., Tisak, M. S., & Tisak, J. (1998). Aggression and con-
ventional rule violation among adolescents: Social-reasoning pre-
dictors of social behavior. Aggressive Behavior, 24, 347-365.
Daro, D., & McCurdy, K. (1990). Current trends in abuse reporting and
facilities: The results of the 1990 annual 50-state survey. Chicago:
National Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse.
Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E., & Valente, E. (1995). Social
information-processing patterns partially mediate the effect of early
physical abuse on later conduct problems. Journal of Abnormal Psy-
chology, 104, 632-643.
Downey, G., Feldman, S., Khuri, J., & Friedman, S. (1994). Maltreat-
ment and childhood depression. In W. M. Reynolds & H. F.
Johnston (Eds.), Handbook of depression in children and adolescents
(pp. 481-508). New York: Plenum.
Egan, S. K., Monson, T. C., & Perry, D. G. (1998). Social-cognitive
influences on change in aggression over time. Developmental Psychol-
ogy, 34, 996-1006.
Fincham, F. D., Beach, S.R.H., Arias, I., & Brody, G. H. (1998).
Children’s attributions in the family: The Children’s Relationship
Attribution Measure. Journal of Family Psychology, 12, 481-493.
Grusec, J. E., Adam, E., & Mammone, N. (1993, April). Mental represen-
tations of relationships, parent belief systems, and parenting behavior.
Paper presented at the Meetings of the Society for Research in Child
Development, New Orleans.
Grusec, J. E., & Mammone, N. (1995). Features and sources of parents’
attributions about themselves and their children. In N.
Eisenberg (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 15,
pp. 49-73). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kipnis, D. (1976). The powerholders. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Larrance, D. T., & Twentyman, C. T. (1983). Maternal attributions and
child abuse. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 92, 449-457.
Lewis, J. C., Bugental, D. B., & Fleck, K. (1991). Beliefs as moderators of
reactions to computer-simulated responsive and unresponsive chil-
dren. Social Cognition, 9, 277-293.
Lovejoy, M. C., Polewko, J., & Harrison, B. (1996). Adult perceptions of
interpersonal control and reactions to disruptive child behaviors.
Social Cognition, 14, 227-245.
Lovejoy, M. C., Verda, M. R., & Hays, C. E. (1997). Convergent and
discriminant validity of measures of parenting efficacy and control.
Journal of Clinical and Child Psychology, 26, 366-376.
Maccoby, E. (1990). The role of gender identity and gender constancy:
A developmental account. American Psychologist, 45, 513-520.
Margolin, G., & Gordis, E. B. (2000). The effects of family and commu-
nity violence on children. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 445-479,
Mills, R.S.L. (1998). Paradoxical relations between perceived power
and maternal control. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 30, 132-136.
Murphy, S., Orkow, B., & Nikola, R. M. (1985). Prenatal prediction of
child abuse and neglect: A prospective study. Child Abuse and
Neglect, 9, 225-235.
Nix, R. L., Pinderhughes, E. E., Dodge, K. A., & Bates, J. E. (1999). The
relation between mothers’ hostile attribution tendencies and chil-
dren’s externalizing behavior problems: The mediating role of moth-
ers’ harsh discipline practices. Child Development, 70, 896-909.
Putallaz, M., Costanzo, P. R., Grimes, C. L., & Sherman, M. (1998).
Intergenerational continuities and their influences on children’s
development. Social Development, 7, 389-427.
Raven, B. H., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1970). Conflict and power. In P.
Swingle (Ed.), The structure of conflict (pp. 69-110). San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
Ruble, D. N., & Martin, C. L. (1998). Gender development. In N.
Eisenberg (Volume Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social,
emotional, and personality development (pp. 933-1016). New York:
John Wiley.
Steinberg, M. S., & Dodge, K. A. (1983). Attributional bias in aggressive
adolescent boys and girls. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 1,
312-321.
Straus, M. (1979). Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: The
Conflict Tactics Scale. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 75-88.
CHILD MALTREATMENT / FEBRUARY 2002

Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1990). Physical violence in American fami-
lies: Risk factors and adaptation to violence in 8,145 families. New
Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Straus, M., Hamby, S. L., Finkelhor, D., & Moore, D. W. (1998). Identi-
fication of child maltreatment with the Parent-Child Conflict Tac-
tics Scales: Development and psychometric data for a national sam-
ple of American parents. Child Abuse and Neglect, 22, 249-270.
Daphne Blunt Bugental is professor of developmental and social
psychology with the Department of Psychology and codirector of the
Interdisciplinary Program in Human Development at the University
of California, Santa Barbara. Her research is concerned with the
influence of cognitive, affective, and neurohormonal variables within
conflictual family systems—with a particular focus on violence and
violence prevention. Her work is published in journals within the fields
CHILD MALTREATMENT / FEBRUARY 2002
Bugental, Shennum / GENDER AND VIOLENCE 63
of social and developmental psychology, and she has contributed chap-
ters to a number of books.
William Shennum is the director of research at Five Acres, a non-
profit child and family services agency serving the greater Los Angeles
area. He is responsible for evaluation research in the agency’s multiple
programs, which include family-based services, foster care, and group
residential treatment. He earned his Ph.D. in psychology at the Uni-
versity of California, Santa Barbara. Within the field of child mal-
treatment, his interests include intervention research, outcome mea-
surement, and analysis of individual differences in outcome. He
chairs research and evaluation committees for the California Alliance
of Child and Family Services and the Inter-University Research Con-
sortium for Family Preservation.