ategory, most of the studies utilize social learning theory to discover or explain the causes of battery. In one such study, some of the more disturbing implications of spousal abuse were found by Walker (1979), who discovered that 53% of batterers examined in the study had also sexually or physically abused their children as well. Other studies have shown that this is part of a vicious circle, as most batterers and abusers were themselves abused as children (e.g., Rosenbaum & O'Leary, 1987), representing a sort of ongoing, dysfunctional procreation of a battering class.
In addition to this social learning theory of learned domestic abuse, several other theories have been proposed. Some studies (e.g., Davidson, 1977; Dobash & Dobash, 1979; Spitzer, 1985) have focused on feminist cultural theories, wherein what is claimed to be a Western tradition of violence and subjugation of women actively encourages battering. Other researchers focus on power theories (e.g., Bograd, 1988; McDonald, 1980; Rollins & Bahr, 1976), wherein the ability of one partner to actually or potentially modify or control the behavior of another is the focus. These power theories borrow heavily from the feminist theories of the differential in power distributions between the genders.
The third major focus of such causative studies examine the roles of ethnicity and class in determining abusive proclivities. As Edleson and Tolman (1992) note, "not only do ethnicity and class influence power within relationships, they also play an important role in how society responds to violent men and their victims" (21). While early studies (e.g., Devore & Schlesinger, 1987; Gordon, 1964) focused on the causal influences of class and ethnicity in abusive relationships, more recent studies have noted that such factors should also be taken into consideration when devising intervention or prevention strategies (e.g., Lum, 1986; Pinderhughes, 1989).
Prevention and in...