DOI: 10.3886/icpsr06114
title: Charlotte [North Carolina] Spouse Assault Replication Project, 1987-1989
title: Archival Version

description: This study is a replication and extension of an experiment
 conducted in Minneapolis (MINNEAPOLIS INTERVENTION PROJECT, 1986-1987
 [ICPSR 9808]) to test the efficacy of three types of police response
 to spouse abuse. Three experimental treatments were employed: (1)
 advising and possibly separating the couple, (2) issuing a citation
 (an order to appear in court to answer specific charges) to the
 offender, and (3) arresting the offender. The main focus of the
 project concerned whether arrest is the most effective law enforcement
 response for deterring recidivism of spouse abusers. Cases were
 randomly assigned to one of the three treatments and were followed for
 at least six months to determine whether recidivism occurred. Measures
 of recidivism were obtained through official police records and victim
 interviews. Cases that met the following eligibility guidelines were
 included in the project: (1) a call involving a misdemeanor offense
 committed by a male offender aged 18 or over against a female victim
 aged 18 or over who were spouses, (2) ex-spouses, (3) cohabitants, or
 (4) ex-cohabitants. Also, both suspect and victim had to be present
 when officers arrived at the scene. Victims were interviewed
 twice. The first interview occurred shortly after the "presenting
 incident," the incident that initiated a call for police assistance.
 This initial interview focused on episodes of abuse that occurred
 between the time of the presenting incident and the day of the initial
 interview. In particular, detailed data were gathered on the nature of
 physical violence directed against the victim, the history of the
 victim's marital and cohabitating relationships, the nature of the
 presenting incident prior to the arrival of the police, the actual
 actions taken by the police at the scene, post-incident separations
 and reunions of the victim and the offender, recidivism since the
 presenting incident, the victim's previous abuse history, alcohol and
 drug use of both the victim and the offender, and the victim's
 help-seeking actions. Questions were asked regarding whether the
 offender had threatened to hurt the victim, actually hurt or tried to
 hurt the victim, threatened to hurt any member of the family, actually
 hurt or tried to hurt any member of the family, threatened to damage
 property, or actually damaged any property. In addition, criminal
 histories and arrest data for the six-month period subsequent to the
 presenting incident were collected for offenders. A follow-up
 interview was conducted approximately six months after the presenting
 incident and focused primarily on recidivism since the initial
 interview. Arrest recidivism was defined as any arrest for any
 subsequent offense by the same offender against the same victim
 committed within six months of the presenting incident. Victims were
 asked to estimate how often each type of victimization had occurred
 and to answer more detailed questions on the first and most recent
incidents of victimization.
description: This study of police response to spouse abuse in
 Charlotte was initiated in response to a National Institute of Justice
 request for proposals to replicate and extend a spouse assault study
 conducted in Minneapolis. In the Charlotte project, the efficacy of
 three types of police response to spouse abuse was tested: (1)
 advising and possibly separating the couple, (2) issuing a citation to
 the offender, and (3) arresting the offender. The main focus of the
 project concerned whether arrest is the most effective law enforcement
 response for deterring spouse abusers from committing subsequent acts
 of abuse. Cases that met the following eligibility guidelines were
 included in the project: a call involving a misdemeanor offense
 committed by a male offender aged 18 or over against a female victim
 aged 18 or over who were spouses, ex-spouses, cohabitants, or
 ex-cohabitants. The cases were followed for at least six months to
 determine whether recidivism occurred. Arrest recidivism was defined
 as any arrest for any subsequent offense by the same offender against
 the same victim committed within six months of the "presenting
 incident," the incident which initiated a call for police assistance.
 The results of this research are intended to help police departments
determine their policies for dealing with incidents of spouse abuse.
description: The study involved the entire Charlotte Police
 Department and operated 24 hours a day in the city during the period
 August 1987 through June 1989. When officers responded to a call for
 assistance regarding a domestic disturbance, they determined whether
 the case met all of the eligibility criteria. If so, the officers
 radioed the dispatcher for one of the three treatment codes, which was
 randomly assigned by computer. The officers then carried out the
 mandated treatment code unless something occurred that prevented them
 from doing so. A total of 686 eligible calls for assistance were
 received. All ineligible cases were explained in writing. Under some
 circumstances an otherwise eligible case was excluded, such as if a
 victim insisted the offender be arrested, if the offender threatened
 or assaulted an officer, or if an officer believed the offender posed
 imminent danger to the victim. Within a few days after the officers
 carried out the assigned responses, research staff sent a letter to
 the victim requesting an interview. If the victim did not respond to
 the first letter, she received a second letter, follow-up phone
 calls, and follow-up home visits. Special care was taken to minimize
 the likelihood of the offender's intercepting the letter and becoming
 aware of the researchers' purposes. Follow-up interviews with victims
 were conducted approximately six months later. Measures of recidivism
were obtained through official police records and victim interviews.
description: The initial interview with the victims focused on
 episodes of abuse which occurred between the time of the presenting
 incident and the day of the initial interview. In particular, detailed
 data were gathered on the nature of physical violence directed against
 the victim, the history of the victim's marital and cohabitating
 relationships, the nature of the presenting incident prior to the
 arrival of the police, the actual actions taken by the police at the
 scene, post-incident separations and reunions of the victim and the
 offender, recidivism since the presenting incident, the victim's
 previous abuse history, alcohol and drug use of both the victim and
 the offender, and the victim's help-seeking actions. The follow-up
 interview focused primarily upon recidivism since the initial
 interview. Victims were asked to estimate how often each type of
 victimization had occurred and to answer more detailed questions on
 the first and most recent incidents of victimization. In both of these
 interviews, victims were asked questions regarding the nature of the
 abusive incidents. More specifically, each victim was asked about six
 types of victimization, whether the offender had threatened to hurt
 her, actually hurt or tried to hurt her, threatened to hurt any member
 of the family, actually hurt or tried to hurt any member of the
 family, threatened to damage property, or actually damaged any
 property. For each offender, data were collected on arrests relating
 to offenses against the original victim. Criminal history information
 concentrated on acts occurring during the six months subsequent to the
 presenting incident. Some information was collected on criminal
 background prior to the presenting incident, such as number of arrests
 and number of arrests for violent crimes. For offenders who received
 citations or were arrested, data were collected from court records
 regarding the disposition of their cases, including charges, type of
release, disposition of case, sentencing, and fines.
description: Response Rates: During the study period, 686 eligible calls for
 assistance were received. Of these, 419 (61 percent) resulted in
 completed initial interviews. Follow-up interviews were conducted with
 324 (77 percent) of the respondents who completed the initial
interview.
description: Presence of Common Scales: The Conflict Tactic Scale is included in the victim
interview questionnaire.
description: The sample consisted of victims of spouse abuse, as
 defined by the researchers, which occurred in Charlotte, North
 Carolina, between August 1987 and June 1989. Randomized treatments
 were assigned to 686 eligible police calls for assistance. Of these,
 the researchers identified 646 victims whom they attempted to
 interview. Initial and follow-up interviews were completed with 419
 and 324 victims, respectively. Offender criminal histories were
 obtained from official police records for a total of 650 different
 offenders who were involved in the 686 eligible calls for police
 assistance included in the study. Of the cases for which a citation or
 arrest was the response, citations were issued in 181 cases, and
 arrests were made in 271 cases. Records were unavailable in nine
 cases, making a total of 443 cases for which court records were
 obtained (court records were not applicable to the cases that received
counseling/separation treatment).
description: Datasets: 
DS0: Study-Level Files
DS1: Police Calls Assigned to Randomized Treatments
DS2: Offender Criminal Histories
DS3: Victim Initial Interviews
DS4: Victim Follow-Up Interviews
DS5: Offender Court Records
DS7: SAS Data Definition Statements for Police Calls Assigned to Randomized Treatments
DS8: SAS Data Definition Statements for Offender Criminal Histories
DS9: SAS Data Definition Statements for Victim Initial Interviews
DS10: SAS Data Definition Statements for Victim Follow-Up Interviews
DS11: SAS Data Definition Statements for Offender Court Records
description: Calls for assistance received by the Charlotte, North
 Carolina, Police Department from August 1987 through June 1989
 regarding domestic disturbances that met predefined eligibility
requirements.
description: face-to-face interview; record abstracts