Enced it only in the past. Those with aggression in the last year had lower dedication, and interestingly, fewer material constraints than those with a past history of physical aggression. Given the general patterns of findings across the three types of aggression history, and particularly the differences between those who had experienced aggression in the past, but not in the last year, these distinctions seem meaningful. These groups will be fluid over time, as some who have not experienced aggression may experience it in the future, some who experienced it only in the past will again experience aggression in the future, and some who experienced it recently will later move into the “only in the past” group. It is also the case that those who experienced aggression only in the past reported less injury, so these findings may reflect something about the severity of aggression in addition to the timing of the aggression. Future research could more qualitatively describe the distinctions based on history of aggression. For example, it might be particularly important in terms of clinical practice to know more about couples who experienced aggression at some point but were able to stop this negative pattern of interaction and continue the relationship. How did these unmarried couples change their negative behaviors? Are these lasting changes? The current study can speak to how having experienced physical aggression is associated with relationship stability over time. Although a more distal history of aggression was not significantly related to breaking up, individuals who experienced aggression in the last year were more likely to end their relationships than those with no history of aggression at all. These findings are in line with other research showing an association between aggression and risk for relationship dissolution (Heyman, O’Leary, Jouriles, 1995; Rogge Bradbury, 1999; Shortt et al., 2006), though we examined a shorter time frame (twelve Z-DEVD-FMK web months) than previous research had. The current findings extend the previous literature by showing that the relationships that had experienced aggression in the last year were alsoNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptJ Fam Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 December 1.Rhoades et al.Pagecharacterized by more constraints and barriers to leaving. This NSC309132 chemical information combination of findings suggests that ending the relationship may have been more difficult, perhaps both emotionally and logistically, for those who had experienced aggression compared to those who had not. A wide literature exists on the process of separation from relationships, particularly marriages, characterized by battering and control (see Walker et al., 2004 for a review), but less is known about unmarried separations, especially for those with lower levels of physical aggression. The results from the current study indicate that dedication and constraints help explain more than 30 of the variability in break-ups among those who had experienced aggression in the last year, suggesting the utility of continuing to measure commitment in research on physical aggression and relationship stability. Several of the commitment constructs individually predicted staying together, but when they were all entered simultaneously, few remained unique predictors of stability, likely because they overlap to various degrees in terms of their meaning. Future research could explore the relationship dissoluti.Enced it only in the past. Those with aggression in the last year had lower dedication, and interestingly, fewer material constraints than those with a past history of physical aggression. Given the general patterns of findings across the three types of aggression history, and particularly the differences between those who had experienced aggression in the past, but not in the last year, these distinctions seem meaningful. These groups will be fluid over time, as some who have not experienced aggression may experience it in the future, some who experienced it only in the past will again experience aggression in the future, and some who experienced it recently will later move into the “only in the past” group. It is also the case that those who experienced aggression only in the past reported less injury, so these findings may reflect something about the severity of aggression in addition to the timing of the aggression. Future research could more qualitatively describe the distinctions based on history of aggression. For example, it might be particularly important in terms of clinical practice to know more about couples who experienced aggression at some point but were able to stop this negative pattern of interaction and continue the relationship. How did these unmarried couples change their negative behaviors? Are these lasting changes? The current study can speak to how having experienced physical aggression is associated with relationship stability over time. Although a more distal history of aggression was not significantly related to breaking up, individuals who experienced aggression in the last year were more likely to end their relationships than those with no history of aggression at all. These findings are in line with other research showing an association between aggression and risk for relationship dissolution (Heyman, O’Leary, Jouriles, 1995; Rogge Bradbury, 1999; Shortt et al., 2006), though we examined a shorter time frame (twelve months) than previous research had. The current findings extend the previous literature by showing that the relationships that had experienced aggression in the last year were alsoNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptJ Fam Psychol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2011 December 1.Rhoades et al.Pagecharacterized by more constraints and barriers to leaving. This combination of findings suggests that ending the relationship may have been more difficult, perhaps both emotionally and logistically, for those who had experienced aggression compared to those who had not. A wide literature exists on the process of separation from relationships, particularly marriages, characterized by battering and control (see Walker et al., 2004 for a review), but less is known about unmarried separations, especially for those with lower levels of physical aggression. The results from the current study indicate that dedication and constraints help explain more than 30 of the variability in break-ups among those who had experienced aggression in the last year, suggesting the utility of continuing to measure commitment in research on physical aggression and relationship stability. Several of the commitment constructs individually predicted staying together, but when they were all entered simultaneously, few remained unique predictors of stability, likely because they overlap to various degrees in terms of their meaning. Future research could explore the relationship dissoluti.
