KNOWLEDGE AND PERCEPTIONS OF DOMESTICALLY VIOLENT VETERANS WITH
PTSD AMONG CRIMINAL JUSTICE STUDENTS AT CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY,
SACRAMENTO
A Thesis
Presented to the faculty of the Division of Criminal Justice
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Criminal Justice
by
Alison Steen
SPRING
2014
KNOWLEDGE AND PERCEPTIONS OF DOMESTICALLY VIOLENT VETERANS WITH
PTSD AMONG CRIMINAL JUSTICE STUDENTS AT CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY,
SACRAMENTO
A Thesis
by
Alison Steen
Approved by:
__________________________________, Committee Chair
Sue C. Escobar, J.D., Ph.D.
__________________________________, Second Reader
Jennie Singer, Ph.D.
____________________________
Date
ii
Student: Alison Steen
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University format
manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to be awarded for
the thesis.
__________________________, Graduate Coordinator ___________________
Yvette Farmer, Ph.D.
Date
Division of Criminal Justice
iii
Abstract
of
KNOWLEDGE AND PERCEPTIONS OF DOMESTICALLY VIOLENT VETERANS WITH
PTSD AMONG CRIMINAL JUSTICE STUDENTS AT CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY,
SACRAMENTO
by
Alison Steen
A survey was distributed to a total of 381 undergraduate criminal justice students at California
State University, Sacramento during the Spring 2013 semester. The student participants were
enrolled in either CrJ 4 or 190 in order to compare the responses of lower and upper division
students. The study aimed to gain an understanding of the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions
held by the students regarding the treatment and/or punishment of veterans with PTSD who
engage in acts of domestic violence. The results indicated that there was not a measureable
difference in responses between the upper and lower division students in terms of sympathy, the
belief in PTSD as a mitigating factor, or extent of knowledge on the issue. However, those
students who indicated that they, or some member of their immediate family, were former or
current military service members showed a significantly higher level of knowledge on the topic.
_______________________, Committee Chair
Sue C. Escobar, J.D., Ph.D.
_______________________
Date
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This thesis would not have been possible without the support of the following people:
My parents – The two most influential people in my life. Thank you for instilling in me
the value of education. Your constant love and encouragement mean more to me than you
know.
My family & friends – You know who you are. There are no words for how much each of
you mean to me. I am so lucky to have all of you in my life. You have taught me so much
and I appreciate that I can count on you to make me laugh even during the most
challenging times.
My cohort classmates – I love that our small class are the only people who can truly
appreciate the ups and downs of our graduate school experience. I feel lucky to have met
and gotten to know you and will consider you life-long friends.
Dr. Escobar & Dr. Singer – My thesis advisor and second reader. I would have been lost
during this entire experience without your help. I have appreciated your feedback and
guidance, and most of all, your patience with me throughout this entire process.
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................ viii
List of Figures ...........................................................................................................................ix
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION……………........…………………………………………………….. 1
Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................. 2
2.
LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................. 7
Veterans ....................................................................................................................... 7
Veterans Courts.......................................................................................................... 11
PTSD & Domestic Violence ...................................................................................... 14
Attitudes & Perceptions ............................................................................................. 18
Perceptions of Domestic Violence ............................................................................. 19
Student Perceptions.................................................................................................... 20
Student Perceptions of Domestic Violence................................................................. 22
Theory.. ...................................................................................................................... 24
Hypotheses.. ............................................................................................................... 28
3. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................... 30
Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 31
Research Design ........................................................................................................ 31
Sampling ................................................................................................................... 32
Data Collection Technique ........................................................................................ 33
vi
Human Subjects Review ........................................................................................... 34
Data Analysis Procedures .......................................................................................... 35
Limitations of the Study ............................................................................................ 36
4. DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................... 38
Participants ................................................................................................................ 38
Research Question #1 ............................................................................................... 41
Research Question #2 ................................................................................................ 42
Research Question #3 ................................................................................................ 44
Military Affiliation .................................................................................................... 45
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ............................................................................... 47
Discussion ................................................................................................................. 47
Research Implications ................................................................................................ 48
Future Research ......................................................................................................... 49
Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 50
Appendix A. Professor Script .............................................................................................. 52
Appendix B. Class Script ...................................................................................................... 53
Appendix C. Consent to Act as a Human Research Subject ................................................ 54
Appendix D. Survey.............................................................................................................. 56
References ............................................................................................................................... 61
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Tables
1.
Page
Table 1 Participant Demographics………………… .………………………………. 40
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures
Page
1.
Figure 1 Survey Questions Associated with Sympathy,………………………………... 42
2.
Figure 2 Survey Questions Associated with PTSD as Mitigating Factor….…………….43
3.
Figure 3 Survey Questions Associated with Extent of Knowledge………..…………….45
ix
1
Chapter 1
Introduction
There are approximately 22 million veterans living in the United States who
served their country during the recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the
Korean War, Desert Storm, Vietnam, and World War II (Department of Veterans Affairs,
2014c). Reintegration into civilian life can be extremely difficult for returning veterans,
causing many to face challenges, including drug and alcohol abuse, homelessness,
unemployment, and mental health issues (Schaffer, 2010, p. 22; Thomas, 2011, p. 34).
Unfortunately, mental health challenges run rampant among combat veterans as a result
of the traumatic images and experiences of war (Russell, 2009, p. 360). Lt. Col. Dave
Grossman (2009), a former army Ranger and paratrooper, describes the disconnect
between society’s expectation of war versus the harsh realities of sending men and
women into combat:
A culture raised on Rambo, Indiana Jones, Luke Skywalker, and James Bond
wants to believe that combat and killing can be done with impunity – that we can
declare someone to be the enemy and that for cause and country the soldiers will
cleanly and remorselessly wipe him from the face of the earth. In many ways it is
simply too painful for society to address what it does when it sends its young men
off to kill other young men in distant lands (p. 94).
2
While mental illness is an issue across all populations, the military sees
particularly high numbers of those suffering. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is one
of the most prevalent of the mental health issues veterans face as they return to civilian
life. According to the National Center for PTSD, 7-8 percent of the general population
will experience PTSD during their lifetime; however, the numbers are far greater for
military personnel (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2014c). In fact, 11-20 percent of
those in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, 10 percent from
Desert Storm, and 30 percent from the Vietnam War are estimated to suffer from PTSD
(Department of Veterans Affairs, 2014b).
Sadly, those suffering from mental illness oftentimes come into contact with the
criminal justice system, committing crimes related to drug and alcohol abuse and
domestic violence (Russell, 2009, p. 366). Approximately 9.3 percent of the inmate
population in the United States are veterans, costing upwards of $6 billion every year
(Thomas, 2011, p. 34). A need exists to better understand how to handle veterans facing
the challenges associated with the ramifications of war.
Statement of the Problem
The numbers of military personnel who have seen combat and returned home
from deployment, including Vietnam, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation Enduring
Freedom in Afghanistan, have grown tremendously over the years (Russell, 2009, p. 357;
Wilson & Zigelbaum, 1983, p. 69). These service members are inevitably changed as a
result of their combat experiences, and are forced to face the difficult task of coping with
the traumas of war that they have witnessed. Some of the most common issues they face
3
include substance abuse, aggression, homelessness, unemployment, strained
relationships, mental illness, and trouble with law enforcement (Russell, 2009, p. 357).
Particularly prevalent in veterans is post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), with estimates
of afflicted veterans ranging between 15 – 70 percent (Russell, 2009, p. 360; Wilson &
Zigelbaum, 1983, p. 70).
Awareness of PTSD came to the forefront as researchers were studying survivors
of major historical events, such as the atomic bomb, World War II, and Vietnam (Wilson
& Zigelbaum, 1983, p. 69). It was determined that exposure to death or life-threatening
situations can produce stress reactions that do not resolve over time. Symptoms include
reliving the traumatic events, nightmares, flashbacks, avoidance behaviors to fend off
unpleasant memory triggers, feeling emotionally numb, hyperarousal, trouble sleeping
and concentrating, agitation, irritability, and rage (Department of Veterans Affairs,
2014b; Wilson & Zigelbaum, 1983, p. 70). Research also indicates that individuals
suffering from PTSD are at increased risk for ending up in the criminal justice system as
a result of criminal behaviors which likely stem from the effects of their disorder
(Cavanaugh, 2011, p. 463). Episodes of domestic violence in the homes of those
suffering from PTSD are particularly common (Price & Stevens, 2009, para. 5).
Research has found that not all military personnel perpetrate incidents of domestic
violence at higher rates than the general population (Marshall, Panuzio, & Taft, 2005, pp.
864-865). However, it has also been determined that veterans suffering from PTSD
commit acts of intimate partner violence more frequently and more severely than that of
the civilian population; in fact, their rates are approximately 2-3 times higher (Byrne &
4
Riggs, 1996, pp. 214, 221). Additionally, veterans with PTSD are more than twice as
likely as veterans without PTSD to commit acts of intimate partner violence (Jordan et
al., 1992, p. 923). Such research reveals a need for veteran-specific accommodations in
the criminal justice system.
Veteran courts, like juvenile, DUI, or drug courts, are a branch of specialty courts
which serve a unique population of offenders that have been selected to be diverted from
traditional court proceedings. These offenders have been involved in experiences of war
that most others are unable to relate to; making traditional courts ill-equipped to provide
effective strategies to handle their issues (Russell, 2009, pp. 364-365). Veteran courts
were established in an attempt to provide collaborative services in the areas of substance
abuse and mental illness, as well as the accompanying criminal behaviors, such as
domestic violence. These courts take a treatment-based approach, focusing on mental
health needs, rather than punitive measures, and offer veterans the help they need to deal
with their issues and stay out of the justice system in the future (Russell, 2009, p.372).
Non-veteran domestic violence offenders may also be diverted to a specialized
domestic violence court in order to alleviate some of the burden on the traditional court
process. Most domestic violence courts focus on having offenders admit guilt for their
crime, attend batterer programs, and possibly undergo some period of probation (National
Institute of Justice, 2011). However, veterans typically do not fit the mold of the
domestic violence offender; in most instances they had never shown any violent
tendencies prior to suffering from PTSD (Bannerman, 2010, para. 6). Veteran courts tend
to be the best option for these individuals because of its focus on mental illness and
5
treatment options for PTSD, as well as its potential for combating the stigma of the
public’s perceptions associated with these issues.
Studying perceptions and attitudes are important in order to gain an understanding
of public and personal opinions. The perceptions and attitudes of law enforcement play a
role in the manner in which domestic violence is handled. Research has shown that
officers often feel stress and frustration during domestic violence calls (Gover, Paul, &
Dodge, 2011, p. 620). Gover et al. (2011) discussed how violence in the home was
historically viewed as a private matter where police would rarely become involved;
however, modern society, as well as law enforcement’s policies, have changed in the
belief that strong and sure responses are necessary (p. 620). These beliefs have prompted
policies, such as mandatory arrest in domestic violence cases (Gover et al., 2011, pp.
620-621). However, policies differ among departments and are often inconsistent,
contributing to officer frustrations. Trujillo and Ross (2008) found that officers’
individual beliefs about the issue of domestic violence, the victims and perpetrators
involved, relationships, and prior experiences are influential in how officers will go into
domestic violence incidents (p. 455). Prosecutors, on the other hand, tend to share the
views of most of the general public. As far as returning combat veterans, the public tends
to be supportive and sympathetic to the challenges they face once they return home.
Similar sympathy has been seen in prosecutors who have been shown to exhibit leniency
when dealing with veterans, particularly with a diagnosis of PTSD (Wilson, Brodsky,
Neal, & Cramer, 2011, p. 326).
6
The differing views of the key players in domestic violence cases (police,
prosecutors, and law makers) demonstrates the inconsistency in the perceptions of
domestic violence, as well as how these cases are handled. Prior research has examined
perceptions and attitudes toward law enforcement, domestic violence, mental illness, and
veterans, yet few include the opinions of students. Current criminal justice/criminology
students are the future policymakers and professionals in the criminal justice field
(Courtright, Mackey, & Packard, 2005, p. 139). These students arguably hold the greatest
power in terms of enacting change in the future of the criminal justice system. Criminal
justice students, as a group, are generally more punitive in their views towards offenders
than those in other areas of study (Courtright et al., 2005, pp. 125-126). Public sentiment
towards the issue of domestic violence and offenders who have committed these crimes is
unfavorable; however, the public support for veterans who have honorably and heroically
served the United States is undeniable. Therefore, the issue that this study will examine is
how these areas intersect. What are the attitudes and perceptions of Sacramento State
criminal justice students towards the treatment and/or punishment of domestically violent
veterans with PTSD?
7
Chapter 2
Literature Review
The rising numbers of veterans in the United States has brought attention to the
challenges veterans face as they return to civilian life (Hink, 2010, p.2). The sad reality is
that many returning veterans are facing mental health issues, making their assimilation
especially difficult (Russell, 2009, p. 357). The issue of PTSD has particularly come to
the forefront in recent years. Unfortunately, a symptom of the disorder is aggressive or
violent behavior, sometimes perpetrated towards the veterans’ family members, thus
creating a population of offenders in the criminal justice system with a unique set of
needs (Russell, 2009, p. 360). In turn, veteran courts have been established in order to
serve this specialized need within the justice system (Russell, 2009, p. 363). Due to the
increasing awareness of the issues facing returning veterans, like posttraumatic stress
disorder and the subsequent criminal behaviors, research has followed suit in examining
how exactly the issues of veterans, PTSD, and domestic violence should be and are being
handled. This study specifically looks at the attitudes and perceptions held by criminal
justice students regarding these issues, as they are considered the future professionals in
the criminal justice field.
Veterans
The veteran population in the United States has risen tremendously as a result of
the Vietnam War and the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, creating a need to understand
the effects war has on military service members and the importance of meeting their
needs (Russell, 2009, p.357). According to the National Survey of Veterans, Active Duty
8
Service Members, Activated National Guard and Reserve Members, Family Members
and Survivors, there are an estimated 23 million veterans living in the United States as of
2010 (Department of Veterans Affairs, 2010, p. 53). Hink (2010) points out how the
conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have resulted in higher deployment numbers, yet lower
casualties than were seen in Korea and Vietnam. Additionally, Hink noted that of those
numbers, approximately 35 percent of returning veterans will face mental health issues as
a result of their experiences (p. 2). Russell (2009), the presiding judge of the original
Veterans Treatment Court in Erie County, New York, points out some of the main issues
facing veterans as they return from deployment and attempt to reintegrate into society,
including problems with employment, housing, mental illness, and substance abuse (p.
357). The issues facing veterans carry over into their family lives and place significant
strain on their relationships, particularly in the instance of mental illness (Russell, 2009,
pp. 358-360).
Finley, Baker, Pugh, and Peterson (2010) conducted a study involving interviews
with veterans who had returned from deployment and their spouses. The interviews
initially focused on the stresses of post-deployment life for these families, as well as
PTSD, and in some cases partner violence (p. 739). Their study is limited due to a small
sample size and the inclusion of only Vietnam veterans rather than including individuals
from other war conflicts (Finley et al., 2010, p.741). The research discussed the impact
that multiple deployments have on veterans’ families and its capacity to cause serious
strain on relationships, especially when considering how multiple deployments can
increase the occurrence of exposure to combat situations (Finley et al., 2010, p. 738).
9
Exposure to combat can potentially lead to an increase in psychological ramifications,
such as PTSD (Finley et al., 2010, pp. 738-741).
The rising population of returning veterans is a relatively new phenomenon, with
greater numbers of veterans coming back from war because of the lower casualty rates in
the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan compared to earlier wars (Hink, 2010, p. 2). While
the effects of any war are difficult, the massive numbers of men and women returning
home with physical and psychological issues is at an all-time high due to experienced war
stressors (Hink, 2010, p. 2). The estimates of veterans suffering from PTSD vary
tremendously among researchers. Of the over 1.6 million veterans deployed in the most
recent military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, anywhere from 12-25 percent will
suffer from PTSD depending on their combat exposure and experience (Cavanaugh,
2011, p. 463). In Hink’s (2010) FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin article, he estimates that
approximately twenty six percent of military service members will suffer from PTSD as a
result of their combat exposure, causing changes to their moods, thoughts, and behaviors
(p. 2). In these cases, veterans may misperceive actions or events in everyday life as
threatening and enter into “survival mode” as a result of their inability to properly
regulate feelings or anger, and manage their inhibitions and self-monitoring behaviors,
generally causing problems with aggressive behaviors (Taft, Street, Marshall, Dowdall, &
Riggs, 2007, p. 270). These PTSD symptoms, particularly aggressive behaviors, have the
potential to lead to abusive relationships and substance abuse and the implication of
increasing the likelihood of problems with law enforcement and involvement in the
criminal justice system (Hink, 2010, p. 3; Taft et al., 2007, p. 275).
10
Military personnel are specially trained to be on alert for potential threats, and
experience stress that the average person cannot comprehend, essentially breeding a
culture of violence and aggression among the military service members out of necessity
for what they will face (Taft et al., 2005, p. 151). Nelson and Wright (1996) argue that
hostile and violent actions, as well as feelings of anger and rage, save lives during
combat; anything less than this is viewed as a sign of weakness among peers (p. 458).
Finley et al. (2010) looked at the patterns and perceptions of intimate partner violence
committed by returning veterans with PTSD through interviews with Vietnam veterans
and their spouses (p. 739). The authors found that increased combat exposure due to
multiple deployments is related to relationship strain and higher levels of relationship
violence (p. 738). The authors stated that the implications for these findings point to the
importance of the understanding that patterns may be identified in veterans with PTSD
and incidents of partner violence, meaning the perceptions of these incidents play a role
in how the veteran and their significant other deal with the issue (Finley et al., 2010, p.
738).
Petrik, Rosenberg, and Watson (1983) conducted a study of patients at a
veteran’s medical center who were being treated for psychiatric or chemical dependency
issues. The veterans in the study were interviewed by staff psychologists regarding their
combat histories, relationships, and any incidents of violence in their relationships (p.
897). Although their research acknowledged that there is a strong relationship between
combat exposure and violent behavior, their findings did not support that the violent
behavior is commonly perpetrated toward women (p. 898); however, their research is
11
dated and was based on a relatively small sample of one hundred veterans. Additionally,
their research does not include the impact of the more recent wars, including Operation
Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.
Veterans Courts
Issues of criminal behavior will lead any group toward involvement in the
criminal justice system (Russell, 2009, p. 357). For veteran offenders the most common
forms of criminal behavior are substance abuse and domestic violence, as well as
associated issues, such as homelessness (Hink, 2010, p. 3). Due to the unique nature of
dealing with the veteran population, specialized courts have been developed in order to
meet the needs of veteran offenders in a manner that tailors services in a treatment-based
approach (Russell, 2009, p. 363). The Buffalo Veterans Treatment Court was the first of
its kind and originated in Buffalo, New York in early 2008 (Russell, 2009, p. 364). This
type of tailored service is modeled after other forms of specialized courts that have been
successful in treating other needy populations, such as drug courts, juvenile courts, DUI
courts, and mental health courts (Russell, 2009, p. 365). Russell (2009) discusses how
veteran courts in particular are structured in a way that primarily focuses on substance
abuse and mental health issues, but take into account many other issues:
While primarily concerned with criminal activity, alcohol and other drug use, and
mental illness, the Veterans Treatment Court team also considers co-occurring
problems such as primary medical problems, transmittable diseases,
homelessness, basic educational deficits, unemployment and poor job
12
preparations, spouse and family troubles – especially domestic violence – and the
ongoing effects of war time trauma (p. 366).
The ultimate goal of these courts is to address the underlying issues the veterans are
facing that have ultimately led to their involvement in the criminal justice system
(Anonymous, 2012, p. 19).
Veteran courts, along with the other forms of specialty courts and diversion
programs, represent a shift toward therapeutic jurisprudence in the United States’
criminal justice system (Schaffer, 2010, p.21). This shift offers offenders a therapeutic
environment, but allows them to continue living in their communities while holding them
accountable for their actions (Russell, 2009, p. 369). In Schaffer’s (2010) article
regarding veteran courts and diversion alternatives, he explains how these programs seek
to address the root of the problems facing specific populations of offenders leading to
their criminal behavior (p. 21). In the specific case of veteran courts, he states, “the need
for intervention, services, and treatment related to their military service has drastically
increased in the last several years, especially with the impact of the Operation Iraqi
Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom wars amid a turbulent economy” (Schaffer,
2010, p. 21). Areas and jurisdictions outside of the original veteran court in Buffalo, New
York have followed suit and veteran courts have been established in counties in
California, Oklahoma, New York, and Alaska, and plans are in motion for many more
(Schaffer, 2010, p. 22).
The Domestic Relations Clinic (DRC) is one example of a diversion program with
similar intentions as veteran courts. DRC is put on through the VA in Cincinnati, Ohio
13
and approved by the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections and Adult Parole
Authority (Schaffer, 2010, p. 22). Schaffer (2010) discusses how this program was
structured as a 13 week course to prevent domestic violence for veterans with anger and
domestic violence issues, and has shown to be effective in reducing recidivism (p. 22).
While the author acknowledged that these types of programs and services are still lacking
nationwide, the need for them is recognized and they are continuously expanding
(Schaffer, 2010, p. 22).
Taft et al. (2013) conducted a study through the Department of Veterans Affairs
and Department of Defense, called Strength at Home, a 12 week intervention program for
veterans or active duty members of the military who had recently committed some act of
domestic violence (p. 226). The program’s purpose was to address the manner in which
the participants process social information and deal with the trauma they have
experienced (Taft et al., 2013, p. 228). In the pilot phase of their study, only individuals
with PTSD were included in the hopes of being able to create a program tailored toward
reducing partner violence in current relationships and preventing it in the future
relationships of those military personnel suffering from PTSD (Taft et al., 2013, p. 226).
The Strength at Home type of intervention differs from veteran courts due to the fact that
participants in veteran courts are not recruited, but are there because of their involvement
in the justice system. However, Strength at Home is an example of a program created
specifically to help the veteran population face the issues in their lives that they most
likely endured due to their military service.
14
PTSD & Domestic Violence
The symptoms associated with PTSD have the potential to create issues within the
interpersonal relationships of individuals suffering from the disorder (Jordan et al., 1992,
p. 916). Byrne and Riggs (1996) researched Vietnam veterans and their intimate
relationships, examining the connection between combat exposure, symptoms of PTSD,
and relationship aggression using several psychological questionnaires (pp. 215-217).
The authors reported that male Vietnam veterans diagnosed with a greater degree of
PTSD symptomology were more likely to engage in violence against their intimate
partners (Byrne & Riggs, 1996, p. 221). However, their findings may be limited due to a
small sample of 50 self-selected veterans (Byrne & Riggs, 1996, p. 222). Additionally,
the authors state that the frequency and severity of such violence, as well as the
seriousness of the relationship problems, increases as the severity of PTSD symptoms
increases (Byrne & Riggs, 1996, p. 221).
Teten et al. (2010) conducted a similar study at a Veterans Affairs medical center
using a sample of both Vietnam veterans and Iraq veterans who served during Operation
Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom. Participants were asked to respond to
questions regarding their combat experiences and relationship aggression (Teten et al.,
2010, pp.1613, 1615). The authors found that in comparison with veterans without PTSD,
those veterans with a diagnosis of PTSD have consistently been found to be more likely
to engage in acts of intimate partner aggression or violence (Teten et al., 2010, p. 1612).
However, these findings are limited to the heterosexual couples and the authors
15
acknowledged that their study may not necessarily be generalized to all Veterans Affairs
facilities (Teten et al., 2010, pp. 1624-1625).
Aside from the potential for physical aggression, the PTSD symptoms that might
have a negative influence on relationships include depression, loss of interest in work and
significant activities, distrust of others, guilt, anger, rage, avoidance, and loss of intimacy
(Wilson & Zigelbaum, 1983, p. 70). In Byrne and Riggs’ (1996) study of relationship
aggression in male Vietnam veterans with PTSD, the authors examined various
symptoms of PTSD and their effect on relationships. They found that mood swings and
rage outbursts negatively impact intimacy, harmony, and commitment in relationships
with others (pp. 213-214). However, their findings could be considered limited due to the
use of a small, self-selected sample (Byrne & Riggs, 1996, p. 222). Similarly, in a
subsequent study looking at the quality of intimate relationships of veterans with PTSD,
the authors concluded that PTSD symptoms like emotional numbing, hyperarousal,
irritability, and avoidance make it difficult for veterans and their partners to bond and
maintain feelings of intimacy and connection (Riggs, Byrne, Weathers, & Litz, 1998, pp.
88, 98).
The sights and experience of war have an undeniable effect on returning veterans
and their attempts to assimilate back into society and reestablish their daily lives (Hink,
2010, p. 2). In their study, Taft et al. (2005) used a subsample of the family interview
portion of the Congressionally mandated National Survey of the Vietnam Generation
which was completed by Vietnam veterans and their spouse or cohabitating partner in
order to identity risk factors of partner violence among combat veterans. The study
16
compared domestically violent veterans with a diagnosis of PTSD to domestically violent
veterans without a diagnosis of PTSD and looked at factors including family of origin,
psychiatric or relationship issues, and combat experience. They found that greater
exposure to war-zone traumas was associated with higher levels of relationship violence
(Taft et al., 2005, pp. 155-156). Byrne and Riggs’ (1996) research concluded that because
PTSD can result from combat exposure and increases the likelihood of relationship
problems, PTSD is responsible for increased rates for relationship violence (p. 221).
Additionally, Jordan et al. (1992) also conducted a study which compared the family
issues of veterans with PTSD to veterans without PTSD using the survey component and
the spouse/partner interview component of the National Survey of the Vietnam
Generation. These authors focused on marital problems, family violence, and issues
among the veterans’ children (Jordan et al., 1992, pp. 923-924). The researchers reported
that while other variables can certainly be at play in family issues, war trauma and
combat exposure was the most problematic (Jordan et al., 1992, p. 924). However, it is
important to note the retrospective design of the study and the level of accuracy of the
authors’ interpretations.
Research has established a strong connection between PTSD and relationship
aggression and violence. With that said, however, physical violence is not the only issue
seen within families dealing with PTSD. The presence of PTSD in a family impacts not
only the individual who has suffered the trauma, but the entire family unit (Riggs et al.,
1998, p. 87). Jordan et al. (1992) discussed how families with the presence of PTSD have
higher levels of violence than families without PTSD. Furthermore, children with a
17
parent with PTSD have higher rates of behavioral issues, such as emotional numbing,
depression, isolation, aggression, and mistrust (Jordan et al., 1992, p. 923). For example,
Jordan et al. (1992) noted that approximately one third of veterans with PTSD have a
child with emotional issues considered to be clinically significant (pp. 923-924). In the
Riggs’ et al. (1998) research comparing Vietnam veterans with PTSD and their intimate
partners to the relationships of Vietnam veterans without PTSD, the authors reported that
the partners of veterans with PTSD were more likely to feel distressed in their
relationships, have difficulties with intimacy, and had more commonly taken steps
toward separation. The veterans themselves in this study who had PTSD also reported
anxieties toward intimacy (pp. 96-97).
In addition, Nelson and Wright (1996) found that verbal and emotional abuse is
even more common in these families than physical violence (p. 459). Important to note,
however, is that all families are different and will cope with issues, including PTSD and
the accompanying relationship stressors, differently. Not all families dealing with PTSD
are crumbling or struggling to the extent of desperation. Jordan et al. (1992) pointed out
that the severity of issues in families where a member has PTSD can vary tremendously
(p. 924).
The cyclical nature of violence is a frequently discussed topic in the area of
domestic violence (Jordan et al., 1992, pp. 924-925). The victims in domestic violence
relationships, although not at fault, play a role in the cycle of violence. Nelson and
Wright’s (1996) study emphasized the need for understanding and treating PTSD
symptoms in the wives and girlfriends of male veterans with PTSD. Their review of
18
literature touched on the fact that some female partners of individuals with PTSD are
predisposed to PTSD symptomology themselves as a result of trauma in their pasts,
including having experienced physical, sexual, and emotional abuse during childhood (p.
461). Moreover, as discussed, Byrne and Riggs’ (1996) research showed that veterans
with more severe degrees of PTSD were more likely to have problems in their
interpersonal relationships. The authors reported higher rates of relationship problems
have been shown to increase intimate partner aggression and violence (Byrne & Riggs,
1996, p. 221). Thus, the effects that PTSD has on relationships are all interconnected.
Attitudes & Perceptions
Acknowledging the importance of taking attitudes and perceptions into account is
significant in the field of social science research because it facilitates the ability to
understand the current culture and potential to predict future policy (Payne & Chappell,
2008, p. 184). The field of criminology/criminal justice and its research are no different,
and pertain to perceptions of crime and attitudes toward punitive measures. Shelley,
Waid, and Dobbs (2011) conducted a study comparing criminology/criminal justice
majors with non-majors regarding the students’ punitive attitudes toward offenders. The
researchers distributed surveys at three different universities among lower and upper
division students of all different majors (Shelley et al., 2011, pp. 530-531). According to
their findings, individual perceptions can be initially shaped as a result of a person’s
gender, ethnicity, geographic location, religion, and political ideals, yet commonly shift
and mature with education and age (p. 527). In terms of perceptions and attitudes toward
crime and punishment, the authors suggest that individuals are influenced by their
19
backgrounds and social circumstances, and particularly their experiences, concerns, and
fears surrounding crime and victimization (Shelley et al., 2011, p. 527).
Perceptions of Domestic Violence
Attitudes toward domestic violence have changed tremendously over the past few
decades, resulting in increased awareness and research for the issue (Nabors, Dietz, &
Jasinki, 2006, p. 779). Similarly, police practices and responses to domestic violence
incidents have evolved to include mandatory arrest policies in many areas, which in turn
impact the discretionary powers of the individual officers responding to these incidents
(Gover et al., 2011, p. 620). Attitudinal research has been utilized in measuring police
officer attitudes toward domestic violence situations. Gover et al. (2011) surveyed
officers for their attitudes and perceptions towards domestic violence and the police’s
response. Their findings revealed that officers generally disagree with their loss of
discretion in domestic violence incidents and mandatory arrest policies because the
officers reported that they do not think it reduces future acts of domestic violence (p.
631). The officers in the study reported a sense of frustration toward domestic violence
calls, the victims, and the policies of how they are to deal with the incidents (Gover et al.,
2011, p. 631). Their findings, however, may be considered limited due to their use of
convenience sampling and lack of qualitative research (Gover et al., 2011, p. 633). With
police response being the first stage of the criminal justice system’s involvement in
domestic violence cases, gaining an understanding of their attitudes are important for
domestic violence research (Sun, Su, & Wu, 2011, p. 3290).
20
Following the arrest of an individual for domestic violence, the courts become
involved (Russell, 2009, p. 366). Gilchrist and Blissett (2002) conducted a study in
Britain examining magistrates’ attitudes toward domestic violence and the sentencing
options for offenders. Their research discussed the critical need for support and
coordination among the various players of the justice system (p. 348). Moreover, the
authors further acknowledge magistrates’ attitudes regarding the importance of such
coordination in the innovative criminal justice interventions being used in response to
domestic violence offenses (Gilchrist & Blissett, 2002, p. 349). An example of such
coordination that has proven effective are veteran courts where the services and mindset
of various players work together to form a cohesive team which not only meets the needs
of veterans, but also benefits the justice system and community (Russell, 2009, p. 368).
Student Perceptions
The use of students as a sample population for the purposes of furthering research
has been popular because researchers have recognized how students represent a broader
picture and reflect the present culture of beliefs (Payne & Chappell, 2008, p. 184). Payne
and Chappell’s (2008) overview of the use of student samples in criminological research
discusses the benefits of student samples in the field of criminology and criminal justice.
The authors point out how students are an accessible population, are cost and time
effective, make it easy to detect change, are typically the same age as those most
commonly committing crime, and that students being studied can also usually benefit
from the studies themselves (p. 183). Specifically, Payne and Chappell (2008) state:
21
It may help us to understand where the future lies in terms of criminal justice
policy…if college students exhibit certain attitudes toward crime and
punishment…They are more likely than other age groups to be ‘in the know’
about trends in deviant/criminal behavior (e.g. popular drugs), even if they are not
participating in the deviant/criminal behavior themselves (p. 184).
However, the authors also acknowledge how some weaknesses may accompany student
samples, including validity and ethical concerns, the stigma of using student samples in
some schools of thought, and the ability to generalize the findings to other populations
(Payne & Chappell, 2008, p. 185). While these potential weaknesses may be true in some
cases, many well respected publications continue to recognize research based on student
sample populations (Payne & Chappell, 2008, p. 185).
In Payne and Chappell’s (2008) discussion of using student samples in
criminological research, the authors touched on the use of attitudinal surveys. They stated
that these types of surveys are useful in predicting the future work and practices of
current criminal justice students (p. 181). Furthermore, research measuring criminal
justice student attitudes are useful in making comparisons between these students and
students in other majors, regular citizens, cultures outside of the United States, offenders,
and professionals in the field (Payne & Chappell, 2008, p. 181). Shelley et al. (2011)
explored the influence of the criminal justice major on students’ punitive attitudes asserts
students’ exposure to the full scope and inner workings of the criminal justice process is
likely to produce “divergent perspectives” from that of other majors (p. 526). Their
research proposed that criminal justice students often hold harsher views surrounding
22
punitive measures for offenders compared to students in other fields of study. However,
the authors questioned whether these attitudes favoring harsher punishments developed
throughout and as a result of their college studies, or whether it is individuals with
already punitive views who are drawn to the major (Shelley et al., 2011, p. 541).
Owens and Wagner (2008) conducted a survey of undergraduate college students
in order to measure and compare authoritarian attitudes among lower and upper division
criminal justice majors and non-criminal justice majors. Their goal was to demonstrate
how criminal justice majors tend to hold a greater sense of authoritarianism compared to
non-criminal justice majors and the implications these aggressive attitudes may have in
the criminal justice field (Owens & Wagner, 2008, p. 30). The authors began their study
with the expectation that attitudes are likely to change when comparing lower and upper
division students due to the exposure of coursework and the development of critical
thinking skills that generally takes place throughout the college experience (Owens &
Wagner, 2008, p. 42). The results of their survey actually showed that lower division
male criminal justice majors were most likely to show higher scores regarding their levels
of authoritarian attitudes. The authors believed that these differences suggest that the
years between when an individual begins college and when they graduate are very
important in terms of “positively shaping students’ attitudes” (Owens & Wagner, 2008, p.
47).
Student Perceptions of Domestic Violence
Sun et al. (2011) used samples of Chinese and American college students to
measure attitudes toward law enforcement’s response to domestic violence. The authors
23
asserted that factors, such as age, race, gender, socioeconomic status, geographic
location, culture, and college major, would influence individuals’ opinions toward law
enforcement response and punitive measures for domestic violence situations (pp. 32953296). Their study examined the differences between the traditional attitudes toward
domestic violence, where the typical opinion was that it was a private family issue, and
the proactive attitude that supports police and community intervention (Sun et al., 2011,
p. 3294). The results of the study concluded that student perceptions of domestic violence
were strongly associated with their feelings toward law enforcement, gender differences,
and violence (Sun et al., 2011, pp. 3308-3309). Similarly, Bensimon and Bodner (2012)
studied perceptions by looking at whether the ages of offenders and victims affect
perceptions of crime seriousness and punitiveness among students. They also found that
those crimes deemed serious by society, such as violent offenses, are perceived to
deserve the harshest punishments (pp. 344-345).
Additionally, in a similar study conducted by Nabors et al. (2006) regarding the
domestic violence beliefs and perceptions of college students, the authors presented the
notion that students’ experiences with intimate relationships and level of education also
play a role in their perceptions of domestic violence and attitudes toward violence (p.
793). The authors conducted a Relationship Characteristics Study where data were
gathered using a questionnaire among undergraduate students. The questions covered
topics including witnessing parental violence, personal victimization, and personal
attitudes toward relationship violence, as well as demographic information regarding
personal relationship status, parental marital status, education level, and income (Nabors
24
et al., 2006, pp. 782-783). Their results suggested that relationship violence is more
common in young people, but domestic violence education is worthwhile among college
students. However, findings were limited due to the fact that they may not be generalized
to apply to all college or young adult populations (Nabors et al., 2006, pp. 793-794).
Theory
Researchers have examined the changes that take place among students
throughout their college careers and through exposure to college coursework (Benekos,
Merlo, Cook, & Bagley, 2002, p. 294). Each of these studies have centered around the
theory that college has a “liberalizing effect” on students as they progress through
coursework (Farnworth, Longmire, &West, 1998, p. 39). Guller (1972) noted how “it is a
culturally shared assumption that through exposure to new and diverse ideas and a
broadening of perspectives, a person’s view of himself and attitudes toward others will
undergo changes in some beneficial manner” (p. 396). In other words, as students
progress through their coursework, their frame of reference is broadened, inevitably
changing their perceptions of themselves and the world around them. The author
conducted a study in the hopes of examining the differences in attitudes between college
freshmen and seniors in the criminal justice field. He looked at authoritarianism, selfesteem, and punitive attitudes (Guller, 1972, p. 369). The results of Guller’s (1972) study
supported the idea that college students are less authoritarian in their actions and punitive
in their viewpoints as they get further into coursework (pp. 400-401). However, it is
important to note that this liberalizing of viewpoints was not only to those students in the
25
criminal justice field, but also applied to the comparison sample of students in other
fields of study (Guller, 1972, p. 400).
Similarly, Farnworth et al. (1998) looked at college students’ views on criminal
justice in the areas of the death penalty, criminal sanctions, and the war on drugs with the
expectation that students’ views would become more liberal, and therefore less punitive,
as a result of exposure to college coursework (p. 39). The authors began with the sense
that because the study of criminal justice is based in a scientific realm, they expected the
students taking part in the study to take a hard-nosed stance as far as punitive attitudes
and criminal sanctions compared to students in other fields of academic study (Farnworth
et al., 1998, p. 51). Ultimately, the authors found that college seniors were less punitive
than their freshmen counterparts, thus supporting the premise that college has a
liberalizing effect on students.
Vandiver and Giacopassi (1997) also based their study on a college student
population in an effort to examine the perceptions of criminal justice majors, as well as
the accuracy of those perceptions (pp. 137-138). The authors distributed a questionnaire
regarding the number of homicides in the United States to students enrolled in an
introductory criminal justice course and those enrolled in a criminal justice capstone
course with the intention of illustrating how exposure to coursework affects perceptions
of crime (Vandiver & Giacopassi, 1997, p. 138). The results of the study showed that the
criminal justice seniors were significantly more likely to accurately estimate the number
of homicides in the United States after their exposure to more criminal justice curriculum
than their freshmen counterparts were (Vandiver & Giacopassi, 1997, p. 139).
26
The changes seen in students’ perceptions and attitudes could be explained
through the expectation that students become better informed as they neared graduation
(Benekos et al., 2002, p. 283). The concept of andragogy supports this assumption in
looking at the adult learning process. Henschke (2011) studied the history of andragogy
and discussed the theories made famous by Dr. Malcolm Knowles in the 1970s, who
asserted the belief that adult learners are better able to work independently from
instructors, with less of a reliance on instructors to spoon feed the curriculum to the
students, but rather facilitate the learning environment (p. 34). Oftentimes, as students
make their way through their college experience, their learning styles shift from those
they may have adopted during their younger educational years. Noor, Harun, and Aris
(2012) also discussed the concepts of andragogy in their research examining the learning
processes of undergraduate students. The authors explained how undergraduate students
learn to work and accomplish their educational goals in a more self-directed manner (p.
677).
Moreover, King, Wood, and Mines (1990) conducted a study examining the
changes that take place among college students regarding critical thinking skills (p. 168).
The premise of the authors’ study was to survey college seniors and graduate students in
the areas of critical thinking and judgment, with the expectation that graduate students
would reflect greater critical thinking abilities due to their educational experience in the
college setting where these skills are more likely to be developed, compared to the
undergraduate students (King et al., 1990, pp. 172-173). The results of the study
concluded that educational level did in fact play a role on students’ scores, with graduate
27
students earning higher scores than the undergraduate seniors in critical thinking levels
(King et al., 1990, p. 179).
An expectation exists that college students are thinking and learning at a higher
level based on the path and work required to get to where they are in their education
(Penn State, 2007). Houghton explains that throughout their educational experiences,
more and more knowledge is gained as students progress into becoming self-motivated
learners, becoming more actively engaged in their own learning and education (as cited in
Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Center, 2011, para. 4). Kolb and Kolb
(2005) discuss experiential learning theory, which asserts that learning is a process where
information is learned and relearned, and impacted by the personal experiences of
students (p. 194). As students initially enter the realm of higher education, their learning
styles tend to be those they adopted during high school where they passively take in the
information presented to them. As they progress in their higher education experience, the
manner in which they gain knowledge evolves into a more active and effective learning
process (Kolb & Kolb, 2005, p. 209).
Each of the theoretical frameworks discussed supports the assertion that students
become better informed and more open-minded as they progress through their education,
subsequently changing their perceptions, attitudes, and viewpoints as they gain exposure
to college coursework. The hypotheses for research questions #1 and 2 follow the same
lines with the expectation that lower division criminal justice students will be less
sympathetic toward the treatment of domestic violence offenders, regardless of their
veteran status or PTSD diagnosis, compared to their upper division counterparts, and
28
more punitive in their attitudes. These hypotheses are based on the “liberalizing effect”
presented in the theoretical frameworks presented where students have been shown to
broaden their perspectives of the world around them as they become more educated, thus
becoming less authoritarian and punitive in their attitudes and perceptions. The
hypothesis for research question #3 is based on experiential learning theory, creating the
expectation that upper division students will be more knowledgeable on the treatment and
punishment of veterans with PTSD who commit acts of domestic violence.
Hypotheses
Based on the studies discussed regarding the changes that take place among students
throughout their college experience, this study aims to address the following research
questions:
Research question 1:
What are the attitudes and perceptions of Sacramento State criminal justice students
towards the treatment and/or punishment of domestically violent veterans with PTSD?

H1: Lower division criminal justice students will be less sympathetic toward the
treatment of domestic violence offenders, regardless of their veteran status and/or
PTSD diagnosis, compared to upper division students.

H0: There will be no difference between lower and upper division criminal justice
students regarding their level of sympathy toward the treatment of domestic
violence offenders with PTSD.
Research question 2:
29
Do students believe a diagnosis of PTSD should serve as a mitigating factor in instances
of domestic violence among veterans?

H1: Upper division criminal justice students believe a diagnosis of PTSD should
serve as a mitigating factor in instances of domestic violence among veterans,
while lower division students do not believe this should serve as a mitigating
factor.

H0: There will be no difference between lower and upper division criminal justice
students regarding the opinion of whether a diagnosis of PTSD should serve as a
mitigating factor in instances of domestic violence among veterans.
Research question 3:
What is the extent of the students’ knowledge of treatment and/or punishment of
domestically violent veterans with PTSD?

H1: Upper division criminal justice students will be more knowledgeable than
lower division criminal justice students of the treatment and/or punishment of
domestically violent veterans with PTSD.

H0: Upper and lower division criminal justice students will have the same level of
knowledge regarding the treatment and/or punishment of domestically violent
veterans with PTSD.
30
Chapter 3
Methodology
The previous chapters have illustrated the importance of acknowledging the issues
facing veterans as they return to civilian life following deployment, particularly PTSD.
Some of the symptoms associated with PTSD, such as violence and aggression, present a
greater likelihood of veterans engaging in criminal behaviors, including domestic
violence (Taft et al., 2007, p. 275). With the rising numbers of veterans suffering from
PTSD, it is more pressing than ever to examine the needs of this unique population within
the criminal justice system (Cavanaugh, 2011, p. 465). Recent years have shown
researchers commonly using criminal justice students as research subjects due to the fact
that they are an easily accessible group and are generally within the same age group as
those most likely to commit crimes (Payne & Chappell, 2008, p. 183). Most importantly,
criminal justice students are a useful sample population because their views can be a
good indication of their actions once they become criminal justice professionals
themselves (Payne & Chappell, 2008, p. 181). These students represent the future of the
criminal justice system (Courtright et al., 2005, p. 139). Interestingly, research has shown
that the views held by students change over the course of their college experiences,
generally becoming more liberal and less punitive in nature (Courtright et al., 2005;
Farnworth et al., 1998). This study aimed to explore this change in perception and
attitudes among criminal justice students in regards to veteran offenders with PTSD.
31
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of the knowledge,
attitudes, and perceptions held by the undergraduate criminal justice majors at
Sacramento State regarding the treatment and/or punishment of veterans with PTSD who
engage in acts of domestic violence.
Research Design
This study took an exploratory approach to gathering quantitative data by
surveying two sets of undergraduate criminal justice students in order to include a
representation of lower and upper division students. The exploratory approach aimed to
examine a new area of research that otherwise lacks any significant theory or prior
explanation (Babbie, 2010, pp. 92-93). The two sets of undergraduate students were
differentiated by their enrollment in either the lower division CrJ 4 course (General
Investigation Techniques) or the upper division CrJ 190 course (Contemporary Issues in
Criminal Justice). Criminal Justice majors are required to complete both courses.
Students must earn a C grade or better in the CrJ 4 course before they can be officially
admitted to the CrJ major, which is an impacted program at Sacramento State. Once
classified as a major, students eventually enroll and complete the required CrJ 190
course, which is a designated writing intensive class. Students typically complete this
course during their final semester at Sacramento State before they graduate, and they
must earn a C- grade or higher in order to successfully complete the course. The
students’ enrollment in either CrJ 4 or 190 represents the independent variable for the
32
study, while the students’ knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of veterans with PTSD
who engage in acts of domestic violence make up the dependent variables.
Sampling
A non-random sampling design of purposive or judgmental sampling was used in
order to gather the sample population. The use of purposive or judgmental sampling
allows the researcher to look at a subset of a much larger population, but where the
population being studied is chosen specifically in order for the sample to be especially
useful (Babbie, 2010, p. 193). In this case, a list was compiled of all the CrJ 4 and 190
classes being offered during the Spring 2013 semester to be included in the study. The
goal was to be able to survey all the CrJ 4 and 190 students in order to have as large of a
sample size as possible. Each instructor for all the CrJ 4 and 190 classes were contacted
in advance and consented providing access to their classes in order for the students to be
approached to participate in the study by completing a brief survey.
All of the CrJ 4 and 190 courses were selected as the sample population for this
study because these courses are part of the coursework for criminal justice majors at
Sacramento State. The students enrolled in the lower division criminal justice courses,
including CrJ 4, are typically freshmen and sophomores. This course, in particular, was
selected with the expectation that there would be a greater percentage of criminal justice
majors enrolled, compared to some of the other lower division criminal justice courses
offered that might include greater numbers of non-majors. The CrJ 190 is an upper
division course restricted to only criminal justice majors and is the capstone course for
33
students who have finished all other required coursework for the major. Therefore, this
course is generally comprised of students at the senior level.
Data Collection Technique
The data for this study were collected through the use of a survey instrument
among the criminal justice students enrolled in the CrJ 4 and 190 courses. Prior to
approaching the students to participate in the study, permission was gained by the
researcher from the instructors of each class section. Each instructor was sent an email
containing the professor script (Appendix A) letting them know what to expect should
they agree to participate. Once each of the instructors granted access to their class
sections, the researcher and instructor agreed on a day and time for the surveys to be
distributed to the students.
On the day and time agreed upon, the researcher visited each section at the
beginning of class time. Using the class script (Appendix B), the researcher went over the
information on the consent to act as a human subject form (Appendix C), including the
purpose of the study, the risks and benefits of participation, and anonymity concerns.
Additionally, students were assured that their participation in the study was completely
voluntary and that there would not be any negative ramifications for declining to
complete the survey. Students were given the option of simply turning in a blank survey
when all surveys were collected for those who opted out of participating. Students were
given as much time as they needed to complete the survey, generally using approximately
15-20 minutes of class time.
34
The survey (Appendix D) is broken down into four sections. Part I asked
questions based on the respondents’ general knowledge of terms, concerns, or social
problems, including the military, veterans’ issues, PTSD, domestic violence, and veterans
as offenders. The questions in part II are based on the respondents’ attitudes and
perceptions of topics, including veterans returning from war, PTSD, and veterans in the
criminal justice system. Part III’s questions are in regards to the respondents’ military
affiliation, such as whether they, or members of their immediate family, have been in any
branch of the US military. Lastly, Part IV asks for the demographic or background
information of each respondent, including their age, gender, class level, and ethnicity.
Human Subjects Review
Because this study was based on a survey of students at Sacramento State, the
study first had to be approved for its use of human subjects in order to minimize any risks
to the population being studied. The researcher went through the Criminal Justice
Division’s human subject’s committee, as well as the Sacramento State Institutional
Review Board (IRB) at the university level. At this time, anonymity concerns were
addressed. While students were asked to complete a demographics sheet in the survey, in
order to ensure anonymity, respondents were never asked to divulge their names or other
identifying information. Additionally, all data collected were aggregated, making it
impossible for any students’ responses or demographic information to be identified. The
study was approved and deemed to be a minimal risk to human subjects.
35
Data Analysis Procedures
Survey questions were grouped together in order to parallel the hypotheses. For
hypothesis 1, it was expected that lower division students would be less sympathetic
toward the treatment of domestic violence offenders compared to their upper division
counterparts. In order to test whether the level of sympathy was affected by enrollment
in either CrJ 4 or 190, an index was created using the survey questions measuring
sympathy toward both veteran and non-veteran domestic violence offenders with PTSD.
Similarly, for hypothesis 2, it was expected that the upper division students would believe
a diagnosis of PTSD should serve as a mitigating factor in instances of domestic violence
among veterans. An index was created using the survey questions associated with
measuring students’ attitudes toward PTSD and whether they believe this should serve as
a mitigating factor. Finally, for hypothesis 3, the idea that upper division students will be
more knowledgeable of the treatment and/or punishment of veterans with PTSD who
engage in acts of domestic violence, an index was created to include the survey questions
measuring students’ knowledge to test whether the level of knowledge was affected by
enrollment in either CrJ 4 or 190.
The SPSS software was used to analyze the data collected in the survey. The data
was aggregated and analyzed using descriptive statistics in order to illustrate the potential
differences in levels of knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions between the lower and
upper division students. Each of the three research question explored in this study were
associated with certain groups of questions asked in the survey. Bachman and Schutt
(2008) discussed the importance of consistency of responses when multiple questions are
36
asked to measure a common concept (p. 156). In this case, reliability measures were used
to check for consistency. Findings were considered more reliable when responses were
consistent (Bachman & Schutt, 2008, p. 73). For this study, three reliability analyses
yielding Cronbach’s alpha were used to measure the correlation within the groups of
questions to indicate their level of reliability (Hagan, 2010, p. 248). If it was determined
that there was a strong enough inter-item correlation between the groups of survey
questions being used to explore the three research questions, t-tests were used to assess
the mean differences between the CrJ 4 and 190 students. According to Hagan (2010), the
t-test is a difference of means test useful for comparing the sample means of different
groups. When there is a significant enough difference in the groups’ means, the null
hypotheses can be rejected (p. 347). Finally, although not hypothesized, the entire sample
was also given a t-test to see if there were differences between the three question groups
based on military involvement, as this information was collected, and the literature
review indicates that positive levels of military involvement would alter levels of
knowledge, sympathy, and attitudes toward the treatment or punishment of PTSD.
Limitations of the Study
The limitations of any research are often associated with the validity and
reliability of the study. Winter (2000) explains how validity represents the accuracy of
the study, or its ability to explain what the study set out to measure in the first place.
Babbie (2010) states that survey research is actually weak in validity because of the
difficulty of accurately gauging respondents’ opinions in the limited terms and options of
responses in a given survey (p. 288). However, survey research is actually strong in terms
37
of reliability (Babbie, 2010, p. 288). Reliability is the consistency or reproducibility of
the research findings (Winter, 2000). Babbie (2010) explained that one of the strengths of
survey research is standardization, and how careful wording can reduce the unreliability
related to unwanted misinterpretation of respondents (p. 288).
The greatest limitation of this study was the use of non-probability sampling, and
thus not being able to generalize the findings beyond the sample population of criminal
justice students at Sacramento State who participated in the survey. The purposive
sampling procedure used in the study was very useful in creating a very specific sampling
frame of undergraduate criminal justice students enrolled in lower and upper division
courses during the Spring 2013 semester. However, the findings from this sample cannot
be interpreted as any indication of the knowledge, attitudes, or perceptions of criminal
justice students at Sacramento State enrolled in other courses or of students at another
university.
38
Chapter 4
Data Analysis
Participants
During the Spring 2013 semester, four sections of CrJ 4 (General Investigation
Techniques) and eight sections of CrJ 190 (Contemporary Issues in Criminal Justice)
were offered. However, one section of CrJ 190 was not surveyed due to a scheduling
conflict. A total of 381 undergraduate criminal justice students at California State
University, Sacramento participated by completing the survey. Approximately 54.6
percent (n=208) of those respondents were in enrolled in CrJ 4 and 45.4 percent (n=173)
in CrJ 190. The respondents ranged in age from 18 to 49 years old. Overall, CrJ 4
students were younger than those enrolled in CrJ 190. Approximately 82 percent (n=163)
of CrJ 4 students were between the ages of 18 to 21 years old, while 67 percent (n=112)
of CrJ 190 students were between 22 to 25 years old. Overall, there were a greater
number of females than males who participated in the study; specifically, 42.9 percent
(n=88) of CrJ 4 respondents were male and 57.1 percent (n=117) identified as females.
Approximately 52.1 percent (n=88) of CrJ 190 respondents were male and 47.9 percent
(n=81) were female.
The student population at California State University, Sacramento is very diverse,
and the Criminal Justice Division is representative of this (see Table 1). Overall, the CrJ
4 and 190 courses were fairly similar as far as the race and ethnic background of student
respondents. Of the CrJ 4 respondents, approximately 31 percent (n=64) identified as
Hispanic or Latino, 28 percent (n=58) as White or Caucasian, 15.4 percent (n=32) as
39
Asian, 7.7 percent (n=16) as Black or African American, 2 percent (n=4) as Native
Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1.4 percent (n=3) as American Indian or Alaska Native, 9
percent (n=19) as other, and 6 percent (n=12) declined to state. Of the CrJ 190
respondents, approximately 47.4 percent (n=82) identified as white or Caucasian, 20.2
percent (n=35) as Hispanic or Latino, 11 percent (n=19) as Asian, 3 percent (n=5) as
Black or African American, .5 percent (n=1) as Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, 10
percent (n=17) as other, and 8 percent (n=14) declined to state.
As discussed, the CrJ 4 and 190 courses were selected as the population to be
surveyed with the expectation that the majority of students enrolled would be criminal
justice majors. Of the CrJ 190 participants, 97.6 percent (n=166) identified themselves as
criminal justice majors. CrJ 4, on the other hand, had greater numbers of non-majors
enrolled in the course. This was expected, however, because it is a lower division course
not restricted to criminal justice majors. Of the respondents enrolled in the sections of CrJ
4, 55.7 percent (n=114) were criminal justice majors, 12.2 percent (n=25) were
undeclared, and 32.2 percent (n=66) identified as other.
40
Table 1
Participant Demographics
CrJ 4
N = 208
CrJ 190
N = 173
N
%
N
%
Gender
Male
Female
88
117
42.90
57.10
88
81
52.10
47.90
Age
18 – 21
22 – 25
26 – 29
30 +
163
33
2
1
81.90
16.60
1.00
0.05
19
112
30
6
11.40
67.10
18.00
4.50
Class Level
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
78
67
38
23
37.90
32.50
18.40
11.20
0
0
0
171
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
3
1.00
0
0.00
32
16
64
4
15.40
8.00
30.80
2.00
19
5
35
1
11.00
2.90
20.20
.06
58
19
12
27.90
9.10
5.80
82
17
14
47.40
9.80
8.10
114
25
66
55.70
12.20
32.20
166
0
4
97.60
0.00
2.40
Race/Ethnicity
American Indian/Alaska
Native
Asian
Black/African American
Hispanic/Latino
Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander
White/Caucasian
Other
Decline to State
Major
Criminal Justice
Undeclared
Other
41
Research Question #1
Research question 1 aimed to explore the students’ attitudes and perceptions
toward the treatment and/or punishment of veterans with PTSD who engage in acts of
domestic violence. This question was intended to measure the differences in students’
sympathy towards domestic violence offenders suffering from PTSD. It was
hypothesized that the lower division CrJ 4 students would be less sympathetic toward the
treatment of domestic violence offenders, regardless of their veteran status and/or PTSD
diagnosis, compared to the upper division CrJ 190 students. In order to test this
hypothesis, an index was created to include survey questions 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, and 20
(See Figure 1). These survey questions were designed to gauge the students’ attitudes and
feelings of sympathy towards domestic violence offenders with a diagnosis of PTSD. The
index allows for the questions measuring the concept of sympathy in an empirical
fashion. These survey questions were based on a Likert scale and students’ responses
were coded for the purpose of data analysis. Each response of Strongly Disagree was
scored as 1, Disagree as 2, Undecided/Neutral as 3, Agree as 4, and Strongly Agree as 5,
with the exception of survey question #15. Survey question 15 was reverse scored
because the negative wording of the question was opposite of the other associated survey
questions. Reverse scoring allowed for the responses to be accurately measured and
included in the analysis.
42
12. Returning veterans are deserving of special benefits and accommodations when
acclimating back to civilian life.
13. Veterans diagnosed with PTSD deserve treatment for dealing with their mental health
issues.
14. Police officers should take into account an individual’s veteran status when responding to
an incident involving a veteran.
15. Returning veterans should be treated exactly the same as any other non-veteran offender in
the criminal justice system.
19. Veteran offenders with PTSD should receive opportunities of treatment in the criminal
justice system.
20. Any offender with a diagnosis of PTSD should receive opportunities of treatment in the
criminal justice system.
Figure 1. Survey Questions Associated with Sympathy
A reliability analysis was conducted on the survey data to validate the survey
items within the subscales. Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure the internal
consistency of the survey questions. The survey questions associated with research
question 1 produced a value of α = .62, and although this is on the low side it is still an
acceptable value for research purposes. Therefore, it was determined that these questions
were statistically cohesive for further analysis.
Subsequently, a t-test was used to analyze whether lower division criminal justice
students are less sympathetic toward domestic violence offenders, regardless of their
veteran status and/or diagnosis of PTSD when compared to upper division students. The
analysis found no difference in the attitudes and perceptions of domestically violent
veterans with PTSD between CrJ 4 (M = 22.50, SD = 3.20) and CrJ 190 students (M =
22.69, SD = 3.11), t(379) = -.563, p = .574. Therefore, the null hypothesis was accepted.
Research Question #2
Research question 2 examined whether the students believe a diagnosis of PTSD
should serve as a mitigating factor in instances of domestic violence among veterans. It
43
was hypothesized that upper division students would believe that a diagnosis of PTSD
should be a mitigating factor in instances of domestic violence among veterans, while
lower division students would not believe that this should serve as a mitigating factor. In
this case, an index was created to include questions 16, 17, 18, 21, and 22 of the survey to
ensure that these questions were statistically cohesive (See Figure 2). As discussed for
research question 1, the responses were recoded. Strongly Disagree was scored as 1,
Disagree as 2, Undecided/Neutral as 3, Agree as 4, and Strongly Disagree as 5. It was not
necessary for any of the associated survey questions for this research question to be
reverse scored.
16. In instances of domestic violence, it should not matter whether the offender is a civilian or
a returning veteran.
17. The criminal justice system should be more lenient with offenders who are returning
veterans.
18. Returning veterans who commit domestic violence offenses should receive more
opportunities for alternative sentencing as opposed to jail time compared to non-veteran
domestic violence offenders.
21. A diagnosis of PTSD should serve as a mitigating factor in cases of domestic violence for
any offender.
22. A diagnosis of PTSD should serve as a mitigating factor in cases of domestic violence
involving veterans.
Figure 2. Survey Questions Associated with PTSD as Mitigating Factor
A reliability analysis was conducted on the survey questions intended to assess
mitigating factors of domestically violent veterans with PTSD. In this case, Cronbach’s
alpha yielded value of α = .71. This is an acceptable value for research purposes, which
indicates these survey questions are statistically cohesive and validated for further
analysis.
A t-test was used to analyze whether lower and upper division criminal justice
students believe that a diagnosis of PTSD should serve as a mitigating factor in instances
44
of domestic violence among veterans. The analysis found a small difference among the
beliefs that PTSD should serve as a mitigating factor between CrJ 4 (M = 13.75, SD =
3.60) and CrJ 190 students (M = 12.98, SD = 3.78), t(379) = 2.04, p = .042. These
findings indicate that the lower division CrJ 4 students were actually stronger in the belief
that this should serve as a mitigating factor. With a p-value of less than 0.05, this is a
statistically significant result. However, the hypothesis is not supported because the
mean value for CrJ 4 students is higher than the mean value for CrJ 190 students,
showing lower division students as being more liberal than upper division students and
more likely to believe PTSD to be a mitigating factor than upper division students.
Research Question #3
Research question 3 addressed the extent of the students’ knowledge of topics
associated with the treatment and/or punishment of domestically violent veterans with
PTSD. It was hypothesized that the upper division CrJ 190 students would be more
knowledgeable than the lower division CrJ 4 students. To test this hypothesis, an index
was created to include survey questions 1-11 (See Figure 3). The possible responses to
these questions in the survey included No Knowledge, Somewhat Knowledgeable,
Neutral/No Opinion, Knowledgeable, and Very Knowledgeable. For the purposes of
running the statistical analysis these responses were recoded. No Knowledge and
Neutral/No Opinion was scored as 0, Somewhat Knowledgeable as 1, Knowledgeable as
2, and Very Knowledgeable as 3.
45
1. The U.S. Military
2. Veterans’ experiences with returning to civilian life after serving in war
3. The health challenges that veterans face when returning to civilian life after serving in war
4. The mental health/emotional challenges that veterans face when returning to civilian life
after serving in war
5. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
6. PTSD among veterans
7. Domestic violence or intimate partner violence
8. Veterans who find themselves involved with domestic violence as offenders
9. Veterans who suffer from PTSD and who engage in domestically violent behavior
10. California domestic violence laws
11. Services available to veterans when they return to civilian life after war
Figure 3. Survey Questions Associated with Extent of Knowledge
A reliability analysis was conducted to ensure inter-item correlation between
survey questions 1-11, which were used to assess the students’ level of knowledge.
Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure the internal consistency of these survey questions.
Questions 1-11 yielded a value of α = .87, which is a relatively good value for research
purposes. This indicates that the group of survey questions 1-11 are related and valid for
addressing the research question.
A t-test was used to analyze whether upper division criminal justice students are
more knowledgeable than lower division criminal justice students of the treatment and/or
punishment of veterans with PTSD who commit acts of domestic violence. The analysis
found no difference between the extent of knowledge of CrJ 4 (M = 12.81, SD = 6.26)
and CrJ 190 students (M = 13.44, SD = 7.09), t(379) = .-563, p = .574. Therefore, the null
hypothesis was accepted.
Military Affiliation
While the information was not hypothesized, students were also asked to answer a
few questions related to military affiliation in the survey. Students were asked to indicate
46
whether they, or any member of their immediate family, were current or former military
service members. Of the total 381 survey participants, 45% (n=170) answered yes to at
least one of these questions indicating some form of military affiliation. These students’
responses were isolated in order to determine whether a difference existed between the
general student population and those claiming military affiliation for each of the three
research questions. The analysis found a small difference in the attitudes and perceptions
toward veterans with PTSD who commit acts of domestic violence between military
connected students (M = 22.95, SD = 3.08) and non-military connected individuals (M =
22.29, SD = 3.19), t(379) = 2.04, p = .043. This indicates that military connected students
are slightly more sympathetic toward veterans with PTSD who commit acts of domestic
violence. With a p-value of less than 0.05, this is a statistically significant result.
Interestingly, the analysis found no difference among the belief that PTSD is a mitigating
factor between military connected individuals (M = 13.31, SD = 3.81) and non-military
connected individuals (M = 13.47, SD = 3.61), t(379) = -.441, p = .660. Most importantly,
a significant difference was found among the level of knowledge of the treatment and/or
punishment of veterans with PTSD who commit acts of domestic violence between the
military connected individuals (M = 14.89, SD = 7.01) and Non-Military connected
individuals (M = 11.66, SD = 5.98), t(379) = 4.85, p = .000.
47
Chapter 5
Discussion and Conclusion
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of the knowledge,
attitudes, and perceptions held by the undergraduate criminal justice majors at
Sacramento State regarding the treatment and/or punishment of veterans with PTSD who
engage in acts of domestic violence. Based on the examined research, it was expected
that lower division students would be less knowledgeable on the topic, be less supportive
of potential treatment options, and hold harsher punitive views toward handling offenders
in the justice system. Along those lines, upper division students were expected to have a
greater extent of knowledge on these issues and hold less authoritative and punitive
attitudes. The life experiences and coursework that students are exposed to throughout
their college experience was expected to play a role in liberalizing student thought
processes to considering alternatives to harsh sentencing or punishment options.
While the findings of this study did not support the hypotheses presented, or the
expectation that there would be significant differences between the lower and upper
division students, the results are limited. The results are only indicative of the knowledge,
attitudes, and perceptions of the undergraduate criminal justice students at California
State University, Sacramento who participated in the survey during the spring 2013
semester. Additionally, the findings are further limited due to one section of CrJ 190 not
being surveyed because of a scheduling conflict. It is possible that the survey instrument
was not effective in detecting differences between the lower and upper division students
48
based on education level. Other factors, such as military affiliation or experiences could
play a role in impacting students’ attitudes, perceptions, and extent of knowledge.
Research Implications
In looking at the students’ attitudes and perceptions of using a diagnosis of PTSD
as a mitigating factor in cases of veterans committing acts of domestic violence, it was
expected that the upper division students would be less punitive in their views. The
research had shown that through exposure to college coursework, students tend to
become more liberal in their views and open-minded to sentencing alternatives.
Interestingly, the findings found the opposite to be true. The analysis in this study showed
that the upper division CrJ 190 students were actually slightly more punitive in their
views toward veterans with PTSD who engage in acts of domestic violence, and less
likely to agree in using this diagnosis as a mitigating factor, however, the results were not
statistically significant. The difference between the lower and upper division students was
slight, but opposite from the expected result. The reasoning behind this unexpected result
is unknown, but could have been influenced by the number of non-majors enrolled in CrJ
4 classes who participated in the survey. Additionally, it is possible that criminal justice
majors actually become less liberal as they progress through college coursework, that as
these students advance they become less tolerant of domestic violence, regardless of who
commits it.
The results of the study indicate a need for increased education of veterans’ issues
among criminal justice students at Sacramento State. As discussed, returning veterans
face tremendous challenges as they acclimate back into civilian life. Unfortunately, at
49
times these challenges lead veterans into the justice system. In this study, student
responses showed a gap in knowledge in the area of veterans as domestic violence
offenders, veterans who suffer from PTSD and commit acts of domestic violence, and the
services available to veterans as they return to civilian life. With the growing numbers of
veterans returning from war, it is important that students, as the future professionals in
the justice system, have knowledge and understanding of the needs of this specialized
population.
Future Research
Despite the lack of highly significant results pertaining to the hypothesized
research questions and hypotheses, the comparison between the military connected and
non-military connected students found a significant difference in the extent of knowledge
between the two groups on the topics relating to veterans issues, PTSD, and veterans who
commit acts of domestic violence. These results are somewhat expected as students who
themselves have served in the military or come from military families would logically
have had greater exposure to these topics, possibly having direct experience with some of
the challenges facing military service members. Additionally, the analysis showed a
small difference between the levels of sympathy felt toward veterans with PTSD, with the
military connected students showing slightly higher levels of sympathy compared to the
students with no military affiliation. These findings could potentially open the door for
future research looking specifically at the extent of knowledge, experiences, and
perceptions of military affiliated students.
50
Conclusion
It was expected that lower division students would be more punitive in their
attitudes toward veterans with PTSD who engage in acts of domestic violence, compared
to their upper division counterparts. This belief was based on research that shows
students’ viewpoints tend to more liberal as they progress through their education.
Additionally, it was expected that upper division students would show a greater extent of
knowledge on veterans issues, such as PTSD and criminal behavior, based on the
expectation that they would have had greater exposure to these topics throughout their
coursework. While the results of this study did not necessarily support these expectations,
the findings did show that both lower and upper division criminal justice students at
California State University, Sacramento generally felt sympathy toward veteran offenders
with PTSD. The students agreed that these offenders are deserving of opportunities for
treatment. Also, both the upper and lower division students had some knowledge of
veterans issues. These findings are important as these students are set to become the
future professionals and policy-makers in the criminal justice field.
This study opens the door for future research to focus efforts specifically on
veteran students within the criminal justice major. In this case, the number of students
who indicated military affiliation surprised the researcher. However, these numbers make
sense with the rising population of military personnel returning from service. Criminal
justice students who are veterans could truly be useful in providing insight in the research
field through their personal experiences surrounding veterans’ issues. These students will
be able to call on their knowledge of these challenges when they become criminal justice
51
professionals. They will be assets in the field with their understanding and experience in
the unique needs of a growing population.
52
Appendix A
Professor Script
My name is Alison Steen and I am currently working on my master’s thesis in the
Criminal Justice graduate program here at Sacramento State. My research aims to
demonstrate the differences in the attitudes and perceptions between lower and upper
division undergraduate Criminal Justice students regarding domestically violent veterans
suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The study will examine whether
students differ in their views toward whether to punish or offer treatment to this unique
population of offenders, as well as whether PTSD should serve as a mitigating factor in
these cases.
My goal is to select sections of the lower division CrJ 4 course and upper division CrJ
190 course using a non-random sampling process. These particular courses were selected
because they are most likely to be composed of mostly criminal justice majors. Your
class’s participation in this study involves each student voluntarily completing a survey
regarding their attitudes toward veteran offenders suffering from PTSD who commit acts
of domestic violence. Prior to completing the survey, each student will be given a consent
form that goes over the purpose of the study, instructions, the potential risks and benefits
of their participation, anonymity, and voluntary participation. In addition to the students
themselves reading the consent form, I will personally introduce the procedures of the
survey and what their participation will entail. I will ensure the class understands that by
completing the survey they are consenting to their participation in the process. In the
event they choose not to participate, they may return their blank survey without any
negative consequence. All survey materials will be maintained by the researcher for a
period of 3 years before being destroyed.
Should you agree to allow your class to be surveyed as part of my research, you can
expect the entire process to take up approximately 20 minutes of class time. I will do my
best to minimize any disruption to your teaching schedule and work with you to select an
appropriate time to conduct the survey.
I am attaching copies of the materials I will distribute to students (the consent form and
survey). Thank you for the consideration and the potential involvement of your class.
Your students’ participation will be of great benefit to my thesis and to the research
literature on perceptions of and attitudes toward domestically violent veterans suffering
from PTSD.
53
Appendix B
Class Script
My name is Alison Steen and I am currently working on my master’s thesis in the
Criminal Justice graduate program here at Sacramento State. My research aims to
demonstrate the differences in the attitudes and perceptions between lower and upper
division undergraduate Criminal Justice students regarding domestically violent veterans
with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
I will be handing out a survey to each student with an attached consent form. Please
carefully read the consent form and instructions completely prior to deciding whether or
not you wish to participate in the research study. Keep in mind that your participation is
completely voluntary. Should you choose not to participate, there are no negative
consequences. You may simply return the blank survey at the end when all the surveys
are collected. If you do choose to participate in the study and complete the survey, your
responses will remain completely anonymous.
All of the data collected from the completed surveys will be analyzed and discussed in
my thesis that will eventually be available in the Sacramento State library. If you have
any questions or concerns about your participation or this research study please see the
consent form attached to your survey and contact either myself and/or Dr. Escobar.
54
Appendix C
Consent to Act as a Human Research Subject
Researcher:
Alison Steen, Graduate Student
Division of Criminal Justice
6000 J Street
Sacramento, CA 95819-6085
Email: XXXXX@XXXXX.com
Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Research Sponsor:
Dr. Sue Escobar
Division of Criminal Justice
6000 J Street
106 Alpine Hall
Sacramento, CA 95819-6085
Email: XXXXX@XXXXX.com
Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Purpose of the study:
You are being asked to participate in a research study by Alison Steen, a Criminal Justice
graduate student at California State University, Sacramento. This research study aims to
gain an understanding of the attitudes and perceptions of undergraduate criminal justice
students at Sacramento State towards the treatment and/or punishment of domestically
violent veterans with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.
Research Procedures:
You will be asked to respond to survey questions regarding your knowledge of and
attitudes toward domestically violent veterans suffering from posttraumatic stress
disorder (PTSD). Additionally, you will be asked to complete a questionnaire designed to
collect the demographic information of the study’s participants.
Eligibility:
You are eligible to participate in the research study if you are at least 18 years old and
enrolled in either CrJ 4 – General Investigation Techniques or CrJ 190 – Contemporary
Issues in Criminal Justice during the spring 2013 semester at California State University,
Sacramento.
Risks:
This study poses minimal risk to its participants with no safety or health risks beyond
those of normal life. Participants are free to skip any questions they are uncomfortable
with or would prefer not to answer.
Benefits:
You may not personally benefit from participating in this research. However, your
participation may contribute to a greater understanding of the current undergraduate
criminal justice students’ knowledge and attitudes toward domestically violent veterans
with PTSD. These students will likely become the future professional in the criminal
justice field.
55
Anonymity:
All responses to the survey and demographic questionnaire are completely anonymous.
You will never be asked to include your name or identifying personal information on any
of the documents being returned to the researcher. All data collected will be aggregated
and combined into a single dataset, leaving no chance for any individual participant to be
identified. Additionally, all research documents will be stored in a locked cabinet only to
be accessed by the researcher. All data documents will be destroyed at the end of a three
year period following their collection.
Voluntary Participation:
Your participation in this research study is completely voluntary. There are no adverse
consequences for choosing not to participate or completing the survey.
Questions/Concerns:
If you have any questions or concerns about this research study, you may contact either
Alison Steen or Dr. Escobar. Contact information is provided at the top of this consent
form.
If after completing the survey you are experiencing any negative feelings and are
interested in speaking to someone, you may contact the Counseling and Psychological
Services office at the WELL on the Sac State campus at (916) 278-6461.
STATEMENT OF CONSENT:
Completion and return of the attached survey and demographic questionnaire implies
that you have read this form and consent to participate in the research. You may keep
this form for your records or future reference.
56
Appendix D
Survey
Directions: Please complete each question to the best of your ability by circling the
appropriate letter or writing your answer on the line provided.
Part 1 – General Knowledge
For the following questions, please rate how knowledgeable you are with each of the
following terms, concepts, or social problems.
NK = No Knowledge
SK = Somewhat Knowledgeable
N = Neutral/No Opinion
K = Knowledgeable
VK = Very Knowledgeable
1. The U.S. Military
NK
SK
N
K
VK
2. Veterans’ experiences with returning
to civilian life after serving in war
NK
SK
N
K
VK
3. The health challenges that veterans
face when returning to civilian life
after serving in war
NK
SK
N
K
VK
4. The mental health/emotional
challenges that veterans face when
returning to civilian life after serving
in war
NK
SK
N
K
VK
5. Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
NK
SK
N
K
VK
6. PTSD among veterans
NK
SK
N
K
VK
57
7. Domestic violence or intimate partner
violence
NK
SK
N
K
VK
8. Veterans who find themselves
involved with domestic violence as
offenders
NK
SK
N
K
VK
9. Veterans who suffer from PTSD and
who engage in domestically violent
behavior
NK
SK
N
K
VK
10. California domestic violence laws
NK
SK
N
K
VK
NK
SK
N
K
VK
11. Services available to veterans when
they
return to civilian life after war
Part II – Attitudes & Perceptions
For the following questions, please rate how strongly you agree or disagree with each of
the following statements by circling the appropriate response.
SD = Strongly Disagree
D = Disagree
U = Undecided/Neutral
A = Agree
SA = Strongly Agree
12. Returning veterans are deserving of
special benefits and accommodations
when acclimating back to civilian life.
SD
D
U
A
SA
13. Veterans diagnosed with PTSD
deserve treatment for dealing with
their mental health issues.
SD
D
U
A
SA
58
14. Police officers should take into
account an individual’s veteran status
when responding to an incident
involving a veteran.
SD
D
U
A
SA
15. Returning veterans should be treated
exactly the same as any other nonveteran offender in the criminal justice
system.
SD
D
U
A
SA
16. In instances of domestic violence, it
should not matter whether the offender
is a civilian or a returning veteran.
SD
D
U
A
SA
17. The criminal justice system should be
more lenient with offenders who are
returning veterans.
SD
D
U
A
SA
18. Returning veterans who commit
domestic violence offenses should
receive more opportunities for
alternative sentencing as opposed to
jail time compared to non-veteran
domestic violence offenders.
SD
D
U
A
SA
19. Veteran offenders with PTSD should
receive opportunities of treatment in
the criminal justice system.
SD
D
U
A
SA
20. Any offender with a diagnosis of
PTSD should receive opportunities of
treatment in the criminal justice
system.
SD
D
U
A
SA
21. A diagnosis of PTSD should serve as a
mitigating factor in cases of domestic
violence for any offender.
SD
D
U
A
SA
59
22. A diagnosis of PTSD should serve as a
mitigating factor in cases of domestic
violence involving veterans.
SD
D
U
A
SA
Part III – Military Affiliation
For the following questions, circle the appropriate response.
23. Are you currently a member of any branch of the United States military?
a. Yes
b. No
24. Are you a veteran of the United States military?
a. Yes
b. No
25. Are any members of your immediate family members of the United States
military?
a. Yes
b. No
26. Are any members of your immediate family veterans of the United States
military?
a. Yes
b. No
Part IV - Background Information/Demographics
For the following questions, circle the appropriate letter or write in your response in the
space provided.
Gender (circle one): Male
Age at last birthday: ______ years
Class level:
a. Freshman
b. Sophomore
c. Junior
d. Senior
Female
60
Race/Ethnic Background:
a. American Indian or Alaska Native
b. Asian
c. Black or African American
d. Hispanic or Latino
e. Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
f. White or Caucasian
g. Other, please specify: _________________
h. Decline to state
Major:
a. Criminal Justice
b. Undeclared
c. Other, please specify: _____________
In which class(es) are you currently enrolled? (Circle all that apply)
a. CrJ 4 – General Investigation Techniques
b. CrJ 190 – Contemporary Issues in Criminal Justice
61
References
Anonymous. (2012). Combat veterans court. Courts Today, 10(3), 19-20.
Babbie, E. (2010). The practice of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Bachman, R., & Schutt, R. (2008). Fundamentals of research in criminology and
criminal justice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Bannerman, S. (2010, September 25). Husbands who bring the war home. The Daily
Beast. Retrieved from http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/09/25/ptsdand-domestic-abuse-husbands-who-bring-the-war-home.html
Benekos, P., Merlo, A., Cook, W., & Bagley, K. (2002). A preliminary study of student
attitudes on juvenile justice policy. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 13(2),
273-296.
Bensimon, M., & Bodner, E. (2012). Does the age of offenders and victims in crime
scenarios affect perceptions of crime seriousness and punitiveness among
students? Violence and Victims, 27(3), 344-359.
Byrne, C., & Riggs, D. (1996) The cycle of trauma: relationship aggression in male
Vietnam veterans with symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder. Violence and
Victims, 11(3), 213-225.
Cavanaugh, J. (2011). Helping those who serve: veterans treatment courts foster
rehabilitation and reduce recidivism for offending combat veterans. New England
Law Review, 45, 463-487.
62
Courtright, K., Mackey, D., & Packard, S. (2005). Empathy among college students and
criminal justice majors: Identifying predispositional traits and the role of
education. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 16(1), 125-144.
Department of Veterans Affairs. (2010). The national survey of veterans, active duty
service members, demobilized national guard and reserve members, family
Members and Survivors. Retrieved from
http://www.va.gov/vetdata/docs/SurveysAndStudies/NVSSurveyFinalWeightedR
eport.pdf
Department of Veterans Affairs (2014a). What is PTSD? Retrieved from
http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/PTSD-overview/basics/what-isptsd.asp
Department of Veterans Affairs (2014b). How common is PTSD? Retrieved from
http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/PTSD-overview/basics/how-common-is-ptsd.asp
Department of Veterans Affairs. (2014c). Statistics at a glance. Retrieved from
http://www.va.gov/vetdata/docs/Quickfacts/Homepage_slideshow_12_31_13.pdf
Farnworth, M., Longmire, D., & West, V. (1998). College students’ views on criminal
justice. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 9(1), 39-57.
Finley, E., Baker, M., Pugh, M., & Peterson, A. (2010). Patterns and perceptions of
intimate partner violence committed by returning veterans with post-traumatic
stress disorder. Journal of Family Violence, 25(8), 737-743.
Gilchrist, E., & Blissett, J. (2002). Magistrates' attitudes to domestic violence and
sentencing options. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 41(4), 348-363.
63
Gover, A., Paul, D., & Dodge, M. (2011). Law enforcement officers' attitudes about
domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 17(5), 619-636.
Grossman, D. (2009). On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and
Society. New York, NY: Bay Back Books/Little, Brown and Company.
Guller, I. (1972). Higher education and policemen: attitudinal differences between
freshmen and senior police college students. The Journal of Criminal Law,
Criminology, and Police Science, 63(3), 369-401.
Hagan, F. (2010). Research methods in criminal justice and criminology. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Henschke, J. (2011). Futures: considerations regarding the future of andragogy, Adult
Learning. 22(1), 34-37.
Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Center. (2011). Levels of thinking
about learning and teaching. Retrieved from http://exchange.ac.uk/learningand-teaching-theory-guide/thinking-about-leaning-and-teaching.html
Hink, J. (2010). The returning military veteran. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 79(8), 18.
Jordan, B., Marmar, C., Fairbank, J., Schlenger, W., Kulka, R., Hough, R., & Weiss, D.
(1992). Problems in families of male Vietnam veterans with posttraumatic stress
disorder. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 60(6), 916-926.
King, P., Wood, P., & Mines, R. (1990). Critical thinking among college and graduate
students. The Review of Higher Education, 13(2), 167-186.
64
Kolb, A., & Kolb, D. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: enhancing experiential
learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning and Education,
4(2). 193-212.
Marshall, A., Panuzio, J., & Taft, C. (2005). Intimate partner violence among military
veterans and active duty servicemen. Clinical Psychology Review, 25(7), 862-876.
Nabors, E., Dietz, T., & Jasinski, J. (2006). Domestic violence beliefs and perceptions
among college students. Violence and Victims, 21(6), 779-795.
National Institute of Justice. (2011). Domestic violence courts. In Offender Monitoring
section. Retrieved from http://www.nij.gov/topics/courts/domestic-violencecourts/Pages/welcome.aspx
Nelson, B., & Wright, D. (1996). Understanding and treating post-traumatic stress
disorder symptoms in female partners of veterans with PTSD. Journal of Marital
& Family Therapy, 22(4), 455-467.
Noor, N., Harun, J., & Aris, B. (2012). Andragogy & pedagogy learning model
preference among undergraduate students. Procedia – Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 56, 673-678.
Owens, S., & Wagner, K. (2008). The specter of authoritarianism among criminal
justice majors. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19(1), 30-53.
Payne, B., & Chappell, A. (2008). Using student samples in criminological research.
Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19(2), 175-192.
65
Penn State, Schreyer Institute for Teaching Excellence. (2007). Adult learners in higher
education. Retrieved from
http://www.schreyerinstitute.psu.edu/pdf/AdultLearners.pdf
Petrik, N., Rosenberg, A., & Watson, C. (1983). Combat experience and youth:
influences on reported violence against women. Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 14(6), 895-899.
Price, J., & Stevens, S. (2009). Partners of veterans with PTSD: research findings.
Retrieved from
http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/treatment/family/partners_of_vets_research_
findings.asp
Riggs, D., Byrne, C., Weathers, F., & Litz, B. (1998). The quality of the intimate
relationships of male Vietnam veterans: Problems associated with posttraumatic
stress disorder. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 11(1), 87-101.
Russell, R. (2009). Veterans treatment court: a proactive approach. New England Journal
on Criminal and Civil Confinement, 35, 357-372.
Schaffer, B. (2010). Veterans courts and diversion alternatives. American Jails, 23(6),
21-24.
Shelley, T., Waid, C., & Dobbs, R. (2011). The influence of criminal justice major on
punitive attitudes. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 22(4), 526-545.
Sun, I., Su, M., & Wu, Y. (2011). Attitudes toward police response to domestic
violence: A comparison of Chinese and American college students. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 26(16), 3289-3315.
66
Taft, C., Macdonald, A., Monson, C., Walling, S., Resick, P., & Murphy, C. (2013).
“Strength at home” group intervention for military populations engaging in
intimate partner violence: pilot findings. Journal of Family Violence, 28(3), 225231.
Taft, C., Street, A., Marshall, A., Dowdall, D., & Riggs, D. (2007). Posttraumatic
stress disorder, anger, and partner abuse among Vietnam combat veterans.
Journal of Family Psychology, 21(2), 270-277.
Taft, C., Pless, A., Stalans, L., Koenen, K., King, L., et al. (2005). Risk factors for
partner violence among a national sample of combat veterans. Journal of
Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 73(1), 151-159.
Teten, A., Schumacher, J., Taft, C., Stanley, M., Kent, T., et al. (2010). Intimate
partner aggression perpetrated and sustained by male Afghanistan, Iraq, and
Vietnam veterans with and without posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 25(9), 1612-1630.
Thomas, D. (2011). New Jersey’s law enforcement approach to the veteran offender.
Sheriff, 63(7), 34-37.
Trujillo, M., & Ross, S. (2008). Police response to domestic violence. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 23(4), 454-473.
Vandiver, M., & Giacopassi, D. (1997). One million and counting: students’ estimates of
the annual number of homicides in the U.S.. Journal of Criminal Justice
Education, 8(2), 135-143.
67
Wilson, J., Brodsky, S., Neal, T., & Cramer, R. (2011) Prosecutor pretrial attitudes and
plea-bargaining behavior toward veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder.
Psychological Services, 8(4), 319-331.
Wilson, J., & Zigelbaum, S. (1983). The Vietnam veteran on trial: The relation of posttraumatic stress disorder to criminal behavior. Behavioral Sciences & the Law,
1(3), 69-83.
Winter, G. (2000, March). A comparative discussion of the notion of 'validity' in
qualitative and quantitative research. [58 paragraphs]. The Qualitative Report
[On-line serial], 4(3/4). Available: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR43/winter.html