WOMEN OFFENDERS’ RESPONSE TO VICTIMIZATION AND TRAUMA, AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH SATISFACTION WITH LIFE, MENTAL ILLNESS, AND SUBSTANCE USE By Kayla M. Hoskins A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Criminal Justice – Master of Science 2018 ABSTRACT WOMEN OFFENDERS’ RESPONSE TO VICTIMIZATION AND TRAUMA, AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH SATISFACTION WITH LIFE, MENTAL ILLNESS, AND SUBSTANCE USE By Kayla M. Hoskins A staggering percentage of court-involved women have experienced victimization and related trauma. Victimization has been linked to criminogenic risk factors such as substance use and mental illness. The purpose of this mixed methods inquiry is to understand 1) how women incorporate the experience of victimization into their identities and 2) how alternative accounts of victimization are related to women's well-being and other recidivism risks. Informed by narrative identity theory as developed by McAdams' (2013), victimization narratives of 118 women on probation and parole are examined for themes indicative of identity development. Quantitative measures of narrative passages and violence exposure are tested with multivariate models with outcome variables (e.g., generativity, life satisfaction, substance abuse, mental health symptoms). Results show that violence exposure is negatively associated with multiple measures of well-being. Limited evidence was found of a negative association between redemption and generativity, suggesting that serious-level female offenders with high rates of violence exposure make good of victimization and take on generative behaviors differently than the general population. These findings have implications for gender-responsive criminal justice practice that focuses on life story development as a therapeutic tool. Copyright by KAYLA M. HOSKINS 2018 To my family, friends, and mentors for encouraging me. iv AKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to offer sincere thanks to my thesis committee members, Dr. Jennifer Cobbina and Dr. Karen Holt, for their time, support, and guidance. I also wish to express my profound gratitude to my thesis chair, Dr. Merry Morash, for motivating me, providing her expertise, reviewing the manuscript, and helping me to navigate this process. v TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES …………………………………………………….…………..……………viii INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………………….…………………..1 CHAPTER 1: RATIONALE FOR THIS RESEARCH.…………….……………………………..2 A Victimized Population .....…………..…………………………………………….………..2 General Research Questions ...….……………………..…………………..……………..4 Theoretical Framework ………………………………………………………………………4 The Present Study ………………………………..………………………………………5 CHAPTER 2: A REVIEW OF EXISITING LITERATURE………………………………………6 Functionality of Modern Story Telling………………………………………….……………6 Narrative Sequences...………………………...………….……………………………… 7 Transformative Narratives……………………………………………………………......8 Theory and Policy Implications………………………………………………………….….13 Expected Findings………………………………………………………………………….. 14 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY……………….………………………………………………15 Overview..…..…………….…………………………………………………………………15 Procedures..…..……………...………………………………………………………………15 Sample……………………………………………………………………..……………15 Participant Characteristics.…………...……………………………………...……...…..16 Data….………………………………………………………….….…….…….……………17 Data Collection ……………………………………………………………………...….18 Measures.……………………………………..…….……….….…………………………...18 Qualitative Measures …………………………………………………..……………….18 Time 3: The Life Story Interview …………………………………….…………….18 Quantitative Measures …………..………………………………………..…………….21 Time 1: Demographics, Trauma Experience, and Exposure to Violence…………..21 Time 2: Generativity, Life Satisfaction, Substance Use, and Exposure to Violence.22 Time 4: Mental Health, Generativity, Life Satisfaction, and Substance Use……….23 Analytic Strategy………......……….………………………………….………….…...……23 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS..……………………………………………………...………………..25 Qualitative Findings ..…..………..…………………………………………………………25 Commonality of Victimization in Women’s Life Stories ……………..……………….25 Narrative Themes Associated with Women’s Victimization Accounts…………….…..25 Redemption…………………………………………………………………………26 Generativity…………………………………………………………………………32 Contamination………………………………………………………………………35 Redemptive Gains.……….………………….…………………….…..………….….....39 Narrative Sequences Related to Generativity.…….……….....………………….……...44 vi Quantitative Findings ……………………………………………………………………....48 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION ………………………………………..…………………………..60 APPENDICES………………..…………………………………………………...……………..63 Appendix A: Third Interview (T3)…………………………………………………….…64 A.1 Life Story Interview………………………………………………………….64 Appendix B: First Interview (T1)…………………………………………………….…..68 B.1 Abuse/Trauma Scale (WRNA)………………………………………………68 B.2 Type of Abuse Measure (WRNA)……………………………………………69 B.3 Neighborhood Crime Measure……………………………………………….71 B.4 Unsafe Housing Measure (WRNA)………………………………………….72 B.5 PTSD Scale (WRNA)…………………………...…………………………...73 Appendix C: Second Interview (T2)……………………………………………………..74 C.1 Loyola Generativity Scale (LGS)……………………………………………74 C.2 Generativity Behavior Checklist (GBC)……………………………………..78 C.3 Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS)………………………………………...79 C.4 Recent Substance Abuse Measure (WRNA)…………………………………80 Appendix D: Fourth Interview (T4)………………………………………………………82 D.1 Depression/Anxiety Measure (WRNA)……………………………………...82 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………..…… 83 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Time Order and Description of the Data…………….…….……..…………….……….18 Table 2 Victimization-Related Narrative Sequences …………….…….……………….………..39 Table 3 Gains Associated with Redemption.……..…………………………….….……………..44 Table 4 Generativity Associated with Other Narrative Sequences..………………….…………..47 Table 5 F Tests Comparing Means of Dependent Variables and All Victimization-Related Redemptive Cases.……………………………………………………………………….…...…..49 Table 6 Correlations of Independent and Dependent Variables ………………….……………..51 Table 7 OLS Regression Model Results of T2 Generativity, Life Satisfaction, Substance Use, and Mental Health on Narrative Sequences and Violence Exposure…………………...……………..53 Table 8 OLS Regression Model Results of T4 Generativity, Life Satisfaction, Substance Use, and Mental Health on Narrative Sequences and Violence Exposure….…………..…………………..55 Table 9 OLS Regression Model Results of T2 Generativity, Life Satisfaction, and Substance Use on Types of Redemptive Gains…………………………..…………………………………………..57 Table 10 OLS Regression Model Results of T4 Generativity, Life Satisfaction, Substance Use, and Mental Health on Types of Redemptive Gains..…………………………………………………..59 Table B.1 Abuse/Trauma Scale (WRNA)……………………….......……………………...……68 Table B.2 Type of Abuse Measure (WRNA)………………………..……………………………69 Table B.3 Neighborhood Crime Measure…………………………..…………………………….71 Table B.4 Unsafe Housing Measure (WRNA)………………………………………..………….72 Table C.1 Loyola Generativity Scale (LGS)……………...………………………………………74 Table C.2 Generativity Behavior Checklist (GBC)…………………….………….……………..78 Table C.3 Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS)……………………….…………..……………...79 Table D.1 Depression/Anxiety Measure (WRNA)………………………………..……………...82 viii INTRODUCTION A staggering percentage of court-involved women have experienced victimization and related trauma. Victimization has been linked to criminogenic risk factors such as substance use and mental illness. The purpose of this mixed methods inquiry is to understand 1) how women incorporate the experience of victimization into their identities and 2) how alternative accounts of victimization are related to women's well-being and other recidivism risks. Informed by narrative identity theory as developed by McAdams' (2013), victimization narratives of women on probation and parole are examined for themes of redemption and contamination. Redemptive sequences are distinguished by five themes; learning, recovery, growth, improvement, and helping others. Contamination is an alternative outcome of exposure to victimization, and it involves the spoiling of an acceptable or positive state by a negative event, such as trauma and victimization. The present study uses multivariate models to examine the relationship of victim- related redemption, redemptive gains, and contamination in women’s life stories with various indicators of well-being. 1 CHAPTER 1: RATIONALE FOR THIS RESEARCH A Victimized Population This study conceptualizes victimization and related trauma as an incident when a person is damaged by harm or violence, which may occur at one point in time or may be ongoing (Deveaux, 2013). Many American women experience victimization and/or related trauma. In 2015 alone, approximately 1,422,800 females 12 years of age and older were victims of violent crime in the United States (Truman & Morgan, 2016). Trauma exposure is especially common for individuals involved with the law as offenders, although it is important to note that not all people are traumatized by their victimization and not all people recognize that they have been traumatized. Women involved with the law are particularly vulnerable, as they are more likely to experience physical and sexual abuse in childhood than women in the general population (Wolf Harlow, 1999). In one study, 84% of female juvenile offenders reported traumatic experiences (e.g., experienced directly or by witnessing violence) (Abram, et al., 2004). Evidence suggests that female offenders experience more victimization than male offenders (Winham et al., 2015). Women involved with the law report high rates of mental health symptoms, substance abuse behaviors, and experiences of abuse (Greenfeld & Snell, 1999; James & Glaze, 2006; Maidment, 2006; Salisbury & Van Voorhis, 2009; Steadman, Osher, Robbins, Case, & Samuels, 2009). Therefore, women offenders may be particularly susceptible to the consequences of victimization. These consequences include risk for crime and lower levels of well-being (e.g., satisfaction with life, substance use, depression/anxiety, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder [PTSD]) (Courtney & Maschi, 2012; Maxfield & Widom, 1996; Smith & Thornberry; 1995). Studies suggest that women involved with the law often have repetitive and/or comorbid experiences of victimization/trauma, substance use, psychological issues, and 2 health issues (Browne, Miller, & Maguin, 1999; Covington, 2007; Hall, Golder, Conley, & Sawning, 2013; Salina, Lesondak, Razzano, & Weilbaecher, 2007; Salisbury & Van Voorhis, 2009; Widom & Ames, 1994; Widom et al., 2015). It is particularly important to conduct research on women offenders because historically, criminological research has focused on men, and women’s criminality was largely neglected (Cullen, Agnew, & Wilcox, 2014). Overlooking the processes associated with women’s criminality is problematic because it neglects the unique circumstances and protective factors experienced by women. Research has shown that female offending is influenced by factors that may be unusual among men, more frequent among women, or occur at the same frequency for both genders, but have differential effects across gender (Belknap & Holsinger, 2006; Chesney- Lind & Shelden, 2004; Gavazzi, Yarcheck, & Chesney-Lind, 2006; Holsinger, 2000; Holtfreter &Morash, 2003; Reisig, Holtfreter, & Morash, 2006; Salisbury & Van Voorhis, 2009). One theory, narrative identity theory, posits that accounts of negative events, including trauma, reflect identity development or stagnation, and identity development can support desistance from crime (Pals and McAdams, 2004; Maruna, 2001). However, there is limited research that has focused on relationships between life story narratives and the factors that increase women’s risk for recidivism. Thus, additional research is needed to understand how women offenders construct traumatic experiences and the relationship of alternative constructions to risks for continued lawbreaking. This information will assist researchers in determining how gender-responsive, trauma-informed treatment should be designed and implemented. Life story narratives organize meaningful and important life episodes and events in a manner which constructs individual identity (Vincze, Ilg, & Polya, 2014). The proposed study 3 will use life story narratives to understand how trauma is related to women offenders’ identity development and to answer the following questions: General Research Questions (1) How do women incorporate traumatic experiences into their identities? (2) How are alternative constructions of trauma related to risk factors for women’s recidivism, specifically satisfaction with life, mental health, and substance use? Theoretical Framework Story-telling is a universal method people employ to manage their experiences and find meaning in their lives, and personal narratives are commonly used in psychological research to capture the complexity of such stories (Thorne & Nam, 2009). McAdams’ (2013) work regarding American adults’ life story narratives examined significant scenes in the person’s life story (e.g., high points, low points, turning points, challenges). McAdams provides a frame of reference for understanding the relationship between how people narrate key scenes in their life stories and their well-being. In narrative identity theory research, content analysis has revealed themes of redemption (e.g., recovery; development; enlightenment; atonement, emancipation, and upward mobility), contamination (e.g., a positive state is spoiled or undermined by something negative), and generativity (e.g., giving back; improving the well-being of others and/or future generations). McAdams’ narrative identity theory was not developed or applied for samples of court-involved women, although some scholars have applied the theory to offenders (Appleton, 2010; Maruna, 2001) and others have applied it to female samples (Blackburn, 2010; Matos, Conde, Concalves, & Santos, 2015; Miller, Corbone-Lopez, & Gunderman, 2015; Singer, Signer, & Berry, 2013). An aim of this thesis is to determine the applicability and usefulness of 4 narrative identity theory (McAdams, 2013) in understanding the relationship between trauma- related identity development and women offenders’ well-being (e.g., depression/anxiety, PTSD, life satisfaction, and substance use). The Present Study Scholars have identified four key aspects of narrative methods, including asking narrative questions, designing narrative prompts, collecting narratives, and coding narratives (Adler et al., 2017). This study uses McAdams’ Life Story Interview which is designed to capture such narratives. For the purpose of this study, the types of victimization to be included are physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, emotional abuse, sudden/unexpected loss of a loved one, severe injury/illness (e.g., of oneself or a loved one), and exposure to violence. Both qualitative and quantitative data are analyzed. The qualitative life story interviews provide descriptions of victimization-related episodes and events. They also show how women construct redemptive sequences that produce gains in agency (e.g., achievement, increases in control, power, or status), communion (e.g., love, relationships, feelings of connectedness to others, ability to help others), and/or spirituality (e.g., religiosity, increased faith or belief in a higher power, divine purpose, or connection with the world/universe). Quantitative analyses are then used to examine the connection of accounts of victimization to various outcomes. Quantitative analyses also is used to determine whether level of victimization and trauma moderates the relationship between redemptive responses to trauma and outcomes. 5 CHAPTER 2: A REVIEW OF EXISTING LITERATURE Functionality of Modern Story-Telling In the present day, many scholars view identity as a continuously developing, complex project focused on becoming one complete person (McAdams, 2015). Story telling about oneself connects a reconstructed past, a perceived present, and an imagined future that provides meaning to the storyteller (Adler et al., 2017; McAdams, 1995; McAdams & McLean, 2013, McAdams & Pals, 2006; Singer, 2004). McAdams (2015) describes people as both the novels and the novelists of their lives, narrating their experiences to explain circumstances and purpose. In his 2015 work, McAdams outlines seven empirically informed common dimensions of narrative identity: agency, communion, redemption, contamination, coherence, complexity, and meaning making. Informed by McAdam’s (2015) description of these dimensions, this thesis considers themes of redemption, agency, communion, and contamination that are found in descriptions of victimization episodes and events. According to narrative identity theory, redemption and contamination sequences are indicative of identity change, and redemption sequences co-occur with increases in agency and communion. McAdams (2015) argues that narrative identity is a personal myth that humans need in order to develop and process memories, and adapt to realities in their lives. In this theoretical framework, storytelling has the potential to serve as a protective and rehabilitative instrument. In an alternative but somewhat overlapping framework, Gubrium and Holstein (2001) assert that in modern American culture, people believe they possess a constant, true, and unchanging personal self. Furthermore, they argue that the personal self is inherently different from the social self, which is a construct of social interaction. These differences often result in conflict related to troubled identities. Troubled identities exist in limitless forms, but consist of 6 undesirable social labels (e.g., addict, victim, mentally ill) which contradict the individual’s perceived personal self. Making connections between the personal self and troubled identity is described as identity work (Loeske, 2001), which is not automatic. For example, in Loeske’s (2001) example, some victims of domestic violence did not understand or acknowledge their victimization. It seems that acknowledgement of victimization experiences is a key element in the construction of identity through accounts that make good out of negative events. Narrative Sequences Three overarching themes indicative of identity change can be distinguished in narrative sequences: generativity, redemption, and contamination. Generativity may be understood as an adult’s interest in and dedication to contributing to the well-being of future generations (McAdams & Bowman, 2001; Erikson, 1963). Initially the conceptualization of redemption and contamination sequences was inspired by qualitative studies on adult generativity (McAdams & Bowman, 2001; McAdams et al., 1997). Redemption sequences reflect a transition in the life story from a negative state to a positive state (e.g., from bad to good). Contamination sequences reflect the opposite transition, in which a positive state is ruined, undermined or otherwise spoiled by a negative occurrence or circumstance (e.g., from good to bad) (McAdams & Bowman, 2001). Redemptive sequences may be viewed as narrative tools for understanding negative events and protecting perceptions of self. Trauma survivors report silver-linings such as positive changes in the self, in relationships, and in philosophies of life (McAdams & Bowman, 2001; Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1995). Psychological research reports evidence that people often identify something good that has resulted from their suffering and this process is indicative of psychological well-being (McAdams & Bowman, 2001). Building upon such evidence, McAdams and Bowman’s (2001) 7 comprehensive case studies showed that individuals whose life story narratives contained mostly redemptive sequences displayed better mental health and well-being than individuals whose narratives emphasized sequences of contamination. More specifically, they found that redemptive narratives were related to higher rates of life satisfaction, self-esteem, and life coherence, and lower rates of depression/anxiety. Unsurprisingly, contamination scripts depicted opposite relationships; they were related to depression, poor states of life satisfaction, low self- esteem, and limited life coherence. So, in what circumstances does trauma result in a redemptive change? Transformative Narratives Consistent with the idea that trauma narratives are transformative processes, Tedeschi and Calhoun (2004) conceptualize the phenomenon of posttraumatic growth as a positive change resulting from crises. Posttraumatic growth is a narrative process which is instrumental in understanding one’s trauma experience and how the sense of self has been transformed for the better as a result of the traumatic incident (Pals & McAdams, 2004; Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004). Posttraumatic growth is inclusive of life satisfaction, increased feelings of power, improved interpersonal relationships, enhanced spiritual/religious belief, and pivotal changes in life priorities (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2004). This manifestation of posttraumatic growth is strongly aligned with McAdam’s (2013) depiction of agency and redemption. Tedeschi and Calhoun (2004) make an important distinction between posttraumatic growth and resiliency, asserting that posttraumatic growth is not only resistance to damage, but also a positive transformation. Likewise, McAdam’s narrative identity theory highlights themes of growth and improvement, and also considers factors related to resiliency, such as types of agency. Tedeschi and Calhoun (2004) call for longitudinal narrative research to explore posttraumatic growth trajectories. 8 In response to Tedeschi and Calhoun’s (2004) model of posttraumatic growth, Pals and McAdams (2004) assert that life stories are critical to understanding posttraumatic growth. Specifically, life story narratives have the capacity to reveal changes in an individual’s sense of self in the wake of a traumatic event, and how the transformed identity functions in the life story. Furthermore, Pals and McAdams (2004) note that a narrative perspective is particularly useful for understanding cultural influence on posttraumatic growth trajectories and assessment of naturally occurring cognitive processes and outcomes. Pals and McAdams (2004) suggest that whether or not an individual experiences posttraumatic growth depends on how the individual narrates the trauma in relation to his/her sense of self. Research supports this notion, finding that traumatic growth is influenced by an individual’s acknowledgement of the significance of the trauma in his/her life, and the individual’s positive cognitive construction of a resolution to the event in relation to the story (King, Scallon, Ramsey, & Williams, 2000; Pals, 2000; Pals & McAdams, 2004). In a study of 12 women’s multiple victimization experiences conducted by Matos, Conde, Goncalves, and Santos (2015), McAdams’ life story interview was utilized to capture how victimization experiences affected self-perceptions. Low socioeconomic status, unemployment, and being Black were correlated with increased vulnerability to victimization. Furthermore, the researchers observed that intimate partner violence was described by all 12 participants, and was discussed more than any other type of victimization. Although all the participants had experienced multiple kinds of victimization, they did not address multiple victimization in relation to their identities. Women did describe indicators of posttraumatic growth (e.g., positive changes resulting from their victimization experiences), particularly from intimate partner 9 victimization that occurred during adulthood. Discourses of perseverance and resistance to their victimization experiences were the most common. Igarashi, Levenson, and Aldwin’s (2018) study also investigated posttraumatic growth. Specifically, they considered how adults develop wisdom in the wake of difficult life events in relation to their social environment. The researchers observed that when individuals faced adversity that led them to question how they perceive themselves and the world, social environments were related to the development of new wisdom-related perspectives (e.g., compassion, self-knowledge, accepting complexity, and comfort with uncertainty). Evidence supports the idea that adult narratives integrate experiences with a sense of self and purpose, and the story telling process serves to enhance personal well-being (McAdams, 2001; Pals, 2006; Singer, 2004; Singer & Blagov, 2004). Pals’ (2006) longitudinal study of women’s narratives explored relationships between challenging experiences, personality, and health. This study found relationships between women’s story telling process, maturity, resilience, and life satisfaction over time. An important limitation of this study is that it is not generalizable beyond the sample of primarily white, college educated women. Court-involved women tend to have more vulnerabilities (e.g., socioeconomic barriers, lack of access to mental health care) and more victimization, which may affect trauma narratives. Although research applying narrative identity theory to court-involved individuals is scarce, Maruna (2001) made strides in filling this gap by exploring desistance and life story narratives. They asserted that ex-offenders desist from crime by making sense of their lives and developing a positive identity. Although Maruna’s (2001) study was not trauma-focused and the majority of the participants were male, it presents promising findings for the applicability of narrative identity theory to understanding outcomes of court-involved women. Maruna’s (2001) 10 research found that ex-offenders’ rehabilitation narratives justified their crime involvement as a necessary experience. The ex-offenders rationalized that their mistakes contributed to their improved purpose and sense of self. Therefore, it is possible that women’s trauma narratives are related to criminogenic risk factors (e.g., substance use, low life satisfaction, depression/anxiety). Generative redemptive sequences that are connected to desistance narratives have been described as reintegrative, empowering, therapeutic, and related to personal growth (Maruna, Lebel, & Lanier, 2004). Informed by Maruna’s (2001) study, Appleton (2010) conducted a qualitative investigation of the desistance narratives of 28 individuals recently released from life sentences to prison. Only 2 participants were female. Appleton (2010) hypothesized that the redemptive narratives of individuals desisting from crime would depict themes of rejecting their prior criminal behaviors, describing personal gains, and reporting generative goals. From her findings, Appleton (2010) formulated a model change narrative, in which life sequences transitioned from contaminated beginnings (e.g., a bad start to life), to subjective reorientation (e.g., hitting an all- time low point), to discarding old identities (e.g., not a criminal, but a decent person). Some of the participants’ subjective reorientation was triggered by a significant traumatic event, or an accumulation of such events (Appleton, 2010). These redemptive responses constructed new, stronger, prosocial identities. This theme supports literature which proposes that redemptive narrative processes serve as coping mechanisms and indicators of mental health and well-being. Only a small number of desisting participants presented generative scripts, although many redemptive accounts resulted in leading ‘normal’ lives (Appleton, 2010). In another study applying narrative identity theory to offending populations, Miller, Carbone-Lopez, and Gunderman (2015) focused on the narratives of female methamphetamine 11 users. They asserted that narrative language reveals important facets and context regarding socialized gender constructs. This narrative scaffolding of social structure is a method of understanding one’s place in the world by adopting and reinforcing gendered societal expectations (Miller et al., 2015). In-depth interviews revealed connections between initiating and continuing drug use, gender, and redemptive explanations. Furthermore, Miller et al. (2015) noted that women’s redemptive narratives highlighted rationalizations of desistence connected to motherhood and gendered social reputation. Women described motivations such as the desire to become a good mother, gain a healthy romantic relationship, and maintain an exemplary household (Miller, Carbone-Lopez & Gunderman, 2015). Surprisingly, the women rarely connected traumatic experiences to resulting drug use and they avoided presenting victim narratives, although many reported traumatic experiences and all of them used methamphetamines. Miller and colleagues (2015) suggest this disconnect may be the result of the cultural popularity of ‘survivor’ labels for victims and/or the influence of the prison setting on women’s responses, as both would encourage women to share narratives of strength and control. Nonetheless, this disconnect suggests the possibility that societal inclinations which stigmatize victims may impede women’s acknowledgement of trauma and trauma’s significance on their lives, which is described by Pals and McAdams (2004) as a vital stage in posttraumatic growth. Informed by McAdam’s (2006) narrative identity theory, Singer, Singer, and Berry (2013) addressed a woman’s contaminating alcohol abuse sequences and negative cognitions in order to develop a narrative therapy approach to alcohol treatment. The study participants’ narration fit the model presented by McAdams (2006). Singer et al. (2013) asserted that the narrative approaches are important aids to practitioners in understanding the cognitive processes related to individuals’ sense of meaning. Although this single case study is not generalizable, it 12 presents a promising model for trauma-informed care and evaluation and it suggests the merit of further research. In another detailed case study of two women, Blackburn (2010) found interconnections among trauma, gender, and culture. This study offered a profoundly unique context, in that both respondents experienced war-induced trauma. The narrative processes displayed women’s intentional attachment to their preferred identity, while they managed the permanent connection between gender and culture. Although Blackburn’s case studies are also not generalizable, they highlight important implications for trauma-informed practice, cultural competency, focus on the preferred self, and a need for more research. Theory and Policy Implications Narrative identity theory holds promise as useful in the development of gender- responsive and trauma informed programming for women involved with the law. Understanding how women make good out of negative situations and its relationship with their well-being may improve treatment responses. However, there are a few limitations to address regarding this perspective. Firstly, empirical testing of narrative theories is no simple task. Qualitative research gains context and detail but presents challenges in establishing measurement validity, and it is time consuming, costly, and typically cannot be generalized to a broader population (Singleton & Straits, 2010). Secondly, a potential impediment to policy implementation for this theoretical approach is that society is often gender-blind, and some ideologies may not endorse differential treatment of men and women involved with the law. Indeed, U.S. criminal justice policy makers have struggled to acknowledge gender and the realities of women’s lives (Bloom, Owen, & Covington, 2004). Thirdly, this vulnerable population has a high rate of mental illness diagnoses. Because many women in this sample have diagnosed mental health disorders and histories of 13 substance use, it is reasonable to assume that some women’s cognitive processing and narratives may be disorganized, incoherent, or impaired. And finally, women may shape their responses in ways that they deem to be socially desirable. This is a weakness of the interpretive nature of narrative research. Expected Findings (1) Women who report victimization in the initial interview will include these experiences in their life stories. (2) Victimization-related contamination sequences will have no connection to victimization-related generativity. (3) Victimization-related redemption sequences will have some connection to victimization-related generativity. (4) Redemptive sequences will be positively related to indicators of well-being. Since women with no or limited victimization and related trauma experiences would not need to address victimization in their identity development, these findings are likely to hold primarily for women with medium to high levels of prior victimization/trauma. 14 Overview CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY The present study is a secondary analysis of data collected in two consecutive studies of a sample of women on probation and parole. The data collection was funded with NSF grant 1126162, “Probation/Parole Officer Interactions with Women Offenders: Do Relationship Style and Communication Pattern Predict Outcomes?”, and NSF grant 1430372, “The Effects of Identity Development on Women’s Recidivism.” For the thesis, the analysis focused on a subsample of 118 women from the larger study of 402 women. Procedures Sample All women in the original sample were substance-involved and began probation or parole approximately three months before the time of the initial interview in 2011 or 2012. These restrictions prevent the findings from being generalizable to all court-involved women, although the majority of women under correctional supervision are substance involved (Daly, 1994; Morash, 2010; Morash, Kashy, Cobbina, & Smith, 2017; Mumola & Karberg, 2006). The primary investigators recruited participants from the caseloads of 73 probation and parole agents in Michigan. Agent selection was restricted to those located within a 1.5-hour drive from the research office. Sixteen counties were included in the recruitment process, which provided a diverse sample of women residing in urban, suburban, and rural areas. Agents identified 846 qualifying women, but not all women participated for reasons such as not responding to contact attempts or not reporting to the agent’s office when interviewers were on site. Several years after the initial interview, women with five or more convictions before the start of the study were 15 recruited for subsample that was interviewed with the Life History interview. This is the subsample considered for the present thesis research. Participant Characteristics The ages of the 118 respondents ranged from 19 to 56 years at the time of the initial interview (M = 36.86; SD = 9.16). The sample was fairly diverse, as 44.9 percent identified as White, 36.4 percent identified as Black, and 17.8 percent identified as multiracial or other. One woman did not report her race/ethnicity. Employment and financial difficulties were common among the women. Only 20.3 percent of the participants were employed full-time, 23.7 percent worked part-time or were unable to work (i.e., due to child or family care, poor health, being a student, etc.), and 55.9 percent of the sample were unemployed but able to work. Many of the women (56.8 percent) reported that they had experienced being homeless or living in a shelter sometime during their adult life. The majority of the women were mothers, and 30.5 percent reported being the sole provider of their children. The majority of the women also acknowledged traumatic experiences, and many indicated recent symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. At the time of the initial interview, 80.5 percent of the women disclosed having a traumatic experience at some point in their lives. PTSD (Appendix B.5) was measured with the WRNA scale (Van Voohris, Bauman, & Brushett, 2013). The PTSD items included symptoms of PTSD, and participants were asked to indicate which symptoms they had experienced in the past month (e.g., “Have you had nightmares about it or thought about it when you did not want to?” “Have you tried hard not to think about it or went out of your way to avoid situations that reminded you of it?” “Were you constantly on guard, watchful, or easily startled?” “Have you felt numb, or detached from others, activities, or your surroundings?”). Women reporting no traumatic experience were scored as zero on the PTSD measure. Only 37.3 percent of the women scored as 16 zero on the measure, whereas 52.6 percent scored at two or more, indicating multiple types of recent PTSD symptoms. Data Demographic and other descriptive data were collected at an initial interview conducted between November of 2011 and October of 2012. The second (T2) interview that generated data for the present analysis was conducted approximately 37 months later (M = 37.37; SD = 5.3; range = 28.07 – 60.98). It included information on satisfaction with life, recent substance use, generativity, neighborhood safety, and housing safety. The Life Story Interview (T3) was conducted soon after (M = 3.39 months; SD = 6.86; range = -1.64 – 26.59). The final interview (T4) was carried out an average of 14 months later with 102 participants (M = 14.15; SD= 8.03; range = -8.88 – 27.51). That interview included measures of recent depression/anxiety, satisfaction with life, recent substance use, and generativity. The reason for the negative values in the ranges is that in 6 instances the T3 interview occurred before the T2 interview and in 9 instances the T4 interview occurred before the T3 interview. All interviews elicited qualitative and quantitative measures except for the Life Story Interview, which was strictly qualitative. The timing of the Life Story Interview (T3) (Appendix A) was close to the timing of the second interview, which is ideal because it can be expected that women’s responses at about the same time would be associated. All protocols of the studies received approval from the Michigan State University Institutional Review Board (IRB). The author applied for and received IRB approval to carry out the analysis of available data. 17 Table 1 Time Order and Description of the Data Time Content T1: Initial Descriptive Data In-person survey (Quantitative): - Demographics (e.g., age, race, employment and financial needs) - WRNA Abuse/Trauma history - Unsafe Housing measure - Neighborhood Crime measure T2: 37 months later Phone survey (Quantitative): - Satisfaction with Life - Recent Substance Use - Generative Concerns - Generative Behaviors - Unsafe Housing measure - Neighborhood Crime measure T3: 3 months after the T2 Interview In-person Interview (Qualitative): - Life Story Interview T4: 14 months after the T3 interview Quantitative Measures Generated from NVivo: - All Redemption - All Contamination - All Generativity Phone survey (Quantitative): - Recent Depression/Anxiety - Satisfaction with Life - Recent Substance Use - Generative Concerns - Generative Behaviors Data Collection For data collection, interviewers were trained to conduct one-on-one in-person or phone interviews. For the in-person T1 interview, participants received a gift card worth $30. For the T2 interview, which was conducted by phone, they received $40, usually in the form of a money order delivered by mail. For the T3 in-person Life Story Interview, a $75 incentive was paid in cash, and for the T4 phone interview, $40 was paid, again usually in the form of a money order. 18 Interview locations were selected by the participants. Most interviews took place in private areas of probation/parole offices and public settings, such as fast food restaurants and cafes. Women’s responses to open-ended questions were recorded (with their consent), then were transcribed and read into NVivo software. Measures Qualitative Measures Time 3: The Life Story Interview The Life Story Interview (Appendix A) (D. P. McAdams, 2008) began by prompting the women to identify the main chapters of their lives, and then the interviewer inquired about meaningful or significant scenes in the life stories. The participants’ responses to these questions were coded for themes of abuse, trauma, redemption, and contamination. The respondents were also asked about their future aspirations. Future scripts were coded for themes of generativity. Consistent with Royce Baerger & Mcadams’ (1999) discussion of the relationship between coherent life story narratives and psychological well-being, only the narratives of cohesive episodes/events were coded for narrative themes. To establish validity in identifying units of analysis, two coders coded 50 narrative interview transcriptions (40% of the transcripts). The coders distinguished units of analysis into three categories: (1) coherent accounts of redemption sequences (“good” things that come from “bad” things) and the associated themes of identity development (e.g., agency, communion, and religious/spiritual gains); (2) coherent accounts in which a negative state is followed by a positive state but does not cause the positive state; and (3) coherent accounts of contamination in which a positive or acceptable state is spoiled, ruined, or otherwise undermined. The coders achieved an acceptable level of agreement about the units of analysis (Guetzhow’s U =.083, 19 which means that they agreed in almost 92 percent of cases) (Guetzkow, 1950). In instances of disagreement in identifying a unit of analysis, the coders discussed the text, reached agreement, and recorded the mutual decision in the master data set. One coder then completed identifying units for analysis in the remaining life stories. After establishing the units of analysis, the coders revisited the units in 40 transcriptions to establish a coding scheme. They identified 6 themes consistent with McAdams’ (2013) work. These themes were (1) redemption sequences including increases in agency, (2) redemption sequences including increases in communion, (3) redemption sequences including the enhancement of the participant’s religious or spiritual experience; (4) a bad to good sequence in which the good follows the bad but is not caused by the bad; (5) contamination sequences; and (6) sequences that involves death of a loved one or threat of death to the self or a loved one. For these sequences, the coders achieved a Cohen’s Kappa of .837. If units contained more than one sequence, the final sequence/outcome of the unit was used to determine the narrative sequence. Generativity was coded in the ‘future scripts’ section of the T3 Life Story interview, in which the participant was asked about their future plans and hopes. Future scripts had already been organized as units. Future scripts were coded to identify future intentions inclusive of generativity, no generativity, and stagnation (Cohen’s Kappa = .886 for n = 118 codes). Then, two coders inductively identified types of redemption sequences inclusive of indicators of identity development for the final coding scheme, such as victimization leading to helping others who have been abused. Twenty-one redemptive patterns were identified, and inter-coder reliability was established for 50 redemptive sequences (Cohen’s Kappa = .755). 20 Quantitative Measures Time 1: Demographics, Trauma Experience, and Exposure to Violence The T1 interview obtained measures of the women’s demographic characteristics (e.g., race, age, employment and financial need), abuse histories, and unsafe housing (e.g., exposure to drugs or domestic violence in the home) from the Women’s Risk/Needs Assessment (WRNA; Van Voohris, Bauman, & Brushett, 2013). The WRNA provides a comprehensive gender- responsive and evidence-based assessment created for female offenders. It was available in 2008 and revised in 2013 through the collaboration between the National Institute of Corrections and the University of Cincinnati. The four items included in the WRNA Abuse/Trauma measure (Appendix B.1) ask whether the participant had experienced physical and/or sexual abuse in childhood and/or adulthood (e.g., “Have you experienced sexual abuse as a child?”). The Type of Abuse measure (Appendix B.2) inquired into the types of abuse and the amount of abuse the participant has experienced in childhood and adulthood (e.g., “Thinking back to when you were a child, has anyone ever kicked/hit you?” and “Since you have been an adult, has anyone ever choked you?” Response options included 1 = “never”, 2 = “less than 5 times”, 3 = “five or more times.” The Unsafe Housing scale (Appendix B.4) included items related to the safety and stability of the women’s living situation (e.g., “Do you feel safe in your home?”). Responses included 1 = “yes” and 2 = “no.” A final measure of victimization was exposure to crime in the neighborhood, a scale that was created specifically for the NSF-funded research (Cobbina, Morash, Kashy & Smith, 2014). The Neighborhood Crime measure (Appendix B.3) included items indicative of dangerous neighborhoods and the participant’s victimization experience in her neighborhood (e.g., “Is their violence in your neighborhood?” and “Have you ever been the victim of a crime in your neighborhood?”). Responses included 1 = “yes” and 2 = “no.” 21 Time 2: Generativity, Life Satisfaction, Substance Use, and Exposure to Violence The second interview obtained quantitative measures of generativity, life satisfaction, substance abuse, neighborhood crime, and housing safety. Generative concerns were measured with the Loyola Generativity Scale (Appendix C.1) (LGS) and generative behaviors were measured with the Generativity Behavior Checklist (Appendix C.2) (GBC) (McAdams, Hart, & Maruna, 1998). Items in the LGS are indicators of generative behavior (e.g., “I try to pass along the knowledge I have gained through my experiences”). The participant’s answers could vary from 0 = “the statement never applies to me” to 3 = “the statement applies to me very often or nearly always” (Cronbach’s alpha: .87). Items in the GBC list behaviors associated with generativity (e.g., “Drew upon my past experience to help a person adjust to a situation”). The women’s response options ranged from 0 = “I have not done this in the past two months” to 2 = “I have done this more than once in the past two months,” (Cronbach’s alpha: .88). To measure the women’s life satisfaction, the study included the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Appendix C.3) (SWLS) (Diener, Emmons, Larson, & Griffin 1985). Items in the SWLS inquire into feelings of life satisfaction (e.g., “In most ways, my life is close to my ideal”) with response options ranging from 1= “strongly disagree” to 7 = “strongly agree,” (Cronbach’s alpha: .89). The Recent Subtance Abuse Measure (Appendix C.4) was taken from the Women’s Risk/Needs Assessment (WRNA; Van Voohris, Bauman, & Brushett, 2013). The measure asked about circumstances which are indicative of recent substance abuse (e.g., “During the past 6 months have you received a drug screen that was rated positive or diluted?”). Responses included 1 = “yes,” 2 = “no,” (Cronbach’s Alpha: .67). Neighborhood crime and housing safety questions were repeated from the T1 interview (Appendix B.3 and Appendix B.4). 22 A total measure of Exposure to Violence/victimization was generated by adding together measures of neighborhood crime, unsafe housing, trauma experience, and abuse history available at T1 and T2 (Cronbach’s Alpha: .69). Time 4: Mental Health, Generativity, Life Satisfaction, and Substance Use The fourth interview included measures of recent depression/anxiety (Appendix D.1) (WRNA; Van Voohris, Bauman, & Brushett, 2013), recent substance abuse (Appendix D.3) (WRNA; Van Voohris, Bauman, & Brushett, 2013), and measures of generativity, and life satsifaction. Items in the Depression/Anxiety measure addressed recent symptoms of mental illness (e.g., “Currently are you experiencing problems concentrating or staying focused?”). Responses included 1 = “yes,” 2 = “no,” (Cronbach’s alpha: .84). The recent substance abuse measure included items pertinent to current substance use risk and engagement, such as “Do you currently have any feelings that you need to use drugs first thing in the morning?” Response options included 1 = “yes,” 2 = “no,” (Cronbach’s alpha: .551). Likewise, generative concerns (Cronbach’s alpha: .85), generative behaviors (Cronbach’s alpha: .91), and life satisfaction (Cronbach’s alpha: .86) measures were replicated from the T2 interview (Appendix C.1, Appendix C.2, Appendix C.3). Analytic Strategy Qualitative data were used to describe the types of victimization and outcomes pertinent to narrative identity theory. The outcomes included contamination, redemption with gains in agency, redemption with gains in communion, redemption with gains in spirituality, and bad to good sequences (no causal connection). The description included the numbers and proportions of women and examples for redemption, contamination, and generative sequences. Exemplary passages discussed in qualitative analyses were chosen based on 1) the most common types of 23 narrative themes coded and 2) passages that clearly demonstrated the nature of women’s victimization narratives in relation to their identity development. Qualitative coding of victimization-related passages of redemption, contamination, generativity, and redemptive gains (e.g., agency, communion, spirituality) were quantified to create measures for the quantitative analyses. Multivariate regression models were tested for each of the 9 dependent variables. In these models, the total number (references) of contamination, redemption, redemptive gains, and generativity were used as independent variables, in addition to violence exposure and its interaction with the other independent variable. The author tested for collinearity with all variables and found no multicollinearity problems. 24 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS Qualitative Findings Commonality of Victimization in Women's Life Stories As shown in Table 2, 110 of the 118 women (93%) shared one or more experiences of victimization and/or trauma in their life story interviews. Most of the women (n = 109; 92.37%) described experiences of childhood victimization. Specifically, 65 women (55.08%) talked about being sexually abused or assaulted as a child and/or adolescent and 44 women (37.29%) reported being physically abused or assaulted before adulthood. Twenty women (16.95%) shared stories of being neglected by parents or guardians and 10 women (8.47%) shared experiences of mental, emotional, or verbal abuse as a child. Passages containing information about abuse or assault in adulthood were less common than passages with information about abuse or assault in childhood. Overall, 65 women (55.08%) talked about victimization experiences in adulthood in their life stories. Of these 65 women, 53 (44.92%) talked about being physically abused or assaulted as an adult. Sixteen women (13.56%) described being sexually abused or assaulted, and 10 women (8.47%) described being emotionally, mentally, or verbally abused in adulthood. Additionally, 34 women (28.81%) shared their experiences involving severe illness or injury, 38 (32.2%) shared stories of sudden or unexpected loss of loved ones, and 31 (26.27%) shared stories about being exposed to violence. Narrative Themes Associated with Women’s Victimization Accounts Although the majority of the women mentioned victimization experiences in the life story interview, not all of the women connected victimization to identity development. Table 2 shows the number of women who shared narrative sequences related to victimization. Sixty-nine women (58.47%) described victimization-related redemptive sequences. These redemptive 25 sequences were the most common narrative sequence shared involving victimization, followed by contamination sequences. Forty-five women (38.14%) provided trauma-related contamination sequences. Thirty women (28.42%) had passages that conveyed generativity related to their victimization experiences, and 24 women (20.34%) narrated victimization-related transitions from bad to good with no causal relationship. Eighty-nine women (75.42%) spoke of experiences of victimization and/or related trauma but described no narrative sequence related to identity. However, it is important to consider that although these 89 women did not draw connections between a particular victimization experience and identity development every time they mentioned a victimization experience, many did at another point in the interview. This shows how common it was for women to share experiences of trauma and victimization that provided evidence of redemption, contamination, and generativity. Redemption Redemption sequences were described by 70 women (59.32%) (See Table 2). The most common type of victimization or trauma related to redemption was experiencing a sudden or unexpected loss of a loved one. Thirty-three women (27.97%) described redemptive sequences related to such losses. Twenty-five of these women (21.19%) told redemptive stories related to being abused or assaulted as a child. By far, the most frequently mentioned type of childhood victimization related to redemption was sexual abuse/assault, which was disclosed by 18 of the women (15.25%). Redemption related to physical abuse or assault in childhood was the next most common among the women, conveyed by 9 of them (7.63%). Twenty four of the women (20.34%) told redemptive stories related to experiences of abuse or assault in adulthood. Of these 24 women, 18 (15.25%) indicated redemption related to physical abuse/assault in adulthood, and 9 (7.63%) talked about redemption related to sexual abuse/assault in adulthood. Fourteen women 26 (11.86%) spoke of severe illness or injuries related to redemption, and 10 (8.47%) recalled violence exposure related to redemption. Thirty-three women narrated accounts of redemption resulting from the sudden or unexpected loss of a loved one. These women were able to find something good that resulted from death or separation. One women (503) described the trauma of going into labor in jail. This woman was taken to the hospital where she was shackled to the bed. Upon giving birth, she was immediately separated from her daughter and returned to jail. She reflected on her ordeal: Woman 503: The whole time I gave birth I was handcuffed, so. Interviewer: Did they let you see her? Woman 503: No. Interviewer: Ok, and when they took you back was there attention given to your health after having a child because they took you back the same day. Woman 503: No, none. I slept on a cement floor and I bled everywhere. I mean it was terrible. And [later on] her dad brought her to jail to see me. And she was just so new born she didn’t know she was there … I try to turn to positive. There is a reason it happened. The reason and you know after I got out I stopped drinking. And now I see her and I see I get her every weekend. Yeah, it happened for a reason. Interviewer: Ok. That makes sense. And what do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? Woman: I think I’m strong to be honest. To go through, I’ve been through a lot of crap. 27 This participant experienced extremely difficult circumstances for childbirth, followed by separation from her newborn daughter. Nonetheless, she learned from this terrible experience and made some good out of it. She gave up drinking and made strides in restoring a relationship with her young daughter. In her account, she suggested that her new identity as a mother served as a reason for her to stop drinking. Twenty-six of the women shared redemption sequences related to childhood abuse or assault, and the most commonly discussed type was sexual abuse. One woman (1405) disclosed being molested by a family member as a child, shortly after losing her mother: Woman 1405: This is a negative childhood memory? I guess it would probably be when my uncle was touching all over me and molested me and whatever. So, that was, yeah—it was just kind of—I mean I had just lost my mother, and then, you know then this crap. It just kind of, just made me … just kind of, I don’t know … just shut down to where when I was in school I wouldn’t talk, participate, or nothing. I never told anybody. And I don’t know why. Until my daughter was 14 I think, and she was the first one I told. Because she was asking me why did I always question them whenever they would go like, to their grandparents’ house, or I would leave them somewhere, I would say, nobody touched you right? And I would always try to seal that image, somebody touches you, you tell me, you know, and whatever so. When she was kind of concerned why I was just so, going to crazy about that, I told her. Interviewer: What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 28 Woman 1405: I went through something terrible in my childhood, you know, and sometimes it might damage a person for life, but I guess I just didn’t … you know, just let it tear me totally down, and totally apart. This woman learned from her sexual victimization and silence about it to keep her children safe. She confided in her daughter to ensure that she knew she should come to her if she was similarly victimized. In this sense, the woman could be available as a source of support for her daughter, as her own mother was unable to be for her. Moreover, she acknowledged that she did not allow the situation to permanently damage her. She created positivity out of a negative situation. In another example, a different woman (411) spoke about being molested and turning down a destructive path of drug use that escalates to her being shot: Woman 411: My low point would be … when I got molested, because … that’s when I started doin’ drugs, and I got involved with the wrong people. And then I started dating this guy, and I dated him for seven years, and I have a son by him, and I got shot because … some people were tryin’ to shoot him and I got shot instead; so I have two low points … because, like, one I could have took myself away from my kids by the destructive stuff I was doin’. And two, I could have been takin’ away from my kids when I got shot, because, the moment—if I wouldn’t have moved how I did, the bullet would have went straight through. … yeah that was a, a—like, a period that … if I could take it back, I wouldn’t because it made me a better person. I’m more cautious about certain things; I’m more protective of my kids. Bein’ violated in the way that I was, that made me more protective of people around me and people I encounter and relationships I 29 develop. So, I’m more guarded; opposed to … the free kind of person that I was before. I’m—I’m less trusting, really. This woman’s low point resulted from her childhood victimization. However, she learned from her low point and realized the importance of being there for her children. She felt that she became a better person and a better mother as a result. Twenty-five women shared redemptive stories related to being abused or assaulted in adulthood. The most common type of adulthood abuse or assault was physical in nature (reported by 18 of the women). One women (109) reflected on her experience with a two-and-a-half year relationship in which her significant other became abusive, beat her, and even stabbed her on one occasion that resulted in her needing stitches: Woman 109: Greatest single challenge. I could say when I use to drink, a while back. You know, my crazy ex. But how I quit cold turkey, it was crazy. I just completely one day was just done with it. From something that I did day up and day out, day-in day-out. And I just quit one day. Interviewer: So was there, like, something that happened or? Woman 109: He used to beat me up. I had to try to numb myself from the pain, irritation, and, you know, the frustration. And you gonna jump on me, but you the one out here doin’ stuff – that don’t make sense. When I got done with him. You know, I was able to release all that, and I figured out that you was like toxic ‘cause you was makin’ me poison myself. You wasn’t makin’ me, but you was influencin’ me doin’ it. I quit cold turkey. It didn’t bother me … but I got out of that. I deserve way better than that … If he loved me, he wouldn’t have put his hands on me. 30 Interviewer: So at what point do you think you realized it was a problem? Woman 109: I really just started fightin’ back. See I’m glad that it was his spot. So I could just pick up and leave, so that’s how I done that. And that was that. I just dipped, like, forget him. Yup. Interviewer: And so what is the significance of this challenge in your life story? Woman 109: Actually, it’s significant in a lot of ways. I mean, it let me know that a man don’t love you that hit you, and stuff. It let me know that. And, you know, I deserve better, I know better. You gotta turn to drugs, you can just walk away if you strong enough. And anything you can … you want to do, you know, you can do it. Excuses, you can't – people be use excuses all the time, but if you try, and pray up on it, things will change. All you gotta do is stay away from the stuff that a make you go back. You know, until you get strong enough to be able to be around it. That’s how I went about it. This woman reached redemption following physical abuse at the hands of her ex-boyfriend. She found the strength to defend herself and leave him. She learned that she deserved better. As a result, she was able to stop self-medicating to cope with the abuse, and so quit using drugs and alcohol. She created some good out of her victimization 31 Generativity In the life story interviews of 30 women (25.42%), generativity was coded in passages about victimization (See Table 2). Fifteen of the women (12.71%) gave examples of generativity that resulted from experiences of abuse or assault in childhood. Seven (5.93%) noted generativity involving childhood sexual abuse, 5 involving childhood physical abuse, and 4 involving neglect. In passages describing experiences that occurred in adulthood, generativity was described by 7 women (5.93%), and all 7 described generativity related to physical abuse/assault. Two of the women victimized in adulthood also discussed generativity related to emotional abuse, and 1 also spoke about it in relation to sexual assault. Additionally, 4 women talked about generativity resulting from violence exposure. Three women discussed generativity associated with a sudden or unexpected loss of a loved one. One women spoke about generativity resulting from a severe illness or injury. Women that expressed generative concerns or behaviors most commonly described goals related to child-rearing and sharing their wisdom with other victims. For example, one woman (413) explained how she used her experiences of sexual abuse as a child to be a better parent and make her son safer. Interviewer: Can you describe this high point scene in detail? Woman 413: The birth of my son. Interviewer: What were you thinking and feeling? Woman 413: I was happy, like I felt … it gave me a reason to live which is something I haven’t felt in a long time. It was … it was a turning point in my life and it was really positive. Interviewer: What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 32 Woman 413: I try every day to be a good mom and to make good choices that would make [Son D] happy, and that’s helped me a lot with my addiction. Just stay clean … motivate me to stay clean and I think as bad as the abuse was that it made me a better parent. Because sometimes I’m too overprotective of him [laughs], but still it did. If nothing else, it helped me become a better parent and to know the signs to look for and how to keep your child safe from, you know, predators. This woman linked her negative experience of abuse to generativity. In her description, she discussed using her knowledge of childhood victimization to better care for her son. Mothers were often concerned with protecting their children from being victimized like they had been. In an additional example of generativity, another woman (512) made good out of the physical abuse she endured as an adult, saying that overcoming the abuse helped her to empathize with other victims and led to her helping women and children in homeless shelters. Interviewer: You take food to the homeless shelter? Woman 512: Mhmm (yes). And I help the ladies there as much as I can with the kids. I try to go there at least 3, 4, 5 times a day … a week, not a day. Interviewer: How long have you been doing this? Woman 512: For about three years. They want me to work there, like, be a payroll person, and I don’t want to do that. Sometimes it upsets me when I go there and I don’t want to have to go there. If there’s somebody there, I don’t know, I get emotionally involved maybe, and some things, like, bother me, you know, like, it just bothers me that somebody wants to go back to somebody that’s beatin’ the 33 crap out of ‘em. Why? You know, I can’t … I can’t tell you yes or no, that’s your decision. And then they do go back and that bothers me. Interviewer: How’d you get involved with this project? Woman 512: I don’t know. I honest to God, I don’t know. I think just one day I was trying to figure out where I could help, you know, like, a little bit, and … Interviewer: You found yourself there? Woman 512: Yeah. I don’t know how. Interviewer: So why is this project important for you or for … for the women? Woman 512: Well I think I have some kind of wealth of knowledge. I’m not dumb. Interviewer: Are you saying because of your past experience [of your ex-husband being physically abusive and trying to kill you]? Woman 512: Yeah, and I think I’m a very good listener. You know, like, been there, done that, I can listen all day. You don’t have to … I don’t give you advice. I don’t force my stuff down your throat – very rarely do I give advice, ‘cause that’s not what I’m there for. I’m there just to … you can banter stuff off me, you know. And if you don’t, that’s great, too. I’ll play with your kid, you know, we’ll have fun. “You need a break? Come on we’re goin’ outside.” I love kids. I think they’re the best thing in the world. This participant felt generative desires to reach out and help others who had faced struggles similar to her own. She experienced an increase in empathy for victims of physical abuse and the homeless, and took generative action to help them. 34 In another example, in her life story interview, a woman (411) spoke about being exposed to violence in her community. Woman 411: Right now… all my time and energy go to my son; tryin’ to keep him out these streets. I don’t want him to get caught up in these streets, because … when I was growin’ up—we had mine fights. It wasn’t a thing to us to fight— protect your woman like a soldier and go on about your business, maybe I’ll fight again, cool, if not leave it alone. Now… they don’t—they don’t do that, they shoot. And this is my oldest son; I have a son under him, and I don’t want him to see… the path that his brother goin’ down. ‘Cause his dad is in prison, and he get out… August. Been gone nine years, my son is 13, so he live with his uncle now, because I don’t want him to see what his brother doin’, ‘cause I don’t want him to try to do it. I don’t want him to follow in that… road. This woman’s exposure to violence made her aware of the danger in the community. This experience led her to describe herself as generative, specifically as prioritizing keeping her son safe from violence. She was concerned with caring for her son and making sure he has a better life than she did. Mothers that reported generative thoughts often linked them to improving the life circumstances of their children. Contamination Contamination related to victimization was discussed by 45 women (See Table 2). The most prevalent time of victimization related to contamination was loss of a loved one. Twenty- six of the women illustrated victimization stories of contamination resulting from a sudden or unexpected loss. Twenty-three women spoke about contamination related to childhood abuse or assault. Of these 23 women, 13 described contamination resulting from childhood sexual abuse, 35 8 from childhood physical abuse, 6 from neglect, and 6 from emotional, mental, or verbal abuse as a child/adolescent. Fewer women (9 women) recounted contamination related to abuse or assault in adulthood. Seven of the women expressed contamination related to physical abuse as an adult, 3 from emotional, mental, or verbal abuse, and 1 from sexual abuse/assault in adulthood. Four women revealed contamination resulting from a severe illness or injury and 1 reported contamination resulting from violence exposure. Women who gave accounts of sudden or unexpected loss related to contamination described themes of death or of separation from living loved ones. In one example, a mother (609) told the interview about getting off of drugs and doing well in life. She lost custody of other children in the past due to her substance use, but she got clean because she became pregnant, and wanted to keep her son. Woman 609: Once I had him the doctors never told me I was in threat or jeopardy or anything that my child could be taken away from me because I had used with the one before him. And two days out of the hospital they just took him, gone. And on top of that, my placenta bag was stuck to my uterus so they had to give me a partial hysterectomy, so I immediately went into surgery; they took my uterus because I couldn’t get the after birth out. Not to mention I can’t never have kids anymore and here it is two days out of the hospital, I don’t even remember my son anymore, you just completely took him away from me and he 14 now and I don’t even know where he … other than that picture right there when he was two weeks old, I don’t even know what he looks like… Yeah, they immediately just took him … I never see his face or anything, they had to count to three and I was gone because my placenta bag was still pumping blood out of me as it’s 36 pumping to the baby. So I never got the chance to hold, never seen him, they just rushed him straight to the emergency room… I was feeling hurt, I was feeling like why. I was feeling like why God … I mean I don’t mean to blasphemy to God but I didn’t know any better then. I’m like, why me, I’m … every time I take a step to do something right, bad is pushing me back down and I don’t want to feel no more so then I go to the other side of the world that I been experiencing every [day] since I lost my kids from the first time. Like losing my girls, it was just like all over again. So I don’t know, I just felt I felt raged, I felt I didn’t care, I don’t care, I don’t love nobody, don’t nobody love me. In this passage, 609 made positive changes in her life (i.e., getting off drugs, doing the right thing) to become a mother to the child she was expecting. This positive change was spoiled because she was unexpectedly denied the opportunity to mother him. Moreover, complications of the birth necessitated a procedure that prevented her from having more children. The loss of her son caused her immense pain, made her question God, and she saw herself as being unloved and despondent. In another example, a participant (142) explained her experience of being sexually abused as a child and how it resulted in contamination: Interviewer: Okay so the next scene is an early memory from childhood or your teenage years that stands out as especially negative in some way. Woman 142: Just my brother, you know, doing stuff to me. Because it affects me, like, you know, a lot wise. Because you know, that should, they don’t, it just is nasty. Thinking of a family member trying to do that to you, and, you know, he has kids. He has two little girls, and they’re handicapped, you know. Has he ever 37 did anything to them? You never know, you know. So it’s just that affected me in a, I think always. Because I would never let him around my kid and like, sometimes he’s over at my mom’s house and he’ll try to like hug my daughter. It makes me feel like I want to throw up and it’s just, so that negatively affected me forever, I’d say. Her sexual victimization as a child caused permanent damage to her identity. Furthermore, she still had encounters with her abuser (her brother) on occasion. He had even interacted with her daughter. The exposure to him continued to cause the woman to feel disgust. Although she expressed the desire keep her brother away from her daughter, she had not been successful in doing so. In a final example of contamination, a woman (1016) described being physically and mentally abused by her father. Interviewer: When did this bad, negative memory occur? Woman 1016: It would have to be the things we endured with my father, living with my father. Interviewer: He was abusive? Woman 1016: Yeah very abusive. Physically yeah, mentally. Like I said, he was on drugs—heroin—for the whole time. Interviewer: What were you thinking and feeling at that time? Woman 1016: Just scared, I was always scared, like just thinking you know? What was walking on eggshells, what was going to happen next? Interviewer: And what do you think that scene says about who you are as a person? 38 Woman 1016: I don’t know, maybe that that’s where I’m emotionally unstable comes from. She speculated that the abuse she endured from her father may be the reason she became emotionally unstable. She believed that dealing with the insecurity and abuse in her childhood affected her emotionally stability in a negative way, indicating contamination. Table 2 Victimization-Related Narrative Sequences Victimization Type Child Abuse/Assault Emotional/Mental Neglect Physical Sexual Adult Abuse/Assault Emotional/Mental Physical Sexual Severe Illness or Injury Sudden/Unexpected Loss Violence Exposure Totals (N = 118) Note. Percentages are calculated from the entire sample of 118 women. 110 women mentioned victimization in their life story interviews. Contamination Redemption n 25 1 3 8 18 24 0 17 9 14 33 10 69 % 19.5 5.08 5.08 6.78 11.02 7.63 2.54 5.93 0.85 3.39 22.03 0.85 38.14 n 23 6 6 8 13 9 3 7 1 4 26 1 45 14.4 7.63 11.86 30.50 8.47 58.47 21.19 0.85 2.54 6.78 15.25 20.34 - % 12.71 Generativity 3.39 4.24 5.93 5.93 1.69 5.93 0.85 0.85 2.54 3.39 25.42 n 15 0 4 5 7 7 2 7 1 1 3 4 30 % - Redemptive Gains Some women described gains in agency (i.e., achievement, control, power, status), communion (i.e., interpersonal relationships, love, connectedness, empathy, helping others), and/or spirituality (i.e., religiosity, faith, divine purpose) as outcomes of redemptive sequences. Table 3 presents counts of the number of participants who discussed one or more of these gains from redemption, organized by victimization type. The most commonly mentioned gain 39 associated with redemption was communion. The narratives of 47 women revealed how they gained communion through redemption from victimization. The most common type of gains in communion were associated with sudden or unexpected loss (n = 24) and child abuse or assault (n = 18). Women who gained communion through redemption increased their capability to care for others, relationships with others, and empathy for others. In an example, one woman (1017) recalled her experience with losing her mother at a young age: Interviewer: Can you describe this good memory in detail? Woman 1017: Oh I don’t [have] any as a teenager. Okay I’m going to go back to when I was like four after my mom died when I can remember. I lived with my grandma and grandpa because we all lived there and that was the best memories I have in my—pretty much childhood—was being with my grandma and grandpa. Interviewer: Why was that a positive childhood memory? Woman 1017: Because I was—right after that I was with my stepmother, my dad got remarried and me and my brother and I went and lived with my stepmother, which she didn’t want kids. So we’d go back and forth to the grandparents and her, back and forth back and forth and that’s—I had a difficult time with the stepmother issues, so that’s another story. It was grandma and I was the baby [laughs]. Out of all ten kids and then two grandkids living there I was the baby, so I got babied and loved and everything. Interviewer: What were you thinking and feeling at that time in your life? Woman 1017: That I didn’t want to go back to my stepmother, I wanted to stay with grandma and grandpa because at that—I packed my suit case at four years 40 old and walked out on her drive in Detroit wanting to go back to grandmas [laughs]. She packed my clothes for me; here go see your grandma [laughs]. Interviewer: What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? Woman 1017: I think it’s a lot how I raised my daughter. Because they showed me love and support and to where I took that to my daughter instead of having my—the rest of life with her having—till I was 15 with grand—with my stepmother and father. So that made me a better mother I think, I think so. In this redemptive sequence, the woman gained communion by developing a stronger relationship with her grandparents and by learning from them how to better care for her children. Thirty-eight women noted gains in agency associated with their redemptive sequences. Gains in agency included gains in feelings of power, status, and achievement. One women (1188) recounts being sexually abused as a child: Interviewer: Looking back over your entire life, can you please identify and describe what you now consider to be the greatest single challenge you have faced in your life? Woman 1188: Getting sober [laughs], that would be the biggest challenge ever. I tried to get sober over the period of probably 15 years before it actually took hold. Interviewer: How did the problem develop? Woman 1188: Being sexually assaulted – having – felt like I had to be the strong one for everybody else and make them think that I was okay when I wasn’t is when I got into using drugs. Because using the drugs made it not real in my mind for … which enabled me to be able to ignore the pain, let people think … it made me be able to make people think that I was okay when I wasn’t. 41 Interviewer: What is the significance of this challenge on your life story? Woman 1188: Well I mean that … that could have went one or two ways … I think that was like a fork in the road for my life to where I could go left or right. And which is, I could go left and ignore it and pretend it didn’t happen and use drugs so I could really pretend it didn’t happen. Or I could have used it constructively without being a victim anymore and instead being a survivor and helped other women who had the same thing happen. This woman displayed gains in agency by exercising control over her identity and future. She actively chose to change and give up drug use. She chose to see herself as a survivor rather than a victim. She gained power and control over her life. In addition, she gained communion because she decides to help other women who have faced similar struggles. Twenty-seven women also gave accounts of episodes or events in which they made spiritual gains. These women experienced strengthened faith, increased concern for life and mortality, and increased connections with God, the world, or the universe. In an example below, one woman (1178) made sense of how facing an unexpected loss of a loved one strengthened her belief in God. Woman 1178: My ex-fiancé, and his family after they took my son when ex- fiancé died of an overdose. Interviewer: What were you thinking and feeling? Woman 1178: I turned back to drugs because I didn’t want to think or feel. Interviewer: Why do you think this particular moment was so bad? Woman 1178: Because death itself is so final. Interviewer: What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 42 Woman 1178: That I’ve experienced quite the diversity in life. Interviewer: What were you thinking and feeling? Woman 1178: It let me know God was there. I would not think about God in such a negative situation, but I could see the shell of my fiancé in his casket, and I knew there was no soul in there. I knew that God had already taken him which really reinforced my belief in God. I had questioned God in the past. Interviewer: What do you think this religious or spiritual experience says about who you are as a person? Interviewer: It says that I know my relationship with higher power. It gives me reason and purpose to live – shows me that we’re all here in person for a short time and not to be reckless. She had questioned God in the past, but when her fiancé died of an overdose, religion brought her solace. She considered mortality and realized life is short and should be valued. 43 Table 3 Gains Associated with Redemption Redemption-Related Victimization Type Child Abuse/Assault Emotional/Mental Neglect Physical Sexual Adult Abuse/Assault Emotional/Mental Physical Sexual Severe Illness or Injury Sudden/Unexpected 11.02 0.85 0.85 3.39 7.63 11.02 Agency n % 13 1 1 4 9 13 0 8 6 6 14 6.78 5.08 5.08 11.86 - Loss - % 15.25 Redemptive Gains Communion n 18 0 3 5 13 11 0 8 4 4 24 6.78 3.39 3.39 20.34 2.54 4.24 11.02 9.32 - - - - Spirituality % n 3 2.54 0 0 0 3 10 0 8 3 6 11 6.78 2.54 5.08 9.32 2.54 8.47 - Violence Exposure Totals (N = 118) Note. Agency, communion, and spirituality are redemptive themes so were only coded within redemptive sequences. Out of the 118 participants, 70 shared stories of victimization-related redemption. Percentages were calculated from the entire sample of 118 women. 3.39 39.83 0.85 22.88 5.08 32.2 6 38 4 47 1 27 Narrative Sequences Related to Generativity As shown in Table 4, redemption was associated with generativity. Seventeen women specified redemption that resulted in generative feelings, goals, or actions. Only 1 woman shared contamination experiences that resulted in generativity. The most common type of victimization related to redemptive and generative narratives was abuse or assault in childhood. For example, one woman (1405), whose redemptive childhood sexual victimization transition was discussed above, detailed how she overcame her victimization and took generative action because of it: Woman 1405: Okay. I don’t know, I guess the turning point in my life was kind of when I—the last time I was on probation, and it was just kind of like, I had … it’s like, here you are. Well back when you got into all that trouble starting all that 44 stuff, then you got on the drugs, then you went to prison, and here you are doing the same thing that got you, you know, that took part of your life away in the first beginning. What is wrong with you? You need to wake up. And so, you know, through the help with going through that … that rehab out-patient thing—I stayed in there a long time because it was my choice not to get out of there. And I don’t know, I guess my probation officer, she was kind of understanding, and … and I just had made up my mind that I wasn’t going to, you know, continue on like that. Interviewer: Okay. And it was kind—even though it was your choice, she was supportive and valued that you wanted to go? Woman 1405: Well it was—I had to go at first. But then I could’ve left, could’ve been done, but it was my choice to remain in there. Interviewer: And kind of, what were you thinking and feeling during this change that you were feeling—that you were starting? Woman 1405: Just kind of feeling that … that I was blessed because a lot of people didn’t make that change, or maybe they had died from a drug overdose, or ended up going to prison for the rest of their life or something, so it was like, something that I needed to do in life, and I wanted to go on and do what I wanted to do and that was to work with children and stuff—to try to help any troubled children that I could, so that’s why I’m trying to get my bachelors in human services so that I can get into that field where I can help the children. Interviewer: And why do you think at this particular time it became, like apparent to you to change? 45 Woman 1405: Well for one thing, I was just kind of looked at—here my, this started back when my children were real small and here it was still going on. My children are grown, they have children, I mean what kind of example am I going to be for my grandchildren. I wasn’t a very good one for my children, so, it’s like, well you know it’s never too late to change and try to be a positive role model for them. Interviewer: What do you think this scene of change says about you as a person? Woman 1405: That I wanted something better for myself. I didn’t want to live my life like that and I am a good person, a worthy person … I’m not a bad person, I just made some bad choices. In narrating her story, this woman achieved redemption because she found good in the bad. She had originally turned to drugs to cope with her victimization. She felt that she was fortunate to have been able to successfully stay in a rehab center and get clean, and that she managed to do something others could not. In addition to redemption, she shared descriptions of generative goals. She now saw herself serving as a role model for her grandchildren and earning her bachelor’s degree in human services to help other children. 46 % 0.85 Table 4 Generativity Associated with Other Narrative Sequences Victimization Type Associated with Generativity Child Abuse/Assault Emotional/Mental Neglect Physical Sexual Adult Abuse/Assault Emotional/Mental Physical Sexual Severe Illness or Injury Sudden/Unexpected Loss Violence Exposure Totals (N = 118) 0.85 Note. This shows redemption and contamination sequences that were coded in the same generative accounts. Of the total 118 participants, 30 described generativity related to victimization, but not all provided sufficient detail about the episode to be coded for redemption or contamination. Percentages were calculated from the entire sample of 118 women. Contamination n 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2.54 0.85 14.41 - - - - - - - - - 2.54 1.69 4.24 2.54 Redemption n % 10 8.47 0 3 2 5 3 0 3 1 0 3 1 17 2.54 0.85 - - - - 0.85 47 Quantitative Findings F tests were used to compare the means for the dependent variables for women with and without evidence of contamination and redemption. There were no significant differences in means for women that reported contamination and those that did not in the life story interview. The results of the comparison of means for women who did and did not describe redemption related to victimization and trauma are presented in Table 5. The only significant difference in means among women that described redemption in their life story interviews and those that did not was for generative behaviors reported at the T4 interview (p = .048). Interestingly, women with no evidence of victimization-related redemption in the life story interviews reported more generative behaviors at the T4 interview than women with evidence of redemption measured at T3. This difference was not statistically significant for the same variable measured at T2, and the means were not significantly different for similar measures of generative behaviors at both T2 and T4. Overall, the model suggests that having no redemption versus having redemption in the life story interviews has no significant difference for most of the dependent variables. There is limited evidence of a difference in generative behaviors shortly after the life story interview, though the difference is not as expected, since women who lack redemption have significantly higher scores than those with redemption. 48 F 10.22 37.31 32.8 10.08 7.75 36.59 33.19 1, 114 1, 100 35.29 37.88 .143 .049 .443 SD df M Redemption = 1 Redemption = 0 SD M Table 5 F Tests Comparing Means of Dependent Variables and All Victimization-Related Redemptive Cases Variable T2 Generative Concerns T4 Generative Concerns T2 Generative Behaviors T4 Generative Behaviors T2 Life Satisfaction T4 Life Satisfaction T2 Substance Abuse T4 Substance Abuse T4 Depression/Anxiety Violence Exposure * p < .05. Note: Statistics under the Redemption = 0 category indicate means for women with no redemptive accounts in the life story narratives, and statistics under the Redemption = 1 category indicate means for women with at least one redemptive account in the life story interview. 3.999* 1, 116 1, 116 1, 116 1, 100 .85 .63 8.8 8.6 .359 .002 1.37 1.07 1.17 1.15 8.03 7.45 .459 .761 1, 114 2.04 -.01 2.21 1.066 33.79 32.11 12.68 15.15 20.09 20.23 19.02 18.83 1.00 .62 1.63 .02 2.01 .61 1, 114 1, 100 .53 .075 1, 114 9.38 11.4 13.57 49 Correlations were generated to search for possible linear relationships among the variables. Table 6 shows the one-tailed and two-tailed correlation values. Several significant correlations were observed. The T2 and T4 dependent variables of life satisfaction were both found to be significantly negatively related to violence exposure, suggesting that the greater exposure to violence, the less likely one was satisfied with life. Likewise, the T2 and T4 recent substance abuse variables were significantly related violence exposure, suggesting that higher scores of violence exposure were associated with more substance use. As expected, contamination was significantly negatively correlated with satisfaction with life at T4, which indicates that women that shared more contamination passages in the life story interview were less satisfied with their lives shortly after at T4. However unexpectedly, redemption was significantly negatively correlated with generative behaviors at T4. In the sample, higher scores of redemption were correlated with less generativity at T4. Contamination and redemption were also were significantly correlated. This finding suggests that women that connected victimization experiences to their identity development in the life story interview shared both contamination and redemption narratives. 50 Table 6 Correlations of Independent and Dependent Variables (N=118) Variable T2 Generative Concerns All Redemption -.097 .300 .036 T4 Generative Concerns -.050† T2 Generative Behaviors T4 Generative Behaviors T2 Life Satisfaction T4 Life Satisfaction T2 Substance Abuse T4 Substance Abuse T4 Depression/Anxiety All Redemption All Contamination -.077 -.294 .069 .063 .006 -.046 .121 – .226 .621 .411 .003* .463 .527 .951 .622 .192 – .014* .080 .163 .013† -.231 -.140 .161 -.010†† .728 .226 – Violence Exposure * p < .05, two-tailed. ** p < .01, two-tailed. *** p < .001, two-tailed. † p < .05, one-tailed. †† p < .01, one-tailed. ††† p < .001, one-tailed. .417 .022† .816 .075 – – 51 All Contamination Violence Exposure .704 .426 .081 .895 .013 .013* .084 .914 .728 .014* – -.139 -.045† .116 .093 -.331 -.338 .418 .371 .003† .022† .075 .137 .656 .214 .355 .000*** .001*** .000*** .000*** .003** .816 .417 The results of multivariate regression analyses of the dependent variables on the independent variables are displayed in Table 7 (T2 dependent variables) and Table 8 (T4 dependent variables). As shown in Table 7, at T2, the F statistic was not significant for the regression models for generative concerns or for generative behaviors. However, at T2 the models to predict both life satisfaction and substance use were statistically significant. For these models, the independent variables can explain 17.1 percent of the variance in life satisfaction and 20.4 percent of the variance in substance use. At T2, violence exposure had a significant negative relationship with both life satisfaction and substance use. In short, contamination and violence exposure negatively predict life satisfaction, and violence exposure predicts substance abuse. The interaction effects are not statistically significant, so the hypotheses that the level of violence exposure acts as a moderator variable are not supported. 52 b β -1.00 b -.983 b .836 β .135 b -.033 β -.035 .131 β -.111 1.63 .064 Table 7 OLS Regression Model Results of T2 Generativity, Life Satisfaction, Substance Use, and Mental Health on Narrative Sequences and Violence Exposure Independent Variable Generative Behaviors Generative Concerns Satisfaction Substance Abuse Life T2 T2 T2 T2 .172 .019 .064 .006 -.755 .395 .054 -.186 1.401 1.338 .122 .724 .32** -3.301 -.240* -4.227 -.289* -1.447 Redemption Contamination Violence Exposure Violence Exposure × Redemption Violence Exposure × Contamination R² F df * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001. Note: Redemption and contamination independent variables are composed of a sum all references of the respective sequences coded in the life story interviews. The interaction variables with all violence exposure use the same variables which sum up all references of the narrative sequence. .204*** 5.649 5, 110 .171** 4.553 5, 110 .038 .88 5, 110 .059 1.387 5, 110 2.098 1.497 -.188 -.012 -.040 -.298 .097 .167 .072 .111 .095 .082 53 Table 8 shows results of the multivariate regression analyses using the T4 dependent variables. The F statistic was not significant for the models predicting generative concerns or generative behaviors. However, the models that significantly predicted the variables life satisfaction, depression/anxiety, and recent substance abuse were significant. The independent variables accounted for 16.2 percent of the variance in life satisfaction, 14.2 percent of the variance in substance abuse, and 9.6 percent of the variance in depression/anxiety. When individual coefficients are considered, the only finding that is significant is the prediction of substance abuse from violence exposure. 54 Table 8 OLS Regression Model Results of T4 Generativity, Life Satisfaction, Substance Use, and Mental Health on Narrative Sequences and Violence Exposure Independent Variable Generative Behaviors Generative Concerns Depression/ Satisfaction Substance Anxiety Abuse Life T4 T4 T4 T4 T4 β b .527 β .091 β -.044 b .193 b -.037 -.025 .749 β .121 -.022 .092 .089 b β b .786 -.822 -.922 -2.98 -.013 -.032 -.050 .080 -.034 .724 -.319 .533 -.138 -.158 -.153 -.219 .076 .092 -.009 -.110 2.279 -3.215 .385** -.306** Redemption Contamination Violence Exposure Violence Exposure × Redemption Violence Exposure × Contamination R² F df * p < .05, ** p < .01. Note: Redemption and contamination independent variables are composed of a sum all references of the respective sequences coded in the life story interviews. The interaction variables with all violence exposure use the same variables which sum up all references of the narrative sequence. .162** 3.703 5, 96 .142** 3.705 5, 112 .096* 2.369 5, 112 .102 2.17 5, 96 .023 .461 5, 96 -1.725 1.358 -.116 -.013 -.108 .748 .027 -.024 .173 -.024 -.727 .025 .082 .213 .056 55 Table 9 presents results of the multivariate regressions of T2 measures of the dependent variables on counts of the number of passages coded as reflecting gains in agency, gains in communion, gains in spirituality, and contamination, controlling for exposure to violence. The F statistic was not significant in the tests for generative concerns or generative behaviors, but for life satisfaction and substance abuse, a statistically significant amount of variance is explained by the full model. The independent variables explained 16.7 percent of the variance in life satisfaction, and 21.1 percent of the variance in substance use at T2. Sharing more contamination stories in the T3 interview was negatively related to life satisfaction. Exposure to violence was also negatively related to life satisfaction. For the prediction of substance abuse measured at T2, violence exposure is a significant positive predictor. 56 b .719 .69 β .060 -.181 -.091 .094 β .014 .115 .002 Table 9 OLS Regression Model Results of T2 Generativity, Life Satisfaction, and Substance Use on Types of Redemptive Gains Independent Variable Generative Concerns Generative Behaviors Satisfaction Life T2 T2 T2 T2 Substance Abuse b β b b .14 β -.158 -.093 -1.88 -1.79 -.042 -.031 -.064 -.040 .987 .037 3.059 -1.131 -2.246 Agency Communion Spirituality Contamination Violence Exposure R² F df * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001. Note: The independent variables Agency, Communion, Ultimate Concerns and Contamination are composed of a sum all references of the respective theme coded in the life story interviews. .211*** 5.887 5, 110 .167** 4.413 5, 110 .060 1.415 5, 110 .091 2.202 5, 110 .394*** -.308** 1.1462 -.236* -1.422 -4.508 -2.695 .132 .170 .336 .112 .134 .120 1.907 -.151 .891 .091 57 Table 10 presents the multivariate regression results of the T4 depending variables on redemptive gains, contamination, and violence exposure. The F statistic was not significant in the tests for generative concerns, however the full models accounted for a significant amount of variance for generative behaviors, life satisfaction, recent substance abuse and depression/anxiety at T4. The independent variables explained 13.5 percent of the variance in generative behaviors, 15.4 percent of the variance in life satisfaction, 15.6 percent of the variance in substance abuse, and 11.6 percent of the variance in depress/anxiety. Communion was a significant negative predictor of generative behaviors, while violence exposure was a significant positive predictor of life satisfaction, substance abuse, and depression/anxiety. 58 β -.055 -.012 -.090 .100 -.037 Table 10 OLS Regression Model Results of T4 Generativity, Life Satisfaction, Substance Use, and Mental Health on Types of Redemptive Gains Independent Variable Generative Behaviors Generative Concerns Satisfaction Substance Abuse Life T4 T4 T4 T4 T4 Depression/ Anxiety b b β b -.032 b .079 β .060 β -.004 .145 b .299 .005 .684 β .117 .002 .165 .665 -.547 -.108 -.117 -.103 -.168 2.169 .080 .068 1.159 -1.016 -1.471 -2.765 -3.952 -.270** Agency Communion Spirituality Contamination Violence Exposure R² F df * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001. Note: The independent variables Agency, Communion, Ultimate Concerns and Contamination are composed of a sum all references of the respective theme coded in the life story interviews. .156** 4.155 5, 112 .116* 2.93 5, 112 .135* 3.006 5, 96 .154* 3.505 5, 96 .020 .397 5, 96 .354*** -.317** -4.318 1.692 -.043 -.069 -.154 -.034 .199 .093 -.551 -.927 .068 .688 .751 -.051 -.033 .946 .251** 59 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION The findings of the present study have several implications for correctional responses to victimization and related trauma, and for future research. The qualitative results show that victimization and/or related trauma was discussed by the majority of the participants in the life story interview. This high rate of victimization indicates the importance of providing trauma- informed interventions to female offenders. Women’s risk for violence exposure and history of victimization should be screened for and responded to in correctional settings. Additionally, narratives of redemption and communion are related to generativity, and so these narrative themes should be considered in trauma-informed responses. Specifically, women seemed to make good of victimization and take on generative actions involving better caring for their children and others’ children, becoming more connected to loved ones, and in a few cases, pursing education and careers to serve other victims. Thus, making good of victimization does seem to be associated with some positive outcomes (i.e., goals and behaviors) and should be incorporated into correctional responses for women. Survivor narratives and other narrative therapies may be a useful therapeutic tool for women on probation and parole with histories of victimization. The quantitative findings revealed that violence exposure predicts substance abuse and depression/anxiety, and negatively predicts life satisfaction. For the sample, violence exposure was associated with diminished well-being, and so mental health and substance abuse screenings and treatment responses should take violence exposure into consideration. As expected, contamination was also negatively associated with life satisfaction at T2. Surprisingly, both redemption and gains in communion were negatively associated with generativity at T4. This finding was inconsistent, has it was not observed at T2. There are a few possible reasons for this. 60 Firstly, victimization-related generativity was not prevalent the life stories. Secondly, the generativity that was described by the participants may not have been captured in the quantitative scales of generative concerns and generative actions. Much of the generativity described was similar to gains in communion, in which the women described better ability to care for others and to help others who have been victimized. This finding suggests that the quantitative measures of generativity for women utilized in the study may not be well-suited to the sample of offenders with records of repeat offending. Such individuals who face high levels of victimization and may lack many resources available to pursue generative goals. Researchers and practitioners should consider the generative goals of women offenders that have been victimized. Generative themes revealed in the qualitative data include efforts to improve women’s relationships with children and other loved ones, and to encourage professional pursuits that lead to careers that involve helping other victims. This study has several limitations because it was carried out using available data. Measures of depression/anxiety were taken up to a year after the Life Story Interview in some cases. This is a limitation, since the data were not collected at or around the same time as the Life Story Interview which measured narrative identity, and although identity is quite stable, it is possible that it was reconstructed after the Life Story Interview. Another limitation is that this sample is composed of the most serious-level of female offenders (e.g., substance-involved with felony convictions, and with multiple convictions before the initial data collection). For this sample, there is not substantial variance in violence exposure and so these findings may not be generalizable to all women on probation or parole. Future research should apply these tests to a more general sample of women involved with the law. In addition, the available data did not measure self-esteem, which has been linked to redemption and contamination sequences 61 (McAdams & Bowman, 2001). Likewise, the available data did not include a measure of cultural and political factors, although research asserts that these factors are related to redemptive sequences (Miller et al., 2015; Pals and McAdams, 2004). Although the proposed study measures race, SES, and age, these variables are not comprehensive assessments of culture. Future research should take cultural influence and into account. More research is needed in order to contribute to the literature surrounding trauma narratives and the outcomes of women involved with the law. Evidence suggests that McAdams’ (2013) narrative identity theory is well-suited for examining this relationship. There is a need for more research with larger, more diverse samples than was used for prior studies. This thesis helps to fill this void by exploring the nature of victimization and identity for women with severe offense histories, and identifying themes related to women’s criminogenic risk and how some find silver linings in after victimization. More research is needed to inform the incorporation of women’s identity development in treatment. This information is useful in informing gender- responsive models. . 62 APPENDICES 63 1.1 We’re going to spend about 20 minutes on this next section. Pleasebeginbythinkingaboutyourlifeasifitwereabookornovel.Imaginethatthe book has a table of contents containing the titles of the main chapters in the story. Please describe very briefly what the main chapters in the book might be. a. Can you give each chapter a title? b. Note: Tell respondents that they can provide 2-7 chapters. c. Can you tell me just a little bit about what each chapter is about? d. Note: Tell respondents to give an overall plot summary of their story, chapter by chapter. e . How do we get from one chapter to the next? Key Scenes in the Life Story Appendix A Third Interview (T3) A.1 Life Story Interview (McAdams, 2008) Life Chapters Now that you have described the overall plot outline for your life, I would like you to focus in on a few key scenes that stand out in the story. A key scene would be an event or specific incident that took place at a particular time and place. Consider a key scene to be a moment in your life story that stands out for a particular reason – perhaps because it was especially good or bad, particularly vivid, important, or memorable. 1.2 High point. Please describe a scene, episode, or moment in your life that stands out as an especially positive experience. This might be the high point scene of your entire life, or else an especially happy, joyous, exciting, or wonderful moment in the story. Can you describe this high point scene in detail? a. What happened? b. When did this high point occur? c. Where did it occur? d. Who was involved? e. What were you thinking and feeling? f. Why do you think this particular moment was so good? g. What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 1.3 Low point. The second scene is the opposite of the first. Thinking back over your entire life, please identify a scene that stands out as a low point, if not the low point in your life story. Even though this event is unpleasant, I would appreciate your providing as much detail as you can about it. Can you describe this low point scene in detail? a. What happened? b. When did this low point occur? 64 c. Where did it occur? d. Who was involved? e. What were you thinking and feeling? f. Why do you think this particular moment was so good? g. What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 1.4 Turning point. Inlookingbackoveryourlife,itmaybepossibletoidentifycertainkeymomentsthatstandoutast urningpoints–episodesthatmarkedanimportantchangein you or your life story. If you cannot identify a key turning point that stands out clearly, please describe some event in your life where in you went through an important change of some kind. Can you describe this turning point in detail? a. What happened? b. When did this turning point occur? c. Where did it occur? d. Who was involved? e. What were you thinking and feeling? f. Why do you think this particular moment was so good? g. What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 1.5 Positive childhood memory. The fourth scene is an early memory – from childhood or your teen-aged years–that stands out as especially positive in some way. This would be a very positive, happy memory from your early years. Can you describe this good memory in detail? a. What happened? b. When did this positive childhood memory occur? c. Where did it occur? d. Who was involved? e. What were you thinking and feeling? f. Why do you think this particular moment was so good? g. What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 1.6 Negative childhood memory. Thefifthsceneisanearlymemory– fromchildhoodoryourteen-agedyears–that stands out as especially negative in some way. This would be a very negative, unhappy memory from your early years, perhaps entailing sadness, fear, or some other very negative emotional experience. Can you describe this bad memory in detail? a. What happened? b. When did this negative childhood memory occur? c. Where did it occur? d. Who was involved? e. What were you thinking and feeling? f. Why do you think this particular moment was so good? 65 g. What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 1.7 Vivid adult memory. Moving ahead to your adult years, please identify one scene that you have not already described in this section (in other words, do not repeat your highpoint, low point, or turning point scene) that stands out as especially vivid or meaningful. This would be an especially memorable, vivid, or important scene, positive or negative, from your adult years. Can you describe this scene in detail? a. What happened? b. When did this vivid adult memory occur? c. Where did it occur? d. Who was involved? e. What were you thinking and feeling? f. Why do you think this particular moment was so good? g. What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 1.8 Wisdom event. Please describe an event in your life in which you displayed wisdom. The episode might be one in which you acted or interacted in an especially wise way or provided wise counsel or advice, made a wise decision, or otherwise behaved in a particularly wise manner. a. What happened? b. When did this wisdom event occur? c. Where did it occur? d. Who was involved? e. What were you thinking and feeling? f. Why do you think this particular moment was so good? g. What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 1 . 9 Religious, spiritual, or mystical experience. Whether they are religious or not, many people report that they have had experiences in their lives where they felt a sense of the transcendent or sacred, a sense of God or some almighty or ultimate force, or a feeling of oneness with nature, the world, or the universe. Thinking back on your entire life, I would like you to identify an episode or moment in which you felt something like this. This might be an experience that occurred within the context of your own religious tradition, if you have one, or it may be a spiritual or mystical experience of any kind. Can you describe this transcendent experience in detail? a. What happened? b. When did this religious/spiritual experience occur? c. Where did it occur? d. Who was involved? e. What were you thinking and feeling? f. Why do you think this particular moment was so good? g. What do you think this scene says about who you are as a person? 66 Future Script 1.91The next chapter. Your life story includes key chapters and scenes from your past, as you have described them, and it also includes how you see or imagine your future. Please describe what you see to be the next chapter in your life. a. What is going to come next in your life story? b. Why do you imagine this for your future? 1.92Dreams, hopes, and plans for the future. Please describe your plans, dreams, or hopes for the future. a. When do you think these dreams and plans for the future will occur? b. Why do you have these dreams, hopes, and plans for the future? c. What do you hope to accomplish in the future in your life story? 1.93Life project. A life project is something that you have been working on and plan to work on in the future chapters of your life story. The project might involve your family or your work life, or it might be a hobby, avocation, or pastime. Can you describe any project that you are currently working on or plan to work on in the future? a. What is the project? b. How did you get involved in the project (or will you get involved in the project)? c. How do you think the project might develop? d. Why is this project important for you and/or for other people? 67 Appendix B First Interview (T1) Table B.1 Abuse/Trauma Scale (WRNA) NOTE: The following questions are copyrighted and cannot be used in other research without permission. To request permission, see https://www.uc.edu/womenoffenders.html I am going to ask you some questions about whether or not you have been physically or sexually abused as a child or adult. There are only four questions in this section, and if the questions are too difficult to answer, we will just move on to the next section. Please understand that the types of experiences that we would consider to be abusive include hitting, slapping, pushing, kicking, and threatening to hurt you. Don’t Know Refused No m Yes m m m m m Have you ever experienced physical abuse as a child? abuse_1@child Have you ever experienced physical abuse as an adult? abuse_1@adult m m Have you ever experienced sexual abuse as a child? abuse_2@child m m Have you ever experienced sexual abuse as an adult? abuse_2@adult m m 68 m m m m Table B.2 Type of Abuse Measure (WRNA) NOTE: The following questions are copyrighted and cannot be used in other research without permission. To request permission, see https://www.uc.edu/womenoffenders.html We would like to know if you have experienced serious forms of mistreatment as a child. Below is a list of some threatening, even abusive, behaviors. If you have experienced any of these acts, please check whether you experienced them infrequently (less than 5 times) or frequently (5 or more times). Check “never” if you have never experienced the act. Treatment as a child Thinking back to when you were a child, has anyone ever… LESS THAN NEVER 5 TIMES 5 OR MORE TIMES REFUSED treat_child_1 Pushed/shoved you treat_child_2 Thrown something at you treat_child_3 Kicked/hit you treat_child_4 Beat you treat_child_5 Dragged you treat_child_6 Scratched you treat_child_7 Bent your fingers/twisted your arm treat_child_8 Held you against a wall treat_child_9 Choked you treat_child_10 Burned/scalded you treat_child_11 Threatened to use weapons against you treat_child_12 Threatened to kill you treat_child_13 Threatened to harm you treat_child_14 Actually used a weapon against you treat_child_15 Forced you to do something embarrassing treat_child_16 Insulted, ridiculed, or humiliated you treat_child_17 Called you loser, failure, stupid, etc. treat_child_18 Said that you were ugly or unattractive treat_child_19 Locked you in some location 69 Table B.2 (cont’d) Treatment as an Adult Now we will ask you about your experiences as an adult. Again, please check whether you experienced them infrequently (less than 5 times) or frequently (5 or more times). Check “never” if you have never experienced the act. This section asks you about physical abuse. 5 OR MORE TIMES REFUSED Since you have been an adult, has anyone ever… NEVER LESS THAN 5 TIMES treat_adult_1 Slapped you treat_adult_2 Pushed/shoved you treat_adult_3 Thrown something at you treat_adult_4 Kicked/hit you treat_adult_5 Beat you treat_adult_6 Dragged you treat_adult_7 Scratched you treat_adult_8 Bent your fingers/twisted your arm treat_adult_9 Held you against a wall treat_adult_10 Choked you treat_adult_11 Threatened to use weapons against you treat_adult_12 Threatened to kill you treat_adult_13 Threatened to harm you treat_adult_14 Threatened to harm your children, loved ones, or pets treat_adult_15 Actually used a weapon against you 70 Table B.3 Neighborhood Crime Measure FOR THE PLACE YOU ARE LIVING NOW: neigh_3 Is it a safe neighborhood? neigh_4 Are there drugs in your neighborhood? neigh_5 Are there gangs in your neighborhood? neigh_6 Do you hear gun shots in your neighborhood? neigh_7 Are there break-ins in your neighborhood? neigh_8 Is there violence in your neighborhood? neigh_9 Have you ever been the victim of a crime in your neighborhood (i.e. assaulted, burglarized, robbed)? neigh_10 Do the police come into your neighborhood a lot? ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO ____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED 71 Table B.4 Unsafe Housing Measure (WRNA) NOTE: The following questions are copyrighted and cannot be used in other research without permission. To request permission, see https://www.uc.edu/womenoffenders.html Next are some questions about YOUR LIVING SITUATION. ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED living_sit_1 Do you feel safe in your home? living_sit_2 Is your current housing stable? Can you count on being able to live there for the foreseeable future? living_sit_3 Is your home environment free of violence? living_sit_4 Is your home environment free of substance abuse? living_sit_5 During the 18 months prior to your offense, how many times did you move your residence? living_sit_6 Will you be living on your own for the next several months? living_sit_7 If no, who will you be living with (relationship not name)? living_sit_8 Who are you living with at present (relationship not name)? living_sit_9 Are you at all concerned about your safety? living_sit_10 Within the last year, has domestic violence taken place in your home? ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____TIMES MOVED IN 18MONTHS PRIOR TO OFFENSE ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED _______________________RELATIONSHIP OF WHO LIVING WITH ____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED _______________________RELATIONSHIP OF WHO LIVING WITH ____LIVES ALONE ____DON’T KNOW ____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED ____YES _____NO____DON’T KNOW____REFUSED 72 B.5 PTSD Scale (WRNA) NOTE: The following questions are copyrighted and cannot be used in other research without permission. To request permission, see https://www.uc.edu/womenoffenders.html Q117 In your life, have you ever had any experience that was extremely frightening, horrible, or upsetting? m Yes (1) m No (2) abuse_3a Q118 CHECK ANY THAT APPLY If yes, IN THE PAST MONTH: q Have had nightmares about it OR thought about it when you did not want to (1) abuse_3c1 q Tried hard not to think about it OR went out of your way to avoid situations that reminded you of it. (2) abuse_3c2 q Were constantly on guard, watchful, or easily startled. (3) abuse_3c3 q Felt numb or detached from others, activities or your surroundings. (4) abuse_3c4 73 Appendix C Second Interview(T2) Table C.1 Loyola Generativity Scale (LGS) Q32 When I read each statement, answer "never" if the statement never applies to you. Answer "occasionally" if the statement only occasionally or seldom applies to you. Answer "fairly often" if the statement applies to you fairly often. Answer "very often" if the statement applies to you very often or nearly always. Never (1) Occasionally (2) Fairly Often (3) Very Often (4) I try to pass along the knowledge I have gained through my experiences. (1) t4_activities_1 I feel that other people need me. (2) t4_activities_2 I think I would like the work of a teacher. (3) t4_activities_3 I feel as though I have made a difference to many people. (4) t4_activities_4 I volunteer to work for a charity. (5) t4_activities_5 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 74 Table C.1 (cont’d) Never (1) Occasionally (2) Fairly Often (3) Very Often (4) I have made and created things that have had an impact on other people. (1) t4_activities_6 I try to be creative in most things that I do. (2) t4_activities_7 I think that I will be remembered for a long time after I die. (3) t4_activities_8 I believe that society CANNOT be responsible for providing food and shelter for all homeless people. (4) t4_activities_9 Others would say that I have made unique contributions to society. (5) t4_activities_10 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 75 Table C.1 (cont’d) Never (1) Occasionally (2) Fairly Often (3) Very Often (4) If I were unable to have children of my own, I would like to adopt children. (1) t4_activities_11 I have important skills that I try to teach others. (2) t4_activities_12 I feel that I have done nothing that will survive after I die. (3) t4_activities_13 In general, my actions have a positive effect on other people. (4) t4_activities_14 I feel as though I have done nothing of worth to contribute to others. (5) t4_activities_15 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 76 Table C.1 (cont’d) Never (1) Occasionally (2) Fairly Often (3) Very Often (4) I have made many commitments to many different kinds of people, groups, and activities in my life. (1) t4_activities_16 Other people say that I am a productive person. (2) t4_activities_17 I have a responsibility to improve the neighborhood in which I live. (3) t4_activities_18 People come to me for advice. (4) t4_activities_19 I feel as though my contributions will exist after I die. (5) t4_activities_20 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 77 Table C.2 Generativity Behavior Checklist (GBC) Q36 For each action, please tell us whether you have done it during the past TWO months, and if you have, whether you did it once or more than once. Once (2) More Than Once (3) Never (1) Taught somebody a skill. (1) t4_thingsyoudo_1 Served as a role model for a young person. (2) t4_thingsyoudo_2 Won an award or contest. (3) t4_thingsyoudo_3 Went to see a movie or play. (4) t4_thingsyoudo_4 Gave money to charity. (5) t4_thingsyoudo_5 Did volunteer work for a charity. (6) t4_thingsyoudo_6 Listened to a person tell me his or her personal information. (7) t4_thingsyoudo_7 Purchased a new car or major appliance (e.g., dishwasher, TV). (8) t4_thingsyoudo_8 Taught Sunday school or provided similar religious instruction. (9) t4_thingsyoudo_9 Taught somebody about right or wrong, good or bad. (10) t4_thingsyoudo_10 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 78 Table C.3 Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) Q31 Life Satisfaction Now I am going to read five statements and ask you how much or how little you agree with each. After I read each statement, tell me how much agree or disagree using these choices: strongly agree, agree, slightly agree, neither agree or disagree, slightly disagree, disagree, or strongly disagree. Please be open and honest in your responding. Strongl y Agree (1) Agre e (2) Slightl y Agree (3) Slightly Disagre e (5) Disagre e (6) Strongly Disagre e (7) Neither agree nor disagre e (4) In most ways my life is close to my ideal. (1) t4_lifesatisfaction_ 1 The conditions of my life are excellent. (2) t4_lifesatisfaction_ I am satisfied with my life. (3) t4_lifesatisfaction_ 2 3 So far I have gotten the important things I want in life. (4) t4_lifesatisfaction_ 4 If I could live my life over, I would change almost nothing. (5) t4_lifesatisfaction_ 5 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 79 C.4 Recent Substance Abuse Measure (WRNA) NOTE: The following questions are copyrighted and cannot be used in other research without permission. To request permission, see https://www.uc.edu/womenoffenders.html Q70 The next set of questions are about drugs and alcohol. Q71 Have you had any recent (past 6 months) conduct violations, law violations, or technical violations related to illegal drugs or alcohol use? m Yes (1) m No (2) m Don't Know (3) m Refused (4) t4_substance_2 Q72 During the past 6 months have you received a drug screen that was rated positive or diluted? Any positive or diluted drug screen applies. m Yes (1) m No (2) m Don't Know (3) m Refused (4) t4_substance_3 Q73 Do you associate with individuals who drink heavily or use illegal drugs? m Yes (1) m No (2) m Don't Know (3) m Refused (4) t4_substance_7 Q74 In the past 6 months, have you missed treatment appointments or stopped participating in support groups? m Yes (1) m No (2) m Does Not Apply (3) m Don't Know (4) m Refused (5) t4_substance_8 80 Q172 Does anyone in your home use illegal drugs or alcohol? m Yes (1) m No (2) m Don't know (3) m Refused (4) t4_substance_12 Q75 Are you currently using illegal drugs? m Yes (1) m No (2) m Don't know (3) m Refused (4) t4_substance_14a Q155 Are you currently using alcohol? m Yes (7) m No (8) m Don't know (9) m Refused (10) t4_substance_14b 81 Table D.1 Depression/Anxiety Measure (WRNA) Appendix D Fourth Interview (T4) NOTE: The following questions are copyrighted and cannot be used in other research without permission. To request permission, see https://www.uc.edu/womenoffenders.html Currently are you: Yes (1) No (2) m m m m m m m m m m m m Experiencing problems concentrating or staying focused? (1)T6_ment_symp_1a Experiencing mood swings – too many ups and downs? (2)T6_ment_symp_2a Experiencing a loss of appetite? (3)T6_ment_symp_3a Experiencing fears about the future, which are difficult to cope with? (4)T6_ment_symp_5a Having trouble sleeping because you are too worried about things? (5)T6_ment_symp_6a Worrying so much about things that you have trouble getting going and getting things done? (6)T6_ment_symp_7a 82 REFERENCES 83 REFERENCES M. K. (2004). Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Trauma in Youth in Juvenile Detention. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 61(4),403-410. Abram, K. M., Teplin, L. A., Charles, D. R., Longworth, S. L., McClelland, G. M., & Dulcan, Adler, J.M., Dunlop, W.L., Fivush, R., Lilgendahl, J.P., Lodi-Smith, J., McAdams, D.P., McLean, K.C., Pasupathi, M., & Syed, M. (2017). Research methods for studying narrative identity: A primer. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(5), 519- 527. Appleton, C. A. (2010). Life after life imprisonment. Oxford University Press. Belknap, J. (2007). The invisible woman: Gender, crime, and justice. (Third Edition).Belmont, Belknap, J., & Holsinger, K. (2006). The gendered nature of risk factors for delinquency. Feminist Criminology, 1, 48 –71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 1557085105282897 CA: Thomson Wadsworth. Blackburn, P. J. (2010). Creating space for preferred identities: Narrative practice conversations about gender and culture in the context of trauma. Journal of Family Therapy, 32(1), 4-26. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1111/j.1467-6427. 2009.00484.x Bloom, B., Owen, B., & Covington, S. (2004). Women offenders and the gendered effects of public policy. Review of Policy Research, 21(1). 31-48 Chesney-Lind, M., & Shelden, R. G. (2004). Girls, delinquency, and juvenile justice (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth. Cobbina, Jennifer E., Merry Morash, Deborah A. Kashey, and Sandi W. Smith (2014). Race, Neighborhood Danger, and Coping Strategies among Female Probationers and Parolees. Race and Justice 4 (1): 3-28. cycle of silence. Traumatology, 19(1). 73-81. and gender-responsive intervention for women in drug treatment. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 387-398. Courtney, D. &Maschi, T. (2012). Trauma and stress among older adults in prison: Breaking the Covington, S. S., Burke, C., Keaton, S., &Norcott, C. (2008). Evaluation of a trauma-informed Cullen, F. T., Agnew, R., & Wilcox, P. (2014). Criminological Theory: Past to Present (Fifth Daly, K. (1992). Women’s pathways to felony court: Feminist theories of lawbreaking and problems of representation. Southern California Review of Law and Women’s Studies, 2, 11-52. Edition). Oxford University Press. 84 generations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Daly, K. (1994). Gender, crime, and punishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. De St. Aubin, E., McAdams, D. P., & Kim, T. (2004). The generative society: Caring for future DeVeaux, Mika‘il. (2013). The trauma of the incarceration experience. Harvard Civil Rights- Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childhood and Society, 2nd Ed. Norton: New York. Gavazzi, S. M., Yarcheck, C. M., & Chesney-Lind, M. (2006). Global risk indicators and the role of gender in a juvenile detention sample. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 597–612. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0093854806288184 Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75. DOI: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 Civil Liberties Law Review, 48. 257-277. Greenfeld, L. A., & Snell, T. L. (1999). Women offenders. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice. world. New York: Oxford University Press. Gubrium, J. F., & Holstein, J. A. (2001). Institutional selves: Troubled identities in a postmodern Guetzkow, H. (1950). Unitizing and categorizing problems in coding qualitative data. Journal of Holsinger, K. (2000). Feminist perspectives on female offending: Examining real girls’ lives. Women & Criminal Justice, 12, 23–51. http://dx .doi.org/10.1300/J012v12n01_03 Clinical Psychology, 6(1), 47-58. Holtfreter, K., &Morash, M. (2003). The needs of women offenders: Implications for correctional programming. Women & Criminal Justice, 14, 137–160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J012v14n02_07 Igarashi, H., Levenson, M. R., & Aldwin, C. M. (2018). The development of wisdom: A social ecological approach. Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 1 – 9. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics. James, D. J., & Glaze, L. E. (2006). Mental health problems of prison and jail inmates. King, L. A., Scollon, C. K., Ramsey, C., & Williams, T. (2000). Stories of life transition: Subjective well-being and ego development in parents of children with Down Syndrome. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 509-536. 85 Toronto Press. Holstein, J. A. (Eds). Institutional selves: Troubled identities in a postmodern world. New York: Oxford University Press. Loseke, D. (2001). Lived realties and formula stories of battered women. In: Gubrium, J. F., & Maidment, M. R. (2006). Doing time on the outside. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Maruna, S., LeBel, T. P., & Lanier, C. S. (2004). Generativity behind bars: Some “redemptive Maruna, S. (2001). Making good: How ex-convicts reform and rebuild their lives. Washington Matos, M., Conde, R., Gonçalves, R., & Santos, A. (2015). Multiple victimization and social truth” about prison society. In: De St. Aubin, E., McAdams, D. P., & Kim, T. (Eds). The generative society: Caring for future generations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. DC: American Psychological Association. exclusion: A grounded analysis of the life stories of women. Journal of Humanist Psychology, 55(2), 223-246. 122. 363-396. Press, New York. Press, New York, NY. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 150, 390-395. Maxfield, M. G., & Widom, C. S. (1996). The cycle of violence: Revisited six years later. McAdams, D. P. (2013). The redemptive self: Stories Americans live by. Oxford University McAdams, D.P. (2006). The redemptive self: Stories Americans live by. Cambridge University McAdams, D. P. (2001). The psychology of life stories. Review of General Psychology, 5, 100- McAdams, D.P. (1995). What do we know when we know a person? Journal of Personality, 63, McAdams, D. P., & Bowman, P. J. (2001). Narrative life’s turning points: Redemption and contamination. In McAdams, D. P., Josselson, R., & Lieblich, A. (Eds.), Turns in the road: Narrative studies of lives in transition (3-34). American Psychological Association Press. Washington, D.C. McAdams, D. P., Diamond, A., de St. Aubin, E., & Mansfield, E. (1997). Stories of McAdams, D. P., Hart, H. M., & Maruna, S. (1998). The anatomy of generativity. In D. P. commitment: The psychosocial construction of generative lives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 678-694. McAdams and E. de St. Aubin (Eds.), Generativity and Adult Development: How and Why We Care for the Next Generation (pp. 7-43). Washington, DC: APA Press. 86 McAdams, D. P., & McLean, K. C. (2013). Narrative identity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 233-238. McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J.L. (2006). A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61, 204 – 217. developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674-701. and services. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press. to girls and their caretakers. Feminist Criminology, 9(4), 298-322. Miller, J., Carbone-Lopez, K., & Gunderman, M. V. (2015). Gendered narratives of self, addiction, and recovery among women methamphetamine users. In Presser, L. & Sandberg, S. (Eds.), Narrative criminology: Understanding stories of crime (69-95). New York University Press. Miller, P. J. (1994). Narrative practices: Their role in socialization and self-construction, in U. Neisser and R. Fivush (eds.), The remembering self: Construction and accuracy in the self-narrative, 158-79. Cambridge University Press. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A Morash, M. (2010). Women on probation and parole: A feminist critique of community programs Morash, M., Stevens, T., & Yingling, J. (2014). Focus on the family: Juvenile court responses Morash, M., Kashy, D. A., Cobbina, J. E., & Smith, S. W. (2017). Characteristics and context of women probationers and parolees we engage in violence. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854817719103 Morash, M., Kashy, D.A., Smith, S.W., & Cobbina, J. E. (2015). The effects of probation or Morash, M., Smith, S. W., Kashy, D. A., & Cobbina, J. E. (2017). Probation/Parole Officer Mulvey, P. (2013). The impact of mental illness on women’s pathways to the criminal justice Mumola, C. J., & Karberg, J. C. (2006). Drug use and dependence, state and federal prisoners, Owen, B. (1998). In the mix: Struggle and survival in a woman’s prison. Albany: State Interactions with Women Offenders: Do Relationship Style and Communication Pattern Predict Outcomes? [Data set]. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. https://doi.org/10.3886/E100410V1 parole agent relationship style and women offenders’ criminogenic needs on offenders’ responses to supervision interactions. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42(4), 412-434. DOI: 10.1177/0093854814551602 2004. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. University of New York Press. system. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, Atlanta, GA. 87 posttraumatic growth. Psychological Inquiry, 15(1), 65-69. Pals, J. L. (2006). Narrative identity processing of difficult life experiences: Pathways of personality development and positive self-transformation in adulthood. Journal of Personality, 74, 1079 -1110. Pals, J. L., & McAdams, D. P. (2004). The transformed self: A narrative understanding of Pals. J. L. (2000). Self-narrative of difficult life experiences in adulthood. Unpublished doctoral Pynoos, R. S., Fairbank, J. A., Steinberg, A. M., Amaya-Jackson, L., Gerrity, E., Mount, M. L., Reisig, M. D., Holtfreter, K., & Morash, M. (2006). Assessing recidivism risk across female et al. (2008). The National Child Traumatic Stress Network: Collaborating to improve the standard of care. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39(4), 389-395. pathways to crime. Justice Quarterly, 23, 384–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07418820600869152 dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. Royce Baerger, D., & McAdams, D. P. (1999). Life story coherence and its relation to psychological well-being. Narrative Inquiry, 9(1), 69-96. Journal of Personality, 72, 437-460. women probationers’ paths to incarceration. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 541-566. Using narrative therapy and mindfulness to treat alcohol abuse. In J. A. Hicks, & C. Routledge (Eds.), The experience of meaning in life: Classical perspectives, emerging themes, and controversies; the experience of meaning in life: Classical perspectives, emerging themes, and controversies (pp. 379-391, Chapter xii, 417 Pages) Springer Science + Business Media, New York, NY. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/10.1007/978-94-007-6527-6_28 Salisbury, E. J., & Van Voorhis, P. (2009). Gendered pathways: A quantitative investigation of Singer, J. A. (2004). Narrative identity and meaning-making across the lifespan: An introduction. Singer, J. A., Singer, B. F., & Berry, M. (2013). A meaning-based intervention for addiction: Shweder, R. A., Goodnow, J., Hatano, G., LeVine, R., Markus, H., and Miller, P.J. (1998). The cultural psychology of development; One mind, many mentalities. W. Damon (ed.), The handbook of child psychology, 865-937. New York: Wiley. Singleton, R., & Straits, B. (2010). Approaches to Social Research (5th Edition). Oxford Smith, C., & Thornberry, T. P. (1995). The relationship between childhood maltreatment and adolescent involvement in delinquency. Criminology, 23(4), 451-477. University Press. 88 serious mental illness among jail inmates. Psychiatric Services, 60, 761-765. girls’ trading sex for benefits. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 60(1), 62-81. Song, J., & Morash, M. (2015). Materialistic desires or childhood adversities as explanations for Steadman, H., Osher, F. C., Robbins, P. C., Case, B., & Samuels, S. (2009). Prevalence of Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (2004). Posttraumatic growth: Conceptual foundations and Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (1995). Trauma and transformation: Growing in the Thorne, A., & Nam, V. (2009). The storied construction of personality. The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology, Philip J Corr & Gerald Matthews eds. NY: Cambridge University Press. Truman, J. L. & Morgan, R. E. (2016). Criminal victimization, 2015. Washington D.C.: Bureau empirical evidence. Psychological Inquiry, 15(1), 1-18. aftermath of suffering. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. of Justice Statistics. Van Voorhis, P., Bauman, A., & Brushett, R. (2013). Revalidation of the Women's Risk Needs Assessment: Probation Results. Cincinnati, OH: University of Cincinnati. Vincze, O., Ilg, B., & Pólya, T. (2014). The role of narrative perspective in the elaboration of individual and historical traumas. In J. P. Forgas, O. Vincze& J. László (Eds.), Social cognition and communication; social cognition and communication (pp. 229-244, Chapter xiv, 350 Pages) Psychology Press, New York, NY. Winham, K. M., Engstrom, M., Golder, S., Renn, T., Higgins, G. E., and Logan, T. K. (2015). Childhood victimization, attachment, psychological distress, and substance use among women on probation and parole. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 85(2). 145-158. Wolf Harlow, C. (1999). Prior Abuse Reported by Inmates and Probationers. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. 89