ORIGINAL ARTICLE Aggressive Cognitions of Violent Versus Nonviolent Spouses Kahni Clements Æ Amy Holtzworth-Munroe Published online: 20 April 2007 Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007 Abstract This study extends previous research on the relationship between aggressive cognition and intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration by comparing the aggressive cognitions of both husbands and wives (not just husbands) in an actual (not hypothetical) relationship problem discussions across three groups of couples—bi- directionally violent (V), nonviolent but maritally distressed (NVD), and nonviolent and nondistressed (NVND). Further extending previous work, across these groups, we also compared spouses’ inferences of aggressive cognitions in their partners’ thoughts and objective observers’ inferences of aggressive cognitions. Violent spouses, whether male or female, had significantly more aggressive cognitions than NVD and NVND spouses. Findings are discussed in relation to how they extend past research and their clinical implications. Keywords Intimate partner violence Á Aggressive cognitions Introduction Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious problem in this country. Each year, 12–14% of married couples experience husband physical aggression and nearly two million women are severely assaulted by their male partners (Shafer, Caetano, & Clark, 2002; Straus & Gelles, 1990). Relationship violence has a variety of serious negative consequences, including physical injury and psychological harm, for both partners and children in violent homes (e.g., Holtzworth-Munroe, Smutzler, & Sandin, 1997). Researchers have examined individual difference correlates of male IPV, seeking to identify variables, ideally derived from theory, that distinguish violent from nonviolent husbands. Such factors might be risk markers for violence, or variables that cause or K. Clements Á A. Holtzworth-Munroe (&) Department of Psychology, Indiana University, 1101 East 10th Street, Bloomington, IN 47405-7007, USA e-mail: holtzwor@indiana.edu Cogn Ther Res (2008) 32:351–369 DOI 10.1007/s10608-007-9139-9 123