Episode-Specific Conflict Tactics Questionnaire (ESCTQ)

The EpisodeSpecific Conflict Tactics Questionnaire (ESCTQ) is a tool used to measure the frequency and severity of intimate partner violence. It is designed to assess the frequency and severity of physical, psychological, and sexual violence that occurs within a single episode of conflict. The ESCTQ was developed in 2004 by researchers at the University of Washington and is based on the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS). The CTS is a widely used measure of intimate partner violence, but it does not provide information about the severity of the violence or the context in which it occurs. The ESCTQ was designed to address these limitations by providing a more detailed assessment of the violence that occurs within a single episode of conflict. The ESCTQ consists of two parts: a frequency scale and a severity scale. The frequency scale assesses the frequency of physical, psychological, and sexual violence that occurred during the episode of conflict. The severity scale assesses the severity of the violence that occurred during the episode. The ESCTQ is a useful tool for researchers and clinicians who are interested in understanding the dynamics of intimate partner violence. It provides a detailed assessment of the violence that occurs within a single episode of conflict, which can help to identify patterns of violence and inform interventions. Additionally, the ESCTQ can be used to assess changes in violence over time, which can help to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. Overall, the ESCTQ is a valuable tool for assessing the frequency and severity of intimate partner violence. It provides a detailed assessment of the violence that occurs within a single episode of conflict, which can help to identify patterns of violence and inform interventions.


1.    I tried to change the subject.
2.    I compromised with him/her.
3.    I calmly discussed the issue.
4.    I avoided him/her.
5.    I showed concern about his/her feelings and thoughts.
6.    I used threats.
7.    I avoided the issue.
8.    I explored solutions with him/her.
9.    I criticized an aspect of his/her personality.
10.I sought a mutually beneficial solution.
11.I shouted at him/her.
12.I tried to postpone the issue as long as possible.
13.I reasoned with him/her in a give and take manner.
14.I tried to make him/her feel guilty.
15.I changed the topic of discussion.
16.I expressed my trust in him/her.
17.I was sympathetic to his/her position.
18.I blamed him/her for causing the conflict.
19.I teased him/her.
20.I was hostile.
21.I ignored the issue.
22.I showed that I lost my temper.
23.I talked about abstract things instead of the conflict issue.
24.I accepted my fair share of responsibility for the conflict.
25.I criticized his/her behavior.
26.I focused on the meaning of the words more than the conflict issue.
27.I tried to understand him/her.
28.I tried to intimidate him/her.
29.I ignored his/her thoughts and feelings.
30.I told him/her how to behave in the future.
31.I denied that there was any problem or conflict.
32.I was sarcastic in my use of humor.
33.I kept my partner guessing what was really on my mind.
34.I avoided the issue by focusing on how we were arguing instead of what we were arguing about.
35.I blamed the conflict on an aspect of his/her personality.
36.I explained why there was no problem at all.
 
 
Avoidance  (alpha .80)‚ Integration (alpha .91) ‚ Criticism (alpha .90)‚ Anger (alpha .80) and  Denial (alpha .80).
 
Not at All‚ Once or Twice‚ Several Times‚ A Good Amount‚ Many Times
 
 

Canary‚ D. J.‚ Cunningham‚ E. M.‚ & Cody‚ M. J. (1988). Goal types‚ gender‚ and locus of control in managing interpersonal conflict. Communication Research‚ 15‚ 426-446.

Canary‚ D. J. & Cupach‚ W. R. (1988). Relational and episodic ch‎aracteristics associated with conflict tactics. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships‚ 5(3)‚ 305-325.

Canary‚ Daniel J. & Spitzberg‚ Brian H. (1989). A Model of the Perceived Competence of Conflict Strategies. Human Communication Research; 15(4): 630–649.

Canary‚ Daniel J. & Spitzberg‚ Brian H. (1990). Attribution biases and associations between conflict strategies and competence outcomes. Communication Monographs; 57(2): 139-151

German‚ Nicole Marie. (2013). Assessment of Disharmony and Disaffection. Auburn University. Doctoral  thesis.

x