PAPELES DEL PSICÓLOGO Vol. 43-1 Enero - Abril 2022

direct victims, but it also affects members of the nuclear and extended family. For instance, children from IPV victims have higher chances of being late into school, getting sick (e.g., respiratory, fever, diarrhea, anemia), or facing developmental delays. Research on interpersonal and social consequences of IPV in Latinas living in the US showed that severely battered women often have a weak social network and low social contact which reduces their chance to leave (Briones-Vozmediano et al., 2016; O’Neal & Beckman, 2017). Studies conducted with health providers at shelters for battered women in Spain identified that weak and ambivalent social and family networks are a result of IPV that turned into a barrier to leaving abusive relationships (Moriana Mateo, 2015). On a behavioral level, a systematic review on the socioemotional effects of IPV in Hispanics showed that victims frequently presented difficulties on interpersonal effectiveness, particularly, a limited repertoire of problem-solving and emotional communication (Blázquez-Alonso & Moreno-Manso, 2008). The combination of socio-economic and cultural barriers, as well as interpersonal and behavioral consequences of IPV, contribute Latinas to being held in abusive relationships which result in high levels of isolation and marginalization. Individual interventions for this particular population may be boosted by including strategies to strengthen the following interpersonal repertoires: (a) expressing emotions and needs, (b) establishing and maintaining interpersonal limits, and (c) asking for help. In addition, to overcome interpersonal and cultural barriers, aiding victims to identify nurturing environments in which those effective interpersonal behaviors would be acknowledged and maintained is crucial to strengthen social networks and contact alternative cultural practices. PSYCHOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS FOR IPV VICTIMS Interventions for reducing the effects of IPV have been conducted from different approaches. Eckhardt et al. (2013) conducted a review of intervention programs for IPV victims that were published in English and without a particular analysis over participants’ ethnicity. This study found that several treatment outcomes were evaluated in studies conducted with IPV victims, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), self-esteem, and social support. Examining treatment outcomes, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) showed good evidence in reducing PTSD and depression symptoms, as well as promising results on helping victims to transition from shelters to an independent life. Supportive group interventions showed promising but limiting evidence on social support and emotional distress. Therapeutic approaches based on contextual behavioral science have also shown positive effects on IPV victims’ functioning. Iverson et al. (2009) adapted Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (DBT) to a 12-sessions group modality for women victims of IPV, including the following strategies: (a) pre-treatment, (b) agreement of schedules and groups, (c) group skills (mindfulness, interpersonal effectiveness, emotional regulation, distress tolerance), and (d) transversal validation. This program decreased participants’ depressive symptoms and hopelessness while increasing social functioning and general psychiatric distress. This program shows promising results for continuing implementing contextual behavioral intervention with this population. CBT and DBT programs have mainly focused on reducing psychological symptoms and improving victims’ assertiveness. However, there is not enough information on how those treatments shape specific interpersonal behaviors hindered by IPV (DBT program mainly focused on assertion needs and interpersonal boundaries). They neither offered a culturally adapted intervention for reducing the impact of social practices on victims. Cultural variables have proven to be boosters and buffers of evaluation and intervention processes in psychological therapies (Bernal et al., 2009). In addition, they do not provide a rationale for therapists to manage interpersonal and cultural challenges when clients are hesitant to complete treatment and generalize behavioral changes. In this context, this paper offers some strategies based on Functional Analytic Psychotherapy that can be implemented by therapists struggling with particular cultural and interpersonal barriers presented by Latina’s victims of IPV. FUNCTIONAL ANALYTIC PSYCHOTHERAPY: A CONTEXTUAL BEHAVIOR THERAPY Functional Analytic Psychotherapy (FAP) is a contextual behavioral therapy focused on strengthening effective interpersonal repertoires through modifying behavioral mechanisms within the context of the therapeutic relationship (Kohlenberg & Tsai, 1991; Callaghan & Follette, 2020). In the latest years, some FAP authors have proposed models for interpersonal functioning (i.e., social connection, intimacy) by extending behavioral principles into middle-level terms (Maitland et al., 2017; Marin-Vila et al., 2020); however, those models are still under development and require more supporting evidence. Because of that, this article will be developed based on the original FAP model developed by Kohlenberg & Tsai (1991). In FAP, therapists provide natural social reinforcement within the therapeutic setting to shape clients’ effective interpersonal behaviors (Clinically Relevant Behaviors 2; CRB2s) such as emotional communication, asserting needs, conflict resolution, and bidirectional communication (Callaghan, 2006). In addition, FAP seeks to reduce problematic interpersonal repertoires (Clinically Relevant Behaviors 1; CRB1) that include hiding emotions, minimizing needs and opinions, establishing weak interpersonal limits, isolating, and concealing information from meaningful relationships (Holman et al., 2017; Kanter et al., 2020). FAP procedures include implementing five therapeutic rules by therapists (Kohlenberg & Tsai, 1991). Rule 1 is therapists’ active observations in order to identify clients’ Clinically Relevant Behaviors (CRBs) within the therapeutic interaction. Rule 2 involves therapists’ behaviors in the services of evoking CRBs. Rule 3 includes therapists’ implementation of contingent reinforcement. When clients present CRB2s, therapists provide positive natural reinforcers (e.g., support, validation, acknowledgment, warmth) to enhance clients’ interpersonal effective behavior (TCBR2). In the case that clients emit problematic interpersonal behaviors (CRB1s) such as shutting down, minimizing themselves, concealing, etc., therapists apply differential reinforcement of alternative behaviors to reduce ineffective behaviors and create the opportunity for CRB2s (TCRB1). Rule 4 is the action by which therapists check whether their implementation of contingent reinforcement was or not effective. Finally, through rule 5 therapists promote generalization and discrimination of interpersonal behaviors from the therapeutic setting to the everyday life environment (Kohlenberg & Tsai, 1991; Kanter et al., 2010; Holman et al., 2017). FAP has been implemented as a booster intervention for several USING FAP FOR SUPPORTING LATINAS’ VICTIMS OF IPV 76 A r t i c l e s