This literature review seeks to explain and address the controversies surrounding the evaluation of the effectiveness of Batter Intervention Programs (BIPs). This review aims to explore the two predominant programmatic approaches to intervening for batterers, including proposed alternative treatment programs, and current research on the effectiveness of BIP. This review will also discuss important issues related to evaluation methodology that inform the design of this research project. Programmatic Approaches Drummer intervention programs operate primarily according to two main treatment models: a psychoeducational approach and a cognitive behavioral approach. Developed in the early 1980s, the Duluth Model is a psycho-educational approach to intervening against abusers that is heavily influenced by feminist theory and therefore gender-based (Herman, Rotunda, Williamson, & Vodanovich, 2014). This model currently constitutes the predominant approach to intervention against batterers: according to a survey conducted by Price and Rosenbaum (2009), 53% of the programs in their sample are identified as “Duluth model-oriented.” According to Herman et al. (2014), one of the main goals of the Duluth Model is behavior modification through the use of the “Power and Control Wheel” which identifies problematic attitudes and behaviors and the “Equality Wheel” which promotes a more constructive perspective on relationship roles Drawing on their foundations in feminist theory, Duluth Model programs propose that cultural and social values ​​that promote men's dominance and control over women are the root cause of intimate partner violence. This philosophical orientation dictates treatment strategies that focus on tension reduction, communication, and… halfway through the paper… basis for attachment theory.” Sonkin and Dutton (2003) also recognize that there is currently no specific model for such treatment. Abuser intervention rooted in attachment theory promotes the idea of ​​a “violent personality,” and this approach may problematize the individual rather than their behavior. Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994) examined 15 types of abusers previously established in the literature to develop three descriptive dimensions used to differentiate subtypes of abusers. These dimensions measure the severity of the marital violence, the generality of the violence, and any psychopathology or personality disorder the abuser may have (Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994). Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994) used these three dimensions to theorize three subtypes of abusers: family-only, dysphoric/borderline, and generally violent/antisocial..