Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory

1. Abstract

The Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory (UPBI) is a comprehensive psychometric assessment tool developed by Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Russell E. Palarea, and colleagues to operationalize, quantify, and evaluate the incidence, frequency, and severity of relational pursuit, post-breakup harassment, and intimate partner stalking victimization. Comprising 26 behavioral items, the instrument is structurally divided into two primary dimensions: Mild Unwanted Pursuit Behaviors (Items 1–13), capturing persistent, intrusive courtship and communicative attempts such as unwanted phone calls, electronic communications, and unexpected appearances; and Severe Unwanted Pursuit Behaviors (Items 14–26), assessing overt intimidation, surveillance, explicit threats of harm or homicide, physical destruction of property, and physical or sexual assault following relationship dissolution. The UPBI utilizes a multi-tiered response protocol: respondents report the occurrence of each behavior (Yes, No, Not Applicable), the temporal frequency of the contact (ranging from more than daily to less than monthly), their personal behavioral reaction (reply vs. non-reply), and the emotional or relational valence of that response (positive or negative). Psychometric evaluations demonstrate strong internal consistency across samples, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients typically exceeding .80 for the total inventory and subscales. The instrument demonstrates robust convergent validity with standardized measures of intimate partner violence, post-traumatic stress symptomatology, depressive affect, and fear appraisals. It also exhibits discriminative utility in differentiating non-threatening post-dissolution boundary ambiguity from dangerous obsession and legal stalking behaviors. As a pivotal instrument cataloged by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in its compendium of intimate partner violence measures, the UPBI serves as an indispensable empirical and diagnostic resource for clinical assessment, legal risk evaluation, and relational aggression research.

2. Keywords

Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory, stalking victimization, post-breakup harassment, intimate partner violence, obsession, relational intrusion, hyperintimacy, psychometrics, relational dissolution, threat assessment

3. Authors

The Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory was authored and developed by:

• Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Ph.D. — Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of South Alabama (later affiliated with the University of North Carolina at Charlotte). Dr. Langhinrichsen-Rohling is an internationally recognized scholar in interpersonal violence, trauma, marital discord, and suicidal behavior.
• Russell E. Palarea, Ph.D. — Operational and behavioral psychologist, Threat Assessment Group and Operational Psychology Services, LLC. Dr. Palarea specializes in threat assessment, stalking management, workplace violence prevention, and behavioral risk analysis for governmental and corporate entities.
• Janie Cohen, M.S. — Clinical researcher and collaborator on post-dissolution relational dynamics, University of South Alabama.
• Martin L. Rohling, Ph.D. — Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of South Alabama; clinical neuropsychologist specializing in statistical methodology, meta-analysis, and psychological assessment.

4. Purpose

The primary clinical and research objective of the Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory (UPBI) is to systematically identify, categorize, and quantify the spectrum of unwanted intrusive activities that occur after the termination of a romantic attachment or marriage. Romantic breakups are ubiquitous developmental transitions; however, the trajectory of relationship dissolution diverges significantly between healthy boundary renegotiation and escalating, intrusive campaigns of harassment. The UPBI addresses a profound methodological gap in relationship science by distinguishing between benign, albeit distressing, persistent reconciliation attempts and high-risk stalking conduct that portends severe physical danger and profound psychological trauma.

From a theoretical perspective, the UPBI was engineered to operationalize unwanted pursuit behaviors along a dimensional continuum rather than relying on binary legalistic thresholds of criminal stalking. Legal statutes governing stalking frequently necessitate establishing both a continuous course of conduct and an explicit, objectively verifiable induction of reasonable fear in the victim. In contrast, psychological research demonstrates that sustained low-level intrusive behaviors (such as repetitive uninvited messaging, public surveillance, and third-party inquiries) induce debilitating chronic hypervigilance, psychological fatigue, and anxiety long before an overt physical threat or violent assault transpires. The UPBI enables investigators and clinicians to map this behavioral trajectory with granular fidelity.

In clinical, legal, and campus counseling settings, the UPBI is used for multi-method threat assessments and safety planning protocols. By recording not only the objective occurrence and frequency of pursuit acts but also whether the victim responded and how they evaluated that response, the inventory allows mental health practitioners and victim advocates to assess victim vulnerability, safety strategies, and boundary consistency. Furthermore, it aids in identifying dangerous escalation markers—such as the transition from mild surveillance to property damage, weapon-related threats, pet abuse, or sexual coercion—facilitating rapid, evidence-informed crisis intervention, protective order applications, and behavioral containment strategies.

5. Psychological Construct

The psychological construct evaluated by the UPBI is Unwanted Pursuit Behavior (UPB), conceptualized as an unwanted, repeated, and boundary-violating pattern of intrusive communicative, surveillance, or proximity-seeking actions enacted by an individual toward an estranged intimate partner following relationship termination. Unlike reciprocal post-breakup ambivalence, UPB is explicitly characterized by its uninvited, non-consensual nature from the perspective of the recipient.

The inventory operationalizes this overarching construct through two distinct behavioral dimensions:

Mild Unwanted Pursuit Behaviors (Items 1–13)

The Mild Acts subscale captures persistent efforts to re-establish proximity, elicit communication, or monitor the ex-partner that do not intrinsically involve direct expressions of physical violence. These actions frequently masquerade as benign attempts at romantic reconciliation, unannounced check-ins, or distress over the dissolution. Representative behaviors encompass:

• Persistent mediated contact: Leaving unwanted phone calls, voicemail messages, electronic communications (emails, faxes, pagers, internet chat rooms), or unsolicited gifts.
• Direct conversational intrusion: Engaging the target in forced or unwelcome telephonic or face-to-face dialogues, or attempting to hand over letters and gifts in person.
• Indirect social surveillance: Infiltrating the victim’s social sphere by soliciting information about their whereabouts, activities, or dating life from friends, family, or professional associates without consent.
• Unsolicited spatial presence: Systematically orchestrating unannounced visits to the target’s residence, workplace, or academic campus, loitering outside relevant physical premises, and deliberately engineering “accidental” encounters.

Severe Unwanted Pursuit Behaviors (Items 14–26)

The Severe Acts subscale delineates aggressive, intimidating, coercive, and overtly violent actions that pose unambiguous risks to psychological stability and physical survival. These behaviors cross the boundary from relational intrusiveness into criminal intimidation, physical battery, and domestic stalking. Dimensional indicators include:

• Overt spatial surveillance and pursuit: Actively tailing or physically stalking the individual during their daily transit.
• Verbal and psychological intimidation: Formulating implied, veiled, or direct explicit threats of homicide or severe physical injury directed at the victim, their close relatives, or companion animals.
• Coercive blackmail and reputation sabotage: Extorting the victim through threats to disclose sensitive, embarrassing, or defamatory private information, and actively executing such disclosures to destroy social and professional capital.
• Instrumental and property violence: Stealing personal belongings, committing intentional vandalism against real estate or vehicles, and threatening the victim with lethal weapons.
• Physical and sexual assault: Perpetrating non-fatal physical injuries, kidnapping, unlawful restraint, or enforcing non-consensual sexual contact following the breakup.

6. Theoretical Framework

The conceptual foundation of the Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory rests upon the intersection of Attachment Theory, Relational Goal Pursuit Theory, and Threat Management Formulations of intimate partner stalking.

Attachment Theory and Separation Distress

Under attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969; Hazan & Shaver, 1987), romantic relationships represent primary adult attachment bonds. The involuntary termination of an attachment bond inevitably activates the attachment behavioral system, prompting intense separation distress and proximity-seeking mechanisms. In individuals exhibiting anxious or insecure attachment orientations, relational dissolution triggers catastrophic anxieties of abandonment, affective dysregulation, and an inability to mourn the lost relationship. Consequently, the pursuer activates hyperactivating strategies, manifesting as obsessive rumination, persistent uninvited outreach, and desperate attempts to force the attachment figure to re-engage, which form the phenotypic behaviors measured in the UPBI’s mild subscale.

Relational Goal Pursuit Theory

Formulated by Cupach and Spitzberg (2004), Relational Goal Pursuit Theory posits that unwanted pursuit emerges when an individual links the attainment of an overarching, highly desirable life goal (e.g., self-worth, relational happiness) exclusively to union with a specific person. When the pursuer encounters rejection, this goal linkage fosters obsessive cognitive activation. Rather than relinquishing the unattainable relational goal, the pursuer experiences self-regulation failure and rationalizes that escalation of pursuit intensity will eventually convince the target to reconcile. As the victim erects firmer boundaries or refuses communication, the pursuer views these boundaries as barriers to be overcome rather than definitive terminations, leading to behavioral escalation from mild intrusive actions to severe, punitive aggression when thwarting becomes unbearable.

Coercive Control and Threat Escalation Dynamics

The severe spectrum of the UPBI draws heavily on Evan Stark’s framework of coercive control and operational threat assessment paradigms (Fein, Vossekuil, & Holden, 1995). When persistent relational courtship fails, pursuers high in narcissistic entitlement, antisocial traits, or borderline rage shift their goal orientation from reconciliation to subjugation and retribution. Rejection is perceived as an intolerable narcissistic injury. In this secondary phase, behavioral manifestations transition into overt territorial surveillance, sabotage, intimidation, and direct interpersonal violence, which the UPBI quantifies as a distinct, high-risk operational continuum.

7. Validity

The construct, criterion, and concurrent validity of the Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory have been substantiated across multiple empirical studies investigating college cohorts, community adult samples, and clinical forensic populations.

Construct and Structural Validity

Construct validity is evidenced by the UPBI’s capacity to operationalize post-dissolution relational intrusions along a coherent gradient from persistent courtship to dangerous aggression. Studies comparing individuals subjected to normative post-breakup grief versus clinically defined stalking victims reveal robust differences in UPBI severity scores. The distinction between the 13-item Mild scale and the 13-item Severe scale has been supported by differential associations with legal intervention thresholds; severe items correlate almost exclusively with criminal harassment criteria, whereas mild items are prevalent across broader post-dissolution samples.

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

The UPBI demonstrates pronounced convergent validity with established measures of intimate partner conflict and psychological morbidity:

• Intimate Partner Violence: Scores on both the mild and severe subscales correlate significantly with the Conflict Tactics Scales-2 (CTS-2), specifically the psychological aggression, physical assault, and injury subscales ($r$ values ranging from .35 to .62).
• Psychological Distress and Trauma: UPBI victimization scores are strongly correlated with elevated symptomatology on the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and measures of post-traumatic stress such as the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R). Victims reporting high-frequency severe acts routinely meet diagnostic thresholds for clinical trauma.
• Discriminant Utility: Discriminant validity has been demonstrated by showing weak or negligible correlations with broad, non-relational personality traits (such as openness to experience) and general academic or occupational aptitude, verifying that the UPBI measures interpersonal pathology rather than generalized negative affectivity.

Predictive and Evaluative Utility

Predictive validity research confirms that high initial scores on the UPBI Severe subscale, coupled with a high calculated Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Severity Index, significantly predict subsequent applications for civil protective orders, geographic relocation by victims, and subsequent episodes of physical assault by the estranged partner.

8. Reliability

The Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory demonstrates robust psychometric reliability across independent empirical investigations.

Internal Consistency

In the foundational validation investigation conducted by Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Palarea, Cohen, and Rohling (2000), internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha) for the instrument were consistently high:

• Total Scale (26 items): $\alpha = .88$ to $.92$, reflecting exceptional inter-item homogeneity.
• Mild Acts Subscale (Items 1–13): $\alpha = .80$ to $.85$, confirming that persistent communicative and surveillance items capture a coherent dimensional pattern.
• Severe Acts Subscale (Items 14–26): $\alpha = .78$ to $.86$, an impressive figure given the lower base rate of severe violent acts in normative post-dissolution populations.

Stability and Test-Retest Metrics

Although the inventory assesses retrospective behavioral occurrences across a distinct post-breakup window, stability evaluations measuring reported victimization across multi-wave longitudinal studies have revealed high test-retest reliability ($r > .80$ over 4-to-8-week intervals). Split-half reliability coefficients similarly confirm that both halves of the instrument yield stable estimates of victim experiences.

9. Factor Analysis

The structural composition of the UPBI has undergone rigorous psychometric evaluation using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis.

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)

Early exploratory factor analyses using principal axis factoring with oblimin (oblique) rotation supported a two-factor dimensional solution that matches the theoretical framework:

• Factor 1: Mild / Intrusive Relational Pursuit: Accounting for the largest portion of common variance, this factor comprises Items 1 through 13. High factor loadings ($lambda = .48$ to $.76$) are observed for unwanted phone calls, electronic messages, soliciting information from third parties, and arriving unannounced at the target’s home or workplace.
• Factor 2: Severe / Threatening and Violent Stalking: This factor encompasses Items 14 through 26, exhibiting strong factor loadings ($lambda = .52$ to $.81$) for overt following, explicit threats of homicide, property destruction, brandishing weapons, physical injury, and forced sexual acts.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)

Subsequent confirmatory investigations evaluated alternative models, including a unidimensional model, an orthogonal two-factor model, and an oblique two-factor model. The correlated two-factor model demonstrated superior fit indices across empirical samples:

• Chi-Square / Degree of Freedom Ratio: $chi^2 / df < 2.5$
• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): $> .92$
• Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI): $> .90$
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): $le .055$ (90% CI [.042, .068])
• Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR): $le .06$

These confirmatory findings confirm that while mild intrusive pursuit and severe stalking aggression share common variance (inter-factor correlations typically range between $r = .45$ and $.60$), they remain psychometrically distinct constructs that warrant separate calculation and clinical interpretation.

10. Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Instrument Name: Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory (UPBI)
• Alternative Title: Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Scale
• Target Population: Adolescents and adults who have experienced the dissolution of a romantic relationship, dating partnership, cohabitation, or marriage.
• Administration Format: Paper-and-pencil questionnaire, computerized survey, or structured clinical interview.
• Item Count: 26 specific behavioral items, supplemented by qualitative contextual descriptions.
• Subscales:
  • Mild Acts Subscale: Items 1 through 13
  • Severe Acts Subscale: Items 14 through 26
• Response Dimensions:
  • Occurrence: Did the contact occur? [Yes, No, N/A]
  • Frequency of Contact:
    • 1 = More than daily
    • 2 = Daily
    • 3 = Weekly
    • 4 = Monthly
    • 5 = Less than monthly
  • Recipient Response: Did you reply to the contact? [Yes, No]
  • Response Valence: Was your response Positive or Negative? [P, N] (Evaluated specifically for mild items 1–13)
• Scoring Protocols:
  • Total Endorsement Score: Calculated by summing the total number of distinct pursuit behaviors endorsed with “Yes” across all 26 items (range: 0–26).
  • Subscale Scores: Sum of endorsed items within the Mild (range: 0–13) and Severe (range: 0–13) subsets.
  • Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Severity Index (Weighted Composite): Computed by identifying only those behaviors that generated a negative impact on the victim. These negative behaviors are weighted by their temporal frequency score. Items belonging to the Severe Acts subscale (Items 14–26) are double-weighted to reflect their severe physical and psychological danger. (Note: Negative emotional response is assumed for items 14–26 due to their severe, threatening nature).
• Qualitative Section: A structured open-ended prompt asking respondents to narrate the typical pattern, frequency, and escalation of contact following the breakup.

11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory was developed in 1998 by Russell E. Palarea and Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling, with its formal peer-reviewed psychometric validation published in 2000 in the journal Violence and Victims. The full instrument, scoring algorithms, and validation metrics are published in the public domain for research and clinical assessment purposes, notably cataloged by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Measuring Intimate Partner Violence Victimization and Perpetration: A Compendium of Assessment Tools (pp. 99–100).

The scale is generally accessible free of charge for non-commercial academic research, pedagogical use, and clinical victim advocacy. Researchers and clinicians intending to implement the UPBI in formal investigations, electronic health record systems, or commercial applications should cite the primary validation publication and contact Dr. Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling or Dr. Russell E. Palarea to ensure adherence to testing standards and obtain permission for proprietary distributions.

12. References

• Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. Basic Books.
• Cupach, W. R., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2004). The dark side of relationship pursuit: From attraction to obsession and stalking. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610225
• Fein, R. A., Vossekuil, B., & Holden, G. A. (1995). Threat assessment: An approach to prevent targeted violence. National Institute of Justice Research in Action, NCJ 155094.
• Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511
• Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Palarea, R. E., Cohen, J., & Rohling, M. L. (2000). Breaking up is hard to do: Unwanted pursuit behaviors following the dissolution of a romantic relationship. Violence and Victims, 15(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.15.1.73
• Palarea, R. E., & Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J. (1998). Unwanted Pursuit Behavior Inventory. Unpublished measurement instrument, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL.
• Saltzman, L. E., Fanslow, J. L., McMahon, P. M., & Shelley, G. A. (1999/2002). Measuring intimate partner violence victimization and perpetration: A compendium of assessment tools. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. https://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/pub-res/IPV_Compendium.pdf
• Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (2007). The state of the art of stalking: Taking stock of the emerging literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12(1), 64–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2006.05.001
• Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: The entrapment of women in personal life. Oxford University Press.

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)