Sarah DeGue

A systematic review of primary prevention strategies for sexual violence perpetration

This systematic review examined 140 outcome evaluations of primary prevention strategies for sexual violence perpetration. The review had two goals: 1) to describe and assess the breadth, quality, and evolution of evaluation research in this area; and 2) to summarize the best available research evidence for sexual violence prevention practitioners by categorizing programs with regard to their evidence of effectiveness on sexual violence behavioral outcomes in a rigorous evaluation. The majority of sexual violence prevention strategies in the evaluation literature are brief, psycho-educational programs focused on increasing knowledge or changing attitudes, none of which have shown evidence of effectiveness on sexually violent behavior using a rigorous evaluation design. Based on evaluation studies included in the current review, only three primary prevention strategies have demonstrated significant effects on sexually violent behavior in a rigorous outcome evaluation: Safe Dates (Foshee et al., 2004); Shifting Boundaries (building-level intervention only, Taylor, Stein, Woods, Mumford, & Forum, 2011); and funding associated with the 1994 U.S. Violence Against Women Act (VAWA; Boba & Lilley, 2009). The dearth of effective prevention strategies available to date may reflect a lack of fit between the design of many of the existing programs and the principles of effective prevention identified by Nation et al. (2003).

A Systematic Qualitative Review of Risk and Protective Factors for Sexual Violence Perpetration

The current review summarized results of 191 published empirical studies that examined the risk and protective factors for sexual violence perpetration. Studies in the review examined factors for perpetration by and against adolescents and adults, by male and female perpetrators, and by those who offended against individuals of the same sex or opposite sex. Factors associated with child sexual abuse (CSA) perpetration were not included. In all, 2 societal and community factors, 23 relationship factors, and 42 individual-level factors were identified. Of these 67 factors, consistent significant support for their association with SV was found for 35, nonsignificant effects were found for 10, 7 factors had limited or sample-specific evidence that they were associated with SV but were in need of further study, and 15 demonstrated mixed results. The factors identified in the review underscore the need for comprehensive prevention programs that target multiple risk and protective factors as well as factors that occur across the social ecology. Moreover, we identified two domains of factors—the presence and acceptance of violence and unhealthy sexual behaviors, experiences, or attitudes—that had consistent significant associations with SV but are not typically addressed in prevention programs. Therefore, SV prevention may also benefit from learning from effective strategies in other areas of public health, namely sexual health and youth violence prevention.

Bullying and suicidal ideation and behaviors: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Over the last decade there has been increased attention to the association between bullying involvement (as a victim, perpetrator, or bully-victim) and suicidal ideation/behaviors. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the association between bullying involvement and suicidal ideation and behaviors. METHODS: We searched multiple online databases and reviewed reference sections of articles derived from searches to identify cross-sectional studies published through July 2013. Using search terms associated with bullying, suicide, and youth, 47 studies (38.3% from the United States, 61.7% in non-US samples) met inclusion criteria. Seven observers independently coded studies and met in pairs to reach consensus. RESULTS: Six different meta-analyses were conducted by using 3 predictors (bullying victimization, bullying perpetration, and bully/victim status) and 2 outcomes (suicidal ideation and suicidal behaviors). A total of 280 effect sizes were extracted and multilevel, random effects meta-analyses were performed. Results indicated that each of the predictors were associated with risk for suicidal ideation and behavior (range, 2.12 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.67–2.69] to 4.02 [95% CI, 2.39–6.76]). Significant heterogeneity remained across each analysis. The bullying perpetration and suicidal behavior effect sizes were moderated by the study’s country of origin; the bully/victim status and suicidal ideation results were moderated by bullying assessment method. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrated that involvement in bullying in any capacity is associated with suicidal ideation and behavior. Future research should address mental health implications of bullying involvement to prevent suicidal ideation/behavior.

Evaluation of the Green Dot Bystander Intervention to Reduce Interpersonal Violence Among College Students Across Three Campuses

Evidence suggests that interventions to engage bystanders in violence prevention increase bystander intentions and efficacy to intervene, yet the impact of such programs on violence remains unknown. This study compared rates of violence by type among undergraduate students attending a college campus with the Green Dot bystander intervention (n = 2,768) with students at two colleges without bystander programs (n = 4,258). Violent victimization rates were significantly (p < .01) lower among students attending the campus with Green Dot relative to the two comparison campuses. Violence perpetration rates were lower among males attending the intervention campus. Implications of these results for research and practice are discussed.

Looking Ahead Toward Community-Level Strategies to Prevent Sexual Violence

The Division of Violence Prevention within CDCs National Center for Injury Prevention and Control recently undertook a systematic review of primary prevention strategies for sexual violence (SV) perpetration. This review identified the lack of community-level strategies to prevent SV as a critical gap in the literature. Community-level strategies function by modifying the characteristics of settings (e.g., schools, workplaces, neighborhoods) that increase the risk for violence victimization and perpetration. Identification of evidence-based strategies at the community level would allow implementation of ecologic approaches to SV prevention with a greater potential for reducing the prevalence of SV perpetration. The field will face several challenges in identifying and evaluating the effectiveness of promising community-level strategies to prevent SV. These challenges include limited knowledge of community-level and societal-level risk factors for SV, a lack of theoretical or empirical guidance in the SV literature for identification of promising community-level approaches, and challenges in evaluating SV outcomes at the community level. Recognition of these challenges should guide future research and foster dialogue within the SV prevention field. The development and evaluation of community-level approaches to SV prevention represent a vital and logical next step toward the implementation of effective, multilevel prevention efforts and a population-level reduction in the prevalence of SV.

Multi-college bystander intervention evaluation for violence prevention

INTRODUCTION The 2013 Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act requires U.S. colleges to provide bystander-based training to reduce sexual violence, but little is known about the efficacy of such programs for preventing violent behavior. This study provides the first multiyear evaluation of a bystander interventions campus-level impact on reducing interpersonal violence victimization and perpetration behavior on college campuses. METHODS First-year students attending three similarly sized public university campuses were randomly selected and invited to complete online surveys in the spring terms of 2010-2013. On one campus, the Green Dot bystander intervention was implemented in 2008 (Intervention, n=2,979) and two comparison campuses had no bystander programming at baseline (Comparison, n=4,132). Data analyses conducted in 2014-2015 compared violence rates by condition over the four survey periods. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate violence risk on Intervention relative to Comparison campuses, adjusting for demographic factors and time (2010-2013). RESULTS Interpersonal violence victimization rates (measured in the past academic year) were 17% lower among students attending the Intervention (46.4%) relative to Comparison (55.7%) campuses (adjusted rate ratio=0.83; 95% CI=0.79, 0.88); a similar pattern held for interpersonal violence perpetration (25.5% in Intervention; 32.2% in Comparison; adjusted rate ratio=0.79; 95% CI=0.71, 0.86). Violence rates were lower on Intervention versus Comparison campuses for unwanted sexual victimization, sexual harassment, stalking, and psychological dating violence victimization and perpetration (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS Green Dot may be an efficacious intervention to reduce violence at the community level and meet Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act bystander training requirements.

Moving Forward by Looking Back: Reflecting on a Decade of CDC's Work in Sexual Violence Prevention, 2000–2010

In 2011, the Division of Violence Prevention (DVP) within CDCs Injury Center engaged an external panel of experts to review and evaluate its research and programmatic portfolio for sexual violence (SV) prevention from 2000 to 2010. This article summarizes findings from the review by highlighting DVPs key activities and accomplishments during this period and identifying remaining gaps in the field and future directions for SV prevention. DVPs SV prevention work in the 2000s included (1) raising the profile of SV as a public health problem, (2) shifting the field toward a focus on the primary prevention of SV perpetration, and (3) applying the public health model to SV research and programmatic activities. The panel recommended that DVP continue to draw attention to the importance of sexual violence prevention as a public health issue, build on prior investments in the Rape Prevention and Education Program, support high-quality surveillance and research activities, and enhance communication to improve the link between research and practice. Current DVP projects and priorities provide a foundation to actively address these recommendations. In addition, DVP continues to provide leadership and guidance to the research and practice fields, with the goal of achieving significant reductions in SV perpetration and allowing individuals to live to their full potential.

Commentary on Foubert, Godin, & Tatum (2010): The Evolution of Sexual Violence Prevention and the Urgency for Effectiveness

Foubert, Godin, and Tatum describe qualitative effects among college men of The Men’s Program, a one-session sexual violence prevention program. This article and the program it describes are representative of many sexual violence prevention programs that are in practice and provide an opportunity for a brief discussion of the development and evaluation of sexual violence prevention approaches. In this commentary, we will focus on two considerations for an evolving field: the adherence to the principles of prevention and the use of rigorous evaluation methods to demonstrate effectiveness. We argue that the problem of sexual violence has created urgency for effective prevention programs and that scientific and prevention standards provide the best foundation to meet this need.

RCT testing bystander effectiveness to reduce violence

Introduction Bystander-based programs have shown promise to reduce interpersonal violence at colleges, yet limited rigorous evaluations have addressed bystander intervention effectiveness in high schools. This study evaluated the Green Dot bystander intervention to reduce sexual violence and related forms of interpersonal violence in 26 high schools over 5 years. Design A cluster RCT was conducted. Setting/participants Kentucky high schools were randomized to intervention or control (wait list) conditions. Intervention Green Dot–trained educators conducted schoolwide presentations and recruited student popular opinion leaders to receive bystander training in intervention schools beginning in Year 1. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was sexual violence perpetration, and related forms of interpersonal violence victimization and perpetration were also measured using anonymous student surveys collected at baseline and annually from 2010 to 2014. Because the school was the unit of analysis, violence measures were aggregated by school and year and school-level counts were provided. Results A total of 89,707 students completed surveys. The primary, as randomized, analyses conducted in 2014–2016 included linear mixed models and generalized estimating equations to examine the condition–time interaction on violence outcomes. Slopes of school-level totals of sexual violence perpetration (condition–time, p<0.001) and victimization (condition time, p<0.001) were different over time. During Years 3–4, when Green Dot was fully implemented, the mean number of sexual violent events prevented by the intervention was 120 in Intervention Year 3 and 88 in Year 4. For Year 3, prevalence rate ratios for sexual violence perpetration in the intervention relative to control schools were 0.83 (95% CI=0.70, 0.99) in Year 3 and 0.79 (95% CI=0.67, 0.94) in Year 4. Similar patterns were observed for sexual violence victimization, sexual harassment, stalking, and dating violence perpetration and victimization. Conclusions Implementation of Green Dot in Kentucky high schools significantly decreased not only sexual violence perpetration but also other forms of interpersonal violence perpetration and victimization.

Identifying Links Between Sexual Violence and Youth Violence Perpetration: New Opportunities for Sexual Violence Prevention

Objective One promising opportunity for advancing sexual violence (SV) research and identifying new avenues for prevention involves examining other forms of violence that may share risk factors with SV. Youth violence (YV) is ideal for consideration given evidence of overlap in SV and YV risk factors, a large set of established YV risk factors across the social ecology, and the number of evidence-based YV prevention strategies available. The current paper identifies shared and unique risk factors for SV and YV and highlights evidence-based YV prevention strategies that impact these shared risk factors. Conclusions Researchers and program developers should consider adapting and evaluating evidence-based YV prevention strategies to prevent SV. Modifying these programs to address SVs unique risk factors may maximize their potential effectiveness. In addition, expanding SV research at the outer levels of the social ecology is critical to developing community-level prevention strategies. The YV literature suggests several potential risk factors at these levels in need of research for SV, including school connectedness, social disorganization, and availability of alcohol and drugs. Using the YV literature as a starting point for expanding SV research leverages prior investments in YV research, may help identify new SV prevention strategies at a limited cost, and moves the field more quickly toward implementation of cost-effective, multidomain violence prevention strategies in communities.