Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of a Bystander-Focused Interpersonal Violence Prevention Program with High School Students

  • Published:
Prevention Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study evaluated the effectiveness of a seven-session, bystander-focused, classroom-delivered curriculum (i.e., Bringing in the Bystander—High School Curriculum [BITB-HSC]) in reducing rates of interpersonal violence among high school students. High schools (N = 26) were randomly assigned to the treatment or control condition. In classrooms in treatment schools, students (n = 1081) completed a baseline survey, participated in the BITB-HSC, and completed an immediate post-test, a short-term post-test (approx. 2 months after intervention), and a long-term post-test (approx. 1 year after intervention). Youth in control schools (n = 1322) completed surveys at similar time points but did not participate in the BITB-HSC. Participants were 15.8 years old on average and largely White (85.1%) and heterosexual (84.5%). Students exposed to the BITB-HSC demonstrated significant short-term changes in victim empathy and bystander barriers/facilitators, and long-term changes in rape myths, media literacy, bystander readiness, and knowledge relative to youth in the control condition. Although the BITB-HSC had little long-term impact on actual bystander behavior, there were reductions in some forms of violence among students in the BITB-HSC condition relative to the control condition. Future research is needed to determine if, for whom, why, and in what contexts (e.g., classroom-based versus school-wide initiatives) bystander-focused violence prevention initiatives reduce violence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The starting sample was 4069, but we removed 665 cases (16.34%) due to an inability to match surveys across time points (n = 625, 15.36%; which would mean that a single participant would be in the dataset as different participant across time points or only took the survey once [e.g., due to absence]), two or more mischievous responses (n = 31, .76%; e.g., wrote in impossible demographics [e.g., age 3], wrote or drew lewd comments and figures, etc.) and/or extreme responses (n = 6, .15%; e.g., indicated the highest possible response on two or more measures, answering yes to every victimization/perpetration question, saying they intervened every time, etc.), and/or transferring from a treatment to control school or vice versa (n = 3, .07%; and thus concerns about contamination). Participants excluded from the final sample had a significantly higher proportion of non-White and/or Hispanic, male, sexual minority, older, impoverished students than other students. We also removed 1001 participants who were surveyed but were not part of the randomized controlled trial (i.e., students in treatment schools who did not receive the program).

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahrens CE, Campbell R. (2000). Assisting Rape Victims as They Recover from Rape: The Impact on Friends. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15(9):28.

  • Banyard, V. L. (2008). Measurement and correlates of prosocial bystander behavior: The case of interpersonal violence. Violence and Victims, 23, 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.23.1.83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Banyard, V. L. (2011). Who will help prevent sexual violence: Creating an ecological model of bystander intervention. Psychology of Violence, 1, 216–229. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banyard, V. L., & Cross, C. (2008). Consequences of teen dating violence understanding intervening variables in ecological context. Violence Against Women, 14, 998–1013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Banyard, V. L., & Moynihan, M. M. (2011). Variation in bystander behavior related to sexual and intimate partner violence prevention: Correlates in a sample of college students. Psychology of Violence, 13, 287–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023544.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banyard, V. L., Moynihan, M. M., & Plante, E. G. (2007). Sexual violence prevention through bystander education: An experimental evaluation. Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 463–481. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.20159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banyard, V. L., Moynihan, M. M., Cares, A., & Warner, R. (2014). How do we know if it works? Measuring outcomes in bystander-focused violence prevention on campuses. Psychology of Violence, 4, 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banyard, V. L., Weber, M. C., Grych, J., & Hamby, S. (2016). Where are the helpful bystanders? Ecological niche and victims’ perceptions of bystander intervention. Journal of Community Psychology, 44, 214–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capilouto, E. I., Beshear, J., Henry, R., Recktenwald, E., Follingstad, D., & Coker, A. L. (2014). “Green dot” effective at reducing sexual violence.

  • Cares, A. C., Banyard, V. L., Moynihan, M. M., Williams, L. M., Potter, S. J., & Stapleton, J. G. (2015). Changing attitudes about being a bystander to violence translating an in-person sexual violence prevention program to a new campus. Violence Against Women, 21, 165–187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Casey, E. A., Lindhorst, T. P., & Storer, H. L. (2016). The situational-cognitive model of adolescent bystander behavior: Modeling bystander decision-making in the context of bullying and teen dating violence. Psychology of Violence, 7, 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000033.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Understanding teen dating violence - Fact sheet 2014. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/teen-dating-violence-2014-a.pdf

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2016). Evaluating practice-based sexual violence primary prevention approaches from CDC’s Rape Prevention and Education (RPE) Program. Retrieved from https://www.nsvrc.org/opportunities/funding/evaluating-practice-based-sexual-violence-primary-prevention-approaches-cdcs

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). Teen dating violence. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/teen_dating_violence.html

  • Coker, A. L., Cook-Craig, P. G., Williams, C. M., Fisher, B. S., Clear, E. R., Garcia, L. S., & Hegge, L. M. (2011). Evaluation of Green Dot: An active bystander intervention to reduce sexual violence on college campuses. Violence Against Women, 17, 777–796. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801211410264.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coker, A. L., Bush, H. M., Cook-Craig, P. G., DeGue, S. A., Clear, E. R., Brancato, C. J., ... Recktenwald, E. A. (2017). RCT testing bystander effectiveness to reduce violence. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 52, 566–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2017.01.020.

  • Cook-Craig, P. G. (2012). Evaluation of the Green Dot bystanding intervention program in Kentucky high schools. Paper presented at the The 6th Biennial National Conference on Health and Domestic Violence.

  • Cook-Craig, P. G., Coker, A. L., Clear, E. R., Garcia, L. S., Bush, H. M., Brancato, C. J., ... Fisher, B. S. (2014). Challenge and opportunity in evaluating a diffusion-based active bystanding prevention program green dot in high schools. Violence Against Women, 20, 1179–1202. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801214551288.

  • DeGue, S. (2014). Preventing sexual violence on college campuses: Lessons from research and practice. Atlanta, GA: Division of Violence Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeGue, S., Valle, L. A., Holt, M. K., Massetti, G. M., Matjasko, J. L., & Tharp, A. T. (2014). A systematic review of primary prevention strategies for sexual violence perpetration. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19, 346–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2014.05.004.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Eckstein, R. P., Moynihan, M. M., Banyard, V. B., & Plante, E. G. (2013). Bringing in the bystander: A prevention workshop for establishing a community of responsibility. In. Durham, NH, USA: Prevention Innovations, University of New Hampshire.

  • Edwards, K. M. (2015). Incidence and outcomes of dating violence victimization among high school youth: The role of gender and sexual orientation. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515618943.

  • Edwards, K. M., Rodenhizer-Stämpfli, K., & Eckstein, R. (2014). Media Literacy Consumption Scale. Durham, NH: University of New Hampshire.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, K. M., Rodenhizer-Stämpfli, K. A., & Eckstein, R. P. (2015). Bystander action in situations of dating and sexual aggression: A mixed methodological study of high school youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44, 2321–2336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0307-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, K. M., Neal, A. M., & Rodenhizer-Stämpfli, K. A. (2017a). Domestic violence prevention. In B. Teasdale & M. Bradley (Eds.), Preventing crime and violence (1 ed.). New York City, NY: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, K. M., Rodenhizer-Stämpfli, K. A., & Eckstein, R. P. (2017b). School personnel’s bystander action in situations of dating violence, sexual violence, and sexual harassment among high school teens: A qualitative analysis. Journal of Interpersonal Violence., 1, 886260517698821. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517698821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, K. M., Banyard, V. L., Sessarego, S. N., Stanely, L. R., Mitchell, K. J., Echstein, R. P., et al. (2018). Measurement tools to assess relationship abuse and sexual assault prevention program effectiveness among youth. Psychology of Violence, 8, 537–545. https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000151.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Edward, K. M., Waterman E. A., Lee K.D. M., Himlin, L., Parm K., Banyard V. L. (2019) Feasibility and Acceptability of a High School Relationship Abuse and Sexual Assault Bystander Prevention Program: School Personnel and Student Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260518824655.

  • Espelage, D. L., Low, S., Polanin, J. R., & Brown, E. C. (2015). Clinical trial of Second Step© middle-school program: Impact on aggression & victimization. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 37, 52–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foshee, V. A., & Langwick, V. L. (2010). Safe Dates: An adolescent dating abuse prevention curriculum (2nd ed.). Center City, MI: Hazeldon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foshee, V. A., Bauman, K. E., Ennett, S. T., Linder, G. F., Benefield, T. S., & Suchindran, C. (2004). Assessing the long-term effects of the Safe Dates program and a booster in preventing and reducing adolescent dating violence victimization and perpetration. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 619–624. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.94.4.619.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Foshee, V. A., Bauman, K. E., Ennett, S. T., Suchindran, C., Benefield, T. S., & Linder, G. F. (2005). Assessing the effects of the dating violence prevention program “Safe Dates” using random coefficient regression modeling. Prevention Science, 6, 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-005-0007-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gad, A. M., & Youssif, N. A. (2006). Linear mixed models of longitudinal data with nonrandom dropouts. Journal of Data Science, 4, 447–460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leyva, C. P., & Eckstein, R. P. (2015). Bringing in the Bystander—high school curriculum. Durham, NH: University of New Hampshire.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallinckrodt, C. H., Clark, W. S., & David, S. R. (2001). Accounting for dropout bias using mixed-effects models. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics, 11, 9–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Manganello, J. A. (2008). Health literacy and adolescents: A framework and agenda for future research. Health Education Research, 23, 840–847.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mazza, G. L., Enders, C. K., & Ruehlman, L. S. (2015). Addressing item-level missing data: A comparison of proration and full information maximum likelihood estimation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50, 504–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2015.1068157.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McMahon, S., & Farmer, G. L. (2011). An updated measure for assessing subtle rape myths. Social Work Research, 35, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/35.2.71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, E., Tancredi, D. J., McCauley, H. L., Decker, M. R., Virata, M. C. D., Anderson, H. A., ... Silverman, J. G. (2012). “Coaching boys into men”: A cluster-randomized controlled trial of a dating violence prevention program. Journal of Adolescent Health, 51, 431–438.

  • Moschella, E. A., Bennett, S., & Banyard, V. L. (2016). Beyond the situational model: Bystander action consequences to intervening in situations involving sexual violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32, 682–702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moynihan, M. M., Banyard, V. L., Arnold, J. S., Eckstein, R. P., & Stapleton, J. G. (2011). Sisterhood may be powerful for reducing sexual and intimate partner violence: An evaluation of the bringing in the bystander in-person program with sorority members. Violence Against Women, 17, 703–719.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moynihan, M. M., Banyard, V. L., Cares, A. C., Potter, S. J., Williams, L. M., & Stapleton, J. G. (2015). Encouraging responses in sexual and relationship violence prevention: What program effects remain one year later? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30, 110–132.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, D. L., Lonsway, K. A., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1999). Rape myth acceptance: Exploration of its structure and its measurement using the Ilinois rape myth acceptance scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 33, 27–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polanin, J. R., Espelage, D. L., & Pigott, T. D. (2012). A meta-analysis of school-based bullying prevention programs' effects on bystander intervention behavior. School Psychology Review, 41, 47–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, S. J., & Moynihan, M. M. (2011). Bringing in the bystander in-person prevention program to a US military installation: Results from a pilot study. Military Medicine, 176, 870–875.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1984). Self change processes, self efficacy and decisional balance across five stages of smoking cessation. Progress in Clinical and Biological Research, 156, 131–140.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prochaska, J. O., DiClemente, C. C., & Norcross, J. C. (1992). In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors. American Psychologist, 47, 1102–1114.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M. (2002). Diffusion of preventive innovations. Addictive Behaviors, 27, 989–993.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenstock, I. M. (1974). Historical origins of the health belief model. Health Education & Behavior, 2, 328–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B. G., Stein, N. D., Mumford, E. A., & Woods, D. (2013). Shifting boundaries: An experimental evaluation of a dating violence prevention program in middle schools. Prevention Science, 14, 64–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ttofi, M. M., & Farrington, D. P. (2011). Effectiveness of school-based programs to reduce bullying: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 7, 27–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-010-9109-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valente, T. W., & Pampuang, P. (2007). Identifying opinion leaders to promote behavior change. Health Education, 34, 881–896.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We owe a great deal of gratitude to our school and community partners and to the 50+ research assistants and program facilitators. Without these agencies and individuals, this project would not have been possible.

Funding

Funding for this study was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Grant no. R01-CEO02524. The findings and implications presented in this paper do not represent the official views of the CDC.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Psychology and Prevention Innovations Research Center, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA

    Katie M. Edwards

  2. Rutgers University, School of Social Work, New Brunswick, NJ, USA

    Victoria L. Banyard

  3. Department of Psychology, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA

    Stephanie N. Sessarego & Emily A. Waterman

  4. Departments of Psychology and Crimes against Children Research Center, Durham, NH, USA

    Kimberly J. Mitchell

  5. Tufts Medical Center, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Boston, MA, USA

    Hong Chang

Authors
  1. Katie M. Edwards
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Victoria L. Banyard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephanie N. Sessarego
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Emily A. Waterman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kimberly J. Mitchell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hong Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katie M. Edwards.

Ethics declarations

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic Supplementary Material

ESM 1

(DOCX 14 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Edwards, K.M., Banyard, V.L., Sessarego, S.N. et al. Evaluation of a Bystander-Focused Interpersonal Violence Prevention Program with High School Students. Prev Sci 20, 488–498 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-019-01000-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-019-01000-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation