Prevention Science

, 6:245 | Cite as

Assessing the Effects of the Dating Violence Prevention Program “Safe Dates” Using Random CoefficientRegression Modeling

  • Vangie A. FosheeEmail author
  • Karl E. Bauman
  • Susan T. Ennett
  • Chirayath Suchindran
  • Thad Benefield
  • G. Fletcher Linder
Original Paper

The Safe Dates Project is a randomized trial for evaluating a school-based adolescent dating violence prevention program. Five waves of data were used to examine the effects of Safe Dates over time including primary and secondary prevention effects, moderators, and mediators of program effects. Using random coefficients models, with multiple imputation of missing data, significant program effects were found at all four follow-up periods on psychological, moderate physical, and sexual dating violence perpetration and moderate physical dating violence victimization. Marginal effects were found on sexual victimization. Effects on severe physical perpetration at all four follow-up periods were moderated by prior involvement in that type of violence. Primary and secondary prevention effects were found and the program was equally effective for males and females and for whites and non-whites. Program effects were mediated by changes in dating violence norms, gender-role norms, and awareness of community services.


adolescence domestic violence intervention studies 



This study was funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cooperative Agreement Number U81/CCU409964. This study was reviewed and approved by The University of North Carolina, School of Public Health, Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects. Active parental consent and adolescent assent were obtained from all study adolescents.


  1. Allison, P. D. (2000). Missing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Avery-Leaf, S., Cascardi, M., O'Leary, K. D., & Cano, A. (1997). Efficacy of a dating violence prevention program on attitudes justifying aggression. Journal of Adolescent Health, 21, 11–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergman, L. (1992). Dating violence among high school students. Social Work, 37, 21–27.Google Scholar
  4. Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Check, J., & Malamuth, N. M. (1983). Sex role stereotyping and reactions to depictions of stranger versus acquaintance rape. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 344–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coker, A. L., McKeown, R. E., Sanderson, M., Davis, K. E., Valois, R. F., & Huebner, E. S. (2000). Severe dating violence and quality of life among South Carolina high school students. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19, 220–227.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Deal, J. E., & Wampler, K. (1986). Dating violence: The primacy of previous experience. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 3, 457–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dusenbury, L., Falco, M., & Lake, A. (1997). A review of the evaluation of 47 drug abuse prevention curricula available nationally. Journal of School Health, 67, 127–132.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Figueredo, A. J., McKnight, P. E., McKnight, K. M., & Sidani, S. (2000). Multivariate modeling of missing data within and across assessment waves. Addiction, 95(Supplement 3), S361–S380.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Finn, J. (1986). The relationship between sex role attitudes and attitudes supporting marital violence. Sex Roles, 14, 235–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  12. Foshee, V. A., & Bauman, K. E. (1992). Gender stereotyping and adolescent sexual behavior: A test of temporal order. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1561–1579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foshee, V. A. (1996). Gender differences in adolescent dating abuse prevalence, types, and injuries. Health Education Research, 11, 275–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Foshee, V. A., Bauman, K. E., Arriaga, X. B., Helms, R. W., Koch, G. G., & Linder, G. F. (1998). An evaluation of Safe Dates, an adolescent dating violence prevention program. American Journal of Public Health, 88, 45–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Foshee, V. A., Bauman, K. E., Greene, W. F., Koch, G. G., Linder, G. F., & MacDougall, J. E. (2000). The Safe Dates program: 1-Year follow-up results. American Journal of Public Health, 90, 1619–1622.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Foshee, V. A., Bauman, K. E., Ennett, S., Linder, G. F., Benefield, T., & 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.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Horton, N. J., & Lipsitz, S. R. (2001). Multiple imputation in practice: Comparison of software packages for regression models with missing variables. The American Statistician, 55, 244–254.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. Hotaling, G. T., & Sugarman, D. B. (1986). An analysis of risk markers in husband to wife violence: The current state of knowledge. Violence and Victims, 1(2), 101–124.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jaffe, P.G., Sudermann, M., Reitzel, D., Killip, S. M. (1992). An evaluation of a secondary school primary prevention program on violence in intimate relationships. Violence and Victimization, 7, 129–146.Google Scholar
  20. Jones L. E. (1991). The Minnesota School Curriculum Project: A statewide domestic violence prevention project in secondary schools. In B. Levy (Ed.), Dating violence: Young women in danger (pp. 258–266). Seattle, WA: Seal Press.Google Scholar
  21. Krajewski, S., Rybarik, M., Dosch, M., & Gilmore, G. (1996). Results of a curriculum intervention with seventh graders regarding violence in relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 11, 93–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lavoie, F., Vezina, L., Piche, C., & Boivin, M. (1995). Evaluation of a prevention program for violence in teen dating relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10, 516–524.Google Scholar
  23. Lloyd, S. (1987). Conflict in premarital relationships: Differential perceptions of males and females. Family Relations, 36, 290–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lloyd, S., Koval, J., & Cate, R. (1989). Conflict and violence in dating relationships. In M. Pirog-Good & J. Stets (Eds.), Violence in dating relationships: Emerging social issues (pp. 126–142). New York: Preager.Google Scholar
  25. Macgowan, M. J. (1997). An evaluation of a dating violence prevention program for middle school students. Violence and Victimization, 12, 223–235.Google Scholar
  26. MacKinnon, D. P., Krull, J. L., & Lockwood, C. M. (2000). Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect. Prevention Science, 1, 173–181.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Malik, S., Sorenson, S. B., & Aneshensel, C. S. (1997). Community and dating violence among adolescents: perpetration and victimization. Journal of Adolescent Health, 21, 291–302.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Mizruchi, E. H., & Perrucci, R. (1962). Norm qualities and differential effects of deviant behavior: An exploratory analysis. American Sociological Review, 27, 391–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Murray, D. M., & Hannah. (1989). Design and analysis issues in the evaluation of lifestyle intervention studies. Preventive Medicine.Google Scholar
  30. O'Keefe, M., & Treister, L., T. (1998). Victims of dating violence among high school students: Are predictors different for males and females? Violence Against Women, 4, 195–223.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. O'Keeffe, N. K., Brockopp, K., & Chew, E. (1986). Teen dating violence. Social Work, 31, 465–468.Google Scholar
  32. Patrician, P. A. (2002). Multiple imputation for missing data. Research in Nursing & Health, 25, 76–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Resnick, M. D., & Blum, R. W. (1985). Developmental and personalogical correlates of adolescent sexual behavior and outcomes. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 1, 293–313.Google Scholar
  34. Roscoe, B., & Benaske, N. (1985). Courtship violence experienced by abused wives: Similarities in patterns of abuse. Family Relations, 34, 419–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rubin, D. B. (1987). Multiple imputation for non-response in surveys. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  36. SAS (Version 8). (1999). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
  37. Schafer, J. L. (1999). Multiple imputation: A primer. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 8, 3–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Silverman, J. G., Raj, A., Mucci, L. A., & Hathaway, J. E. (2001). Dating violence against adolescent girls and associated substance use, unhealthy weight control, sexual risk behavior, pregnancy, and suicidality. JAMA, 286, 572–579.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Slaby, R. G., & Guerra, N. G. (1988). Cognitive mediators of aggression in adolescent offenders: 1. Assessment. Developmental Psychology, 24, 580–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Smith, J. P., & Williams, J. G. (1992). From abusive household to dating violence. Journal of Family Violence, 7, 153–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Solomon, S. D., & Harford, T. C. (1984). Drinking norms versus drinking behavior. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 8, 460–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tallichet, S. E., & Willits, F. K. (1986). Gender-role attitude change of young women: Influential factors from a panel study. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, 219–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weinstein, N. (1988). Effects of personal experience on self-protective behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Weisz, A. N., & Black, B. M. (2001). Evaluating a sexual assault and dating violence prevention program for urban youths. Social Work Research, 25, 89–100.Google Scholar
  45. Wolfe, D. A., Wekerle, C., Scott, K., Straatman, A., Grasley, C., & Reitzel-Jaffe, D. (2003). Dating violence prevention with at-risk youth: A controlled outcome evaluation. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 279–291.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Worell, J. (1982). Psychological sex roles: Significance and change. In J. Worell (Ed.), Psychological development in the elementary years (pp. 3–44). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Prevention Research 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vangie A. Foshee
    • 1
    • 4
    Email author
  • Karl E. Bauman
    • 1
  • Susan T. Ennett
    • 1
  • Chirayath Suchindran
    • 2
  • Thad Benefield
    • 2
  • G. Fletcher Linder
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public HealthUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biostatistics, School of Public HealthUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA
  3. 3.Department of Sociology & AnthropologyJames Madison UniversityJames MadisonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public Health, 319B Rosenau HallUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations