Evaluation of a Bystander-Focused Interpersonal Violence Prevention Program with High School Students
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.
KeywordsDating violence Relationship abuse Sexual assault Prevention Bystander Cluster randomized control trial High school students Youth
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 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.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
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 was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Ahrens CE, Campbell R. (2000). Assisting Rape Victims as They Recover from Rape: The Impact on Friends. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15(9):28.Google Scholar
- Capilouto, E. I., Beshear, J., Henry, R., Recktenwald, E., Follingstad, D., & Coker, A. L. (2014). “Green dot” effective at reducing sexual violence.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.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle 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.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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.Google Scholar
- 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., 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.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.CrossRefGoogle 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.
- 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.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle 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
- 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.Google Scholar
- 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.CrossRefGoogle 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
- 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.Google Scholar
- Rosenstock, I. M. (1974). Historical origins of the health belief model. Health Education & Behavior, 2, 328–335.Google Scholar
- Valente, T. W., & Pampuang, P. (2007). Identifying opinion leaders to promote behavior change. Health Education, 34, 881–896.Google Scholar