Advisor
Heather de Vries McClintock
Degree Name
Master of Public Health/Master of Medical Science
COinS
Apr 17th, 12:00 AM
A Comparative Program Analysis of Male Bystander Intervention Programs on College Campuses
Comments
Background: Over 1 in 10 reported incidences of sexual violence (SV) have a male perpetrator. Key governing bodies have emphasized SV prevention programs that mobilize men and boys as allies. The “Bystander Model” has been identified as the most effective strategy to prevent SV on college campuses, but more recent studies have called for a comprehensive approach to SV prevention that combines several approaches to fully address the factors that influence SV perpetration and victimization.
Objective: The purpose of this project is to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of current SV prevention programs targeting college males using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) technical report on SV.
Design/Methods: A comparative program analysis of male-focused SV prevention programs was conducted utilizing PubMed and GoogleScholar databases. A snowballing strategy was used to identify appropriate programs. An analysis of these programs examined key components and outcomes in relation to the CDC technical report on SV.
Results: In all, 5 SV prevention programs were identified that targeted college males. Programs ranged in length from 1 to 5.5 hours and from one (40%) to two or more sessions (60%) in duration. All (100%) programs reported significant intervention effects on outcomes. Outcomes consistent with CDC technical guidance included reductions in rape myth acceptance (100%), ideas surrounding masculinity (60%), accurate identification of consent (60%), improved social norms (60%), increases in bystander willingness to help, intentions, efficacy, or behaviors (100%), and reductions in SV perpetration or sexual aggression (40%). Programs that reported significant reductions in SV perpetration/aggression delivered the intervention in multiple short sessions. On average, each program evaluated 8.8 outcomes. The proportion of program outcomes that were aligned with the CDC’s technical report on SV ranged from 6.28% to 18.75%. Programs that had a higher proportion of outcomes that were aligned with the CDC technical report tended to have a higher proportion of significant findings.
Conclusion: Male-focused SV prevention programs evaluate a range of outcomes, some of which are consistent with CDC technical guidance. Greater concordance with CDC recommendations may be related to bystander program effectiveness.