Experimentally Testing the Effectiveness of a Campus-based Bystander Intervention

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Sexual Assault and Rape; Assaultive Behavior; Violence; Helping Behavior
• Interventions: Behavioral: SCREAM Theater Dose 1; Behavioral: SCREAM Theater Doses 2 & SCREAM Theater Dose 3; Behavioral: SCREAM Theater Dose 4

• Registration Number: NCT02083302
• Lead Sponsor: Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a bystander intervention education program on college students' attitudes and behaviors associated with bystander intervention and sexual violence.

Detailed Description

This study used a randomized control trial, longitudinal design to determine the impact of a peer education theater intervention on undergraduate student attitudes and behaviors related to sexual violence and bystander intervention. Students were assigned to either an experimental group (receiving 3-4 doses of the intervention ) or a comparison group (receiving 1 dose only) and were surveyed six times over an 18 month period.

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2010-06
• Primary Completion: 2012-02
• Study Completion: 2012-02
• Status Verified: 2014-03
• Study First Submitted: 2014-03-03
• Study First Submitted QC: 2014-03-07
• Last Update Submitted: 2014-03-07
• Study First Posted: 2014-03-11
• Last Update Posted: 2014-03-11

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 4385

Inclusion Criteria

• Incoming first year students in the fall semester of 2010
• Age 18 - 21
• Attended Summer Orientation session

Exclusion Criteria

• Incoming transfer students
• Younger than 18 or older than 21

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Treatment2	SCREAM Theater Dose 1	The Treatment2 group received SCREAM Theater Dose 1, SCREAM Theater Dose 2, SCREAM Theater Dose 3 and SCREAM Theater Dose 4.
Treatment2	SCREAM Theater Dose 4	The Treatment2 group received SCREAM Theater Dose 1, SCREAM Theater Dose 2, SCREAM Theater Dose 3 and SCREAM Theater Dose 4.
Treatment2	SCREAM Theater Doses 2 & SCREAM Theater Dose 3	The Treatment2 group received SCREAM Theater Dose 1, SCREAM Theater Dose 2, SCREAM Theater Dose 3 and SCREAM Theater Dose 4.
Treatment1	SCREAM Theater Dose 1	The Treatment1 group received SCREAM Theater Dose 1, SCREAM Theater Dose 2 and SCREAM Theater Dose 3.
Treatment1	SCREAM Theater Doses 2 & SCREAM Theater Dose 3	The Treatment1 group received SCREAM Theater Dose 1, SCREAM Theater Dose 2 and SCREAM Theater Dose 3.
Control	SCREAM Theater Dose 1	The control group received SCREAM Theater Dose 1.

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Bystander Intentions	Change from baseline in bystander intentions to up to twenty months	To measure intentions to be a bystander, we used the Bystander Attitude Scale, Revised (BAS-R) which is a modified version of Banyard's Bystander scale (Banyard, Plante, \& Moynihan, 2005; see McMahon et al., in press, for scale development information). Participants were asked to indicate how likely they were to engage in the behavior in the future on a Likert scale from 1 - 5, "Unlikely" to "Very likely." Students' bystander intentions were assessed via (1) a paper survey in June, July or August 2010 (baseline); (2) a follow-up web-based survey in early September, 2010; (3) a follow-up web-based survey in early December 2010; (4) a follow-up web-based survey in February, 2011; (5) a follow-up web-based survey in September, 2011 and (6) a final follow-up web-based survey in February 2012.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Bystander Efficacy	Change from baseline in bystander efficacy to up to twenty months	To assess level of confidence in one's ability to intervene, the Bystander Efficacy Scale was used (Banyard et al., 2007). Respondents were asked to rate their level of confidence that they would perform certain bystander behaviors on a scale of 0 ("can't do") to 100 ("very certain can do"). Students' bystander intentions were assessed via (1) a paper survey in June, July or August 2010 (baseline); (2) a follow-up web-based survey in early September, 2010; (3) a follow-up web-based survey in early December 2010; (4) a follow-up web-based survey in February, 2011; (5) a follow-up web-based survey in September, 2011 and (6) a final follow-up web-based survey in February 2012.
Sexual Violence Perpetration	Change from baseline in sexual violence perpetration to up to twenty months	Two questions from Lisak's Perpetrator History (PH) Scale (Lisak, Conklin, Hopper, Miller, Altschuler \& Smith, 2000) were used to assess actual perpetration. Students' past perpetration was assessed via (1) a paper survey in June, July or August 2010 (baseline); (2) a follow-up web-based survey in early September, 2010; (3) a follow-up web-based survey in early December 2010; (4) a follow-up web-based survey in February, 2011; (5) a follow-up web-based survey in September, 2011 and (6) a final follow-up web-based survey in February 2012.
Rape Myth Acceptance	Change from baseline in rape myth acceptance to up to twenty months	A revised version of the Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance Scale (Payne, Lonsway, \& Fitzgerald, 1999) was used. The revised version (McMahon \& Farmer, 2011) was selected because the scale includes updated language for college students as well as having a specific focus on accountability for rape and victim blaming (for information on scale development, see McMahon \& Farmer, 2011).Students' rape myth acceptance assessed via (1) a paper survey in June, July or August 2010 (baseline); (2) a follow-up web-based survey in early September, 2010; (3) a follow-up web-based survey in early December 2010; (4) a follow-up web-based survey in February, 2011; (5) a follow-up web-based survey in September, 2011 and (6) a final follow-up web-based survey in February 2012.
Bystander Friend Norms	Change from baseline in bystander friend norms to up to twenty months	To measure friends' norms about being a bystander, we used the Bystander Attitude Scale, Revised (BAS-R). In this portion of the survey, participants were asked to indicate how likely they think their friends would be to engage in the items on the BAS-R in the future on a Likert scale from 1 - 5, "Unlikely" to "Very likely." Students' bystander friend norms were assessed via (1) a paper survey in June, July or August 2010 (baseline); (2) a follow-up web-based survey in early September, 2010; (3) a follow-up web-based survey in early December 2010; (4) a follow-up web-based survey in February, 2011; (5) a follow-up web-based survey in September, 2011 and (6) a final follow-up web-based survey in February 2012.
Bystander Behavior	Change from baseline in bystander behavior to up to twenty months	To measure actual bystander behavior, we used the Bystander Attitude Scale, Revised (BAS-R), which contains 18 items, each stating a different bystander behavior. For this portion of the survey, participants were asked whether they actually participated in the behavior in the previous month. Respondents can indicate "Yes", "No", or "Wasn't in the Situation". Students' bystander behavior was assessed via (1) a paper survey in June, July or August 2010 (baseline); (2) a follow-up web-based survey in early September, 2010; (3) a follow-up web-based survey in early December 2010; (4) a follow-up web-based survey in February, 2011; (5) a follow-up web-based survey in September, 2011 and (6) a final follow-up web-based survey in February 2012.
Proclivity to Perpetrate Sexual Violence	Change from baseline in proclivity to perpetrate sexual violence to up to twenty months	For proclivity to perpetrate, we used an item from Malamuth's (1989) Attraction to Sexual Aggression Scale and we created a question that combined items from Malamuth's scale and Lisak's Perpetrator History (PH) Scale (2000). These measures were assessed via (1) a paper survey in June, July or August 2010 (baseline); (2) a follow-up web-based survey in early September, 2010; (3) a follow-up web-based survey in early December 2010; (4) a follow-up web-based survey in February, 2011; (5) a follow-up web-based survey in September, 2011 and (6) a final follow-up web-based survey in February 2012.

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey; 🇺🇸 New Brunswick, New Jersey, United States