Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Engaging Communities in Interpersonal Violence Prevention

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Engaging Communities in Interpersonal Violence Prevention"— Presentation transcript:

1 Engaging Communities in Interpersonal Violence Prevention
Who Will Help? Engaging Communities in Interpersonal Violence Prevention Victoria L. Banyard, Ph.D. Psychology & Prevention Innovations University of New Hampshire 2011 Bystander Summit, SUNY Oneonta

2 Overview Translating bystander research into prevention
Formative evaluation: Lessons Learned Implementation Diffusion of innovation Outcome evaluation: Does it work?

3 How do we promote positive bystander intervention?
Lessons from social psychology Lessons from health behavior change literature Applications to interpersonal violence: research examples

4 Adapted from Latane and Darley and Dovidio.
Notice event + need for help Empathy Assume responsibility Social Norms Pros and cons including safety Perceived efficacy Skill set + experience Adapted from Latane and Darley and Dovidio. Choose from options Provide help

5 Need to notice risk factors
AWARENESS/KNOWLEDGE Need to notice risk factors Need to define the situation as problematic Perceived susceptibility and severity (Health Belief Model) Cues to action (HBM) Asked to intervene Community specific stories, examples, data Knowledge of sexual assault; knowledge of risk factors

6 Characteristics of the bystander Perceptions of the victim
RESPONSIBILITY Characteristics of the bystander Perceptions of the victim Victim empathy In-group versus out-group status Social norms Against sexual violence In favor of intervention (TPB) Being asked (cues to action) Characteristics of the situation Diffusion and facilitation Characteristics of the bystander: Research also shows the importance of personality dimensions of motivation (e.g. Michelini, Wilson, & Messe, 1975), religious faith (e.g. Hardy & Carlo, 2005) and personal experiences with the situational context. Research tends to find that people are more likely to help those that seem similar to them (e.g. Miller, Kozu, & Davis, 2001). Positive mood linked to helping. Finally, the role of demographics, particularly gender, is complex. Eisenberg and colleagues (2002) have garnered some evidence for aspects of a prosocial personality and prosocial moral judgement that seem to impact actual prosocial behavior over time . There also also likely personality differences in HOW an individual will feel most comfortable helping. A meta-analysis by Eagly and Crowley (1986) on gender and helping found men more likely to help in situations involving an emergency or danger and women more likely to help in more safe situations such as volunteering for organizations or needy groups or helping friends (e.g. George et al, 1998). Such research has begun to be applied to the field of interpersonal violence. For example, Christy and Voigt (1994) researched and conducted studies on bystander responses to child abuse and found that “bystanders intervened in situations where others also intervened”(841). They found that intervention was associated with the characteristics of the bystander, the abusive situation, the victim, and the perpetrator. For example, people who had intervened in a case of observed child abuse were more likely than non-interveners to say they knew how to intervene and felt responsible for stopping abuse. They were also more likely to have been abused themselves as a child. In terms of the situation, they were more likely to say that other witnesses did not intervene. Shotland and Straw’s (1976) review of the literature showed that men are less likely to intervene when a man attacks a woman than they are to intercede in other fights. Other literature also suggests that women are more likely to elicit help from strangers (see Laner, Benin, & Ventrone, 2001 for review). Researchers, however, have noted that in terms of interpersonal violence, knowledge that the abuser is related to the victim will affect the likelihood of intervention. If respondents know that the abuser and victim are related, respondents will be less likely to intend to intervene (Laner, Benin, & Ventrone, 2001; Levine, 1999; Shotland & Straw, 1976). A study by Harari, Harari, and White (1985), however, using a simulated rape found high rates of intervention by male bystanders whether the bystanders were alone or in a group. It should be noted, however, that the rape scenario involved the stereotypical scene of a stranger jumping out of the bushes and attacking a woman. Much less is known about interventions in situations of sexual assault by an acquaintance in a social setting such as a party. Is victim seen like self? More likely to help friends than strangers. UK research on in-group membership – can manipulate this to some extent to increase helping. Is victim seen as helpless or as causing their problems (is where links to rape myth acceptance may be key – issue of fault and victim blame). Social norms about being a bystander – Stein article about men’s peers view of sexual assault prevention. Key component of theories like Theory of Reasoned Action. Characteristics of situation – number of bystanders makes a difference and whether bystanders know each other – larger number of bystanders who are unknown to each other decreases helping but more cohesive group of bystanders can promote helping. My research on residence halls – more helping in smaller halls. Frye research on neighborhoods here too. Gracia research – social disorganization in communities (low sense community) related to increased reluctance to report DV.

Health behavior theories support decision process for new behaviors – weigh pros and cons Bystander research also shows cost/benefit analysis Safety nets for bystanders Social norms to support helpful intervention Audience inhibition (Berkowitz) Need to help people be conscious about pros and cons – key components of HBM and other theories of health behavior change. Need to have policies and norms that support helpful bystanders stepping in – good samaritan type policies. This is a concern for students.

Increase confidence/efficacy Need specific skill building Need role models (POLS research) Need range of options (MVP program) Beliefs about outcomes (TPB) Focus on efficacy comes from bystander research but also part of HBM and TRA. – very strong predictor in these models!!!

9 Empirical Support for the Situational Model: Studies of Bystander Behavior and Relationship Violence
Review findings on studies of correlates of bystander behavior. Bystander attitudes: Recent Brown & Messman-Moore article; Chabot article in JIV – peer norms are important in likelihood of intervening (like Stein study of likelihood of men getting involved in rape prevention). Most studies are on attitudes rather than actual behavior. Social psych studies use experimental design – less understood is actual behavior in the community (Frye article is an exception here). Bystander behavior: my recent analyses with Mary – role of gender as moderator; importance of decisional balance; importance of sense of responsibility for men. UNH research on sexual violence and bystanders. Greater sense of community, knowledge of sexual assualt, decreased rape myths were associated with greater expressed willingness to help. Also greater bystander efficacy was related to later measures of actual bystander behavior.

10 Attitudes *** *** ** *** Banyard, V. L. (2008). Measurement and correlates of pro-social bystander behavior: The case of interpersonal violence. Violence and Victims, 23,

11 Broader Bystander Behaviors

12 Longitudinal Predictors of Behavior: Attitudes matter
*** Study of nearly 400 UNH students. N=94 who completed 2 mo followup behavior measure and didn’t get the program (control group only from NIJ study). Banyard, V. L. (2008). Measurement and correlates of pro-social bystander behavior: The case of interpersonal violence. Violence and Victims, 23,

13 Complexities Gender Age Who is helped? Typology of helping
Friends versus strangers Victims versus perpetrators Typology of helping Which models better predict behavior? Environmental contexts (e.g. community size; sense of community) Residential life data about small dorms and sense of community.

14 Theories of Health Behavior Change: Lessons from Prevention
Parallels Readiness for Change process Key variables from Social/cog model, TPB, HBM: Knowledge Personal attitudes and Peer norms Confidence/efficacy Beliefs about outcomes (pros and cons) Behavioral intention Stages of change parallel situational model in many ways Different tools for different stages – our program seeks to do this - modeled on work related to prevention of smoking or healthy behavior promotion, substance abuse is key topic here. ELMQ – Heppner work – need to make messaging personally relevant – local stories and stats HBM – need to increase effiacacy that you can do something about the problem and see own behavior as relevant – key for prevention behaviors like wearing sunscreen or breast cancer screening. Key role of social norms – Edwards POLS work with SEEDS and green dot programs are relevant here. – HIV research very key here.

15 Founding Bystander Programs
Founding Programs: Jackson Katz – Mentors in Violence Prevention (MVP) Alan Berkowitz Recent Programs Bringing in the Bystander (UNH) Foubert – The Men’s Program Edwards - SEEDS Theater Programs InterACT – California State University No Zebras – Central Michigan iScream – Rutgers - McMahon

16 Shared components Use of discussion and active learning
Visualization exercises build empathy Connect material to participants’ felt experience Practice scenerios Model and practice skills Practice applying to own experience Increase awareness Debunk myths Provide information to reduce ambiguity Directly ask people to play a role Need for evaluation data

17 Bringing in the Bystander ™
Social marketing campaign (Potter & Stapleton) In-person educational workshop (Moynihan, Eckstein, Banyard) © University of New Hampshire

18 The Program: Specific content
What is a bystander? Victim empathy Defining scope of sexual violence causes and consequences Consent 101 Range of safe interventions for bystanders Modeling range of skills Reviewing community resources Emphasis on bystander safety Pledge to intervene Bystander plan

19 A Local Example: Stoke Hall Gang Rape 1987
Three men gang raped a woman in 1987 in Stoke Hall, a residence hall at UNH. The victim transferred to another University. Two of three offenders plead guilty to misdemeanor sexual assault for which they would each spend 2 months in prison.

20 Small Group Work Ask participants to:
think of examples when they did or did not intervene think of examples when they saw someone else intervene think of examples when someone intervened on their behalf discuss and list the reasons they did or did not intervene share how they felt about their experiences, what impact it had on them discuss if it is easier or more difficult to intervene when it’s a friend or a stranger, and why?

21 Responsibility Responsibility bystander pledge being asked to step in
readiness for change – use of lots of different tools to move forward people who are in different places in readiness to change.

22 BYSTANDER PLEDGE I pledge to Express my outrage about rape and all forms of sexual violence. Talk to other community members about sexual violence. Interrupt sexist jokes that objectify women and girls. Seek information about why sexual violence is so prevalent in our society and how I can help prevent it. Change anything I may be doing that contributes to sexual violence. Support and encourage men and women to take responsibility for ending sexual violence. Listen to my friends’ and partners’ fears and concerns for safety. Pay attention to cries for help and take action. Challenge images of violence against women in advertising and entertainment. Support women and men working together to end sexual violence. Nurture myself and be aware of my personal safety. Believe and support women, children, and men who have experienced any form of sexual violence. _____________________________________ Name and Date Witness and Date

23 Decision making process

24 Decision Making Process
QUESTIONS TO ASK BEFORE I TAKE ACTION: Am I aware there is a problem or risky situation? Do I recognize someone needs help? Do I see others and myself as part of the solution? QUESTIONS TO ASK DURING THE SITUATION: How can I keep myself safe? What are my available options? Are there others I may call upon for help? What are the benefits/costs for taking action? DECISION TO TAKE ACTION: When to act? Resources: people, phone, etc available? ACT

25 Close up Least safe With others Alone Most safe Distant

26 The ABCs of Intervention “Active Bystanders Care” Assess for safety.
NUMBERS TO CALL Emergency or Police 911 Sexual Harassment and Rape Prevention Program 862-SAFE (7233) (SHARPP) New Hampshire Statewide Toll Free Hotlines (Domestic Violence) (Sexual Assault) For more information about Bringing in the Bystander contact The ABCs of Intervention “Active Bystanders Care” Assess for safety. Be with others. Care for victim. Bringing In the BystanderTM A Prevention Workshop for Establishing a Community of Responsibility © Plante, Banyard, Moynihan, Eckstein QUESTIONS TO ASK BEFORE I TAKE ACTION Am I aware there is a problem or risky situation? Do I recognize someone needs help? Do I see others and myself as part of the solution? QUESTIONS TO ASK DURING THE SITUATION How can I keep myself safe? What are my available options? Are there others I may call upon for help? What are the benefits/costs for taking action? DECISION TO TAKE ACTION When to act? Are resources available (people, phone, information)? ACT HOW TO INTERVENE SAFELY Call police or someone else in authority. Tell another person. Being with others is a good idea when a situation looks dangerous. Yell for help. Ask a friend in a potentially dangerous situation if he/she wants to leave and then make sure that he/she gets home safely. Ask a victim if he/she is okay. Provide options and a listening ear. Call the local crisis center for support and options. See telephone numbers on the back of this card.

27 SCENARIO THREE: You are walking down the hall to catch the elevator to go to your room. When you pass a dorm room on the first floor you hear a man and a woman yelling at each other. The man is calling the woman a “slut” and other names. Decision Making Process: People have arguments all the time…is this my business? Have they been drinking?…I wonder if this argument will escalate and someone is at risk of being physically hurt…will someone else call the police if it continues?…should I go get my RA? What am I supposed to do? Pros and cons of each option: Nothing. It is none of my business. Go to my room and come down in an hour to see if they are still “going at it.” Go get my RA and discuss it with her/him. Call 911. Your own idea:_____________________________________ What do you do? How do you stay safe? * Format adapted with permission from Katz, Mentors in Violence Prevention

SCENARIO:___________________________________________________________ DECISION MAKING PROCESS:_____________________________________ PLAN OF ACTION:____________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Program seems to work and have persisting effects for 2 months Program works for both men and women ADDS TO PREVIOUS LITERATURE BUT ALSO LINKS TO PRACTICE! FOUNDATION FOR MEDIA CAMPAIGN AND UNH PD IMPLEMENTATION GRANT TO REDUCE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN. Need to replicate with more diverse sample Need longer follow-up Preliminary analyses of 4 & 12 month show persistence of effects on attitudes and knowledge, less so for behavior but may be artifact of data collection time point (February – when last 2 months included school break) – small sample size here and overrep of females. Need to work on improving and expanding measures – ex. Measure of opportunities to intervene. Also, measures of things like Malamuth attractiveness of sexual aggression. Further analyses of current data: Unpack few gender differences, examine readiness to change and ELMQ, survivor questions. Have grant for secondary analysis submitted and being reviewed at NIJ right now. Partnership with UNH PD grant to prevent VAW on campus Pilot project with Fraternities, Sororities, and athletes. Media Campaign Measurement development Grant under review to expand across different types of campuses and with dual focus on SV and IPV. Broader community focus – secondary schools, wider community context – special issue of Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community

29 Stages of Change Denial and precontemplation: lower efficacy and higher rape myth acceptance, cons outweigh pros Contemplation: greater knowledge, intent, confidence, pros outweigh cons Action: greater helping and confidence (cost/benefit not significant)

30 Rape Myth Acceptance

31 Decisional Balance


33 Experimental Evaluation
3 conditions Control One-session treatment Three-session treatment Longitudinal design Part of this project was supported by Grant No WG-BX-0009 awarded by the National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Dept. of Justice. Points of view in this presentation are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Dept. of Justice

34 Participants 389 undergraduates (172 men ; 217 women)
Exclusionary criteria: participants excluded if not traditional college age and if had received prior training as peer advisor or advocate at sexual assault crisis center. Retention rate 75-94%

35 Outcomes Knowledge Efficacy Attitudes Rape myth acceptance
Willingness to help Pros and cons of being a bystander Self-reported bystander behavior

36 Hypothesis: Program will be effective
Repeated measures using measure of social desirability as covariate across 3 time points (pre-, post-, 2 mo). Significant time x group interaction No gender differences in program effects Some persistence of effects at 4 and 12 months Banyard et al (2007). Sexual violence prevention through bystander education: An experimental evaluation. Journal of Community Psychology, 35,

37 Knowledge

38 Helping Intention

39 Decisional balance: Total

40 Bystander Behaviors

41 Percentage improving by at least 1 SD

42 Percentage worsening by at least 1 SD

43 Next Steps

44 CDC grant 2 campuses Cohort Effects
Social marketing as booster for program Community surveys

45 Collaboration with Residential Life
Who helps? An ecological model Intrapersonal: women, first year students; those who spend less time drinking, watching TV and videogames, those who study more, prosocial tendencies Interactional: Higher floor sense of community; Higher campus sense of community; Those involved in student orgs Exosystem: size of living situation

46 Context and Behavior

47 Acknowledgements Mary Moynihan, UNH Jane Stapleton, UNH
Sharyn Potter, UNH Bobby Eckstein, UNH Mary Mayhew and the staff of SHARPP Angela Borges Our Umass Lowell partners: Linda Williams, Alison Cares, Mary Frederick Elizabethe Plante Grace Mattern and the NH Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence Our teams of graduate and undergraduate peer educators and research assistants. UNH Office of Residential Life Research participants who gave their time to the projects

Download ppt "Engaging Communities in Interpersonal Violence Prevention"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google