1. College Male Attitudes Towards Bystander Intervention Nate Tysk Advisor: Susan Wolfgram, Ph. D University of Wisconsin-Stout RESEARCH PROBLEM: College males are more likely than college females to accept rape myths and less likely to hold positive views towards bystander intervention (McMahon, 2010; Kress, Shepherd, Anderson, Petuch, Nolan, & Thiemeke, 2006). RESEARCH QUESTION: What are college male attitudes towards bystander intervention in the context of violence against women? HYPOTHESIS: 1) Males will not deviate from the current social structure, as defined by the Feminist Theory, thus choosing to be an inactive bystander and stay silent.(Boss, Doherty, LaRossa, Schumm, & Steinmets, 1993). 2) Positive correlation between BPA and the following WTI, IMF, IFM, CSS, WSD, BEA, CCI 3) Positive correlation between BVI and the following WTI, IMF, IFM, CSS, WSD, BEA, CCI 4) Positive correlation between VFB and the following WTI, IMF, IFM, CSS, WSD, BEA, CCI PURPOSE OF STUDY: 1) To investigate college male attitudes towards bystander intervention in the context of violence against women 2) To develop a reliable survey instrument to measure those attitudes towards bystander intervention 3) To use the results from this study to increase college campus administration’s awareness of the need for bystander intervention programming as well as to increase males’ awareness of their accountability as a bystander of any violence or even potential violence towards another individual. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: Feminist Theory (Boss, Doherty, LaRossa, Schumm, & Steinmets, 1993) This theory is unique in the sense that it is action oriented, focused on the study of female subordination with the intentions to change that gendered mindset. As applied to my study this theory predicts male perspectives will be affected simply due to their societal understanding of social relations between genders. LITERATURE REVIEW: McMahon (2010) discovered incoming college students had a negative relationship between their acceptance to rape myths and willingness to intervene. Three variables were significant in bystander attitudes: 1) being male 2) those lacking previous rape education and, 3) those not knowing a survivor of sexual assault. Hillenbrand-Gunn et al. (2010) found that both male and female rape-supportive attitudes decreased after educational intervention. Moynihan et al. (2010) conducted an exploratory evaluation of a sexual and intimate partner violence prevention program focusing on intercollegiate athletes and found that such individuals confidence and intent to practice bystander behaviors increased regardless of gender. Banyard et al. (2007) found a college sexual violence prevention program focused on the education of safe and effective intervention to increase prosocial bystander attitudes, increase bystander efficacy, and increase self-reported bystander behaviors in both men and women. Kress et al. (2006) examined a sexual assault program that targeted college freshmen and discovered that men held a greater endorsement for rape myths and that the program greatly decreased rape myth acceptance attitudes regardless of gender. DEPENDENT VARIABLES: WTI (I would intervene if I saw a male forcefully taking a female who is intoxicated back to his room) IMF (I would intervene if I saw a male being verbally aggressive towards a female in a busy public area) IFM (I would intervene if I saw a female being verbally aggressive towards a male in a busy public area) CSS (I would voice my disapproval if I was in the presence of a male making a sexist joke) WSD (I would support a female in front of my friend if he was blaming the female for being sexually assaulted) BPA (When a violent offense occurs towards a female in a busy public area, the bystanders are at least partially accountable. IAP (It is more important to me to be accepted by my peers than to intervene for a female in a situation that is potentially dangerous for her) BEA (If I intervene regularly in situations where there is a possibility of violence against females I can prevent someone from being hurt) CCI (I am confident that I would have the courage to intervene in a situation where it is likely another male may hurt a female) BVI (I believe there are many warning signs in public that could indicate a male’s tendency to be aggressive. (ex. Demeaning language, encouraging females to over consume alcohol, etc.) VFB (I would intervene if a male was being aggressive with a female because she would not go home with him, even if she was accepting drinks from him and “leading him on” all night) VARIABLES: DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES: GEN (Gender), AGE (AGE), CST (College Status), PBE (I have previously participated in some form of bystander intervention education or training: IMF IFM CSS BPA IAP BEA CCI BVI VFB WTI.495.416-.326.361.418.369.508 IMF.521.332.392.407 IFM.330.318 CSS.311 WSD.362 IAP-.316-.345 BEA.382 BVI.378 Correlations: All Correlations significant at the p<0.01 level (2-tailed) RESULTS: HYPOTHESES: 1) Little support for this hypothesis. 70% of surveyed chose intervention over silence. support: WTI, WSD, IAP, CCI. 2) Some support for this hypothesis. Correlation between BPA and WSD. 3) Support for this hypothesis. Correlation between BVI and WTI, as well as BVI and BEA. 4) Strong support for this hypothesis. Correlation between VFB and WTI, as well as VFB and IMF, as well as VFB and CSS.. RELIABILITY ANALYS: Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.677 IMPLICATIONS: PRACTITIONERS: University use by Housing, Counseling Center/Campus Violence Prevention Project, general/staff and students. FUTURE RESEARCH: Increase variability on the scale, using a 1- 6 scale (Agree Strongly, Agree Moderately, Agree Slightly, Disagree Slightly, Disagree Moderately, Disagree Strongly) rather than a 1-5, to help decrease neutral answers. Large and random sampling so findings can be generalized. Wording of dependent variable IAP survey statement should be altered to be a “positive inquiry,” similarly phrased as other survey statements. If this question were to be deleted the Cronbach’s Alpha would have been.755 Due to the strongly defensive reactions displayed in the open ended questions of the survey, it would be beneficial to conduct qualitative interviews allowing a researcher to further explore the origin of such responses. More questions similar to the variables IMF and IFM: exploring reactions to similar bystander situations while changing the gender of the victim and aggressor to study differences in responses. CONCLUSION: Majority of college males willing to intervene when females are in situations potentially dangerous. But, bystander intervention: 1) varied depending on gender of the victim and/or aggressor 2) correlated with belief of warning signs indicating aggression 3) correlated with a male’s view of the female’s blameworthiness. Preventative efforts : youth programming focused on the education of the topics above could help eliminate unhealthy viewpoints held towards females, encourage bystander intervention, and help break the cycle of violence. METHOD: PARTICIPANTS: 69 college male students from a Midwestern University RESEARCH DESIGN: Non-random pilot study, cross sectional, purposive sampling DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENT: IRB approved, informed by literature & theory, implied consent. Online survey with 4 demographic variables, 12 closed ended statements based on a 1-5 Likert Scale, and 5 open ended statements. PROCEDURE: Questionnaires administered to male college students living in campus residence halls. Implied consent and confidentiality was attached to email with survey. DATA ANALYSIS PLAN: Cleaned & coded surveys, analyzed data using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), frequencies, mean comparisons, correlations, and a reliability analysis: Cronbach’s Alpha.