Attitudes, Identification, Decisions to Report, and Bystander Factors Among College Freshman Regarding Sexual Assault
Committee memberDuCette, Joseph P.
Fiorello, Catherine A.
Gross, Steven Jay
Sexual Assault Attitudes
Sexual Assault Identification
Sexual Assault Reporting
Permanent link to this recordhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/1419
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractSexual assault has increasingly become a large problem on college and university campuses in the United States. Not only is the frequency of the occurrences problematic, but the lack of reporting, the mishandling of cases, and efforts to stop campus sexual assaults have also garnered a large amount of attention. While many research studies have focused on the effectiveness of educational programs aimed to increase awareness, reporting, and prevention of sexual assault among college students, not many studies have examined if students’ abilities to identify sexual assaults in contextual situations and their attitudes regarding sexual assault are affected by these programs. The purpose of this study was to investigate if students entered college with attitudes that are supportive of sexual assault, the ability of first-semester college freshman to identify sexual assault within contexts, students’ decision to report a perceived sexual assault, the likelihood that students would intervene as a bystander, and demographics related to student attitudes toward, identification of, and decisions to report sexual assaults. Participants in this study were 551 freshmen in their first-semester at Temple University, who were 18 or 19 years of age. Participants completed a survey which consisted of demographic questions, 11 original vignettes depicting potential sexual assault scenarios, the updated Illinois Rape Myth Acceptance (IRMA) scale, and the Type T personality questionnaire. Results revealed that about one-third of students surveyed did not completely disagree with sexual assault-supportive statements on the updated IRMA scale, with the He Didn’t Mean To and She Lied attitudes being the most popularly endorsed. Students who endorsed sexual assault-supportive attitudes were significantly more likely to misidentify an instance of sexual assault and to not report a perceived sexual assault in some scenarios. In regards to demographics, males were more likely than females to endorse sexual assault-supportive attitudes, to misidentify sexual assaults, to not report a perceived sexual assault in some scenarios, and they were less likely than females to intervene as a bystander in a sexual assault scenario. Sexuality and ethnic identification had some effect on attitudes endorsed and ethnic identity had an effect on the decision to report a sexual assault in two specific scenarios. In addition, the type of high school students attended and the types of sexual education topics they were educated on prior to college were significantly linked to attitudes endorsed, and the type of high school students attended was significantly linked to identifying instances of sexual assault. The growing issue of campus sexual assault is represented by the amount of students in this study who cannot correctly identify sexual assault situations, by the attitudes that contribute to the occurrences of sexual assault, and by the reasons why students feel sexual assault scenarios should not be reported. The significant relationship between endorsing attitudes and incorrectly identifying sexual assaults, as well as the decision to not report perceived sexual assaults, supports the potentially harmful effects having an attitude that essentially supports sexual assault can have in society. Prevention efforts need to address the root of a problem, which in this case is a culture where sexual assault, largely against women, is excused, dismissed, and subsequently deemed acceptable. Thus, adolescents should be educated and provided with appropriate messaging on topics related to sexual assault well before they enter college.
ADA complianceFor Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Evaluation of a sexual assault and dating violence prevention program for middle school studentsFullard, William; DuCette, Joseph P.; Sewell, Trevor E.; Farley, Frank; Stahler, Gerald (Temple University. Libraries, 2009)Sexual assault and dating violence among adolescents is a critical matter with potential life threatening consequences. Adolescence is a difficult stage in which personal choices (whether good or bad) can determine future lifetime successes or failures. This problem is of great concern to parents, educators and the community at-large in the United States. Among high school youth nationwide, approximately 9% of students reported that they have been forced to have sexual intercourse (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2004). Serious dating violence occurs in 1.6% of adolescent relationships...roughly 400,000 adolescents (Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2008). Spurred by this information, a variety of programs have been developed to provide adolescents with the information and skills necessary to limit the occurrence of relationship violence. Evaluation of these programs is not mandatory and often prevention programs fail to impact students because of problems with implementation and retention of students. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to evaluate one such program, Project Awareness, a comprehensive, educational approach focusing on middle-school students. Sixty-six middle school students participated in the Project Awareness program and were administered pre- and post-program measures to examine differences in sexual assault and dating violence knowledge, attitudes and behavior. Participating in the program proved to impact female students more than males. Females gained both more knowledge about rape myths and demonstrated greater attitude change about sexual assault. Programs about sexually-related violence should be implemented in schools before high school, be conducted in single-sex classes and must be evaluated for effectiveness.
Trump's New 'Regulatory Czar': Poised to Lead the Assault on Our SafeguardsThe Center for Progressive Reform (2017-04)The White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) sits at a critical juncture in the path of regulatory safeguards for health, safety, and the environment. It has a long history of using the lever of cost-benefit analysis to dilute and block safeguards unpopular with industry, and in a variety of ways, politicizing the regulatory process. According to an April 2017 report from CPR, the nomination of George Mason University law professor Neomi Rao to serve as its administrator signals the Trump administration’s determination to buttress OIRA’s role as an impediment to sensible safeguards. The report by CPR Member Scholars Thomas McGarity, Amy Sinden, Rena Steinzor, and Robert Verchick, and CPR Senior Policy Analyst James Goodwin, examines Rao’s background and concludes the her modest record of “scholarship and other public statements reflect a deep distrust of federal agencies and their role as policymaking institutions within our constitutional system of government.” The authors note, Rao “has called for more constraints on regulatory agencies – including enhanced centralized presidential control over both executive branch and independent agencies – that would inhibit their ability to carry out their respective missions by instituting new public safeguards and enforcing existing ones. In addition, she has staked out an extremely narrow conception of some human rights, which could lead to a low-balling of rules intended to protect those rights.” Since the early days of the Reagan administration, OIRA has required regulatory agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, Food and Drug Administration, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and others to seek its approval before issuing protective rules — thus giving political appointees in the White House great influence over the rules designed to enforce landmark laws like the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, and more. OIRA rides herd over agencies’ cost-benefit analyses for rules and uses that authority to block or weaken them, often after inviting industry lobbyists to weigh in, repeating objections they’ve voiced to agencies during the development of the rules. Two key factors are likely to distinguish the Trump administration’s regulatory process from his predecessors’, according to the report: “The first is Trump’s’ selection of individuals – such as EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt – who are actively hostile to the missions of the agencies they will be running. The other is Trump’s two new anti-regulatory executive orders, which together make deregulation a top policy priority for the administration and a shared commitment among Trump-appointed officials to comply with those orders.” Rao and OIRA are poised to oversee implementation of Trump’s assault on our safeguards, working to assist and direct agencies in dismantling crucial public protections, and perhaps helping them devise ways to insulate the repeal of duly enacted rules from subsequent legal challenge.
School-based Assaultive Violence Prevention in Middle and High Schools Scoping Review Search StrategyRoman, Caterina; LaSane, Talia; Given Castello, Olivia; Given Castello|0000-0002-2721-9809 (2023-07-21)Search Methods for Identification of Studies: To identify studies to include or consider for this scoping review, the review team worked with a research librarian (OGC) to develop detailed search strategies for each database. The PRISMA-S extension was followed for search reporting. The research librarian (OGC) developed the search for APA PsycINFO (EBSCOhost) and translated the search for every database searched. The APA PsycINFO (EBSCOhost) search strategy was reviewed by the research team to check for accuracy and term relevancy, and all searches were peer-reviewed by another research librarian (AGS) following the PRESS checklist. The databases included in this search are PubMed (NLM), Education Resources Information Center (ERIC; EBSCOhost), National Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts (NCJRS; ProQuest), Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA; ProQuest), and Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics), which were searched using a combination of keywords and subject headings. A grey literature search included ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global (PQDT), Policy File Index (ProQuest), Rutgers University Don M. Gottfredson Library of Criminal Justice Gray Literature Database, Policy Commons, and TRIP Pro. All final searches were performed on May 15, 2023. The full search strategies as reported by the librarian are provided.