Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Criminal Justice, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina.
Department of Public Health and Exercise Science, Appalachian State University, Boone, North Carolina.
J Adolesc Health. 2023 Jun;72(6):831-844. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2023.02.022. Epub 2023 Apr 8.
The US Campus Sexual Assault Violence Elimination (SaVE) Act of 2013 mandates that all higher education institutions receiving federal funds offer incoming students primary prevention and awareness programming addressing sexual violence. Yet, there is no thorough and up-to-date quantitative synthesis of the effects of campus sexual assault prevention programs on sexual assault attitudes/knowledge and behaviors. Thus, we conducted a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis of experimental and high-quality quasi-experimental research examining effects of college sexual assault prevention programs on sexual assault attitudes and behaviors. Our synthesis of 385 effect sizes from 80 eligible studies disseminated between 1991 and 2021 indicates campus sexual assault programs have a more pronounced effect on attitudes/knowledge than on violence. Effects on sexual assault victimization were significant but small (g = 0.15) and effects on sexual assault perpetration were nonsignificant. Moderator analyses indicate programs that use a risk reduction framework are associated with less favorable outcomes than programs that do not use a risk reduction framework. Considering the limited effect of campus sexual assault prevention programs on violence, we recommend programming efforts move beyond a focus on individuals and, instead, adopt an ecological perspective targeting individuals, social relationships, community factors, and societal factors.
美国 2013 年《校园性侵犯暴力消除法》(SaVE 法案)要求所有接受联邦资金的高等教育机构为新入学的学生提供针对性暴力的初级预防和意识培养方案。然而,目前还没有对校园性侵犯预防计划对性侵犯态度/知识和行为的影响进行全面和最新的定量综合分析。因此,我们对文献进行了系统回顾,并对实验和高质量准实验研究进行了荟萃分析,以检验大学性侵犯预防计划对性侵犯态度和行为的影响。我们对 1991 年至 2021 年期间发表的 80 项合格研究中的 385 个效应量进行了综合分析,结果表明,校园性侵犯预防计划对态度/知识的影响比暴力更显著。对性侵犯受害的影响是显著的,但幅度较小(g=0.15),对性侵犯加害的影响则不显著。 调节分析表明,使用风险降低框架的计划与不使用风险降低框架的计划相比,结果不太有利。考虑到校园性侵犯预防计划对暴力的影响有限,我们建议计划工作不再仅仅关注个人,而是采取一种针对个人、社会关系、社区因素和社会因素的生态视角。