Gay-straight alliances (GSAs) are school-based organizations for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) youth and their allies that often attempt to improve school climate for sexual and gender minority youth. This meta-analysis evaluates the association between school GSA presence and youth's self-reports of school-based victimization by quantitatively synthesizing 15 primary studies with 62,923 participants. Findings indicate GSA presence is associated with significantly lower levels of youth's self-reports of homophobic victimization, fear for safety, and hearing homophobic remarks, and these results are robust, controlling for a variety of study-level factors. The findings of this meta-analysis provide evidence to support GSAs as a means of protecting LGTBQ+ youth from school-based victimization.

No abstract

No abstract

1 | PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY 1.1 | Bystander programs increase bystander intervention but no effect on perpetrating sexual assault Bystander sexual assault prevention programs have beneficial effects on bystander intervention but there is no evidence of effects on sexual assault perpetration. Effects on knowledge and attitudes are inconsistent across outcomes. | What is this review about?Sexual assault is a significant problem among adolescents and college students across the world. One promising strategy for preventing these assaults is the implementation of bystander sexual assault prevention programs, which encourage young people to intervene when witnessing incidents or warning signs of sexual assault. This review examines the effects bystander programs have on knowledge and attitudes concerning sexual assault and bystander behavior, bystander intervention when witnessing sexual assault or its warning signs, and participants' rates of perpetration of sexual assault. What is the aim of this review?This Campbell systematic review examines the effects of bystander programs on knowledge and attitudes concerning sexual assault and bystander intervention, bystander intervention when witnessing sexual assault or its warning signs, and the perpetration of sexual assault. The review summarizes evidence from 27 high-quality studies, including 21 randomized controlled trials. 2 | WHAT ARE THE MAIN FINDINGS OF THIS REVIEW? 2.1 | What studies are included? This review includes studies that evaluate the effects of bystander programs for young people on (a) knowledge and attitudes concerning sexual assault and bystander intervention, (b) bystander intervention behavior when witnessing sexual assault or its warning signs, and (c) perpetration of sexual assault. Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. These included studies span the period from 1997 to 2017 and ---This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.were primarily conducted in the USA (one study was conducted in Canada and one in India). Twenty-one studies were randomized controlled trials and six were high quality quasi-experimental studies. | Do bystander programs have an effect on knowledge/attitudes, on bystander intervention, or on sexual assault perpetration?Bystander programs have an effect on knowledge and attitudes for some outcomes. The most pronounced beneficial effects are on rape myth acceptance and bystander efficacy outcomes. There are also delayed effects (i.e., 1 to 4 months after the intervention) on taking responsibility for intervening/acting, knowing strategies for intervening, and intentions to intervene outcomes. There is little or no evidence of effects on gender attitudes, victim empathy, date rape attitudes, and on noticing sexual assault outcomes. Bystander programs have a beneficial effect on bystanderintervention. There is no evidence that bystander programs have an effect on pa...

No abstract

Although college hookups are typically enjoyable for both men and women, heterosexual hookups often involve inequitable power dynamics that privilege men (e.g., women perform sexual acts to please partners and/or succumb to pressure for intercourse). Some scholars have attributed this power imbalance to the traditional double standard. However, recent studies have indicated college students typically endorse egalitarian standards-and some endorse a reverse double standard in which they negatively judge men more than women for engaging in the same sexual behavior. Using Online College Social Life Survey data (N = 11,077) I examined relationships between endorsement of double standards and power in hookups. Because contemporary students often believe double standards exist in society but not in their own minds, I also examined relationships between feeling negatively judged for hooking up and power. Most respondents endorsed egalitarian standards, but women were more likely than men to feel judged for hooking up. Feeling judged was a significant predictor of power disadvantages for women and men; endorsing a double standard disparaging one's own gender was significant among men. Findings suggest contemporary relevance of the traditional double standard and highlight differences between women's and men's endorsement of double standards disparaging their own gender.

No abstract

This article provides initial factor analysis grounding for a new clinical and research tool to assess disability identity for adults with either visible/apparent or hidden/less apparent disabilities. The exploratory factor analysis identifies both internal and external dimensions of disability identity. Both internal and external dimensions are important and together represent disability identity. Rehabilitation practitioners are encouraged to consider disability identity while assessing and assisting clients in addressing issues related to their disability.