Homophobic name-calling and sexual violence are prevalent among US high school students and have been associated with a host of negative consequences including anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders, especially among sexual and gender minority youth. Although homophobic name-calling and sexual violence are linked to common risk and protective factors, most prior studies have failed to include gender and sexual minority groups. The present study used path analyses to explore the associations between eight protective factors and the outcomes of homophobic name-calling perpetration, homophobic name-calling victimization, sexual violence perpetration, and sexual violence victimization. The sample included LGB (n = 938), transgender (n = 140), and heterosexual (n = 3,744) high school students in Colorado, USA (N = 4,822). Protective factors included: (1) family support; (2) peer support; (3) friendships with trusted adults; (4) participating in healthy activities;(5) helping others; (6) spirituality; (7) access to counseling; and (8) access to medical services. For homophobic name-calling perpetration and victimization, significant negative associations emerged across different groups for the protective factors of family support, peer support, helping others, spirituality, counseling, and medical access. For sexual violence perpetration and victimization, significant negative associations emerged across different groups for the protective factors family support, peer support, and counseling access. Findings suggest that prevention and intervention efforts to address gender-based harassment should focus on building protective, supportive environments across the schools, families, and communities.
Sexual assault (SA) continues to be a serious problem on college campuses in the United States. This meta-analysis sought to identify correlates for SA victimization on college campuses, as well as examine if there were any differences in correlates for men and women. Database searches utilizing Boolean search terms were used to identify studies to be included in the meta-analysis. Studies were included if they provided quantitative data on correlates for SA victimization among college students. A total of 118 studies yielding 405 unique effect sizes were included in this study. The strongest correlates for SA victimization among college students were physical intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration, physical IPV victimization, emotional IPV victimization, and prior SA victimization. Other significant correlates were related to mental health (e.g., hopelessness, suicidal ideation, trauma symptoms, anxiety symptoms, depressive symptoms), and factors related to a campus party culture (e.g., binge drinking, alcohol use, drug use, Greek membership). We were able to compare seven correlates between men and women. Results of the meta-analysis also highlight the need for future research to examine additional correlates for SA victimization, as well as examine race/ethnicity and gender as separate categories when trying to further understand correlates for SA victimization.
Sexual assault (SA) on college campuses remains a prominent public health issue. This meta-analysis focuses on identifying all potential risk markers for college male SA perpetration. Using standard search procedures, a total of 25 studies yielding 89 unique effect sizes were included in the study. Significant risk markers were related to hegemonic masculinity (e.g., peer approval of SA, rape myth acceptance, sexist beliefs, hostility towards women), other forms of dating violence perpetration (e.g., physical and psychological dating violence perpetration), and the college party culture (e.g., binge drinking, alcohol and substance use, frequency of hook-ups). Psychological dating violence victimization, athletic team membership, race/ethnicity, relationship status, and religiosity were not significant risk markers for SA perpetration. Findings support potential benefits of SA prevention efforts prioritizing peer education/student leaders modeling SA disapproval, challenging hegemonic masculinity, healthy relationship and sexual education, as well as alcohol and substance use awareness.
Heterosexism, in the form of microaggressions, contributes to hostile, anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) college campus climates, thereby limiting sexual and gender minority students’ social engagement and academic persistence. Using Tinto’s model of institutional departure, we examined the degree to which experiencing microaggressions affects sexual minority college students’ retention as a function of their feelings of discomfort in the classroom. Mediation analyses were performed on a subsample of data from 152 self-identified LGBTQ college students at a southern university in the United States to examine relations among experiences of self-reported microaggressions, self-rated classroom discomfort, and expressed intentions to transfer from the university. Self-reported discomfort in the classroom accounts for the relation between experiences of microaggressions and LGBTQ students’ intentions to transfer from the university. Specifically, LGBTQ students who experienced microaggressions more often reported greater discomfort in their classrooms and reported fewer intentions to continue studying at their university. Universities should strive to implement campus-wide programs that help minimize microaggressions, encourage cultural competency and comfort in the classroom, and combat anti-LGBTQ prejudice to better support students in their day-to-day academic endeavors. LGBTQ students who feel safe and supported in the classroom may be protected from heterosexism and social isolation and, thereby, may be more likely to persevere in their academic pursuits.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.