Varying prevalence rates of sexual violence across colleges and universities indicate the need to understand institutional factors underlying such variation; however, research often focuses exclusively on individual risk and protective factors, which both under theorizes and under explains the phenomenon of campus sexual assault. In this review, we propose that broadening to include campus- and contextual-level factors is necessary to fully explain campus sexual assault. Using an ecological approach, we identify and synthesize research related to campus-level variation in sexual violence, including availability of campus services and resources for survivors, institutional risk factors such as alcohol and party culture, athletics, and fraternities, and the impact of policies at the state and federal levels. Suggestions are made for conducting additional research at the campus level and implications of reframing campus sexual assault from an institutional lens are discussed, including the importance of this approach for practice, evaluation, and policy.

The practice of ethics in social science research is a reflexive process of self-review to define a profession’s collective responsibility in the face of changing norms and expectations. In recent years, we have seen transformative changes in how society thinks about supporting sexual assault survivors, and how the scientific community thinks about our obligations to society. Decades of research on trauma and its impact has raised awareness about the needs of victimized individuals, giving rise to the trauma-informed practice movement, which emphasizes that service providers must center survivors’ well-being in all interactions, decisions, and program practices. The field of sexual assault research helped give rise to this movement and provides empirical support for its guiding tenets, and in this article, we explore how to bring these ideas full circle to begin articulating trauma-informed principles for research. A trauma-informed perspective on research challenges scientists to go beyond the requirements of the Belmont Report (1979) and institutional review boards' (IRB) regulations to develop research procedures that fully support survivors’ choice, control, and empowerment. Such reflection on participants’ rights is particularly important given the open science movement sweeping academia, which calls on scientists to share their data publicly to promote transparency, replication, and new discoveries. Disseminating data could pose significant safety, privacy, and confidentiality risks for victims of sexual assault, so we need to evaluate what open science means within a trauma-informed framework. In this article, we examine three key stages of the research process—participant recruitment, data collection, and dissemination—and consider how trauma-informed principles could help, but also could complicate, research practices. We explore these tensions and offer potential solutions so that research on sexual trauma embodies trauma-informed practice.

The purpose of this study was to advance the measurement of economic abuse by developing an updated version of the Scale of Economic Abuse that addresses key limitations of existing instruments. Building on the original Scale of Economic Abuse, we constructed a 2-dimensional Revised Scale of Economic Abuse (SEA2) to measure abusers' use of economic restriction and economic exploitation to exert control over the economic domain of their partners' lives. Method: Using data collected through a survey of 248 women seeking services for intimate partner violence (IPV), we examined the factor structure of the 14-item SEA2 to test the psychometric soundness of the 2-dimensional conceptualization. We also performed an initial test of the instrument's construct validity by examining its relationship with closely associated constructs, material dependence on the abuser and outstanding debt. Results: Confirmatory factor analysis provided support for the 2-factor structure of the SEA2. Regression analysis results suggested that the SEA2 measures an economic dimension of IPV as intended and provided initial evidence that the 2 subscales measure distinct forms of economic abuse. Conclusion: The SEA2 appears to be a psychometrically sound instrument for measuring the economic abuse construct. Researchers can use this instrument to further our understanding of the correlates and consequences of this distinct form of IPV. Practitioners could use the SEA2 to assess the types and extent of economic abuse their clients experienced. The substantive findings of the study also have implications for practice and policy.

Sexual assault and intimate partner violence are problems on college campuses, yet few studies have examined campus-level factors that may be associated with their prevalence. This study examines campus-level factors that influence rates of sexual assault and intimate partner violence among college students. Method: Data are from 474 campuses that participated in the National College Health Assessment survey between 2011 and 2015. We used linear regression models to assess the impact of campus-level variables on campus rates of sexual assault and intimate partner violence. Results: Significant campus-level predictors of sexual assault rates included rates of binge drinking, proportions of sexual minority students, lower student mean age, and higher proportions of students reporting experiences of discrimination. The strongest campus-level predictors of intimate partner violence rates included greater average number of sexual partners, lower rates of binge drinking, older student mean age, and lower proportions of full-time students. Conclusions: Campus-level factors associated with rates of sexual assault and intimate partner violence provide intervention targets for college administrators and student support staff. Colleges should address both individual and college-level factors in their efforts to prevent and reduce sexual assault and intimate partner violence.

Objective: Campus climate surveys related to sexual violence have become commonplace on college campuses. Despite what their name implies, these surveys have lacked both a clear definition of climate and conceptualization of how climate shapes sexual violence. Moreover, these surveys have largely focused on individual attitudes and behaviors, paying limited attention to campus-level factors that could be targeted to strengthen campus response and prevention efforts. Methods: Drawing on research related to sexual violence and climate assessment in other fields, we propose a comprehensive definition of climate comprising five dimensions-behavioral, perceived, felt, structural, and historical climate. Using this multidimensional framework, we identify aspects not currently assessed by existing climate assessments that have the potential to inform a more comprehensive assessment of climate as it relates to sexual violence. Results: Current climate assessments focus mostly on behavioral climate and perceived climate, with less attention to felt, structural, and historical climate. Addressing these additional climate dimensions would allow institutions to identify and track factors that result in disproportionate burden of sexual violence among students with marginalized identities and help identify prevention targets at the outer levels of the social ecology. Conclusion: A more comprehensive climate assessment may empower institutions to enact programs or policies, foster community norms, grapple with complicated histories, and otherwise endeavor to change their climate to one that effectively prevents and responds to sexual violence.