Improving Social Norms and Actions to Prevent Sexual and Intimate Partner Violence: A Pilot Study of the Impact of Green Dot Community on Youth

Abstract

Sexual violence (SV) and intimate partner violence (IPV), which often co-occur with bullying, are serious public health issues underscoring the need for primary prevention. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a community-building SV and IPV prevention program, Green Dot Community, on adolescents’ perceptions of community social norms and their propensity to intervene as helpful actionists using two independent data sources. Green Dot Community takes place in towns and aims to influence all town members to prevent SV and IPV by addressing protective factors (i.e., collective efficacy, positive prevention social norms, and bystander helping, or actionism). In the current study, one town received Green Dot Community (the prevention-enhanced town), and two towns received prevention as usual (i.e., awareness and fundraising events by local IPV and SV advocacy centers). The program was evaluated using a two-part method: (a) A cross-sectional sample of high school students from three rural communities provided assessment of protective factors at two time points (Time 1, n = 1,187; Time 2, n = 877) and (b) Youth Risk Behavior Survey data from the state Department of Health were gathered before and after program implementation (Time 1, n = 2,034; Time 2, n = 2,017) to assess victimization rates. Youth in the prevention-enhanced town reported higher collective efficacy and more positive social norms specific to helping in situations of SV and IPV over time but did not differ on bystander behaviors or on victimization rates. Community-based prevention initiatives may be helpful in changing community norms to prevent SV/IPV.

Youth perceptions of prevention norms and peer violence perpetration and victimization: A prospective analysis

“…The measure of social norms perceptions used in the current study for adults may represent a dimension of adult monitoring. The findings do underscore the importance of involving important adults throughout the community in prevention (Banyard, Edwards, Rizzo, et al, 2020).…”

“…Addressing social norms alongside other evidence‐based prevention components (e.g., bystander intervention skills), may help to reduce peer‐to‐peer violence (Basile et al, 2016; Orchowski et al, 2020). Furthermore, the data also contribute further understanding regarding the potential for moving beyond high school or college campuses to community‐wide initiatives, given the data presented here were based on community‐wide norms (Banyard, Edwards, Rizzo, et al, 2020). These data also underscore the important role of adults in preventing peer‐to‐peer violence.…”

“…In particular, the current study differs from previous studies on teachers and parents because it assesses perceptions of norms among community adults. Understanding these relationships may open doors for new areas of prevention such as the Green Dot Community program that builds community relationships among adults and agencies to enhance bystander intervention (Banyard, Edwards, Rizzo, et al, 2020).…”

Who Do We Model? A Brief Report Comparing Different Sources of Normative Influence on Adolescent Bystander Intervention

“…Participants were students from three high schools located in three different towns in northern New England. Data was collected as part of a larger evaluation of a community DSV prevention program; however, in this paper, we analyze data from the baseline survey prior to the implementation of the prevention initiative (Banyard et al, 2020). No significant demographic differences were observed across the three towns in sex, race/ethnicity, or age; demographics and results are reported in aggregate rather than by town.…”

“…Adolescents' actual bystander behavior in DSV situations was measured through calculating their bystander action ratio (BAR) using 12 paired items. These items were from the larger Bystander Opportunity Scale (Coker et al, 2011) and were also validated with this sample by our research team (Banyard et al, 2020). Six items assessed frequency of opportunity to intervene, and six items assessed frequency of intervention, if they indicated any opportunity.…”