Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Nov;1(2):183-211.
doi: 10.1177/2632077020966571. Epub 2020 Oct 29.

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

Affiliations

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

Victoria L Banyard et al. J Prev Health Promot. 2020 Nov.

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.

Keywords: bystander behavior; prevention; sexual and relationship violence; social norms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest related to this work.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Anderson LA, & Whiston SC (2005). Sexual assault education programs: A meta-analytic examination of their effectiveness. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29(4), 374–388. 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00237.x - DOI
    1. Ansari S (2013). Social capital and collective efficacy: Resource and operating tools of community social control. Journal of Theoretical & Philosophical Criminology, 5(2), 75.
    1. Banyard V, Edwards K, Jones L, & Mitchell K (2020). Poly-strengths and peer violence perpetration: what strengths can add to risk factor analyses. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49(3), 735–746. 10.1007/s10964-020-01197-y - DOI - PubMed
    1. Banyard VL, Edwards KM, & Rizzo AJ (2019). “What would the neighbors do?” Measuring sexual and domestic violence prevention social norms among youth and adults. Journal of Community Psychology, 47(8). 10.1002/jcop.22201 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Banyard VL, Edwards KM, & Siebold WL (2017). Involving community in sexual violence prevention: Engaging bystanders. In Sturmey P (Ed.), The Wiley Handbook of Violence and Aggression (Vol. 3). Wiley. 10.1002/9781119057574.whbva122 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources