Researchers have emphasized the detrimental effects of COVID-19 on mental health, but less attention has been given to personal strengths promoting resilience during the pandemic. One strength might be gratitude, which supports wellbeing amidst adversity. A two-wave examination of 201 college students revealed anxiety symptom severity increased to a lesser extent from pre-COVID (January–March 2020) to onset-COVID (April 2020) among those who reported greater pre-COVID gratitude. A similar trend appeared for depression symptom severity. Gratitude was also correlated with less negative changes in outlook, greater positive changes in outlook, and endorsement of positive experiences resulting from COVID-19. Thematic analysis showed “strengthened interpersonal connections” and “more time” were the most commonly reported positive experiences. Overall findings suggest gratitude lessened mental health difficulties and fostered positivity at the onset of the pandemic, but more research is needed to determine whether gratitude and other strengths promote resilience as COVID-19 continues.

Victims of sexual assault often disclose their victimization experiences to friends and family members in the hope of gaining support. However, a number of factors may influence the manner in which these confidants respond to the disclosure (e.g., severity of the victim’s assault). The purpose of this study was to examine the role of two unique factors—the disclosure recipient’s sexual victimization history and endorsement of rape myths—in predicting responses to disclosure. Participants were 114 undergraduate students who indicated that a close friend or family member had previously disclosed a sexual victimization experience to them. The participants’ responses to that disclosure, personal sexual victimization history, and rape myth attitudes were assessed via a self-report. Results indicated that a history of victimization predicted increased emotionally supportive responses to disclosure. Lower rape myth acceptance predicted increased supportive responses (i.e., emotionally supporting the victim and aiding the victim) and decreased unsupportive responses (i.e., treating the victim differently after the abuse, distracting the victim from the abuse, and blaming the victim). These results have implications for prevention efforts and those working with sexual assault survivors.

Objective: Although data evaluating bystander interventions are promising (e.g., Banyard et al., 2007), little is known about factors that may interfere with friends taking action to prevent assault or to support victims upon assault disclosure. The present study examines the effects of victim alcohol intoxication and perpetrator social status (represented as a collegiate athlete) as potential barriers to effective bystander intervention and supportive responses to disclosure. Method: Using an experimental vignette design, participant responses were assessed in response to a situation involving imminent sexual risk to a friend (T1) and in response to the friend's disclosure of sexual assault (T2). Victim alcohol intoxication and perpetrator status were hypothesized to relate to bystander responses during the sexual risk scenario, which in turn were predicted to impact disclosure responses after the victim's assault. Results: Victim intoxication-though not perpetrator status-predicted friends' likelihood to intervene at T1 such that those in the high intoxication condition were more likely to intervene than were those in the low and no intoxication conditions. Further, friends' likelihood to intervene in the moment at T1 predicted a number of responses to the victim's disclosure at T2. Those who were more likely to intervene in the moment responded to the victim's disclosure with more supportive responses and less blameful responses. Implications: Bystander programs should teach friends to intervene in risk situations regardless of victim alcohol use and should highlight the importance of responding supportively to assault disclosure, regardless of initial intervention behaviors. Clinical Impact StatementFindings indicate that friends are less likely to intervene when a victim is sober or mildly intoxicated (vs. highly intoxicated). Bystander intervention programs should emphasize that an individual's intoxication level is but one important indication of risk and urge participants to not overlook risk to sober individuals. Findings also indicate that friends who do not intervene during sexual risk might respond more negatively to the victim's assault disclosure. Bystander programs should normalize conflicting feelings that might arise after a missed intervention opportunity and highlight that failing to intervene does not mean that it is too late to provide support.

Background: Many child sexual abuse (CSA) survivors delay or withhold disclosure of their abuse, even when presenting for formal investigation interviews. Objective: This study examined factors that relate to the CSA disclosure process. Participants and Settings: Participants were CSA victims (N = 1,732) presenting to a Child Advocacy Center (CAC) for a forensic interview. Method: We tested a structural model to predict disclosure before and during a forensic interview using secondary data analysis. Results: Youth were less likely to disclose before a forensic interview if they witnessed domestic violence (β =-.233, p < .05). Caregivers were less likely to believe the abuse allegation if the alleged perpetrator resided in the home β =-.386, p < .05) and more likely to believe if the youth made a prior disclosure (β = .286, p < .05). Youth were more likely to disclose during the forensic interview if they were older (β=.388, p < .05), if the alleged perpetrator resided in their home (β=.209, p

This study examined whether sexual objectification (i.e., reducing someone to a sex object via a disproportionate focus on appearance and sexual characteristics) was associated with decreased confidence in future bystander intervention to reduce the risk for sexual violence (i.e., bystander efficacy) through several barriers to intervention:failing to noticethe event,failing to identify the situation as risky, andfailing to take responsibility. Participants were 1,021 undergraduates (n= 309 men;n= 712 women) who completed self-report measures. Because men frequently perpetrate objectification, whereas women often experience objectification, complementary models were tested with objectification perpetration in men and objectification experiences in women. As expected, for men, each barrier mediated negative associations between objectification perpetration and bystander efficacy. Unexpectedly, for women, each barrier mediated positive associations between objectification experiences and bystander efficacy. Findings underscore important gender differences in associations between sexual objectification and bystander efficacy, as well as potential benefits of helping bystanders recognize the risk for sexual violence and assume responsibility for intervening.