Bystander intervention is receiving increased attention as a potential sexual violence prevention strategy, especially to address campus sexual assault. Rather than focusing on potential perpetrators or victims, the bystander approach engages all members of a community to take action. A growing body of evaluative work demonstrates that bystander intervention education programs yield increased positive attitudes and behaviors related to sexual violence and greater willingness to intervene in pro-social ways. Future program outcome studies, however, would benefit from more refined measures of bystander action as it is a key variable that prevention education programs attempt to influence. The purpose of the current article is to present key issues, identified by four different research teams, on the measurement of bystander behavior related to sexual violence in the context of college campuses. Comparisons among the methods are made to suggest both lessons learned and new directions for bystander behavior measurement using self-report surveys in program evaluation.

Bystander intervention has been increasingly applied to prevent sexual violence on college campuses. Its underlying theory assumes unidirectional relationships between variables, predicting that bystander behaviors (i.e., actions taken to intervene in sexual violence situations) will be influenced by bystander intentions (BI; i.e., likelihood to intervene in the future), which in turn will be affected by bystander efficacy (BE; i.e., confidence to intervene). One question for theory is whether a reciprocal relationship exists between BI and BE. We used structural equation modeling (SEM) with longitudinal data to test unidirectional and reciprocal causal relations between BI and BE. Participants (n = 1390) were students at a northeastern US university. Four models were examined using SEM: (1) a baseline model with autoregressive paths; (2) a model with autoregressive effects and BI predicting future BE; (3) a model with autoregressive effects and BE predicting future BI; and, (4) a fully cross-lagged model. Results indicated that reciprocal causality was found to occur between BI and BE. In addition, a final model demonstrated indirect effects of a bystander intervention program on bystander behaviors through both BI and BE at different time points. Implications for theory and practice are described, and directions for future research discussed.

This article reports findings from a longitudinal, experimental evaluation of a peer education theater program, Students Challenging Realities and Educating Against Myths (SCREAM) Theater. This study examines the impact of SCREAM Theater on a range of bystander-related outcomes (i.e. bystander intentions, bystander efficacy, perception of friend norms and bystander behaviors) in situations involving sexual violence and whether there was a differential impact of the program by participant sex. First-year college students completed three waves of surveys (pretest, first post-test and second post-test). All participants received one dose of the intervention during summer orientation after the pretest. After the first post-test, participants were randomly assigned to receive two additional doses, or to a control condition, in which they received no additional doses. Students in both one- and three-dose groups reported a number of positive increases. Overall, an intent-to-treat analysis (n = 1390) indicated three doses of the intervention during the first semester of college resulted in better outcomes than the one-time intervention during summer orientation alone. Although both male and female students' scores increased during the study period, female students consistently scored higher than male students on each outcome. The findings suggest that peer education theater holds promise for bystander intervention education on college campuses.

This study utilized an experimental design to determine how bystanders would intervene in campus sexual assault (SA) or intimate partner violence (IPV) situations. Specifically, it examines whether the type of intervention (direct, indirect, or delegation) is associated with relational distance, the nature of the crime, or the sex of the bystander. A random sample of college students completed a web-based survey at a private university in the Midwest. Survey participants were randomly assigned two vignettes-an SA scenario ( n = 371) and an IPV scenario ( n = 350)-with one of three conditions: knew the victim, knew the perpetrator, or knew neither. Chi-square tests, binary logistic regressions, and predicted probabilities were conducted to test three hypotheses. Results indicate that relational distance affects how a bystander will intervene. In the SA vignette, students who knew the victim or perpetrator chose direct intervention. In the IPV vignette, students who knew the victim or perpetrator chose direct or indirect interventions. Students who knew neither the victim nor the perpetrator tended to choose to delegate the intervention to someone else for both crime types. Although there were differences by sex, the larger differences were between whether they knew someone or not. Still, men had the highest probability of directly intervening in the SA scenario, whereas women had the highest probability of indirectly intervening in the IPV scenario. The results of this study suggest that campus violence prevention programs should consider context-specific issues in their trainings such as relational distance and type of crime.

No abstract