What Works in Violence Prevention Among Young People?: A Systematic Review of Reviews

Abstract

Violence prevention programs aim to raise awareness, change attitudes, normative beliefs, motivation, and behavioral responses. Many programs have been developed and evaluated, and optimistic claims about effectiveness made. Yet comprehensive guidance on program design, implementation, and evaluation is limited. The aim of this study was to provide an up-to-date review of evidence on what works for whom. A systematic search of PsycINFO, MEDLINE, ERIC, and Sociology Collection ProQuest identified 40 reviews and meta-analyses reporting on the effectiveness of violence prevention programs among young people (age 15–30) in educational institutions, published before October 2018. These included reviews of programs designed to reduce (i) bullying, (ii) dating and relationship violence, (iii) sexual assault, and (iv) antisocial behavior. Only evaluations that reported on behavioral outcomes such as perpetration, victimization, and bystander behavior were included. The reviewed evaluations reported on programs that were mainly implemented in high-income countries in Europe and North America. The majority found small effects on violence reduction and victimization and increases in self-reported bystander behavior. Our findings expose critical gaps in evaluation research in this area and provide recommendations on how to optimize the effectiveness of future programs.

Effects of the Action for Neutralization of Bullying Program on Bullying in Spanish Schoolchildren

“…In this study, the ANA program achieved this “maintenance effect” 3 months after implementation, achieving even greater reduction in victimization behaviors after 3 months than immediately after the program. One possible explanation for this “maintenance effect” may be the active involvement of teachers and other observers in the educational community during and after the application of the program [ 33 ], given the special importance of the program to them. Among the reductions, the decreases after 3 months of reported values of physical and verbal abuse are especially relevant, since these two components of the bullying tend to be the ones with the most weight or more general in these kinds of behaviors [ 36 ].…”

“…Since the problem of the bullying is partially explained by family context, it would be interesting to also assess the prosocial or antisocial tendencies of the children’s families to evaluate their influence in the program changes [ 6 , 18 ]. Additionally, following current trends [ 33 ], the inclusion of booster sessions after the end of the program and after an extended period of time has elapsed would be of relevant interest in order to consolidate the gains previously achieved through the program. In addition, longer follow-up would allow further evaluation of the effects of the program.…”

“…This special weight given to the observers relies on the fact that they are the ones constantly in contact with the children and consequently the ones that might be able not only to apply the program effectively over the years or the different generations, but also to maintain it. Moreover, this role given to the observers offers the possibility to, albeit following the program, adapt it to specific necessities of the children [ 33 ]. The intervention applied in this study consisted of eight group sessions delivered over two months and was aimed mainly at mobilizing the observers.…”

Exploring risk and protective factors for adolescent dating violence across the social-ecological model: A systematic scoping review of reviews

“…Per the general focus of most ADV research (and current ADV interventions, e.g., 70 ), we were not surprised to find that most work on ADV risk and protective factors has focused on risk factors at the individual and relationship levels. This is likely due (at least in part) to the challenges of measurement in capturing community and societal level factors, and connecting them back to individual-level behavior.…”

Universal violence prevention interventions: Umbrella review of effectiveness meta-analyses

“…Regardless of the level of intervention, violence prevention programmes need to be supported by evidence of their efficacy (Hailes et al, 2019;World Health Organization, 2022). However, most violence intervention programmes have not been properly tested (Kovalenko et al, 2022;Nation et al, 2003), some of which may be harmful as they might increase risk of violence or other adverse outcomes. Those with no effect on individual outcomes are also harmful in wasting limited resources.…”