Effectiveness of Universal School-Based Programs for the Primary Prevention of Violence

Supplemental Materials

Effectiveness of Universal School-Based Programs for the Primary Prevention of Violence in Adolescents

by A. J. Gavine et al., 2016, Psychology of Violence

Appendix 1.

Summary of characteristics, findings, and quality of the 21 included studies

Intervention/
study/
country / Nature of
Program
(person delivering programme) / Study Design / Population
(grade, demographics) / Outcomes and Effect Size / Study Quality
BRAVE
Griffin et al. (2009) US / SD (external program organizers) / Cluster-randomized (class level) / 8th. Inner city, high proportion African Americans. / Monitoring the Future national survey instrument.
Victimization: d = 0.06 (p = .76). 2) d = 0.17 (p = .36)
VB: d = 0.17 (p = .36) / Moderate
Count on Me
Jimenez-Barbero et al. (2013) Spain / SD (own teacher) / Cluster-randomized (class level) / 6th -7th. Mean demo-
graphics for that urban area / Cuestionario de Actitud Hacia la Violencia:
ATV. Violence as fun, d = 0.20 (CI= 0.09-5); Violence to improve self-esteem, d = 0.02, CI = -.0.27 – 0.32); Violence as a social skill, d = 0.08, CI = -0.02 – 0.38; Violence as legitimate, d = 0.26, CI = -0.4 – 0.55.
Author developed scale.
School violence (classroom): d = 0.07, CI = -0.22 – 0.36
School violence (playground):d = 0.306, CI = 0.01 – 0.60 / Moderate
Expressive writing programKliewer et al. (2011) US / SD (external project staff) / Cluster-randomized (class level) / 7th.Urban, high proportion African Americans. / Problem Behaviours Frequency Scale (PBFS):
PA at 2 months:d = 0.12 (p = >.05); 6 months, d = 0.02,(p = >.05)
Achenbach’s AggressiveBehavior
PA (Teacher report): d = -0.48, p = <.001 and 6 months, d = 0.09,(p = >.05). / Moderate
Get Real About ViolenceMeyer et al. (2004) US / SD & SN(teachers within the school) / Non-randomized (school level) / 7th.high proportion African Americans. / Author developed scale.
NPA: d = 0.39, CI = 0.16 – 0.63. 3
VB:d = 0.06, CI = -0.18 – 0.29. / Weak
GREAT (MVPP)
MVPP (2008)
US / SD (external specialists who were graduate students or former teachers) / Cluster-randomized (school level) / 6th. High SED. / Beliefs Supporting Fighting and Non-violent responses scale and individual norms for aggression:
ATV: beliefs for fighting, d = -0.04, (p = >.05); beliefs non-violent responses, d = -0.03, p = >.05); individual norms for aggression, d = 0.01, (p = >.05); individual norms for nonviolent behavior, d = -0.10, (p = <.05); goals and strategies supporting aggression, d = -0.11, (p = <.05); goals and strategies supporting non-violent responses, d = -0.03, (p = >.05).
Self-efficacy for non-violent responses scale:
CRS:d = -0.07, (p = >.05).
Behavioural Assessment System for Children (BASC).
PSS (teacher-rated): d = 0.00, (p = >.05). / Strong (Moderate for teacher rated outcomes)
MVPP (2009)
US / PBFS
PA:d = -0.09, p = <.05).
Victimization: overt, d = 0.02, p = >.05); relational, d = 0.04, p = <.05).
School Safety Problems Scale
Violence within school d = 0.05, (p = >.05) / Strong (Moderate for teacher rated outcomes)
Incremental Theory InterventionYeager et al. (2013) US / SD (external facilitators, experienced at working with adolescents) / Cluster-randomized (class level) / 9th-10th. Mean demographics for that urban area / Author developed computer vignettes
NPA: d = 0.47, p = <.05).
PSS: d =0.86, p = <.05). / Moderate
INTEMOCastillo et al. (2013) Spain / SD (external psychologist) / Quasi-randomized (school level) / Urban public middle and high schools. / Buss and Perry Aggression Questionnaire (Spanish).
PA: d = 0.23, CI = 0.07 – 0.4
NPA: d = 0.36, CI = 0.19 – 0.53.
Interpersonal Reactivity Index.
PSS: d = 0.19, CI = 0.02 – 0.35. / Moderate
Leadership Program: Violence Prevention ProjectChauveron et al. (2012) US / SD & SN (external facilitators) / Quasi-randomized (class level) / 6th-8th. High SED. / Huesmann’s normative beliefs about aggression scale.
ATV: dcorr = 0.1 (p = <.05).
Author developed vignettes.
Conflict resolution skills: Pro-social verbal responsedcorr = 0.016; (p = <.05); Walking away dcorr = 0.06, (p = <.05). / Weak
Life Skills Training (LST)
Botvin et al. (2006) US / SD (teacher) / Cluster-randomized (school level) / 6th. High SED. / Author developed scales*
Any NPA (WG): OR = 0.77, CI = 0.44-1.33;
High NPA (WG): OR = 0.90, CI = 0.47-1.77.
Any NPA (FG): OR = 0.72, CI 0.36 -1.46,
High NPA (FG): OR = 0.50, CI = 0.31 - 0.83.
Any PA (WG): OR = 0.50, CI = 0.37 -0.67
High PA (WG): OR = 0.61, CI = 0.44-0.85
PA (whole group): OR = 0.77, CI = 0.44-1.33.
Any PA (FG): OR = 0.77, CI = 0.44-1.33
High PA (FG): 0.76, CI = 0.50-1.16.
Any VB (WG): OR = 0.78, CI = 0.55-1.12
High VB (WG): OR = 0.74, CI = 0.57-0.97.
Any VB (FG): OR = 0.53, CI = 0.37- 0.74
High VB (FG): OR = 0.56, CI = 0.40-0.79 / Moderate
Mentors in Violence PreventionKatz et al. (2011) US / SN (MVP mentors who a trained students within the school) / Non-randomized cluster (school level) / 9th-12th. Midwest / Student perceptions of wrongfulness of violent survey.
ATV (less aggressive response): d = 0.60, CI = 0.49 – 0.71
ATV (aggressive response):d = 1.47, CI = 1.35 – 1). / Moderate
RIPP
Farrell et al. (2003a) US / SD &SN (external trained prevention specialists) / Non-randomized cluster (class level) / 7th.Urban, high SED. / PBFS
VB: post–test, d = -0.11, CI = -0.20 – 0.14; 6 months, d = 0.03, CI = -0.21-0.27; 12 months, d = 0.10, CI = -0.11-0.32
NPA: post-test, d = - 0.03, CI = -0.22 – 0.17; 6 months, d = 0.06, CI = -021 – 0.34; 12 months, d = 0.17, CI = 0.07-0.42.
Beliefs Supporting Aggression and Attitudes Towards Conflict Scale (BSAATC).
ATV:d = -0.06, CI = -0.26 – 0.14; 6 months, d = 0.08, CI = -0.14 – 0.29, 12 months, d = 0.00, CI = -0.23 – 0.23.
CRS: d = -0.01, CI = -0.22 -021; 6 months, d = 0.01, CI = -0.28 – 0.29; 12 months, d = 0.20, CI = -0.03 – 0.44. / Moderate
Farrell, et al. (2003b)
US / SD & SN (external trained prevention specialists) / Cluster-randomized (class level) / 6th-8th. Rural area, high SED. / PBFS,
PA: 4 months, d = 0.10, (p = >.05); 9 months, d = 0.17, (p = <.05)
BSAATC:
ATV (approval of violence): 4 months, d = 0.12, (p = <.01), 9 months, d = 0.06, (p = >.05).
ATV (approval of non-violence): 4 months, d = 0.19, p = <.01; 9 months, d = 0.14, (p = <.01).
Problem Situation Inventory
CRS:4 months, d = 0.10, (p = >.05); 9 months, d = -0.05, (p = >.05).
Children’s Report of Exposure to Violence
Victimization: 4 months, d = 0.04, (p = >.05). Not conducted at 9 months. / Moderate
Resolve It, Solve It
Swaim & Kelly (2008) US / SN (local high school students) / Non-randomized cluster (school level) / 7th-8th. Across US, mainly white, schools selected to be generalizable across US / Scale of Aggressive Anger Expression
VB: Intervention (I) b = -0.208, Control (C) b = -0.015, (p = <.05).
PA: I b = 0.17, C b= 0.28, (p > 0.05).
NPA: I b = 0.58, C b = 0.55, (p > 0.05).
Self-efficacy and Intent for Future Violent Behaviour Scale
CRS: I b = 0.05, C b = 0.33, p = <.05.
Author developed scales
Victimization (verbal): I b = 0.21, C b = 0.11, (p = <.05).
Vicimization(physical): I b = -0.23, C b = -0.08, (p > 0.05).
PSS: I b = 0.01, C b = -0.16, (p = <0.05). / Moderate
Second Stepsvan Schoiack-Edstorm et al. (2002) US and Canada / SD &SN (class teachers or counsellors or school psychologist) / Non-randomized cluster (comm-unity level) / 6th-8th. Range of demographics / Endorsement of aggression scale
ATV: level 1 students, d = 0.43, p = <.05; level 2 students, d = 0.87, p = <.001.
Perceived Social Difficulty Scale.
PSS: level 1 students, no significant result (no data presented to compute d); level 2 students, d = 0.34, p = <.01. / Weak
Second Step: Student Success Through PreventionEspelage et al. (2013) US / SD (class teachers) / Non-randomized cluster (class level) / 6th-8th. Midwest, high SED. / University of Illinois Fighting Scale
VB: OR 0.69, CI = 0.60 – 0.79. / Moderate
Social Development Curriculum Flay et al. (2004) US / SD & SN (university based health educators) / Random-block design. Schools stratified into quartiles. / 5th-8th. Inner city & suburban. High proportion African-Americans. / Author developed scale
VB: (boys), d = 0.31, p = 0.05. no significant effect for girls, data not reported. / Moderate
Jagers et al. (2007) US / Bryant Empathy Scale and Davis Empathetic Concern sub-scale.
PSS: b = 0.394 (0.160),
Z=2.462, p = 0.013,
Violence Avoidance Efficacy Beliefs Scale.
CRS: b= 0.072 (0.345), p = >.05 / Weak
Ngwe et al. (2004) US / Author developed scale
ATV: b = -0.28, SE = 0.160),
p = <0.05. / Weak
Segawa et al. (2005) US / Author developed scale
VB (re-analysis of the data presented in Flay et al. [2004] with students classified as having high, medium or low baseline scores).High baseline students, slope estimate = -3.18, SE = 1.18, p = .004. No significant programme effect for the students classified as medium or low at baseline / Moderate

Note.

* Sample analysed as whole group (WG) and fidelity group (FG) where students received at least 50% of the programme.

** High level defined as > 5 events in a month

$High level defined as >3 events in a month