Summary of Evidence for General Activities
Summary of evidence for general activities
Use this document to find and read more about the evidence behind what works when evaluating sexual violence primary prevention activities.
This scale was created for the Sexual Violence Primary Prevention Toolkit in September 2016.
Ecological model
/ Public health approach as an essential element (Davies et al., 2003; Urbis Key Young, 2004, both cited in Russell, 2008).Public health approach criticised as treating sexual violence as something akin to influenza; however it has moved the debate away from feminist understandings and reframes the issue as one which can be prevented (Carmody, 2013). / Requires a sound theoretical base focussing on risk and protective factors (Schwere, 2002, in Keel 2005; Hassall & Hanna, 2007, cited in Russell, 2008) within multiple domains (Mulroney, 2003, cited in Russell, 2008). / Target specific risk factors: Individual, relationship community, and society levels (Mulroney, 2003; Hassall & Hanna 2007; Gottfredson, 1998, all cited in Russell, 2008).
Working at different levels increases the likelihood that goals will be achieved (Arthur and Harrison, 2012). / Successful programmes need to reflect the overlap and interconnection between sexual assault and domestic/family violence (Quadara & Wall, 2012).
Interventions should explicitly address human rights and gender equality issues, including gender stereotypes, power relations, and control (Maxwell et al., 2010). / Violence needs to be addressed at several levels, including changing social mores and organisational behaviour as well as understanding and developing the skills of healthy relationships (Hromek & Walsh, 2012).
Resourcing
/ Resourced to have high quality management, administrators, and well-trained, -supervised, and -paid staff (Davies et al., 2003, cited in Russell, 2008). / Funding to assess longer term outcomes (Davies et al., 2003, cited in Russell, 2008). / Quality programmes, well-funded pilots, and skilled personnel are critical to success (Shonkof & Phillips, 2000, cited in Russell, 2008). / Staffing longevity is integral to ability to do innovative work. Supported by fair wages, family-friendly workplaces, positive environments, and meaningful work (Townsend, 2012). / Staff need to have capabilities beyond technical skill and knowledge, and need capacity to teach non-violent and desirable relationship skills (Carmody et al., 2009).Research and Evaluation
/ Evaluation strategy should be integrated from programme’s inception (Mulroney 2003; Davies et al., 2003, Hassall & Hanna 2007, all cited in Russell, 2008). / Programmes have clear goals and systematically document their results relative to their goals (Nation et al., 2003; Hassall & Hanna, 2007, cited in Russell, 2008). / New information reinforces and expands on previous material and provides necessary data for programmes to evolve (Lee, 2007, cited in Russell, 2008).Evidence base drawn from evaluations that have grasped what on-the-ground initiatives are trying to do in their theory-driven sense (Kwok, 2013). / Evaluation practice must be focussed, engaged, personal, responsive, collaborative, meaningful, and transformational – and deeply participatory and learning-oriented (Kwok, 2013). / Evidence-based approach to programme development and delivery is strongly encouraged (Carmody, 2009).
Evaluations should identify the theoretical underpinnings of the programme in order to accurately judge the efficacy of various programme components (Flood, 2013, Carmody et al., 2009, Topping & Barron, 2009).
Community approach
/ Programmes are community-led (Lee et al., 2007, cited in Russell, 2008).Successful approaches require community participation in the testing, development, and evaluation (Urbis Key Young 2004, cited in Russell, 2008). / Use of local statistics have a greater impact than national statistics (Schwere, 2002, in Keel 2005, cited in Russell, 2008). / Development of programmes are responsive to local needs and issues (Mulroney, 2003; Davies et al., 2003, both cited in Russell, 2008),
Allow intensive interventions among particular populations or in particular settings (Flood, 2013). / Includes content that supports a broader community approach to prevention (Banyard, Moynihan, & Plante, 2007, cited in Russell, 2008). / Innovative programs view prevention as social change (as distinct from community education), and as needing to be tailored to the community. (Townsend, 2012).
Networks and partnerships
/ Strategic partnerships offer a co-ordinated, collaborative approach to producing better outcomes (Davies et al., 2003, cited in Russell, 2008). / Linkages with other programmes and community activities support the development and achievement of common goals, objectives, and networks (Davies et al., 2003, cited in Russell, 2008). / Successful programmes increase communication and collaboration between domains (Hassall & Hanna, 2007, cited in Russell, 2008). / Support from external agencies is valued (Maxwell et al., 2010).Tailored to Audience
/ Programmes must be tailored to the audiences (Schwere 2002, in Keel, 2005; Webster-Stratton & Taylor, 2001; MacIntyre & Carr 1999; Adair 2006: Lee et al., 2007; Briggs & Hawkins, 1997, all cited in Russell, 2008). / Programmes need to be flexible and culturally competent to engage different audiences (Webster -Stratton & Taylor, 2001; Mulroney, 2003, both cited in Russell, 2008). / Effective multi-level prevention programmes involve partnering with the community in identifying change strategies, thereby ensuring relevance in their application (Casey & Lindhorst, 2009). / Relevant and socially-inclusive practice is an important aspect of successful programmes (Flood, 2009). / Need to ensure local experiences, beliefs, language, and social constraints are included to ensure that prevention language and programming can mirror these (Casey & Lindhorst, 2009).Disclosure
/ Programmes must be able to adequately deal with any disclosures that occur through the delivery of the programmes (Adair 2006; Wolfe et al., 2006, both cited in Russell, 2008). / Schools need to be informed about the support mechanisms for dealing with disclosure and know referral sources (Mulroney, 2003; Adair, 2006, both cited in Russell, 2008). / Students participating in school programmes need to be informed of school policies such as complaints procedures and existing laws (Adair, 2006, cited in Russell, 2008).Promoting healthy behaviours
/ Programmes need to focus on promoting healthy behaviours and relationships, not just decreasing negative behaviours (Schwere, 2002, in Keel, 2005; Adair, 2006, both cited in Russell, 2008) / Need to promote positive masculinity (Davies et al., 2003, cited in Russell, 2008) and ethical relationships (Carmody, 2006, cited in Russell, 2008). / Prevention work should be incorporated in the broad themes of healthy relationships, human rights, and gender equality (Wolfe et al., 2006, cited in Russell, 2008). / Curricula need to balance both the pleasurable aspects of sex with a recognition of the unintended consequences of sex, including the high rates of pressured and unwanted sex experienced, especially by young women (Carmody &, Ovenden, 2013). / Promote respectful, non-violent relationships in which each partner feels empowered, safe, supported and respected (Ministry of Women’s Affairs, 2012).Encourage young people to define and develop healthy relationships in social media contexts, with a focus on empowering young people to make informed decisions about risk and healthy relationships (Fairbairn, et al., 2013).
Challenge cultural norms
/ Need to understand and challenge the cultural norms that normalise sexual violence (Carmody and Carrington 2002; Foshee et al., 2005 cited in Russell, 2008). / Prevention work must challenge rape myths and the social and political context in which political violence occurs (Mulroney 2003; Adair 2006 cited in Russell, 2008). / Programmes aim to change aspects of society that support violence and target attitudes and beliefs about aggression and violence (Wolfe et al., 2006 cited in Russell, 2008). / Programmes must include a focus on personal values and ethics, the construction of gender, and male identity (Urbis Key Young 2004 cited in Russell, 2008). / Peer influence is considered to be particularly important in shaping norms and inspiring behaviour change – therefore, prevention efforts are more effective when they take place in the context of cohesive peer groups (Gidycz, Orchowski & Berkowitz, 2011).Comprehensive approach
/ Successful programmes are comprehensive, targeting multiple domains within the environment, multiple risk factors in multiple settings, and attending to the linkages between them (Wolfe et al., 2006, cited in Russell, 2008).Collective promotion of equity and respect is likely to define the next phase of efforts to prevent violence against women (Graffunder et al., 2011). / Explore the contribution that alcohol and other drugs may play in sexual assault (Adair, 2006, cited in Russell, 2008).
Examine the concept of consent and coercion in programmes for adolescents (Adair, 2006, cited in Russell, 2008). / Prevention approaches need to be part of a broader strategy concerning violence and healthy relationships (Mulroney, 2003, cited in Russell, 2008).
Cover bullying and other forms of victimisation (MacIntryre & Carr, 1999, cited in Russell, 2008). / Programme design needs to demonstrate how research literature and practice knowledge have informed programme design decisions (Carmody, 2009). / Include multiple strategies that target the same outcome and that are implemented at two or more levels at the same time (Casey & Lindhorst, 2009).
Promote victim empathy
/ Promoting victim empathy instead of traditional victim blaming (Adair, 2006, cited in Russell, 2008) / It is crucial to recognise the implications of rape myth acceptance as a social norm and to challenge through broadly targeted educational campaigns (Bohner et al., 2009). / All-male programmes are effective at improving rape-related attitudes and rape empathy (Vladutiu, Martin, & Macy, 2011).Male participation
/ Important that men are not excluded from the design, delivery, and receipt of programmes (Carmody, 2006, cited in Russell, 2008). / Avoid blaming men – this can result in disengaging men from the programme and cause a ‘rebound effect’ or resistance to the ideas being put forward (Winkel & De Kluever, 1997; Schwere, 2002, in Keel, 2005, both cited in Russell, 2008). / Engage men as allies rather than constructing them solely as potential perpetrators (Casey & Ohler, 2012; Albury et al., 2011; Katz, 1995, all cited in Russell, 2008). / Including males may shift the discourse of young women’s accountability, particularly surrounding alcohol consumption and ‘risk’ management, which currently dominates the prevention field (Carmody & Ovenden, 2013). / Encourage non-violent men to commit to serving as positive role models and recognise that men are also beneficiaries of prevention efforts (Ministry of Women’s Affairs, 2012).Single sex sessions
/ Single sex sessions are part of effective prevention programmes (Urbis Key Young, 2004, cited in Russell, 2008). / Opportunities should be made to separately educate young men and women (Carmody & Willis, 2007, cited in Russell, 2008).Mixed-gender programmes are generally found to be less effective than single-gender programmes (Vladutiu, Martin, & Macy, 2011). / Effective female-only programmes include: ways perpetrators behave, peer pressure, bystander issues, victim blaming attitudes, assertiveness training, self-defence skills (National Rape and Sexual Assault Prevention Project, 2000, in Adair 2006, cited in Russell, 2008).
All-female programmes are effective at improving rape attitudes, behavioural intent, rape awareness, and knowledge about sexual assault (Vladutiu, Martin, & Macy, 2011). / Effective male-only programmes include: peer and societal pressure, rape myths and stereotypes, men and boys as victims, how to respond to individuals who have been victimised (National Rape and Sexual Assault Prevention Project, 2000, in Adair, 2006, cited in Russell, 2008).
All-male programmes are effective at reducing rape-supportive behaviours and rape myth acceptance (Vladutiu, Martin, & Macy, 2011). / There is value in using different teaching strategies for different sexes; women should learn about risk and protective strategies and young men should learn about the impact of sexual assault on victims (Dyson & Flood, 2008; Flood, 2005/2006; Morrison, et al., 2004; Schewe 2002, in Keel, 2005, all cited in ussell, 2008).
References
Arthur, J., & Harrison, R. (2012). Report and evaluation of the CAPS Hauraki Right 2 B Safe Child Sexual Abuse Primary Prevention Campaign 2011–2012. Thames, NZ: CAPS Hauraki. Available online at:
Bohner, G., Eyssel, F., Pina, A., Siebler, F., & Tendayi Viki G. (2009). Rape myth acceptance: cognitive, affective and behavioural effects of beliefs that blame the victim and exonerate the perpetrator. In M. Horvath, & J. Brown (Eds.), Rape: Challenging Contemporary Thinking, pp. 17–45. Portland, OR: Willan Publishing.
Carmody, M. (2009). Sex and Ethics: Young People and Ethical Sex. South Yarra, Australia: Palgrave Macmillan.
Carmody, M., Evans, S., Krogh, C., Flood, M., Heenan, M., & Ovenden, G. (2009). Framing best practice: national standards for the primary prevention of sexual assault through education. Sydney: National Sexual Assault Prevention Education Project for NASASV, University of Western Sydney.
Carmody, M., & Ovenden, G. (2013). Putting ethical sex into practice: sexual negiotation, gender and citizenship in the lives of young women and men, Journal of Youth Studies, 16 (6): 792–807.
Casey, E. A., & Lindhorst, T. P. (2009). Toward a multi-level, ecological approach to the primary prevention of sexual assault prevention in peer and community contexts. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 10 (2), 91–114.
Fairbairn, J., Bivens, R., & Dawson, M. (2013). Sexual violence and social media: building a framework for prevention. Ottawa: Crime Prevention Ottawa.
Flood, M. (2009). Respectful relationships education: violence prevention and respectful relationships education in Victorian secondary schools. Melbourne: Department of Education and Early Childhood Development
Flood, M. (2013). Evaluation capacity building in the Respect, Responsibility and Equality program: Report on Stage 1 (2008–2010). Melbourne: VicHealth.
Gidycz, C. A., Orchowski, L. M., & Berkowitz, A. D. An evaluation of a social norms and bystander intervention to prevent sexual aggression among college men. Violence Against Women, 17 (6): 720–742.
Grafunder, C. M., Cline, R., & Lane, K. G. (2011). Primary prevention. In C. M. Renzetti, J. L. Edleson, & R. K. Bergen (Eds), Sourcebook on Violence Against Women, pp. 209–224. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hromek, R., & Walsh, A. (2011). Peaceful and compassionate futures: positive relationships as an antidote to violence. In S. Roffey, Positive Relationships, pp. 35–53. London: Springer.
Kwok, W. L. (2013). Evaluating preventing violence against women initiatives: A paticipatory and learning orientated approach for primary prevention in Victoria. Melbourne: VicHealth. Available online at: http://www.vichealth.vic.gov.au/Publications/Freedom-from-violence/PVAW-evaluation-trends.aspx
Maxwell, C., Chase, E., Warwick, I., Aggleton, P., & Wharf, H. (2010). Preventing Violence, Promoting Equality: A Whole-School Approach. London, UK: Womankind Worldwide.
Ministry of Women's Affairs. (2012). Lightning does strike twice: Preventing sexual revictimisation. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Women's Affairs. Available online at: http://mwa.govt.nz/documents/lightning-does-strike-twice-preventing-sexual-revictimisation-2012
Quadara, A. &. Wall, L. (2012). What is effective primary prevention in sexual assault? Translating the evidence for action. ACSSA Wrap, 11: 1–15. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Russell, N. (2008). What works in sexual violence prevention and education: a literature review. Wellington: Ministry of Justice. Available online at: http://www.justice.govt.nz/policy/supporting-victims/taskforce-for-action-on-sexual-violence/documents/What%20Works%20in%20Prevention.pdf
Topping, K. J., & Barron, I. G. (2009). School‐based child sexual abuse prevention programs: a review of effectiveness. Review of Educational Research, 79 (1), 431–463.
Townsend, S. (2012). Year 2 report: innovations in prevention. Encola, PA: National Sexual Violence Resource Center.
Vladutiu, C. J., Martin, S. L., Macy, R. J. (2011). College- or university-based sexual assault prevention programs: a review of program outcomes, characteristics, and recommendations. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 12 (2): 67–86.
Summary of evidence for general activities – September 2016