Randomized trial evaluates a bystander intervention program to improve support and prevention in fraternity and sorority life, suggesting promising outcomes.
Gender-based violence (GBV) is pervasive on college campuses, especially within fraternity and sorority life (FSL) communities. To date, the most effective GBV prevention programs are based on the bystander model, which provides participants with education on intervening in GBV and challenges norms that perpetuate it. Research suggests that tailoring bystander programs to target populations elicits the best results; however, limited research exists regarding bystander programs tailored to FSL communities. Thus, this study expanded the bystander model to include support for survivors after GBV and piloted a collaboratively developed prevention program. Data on participants’ self-reported bystander self-efficacy for intimate partner violence (IPV) and sexual assault, prosocial bystander willingness, rape empathy, and rape myth acceptance (RMA) were collected pre- and post-intervention from 74 FSL undergraduates at a private US university. Results from repeated measures ANOVAs showed significant increases in participants’ self-reported bystander self-efficacy for IPV ( ηp 2 = .52) and sexual assault ( ηp 2 = .38), as well as prosocial bystander willingness ( ηp 2 = .33), and during rape empathy ( ηp 2 = .19) following intervention. However, significant changes were not identified for self-reported after rape empathy or most rape myths, with the exception of rape myths It Wasn’t Really Rape ( d = −0.29) and Rape is a Deviate Event ( ηp 2 = .07), which increased following intervention. Participants overwhelmingly reported satisfaction with the program. Results suggest initial support for the pilot intervention in areas of bystander efficacy and prosocial bystander willingness, with refinement needed in RMA and rape empathy to optimize GBV prevention in FSL communities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Calene et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: