Collegiate athletes are at increased risk for both experiencing and perpetrating sexual violence (SV). The current study provides a systematic review and meta-analysis of SV prevention programs targeting student athletes. A search of 31 databases and an extensive grey literature review identified 3071 articles. Studies were included if they (1) implemented a randomized control or matched comparison group design, (2) involved college varsity athletes, (3) focused on SV prevention or awareness, (4) quantitatively reported on SV knowledge, attitudes, perpetration, victimization, or bystander attitudes, beliefs, or behaviors, (5) were published in English between January 1994 and July 2024, and (6) were conducted in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, the USA, or Western Europe. Nine studies provided 17 effects sizes across three outcomes: rape myth acceptance (RMA; k = 8), bystander intentions (k = 5), and bystander behavior (k = 4). Bystander behaviors were significantly improved after intervention; programs were not found to be effective at reducing RMA or changing bystander intentions. Moderator analyses suggest that programs focused on team culture had a negative effect on RMA. Future work targeting the development of sexual violence prevention programs for student athletes should consider catering to the specific group, as opposed to using university-wide programs. While additional research is needed to further explore the effects of SV programs for student athletes, suggestions for program improvement based on the available evidence are discussed. • Sexual violence prevention programs targeting student athletes were meta-analyzed. • Program participation did not impact bystander intentions to intervene. • Program participation did not impact rape myth acceptance. • Programs focused on team culture had a negative effect on rape myth acceptance. • Bystander behaviors were significantly improved after intervention.
Wong et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: