Posted at 12.13.2018
Article Overview: Foubert, Newberry, & Tatum
Foubert, J. D. , Newberry, J. T. , & Tatum, J. L. (2007). Behavior Variances Seven Months Later: Effects of a Rape Elimination Program. The Journal of Learner Affairs Research and Practice, 44, 728-749.
The authors of the article investigated the consequences of guy first 12 months students' contribution in the rape avoidance program, The Men's Job, and compared groups of participants who signed up with a fraternity and the ones who did not become a member of a fraternity against a control group of first year guy students who didn't take part in the rape reduction program. Today's research included a longitudinal design facet of surveying the members in an additional post-test seven months after program contribution. The writers' major hypotheses were (1. ) First year fraternity participants will commit sexually coercive acts than first year non-fraternity members, (2. ) First year fraternity members who completed The Men's Program would commit fewer works of sexual coercion than first calendar year fraternity individuals who didn't complete The Men's Program, and (3. ) Individuals within the Men's Job would exhibit a substantial drop in rape myth attitudes, both soon after program completion, and seven weeks' post program. All hypotheses were verified, with the unexpected finding that the rape myth attitudes of the non-fraternity experimental group participant's seven-month post-test did not maintain the drop that was seen one of the fraternity people who got completed The Men's Project.
Study individuals (N=565) were first yr full-time undergraduate male students, living on campus, at a midsized university in the southeast region of america. The participants were randomly assigned to either take part in the experimental group, attending The Men's Job, or assigned to the control group, participating another benign program, each as an expansion of the college or university orientation requirements. Fraternity recruitment took place after original orientation, so random assignment to fraternities had not been possible.
Materials and Procedure
Male university or college graduate students received considerable training on The Men's Project and administering the study. First year men undergraduate students were required by the university to attend The Men's Program or another inequivalent one. The questionnaire useful to measure attitudes toward sexual assault was the Illinois Rape Misconception Acceptance Scale (IRMA), brief form. The Sexual Activities Survey (SES) was given to each participant to assess participants' prior encounters perpetrating sexually coercive serves. Participants were randomly designated to four teams: Pretest, no pretest, contribution in The Men's Program, control group not taking part in The Men's Program. The graduate students conducted all research of the individuals: Administering pretesting to one half of the individuals that included the short form of the Illinois Rape Misconception Acceptance Size, the Sexual Encounters Survey, a brief demographic review; administering the posttest rigtht after program completion to all or any participants; administering yet another post-test seven a few months later, by the end of the educational year to all participants. Individuals were rewarded with a gift credit card for full participation in the analysis, but were only required by the college or university to attend this program. There is a 90% participation rate of the first-year male students.
Experimental Group Procedure. The language employed by the trained administrators on the Men's Task was designed to evoke a sense of your workshop environment, intended to empower the individuals in how to aid rape survivors, instead of language that inferred the participant may be a potential rapist. Participants first viewed a rape video tutorial affecting a heterosexual male officer who was raped by two heterosexual perpetrators and a detail of a healthcare facility experience of the rape survivor. This founded rape as a criminal offenses of electric power, and illustrated how the rape exam can be secondary victimization. This technique was pivotal to diminish homosexual stereotypes of men raping men. The film is then accompanied by some instructions to build up the skill set for supporting rape survivors. This is of consent is provided, then teaching for bystander involvement in potential sexually coercive abuse situations. A guided imagery exercise requires members to imagine a female loved one being sexually assaulted, and the imagery carries a bystander who is not arriving to the aid of the victim. This specific exercise is to build better empathy toward rape survivors. Individuals are then asked to illustrate how they would intervene in a hypothetical circumstance of a female who is unable to give consent in a sexually coercive situation. A conversation of individuals' considerations of their own manners with alcohol and intimate situations is accompanied by an illustration of the pervasiveness of erotic assault and violence against women, concluding The Men's Project presentation.
The creators' hypotheses were all established. First year participants who joined up with a fraternity were a lot more likely to execute a sexually coercive function (8%), versus those students who weren't fraternity users (2. 5%). The next hypothesis that fraternity students who participated inside the Men's Job would commit fewer erotic coercive acts, was proved as well. It had been found to be significantly fewer than the fraternity associates who did not take part in The Men's Job, translating into 6% on the Men's Project fraternity participants, compared to 10% of the fraternity students in the control group. The creators' third hypothesis acquired more complex findings. An evaluation design of a two by two by three blended ANOVA was computed. The results demonstrated a statistically significant drop in rape myth acceptance from pre-test to post-test, and a significant long-term drop first-year fraternity students, however, those students who did not sign up for fraternities experienced significantly less long term decline in reported rape myth acceptance, no matter condition.
Limitations of this study are mostly concerned with evaluating effects and generalizability. This analysis was limited to one midsized college campus, centered on a sample of only first 12 months men students. Future studies should provide different regional environments, larger college populations, and include subgroups of populations other than fraternity and first calendar year students.
The most powerful facet of this study is usually that the authors have successfully provided quantitative information that a extensive university campus rape avoidance program has provided measurable change in both behaviour and behaviors of several first year fraternity men, producing a reduction of sexually coercive behaviours. As discussed by the authors, the sexually coercive conducts that were reported, were considered minimal severe of unwarranted intimate contact, in comparison to erotic assaults and attempted rape among the sexually coercive acts reported by the fraternity individuals in the control group. Furthermore, the implication of the seven-month post-test results is that long-term attitudinal change may be accomplished by implementation of such a program. The studies that the non-fraternity members did not show the same drop in rape misconception acceptance attitudes gives way to future research to research the social dynamics that are in play within the fraternity that may be reinforcing the long-term drop in rape myth popularity. Also, what sociable or emotional dynamics are or are not getting into play in the non-fraternity group that does not reinforce long term decline in rape misconception acceptance? The results of this analysis lay the building blocks for future research, program development, and policy considerations.
Foubert, J. D. , Newberry, J. T. , & Tatum, J. L. (2007). Behavior Variations Seven Months Later: Effects of a Rape Protection Program. The Journal of College student Affairs Research and Practice, 44, 728-749.