Mediators to Efficacy of a Bystander Program to Reduce Dating Violence Outcomes Among High School Students Who Witnessed Parental IPV

Background and Purpose: Youth who witness parental IPV are more likely to be victims of teen dating violence (TDV), highlighting the social injustice of violence. These youth also tend to endorse problematic social norms related to violence at high rates (e.g., rape myths and dating violence acceptance), which in turn are associated with later victimization and perpetration. Bystander intervention has emerged as a promising approach to reduce violence victimization and perpetration – however more evidence exists for its effectiveness to reduce endorsement of problematic social norms than reduce violent outcomes. The purpose of this research is to identify whether acceptance of violence norms mediates the effectiveness of bystander training among youth who did and did not witness parental IPV.

Methods: A secondary analysis of data collected as part of a five-year randomized control trial was conducted. In the parent study, 13 schools were randomized to the intervention and 13 schools were randomized to control. Analyses were conducted at each phase of the intervention implementation: Baseline (year 1, no intervention, 15,863 surveys from students); Partial Implementation (Year 2 & 3, majority of students received persuasive speeches, 30,014 surveys); Full implementation (Years 4 & 5, popular opinion leaders participate in skill-based training, 25,920 surveys). Measured variables included amount of bystander training received, rape myths, acceptance of dating violence, and physical and psychological dating violence victimization and perpetration. Multigroup path analyses were conducted comparing mediators and outcomes among youth who did and did not witness parental IPV.

Results: Multigroup path analyses were a good fit to the data at each phase (RMSEA <.07, SRMR=.05, CFI>.90), and that the multigroup models fit significantly better than the full group models (p<.01). During full implementation, for students who did not witness parental IPV, the intervention was associated with reductions in psychological DV victimization only (p<.01); for students who were exposed to parental IPV the intervention was associated with reductions in psychological and physical DV perpetration and psychological DV victimization (p<.01). During phase 2, amount of training received and endorsement of violence norms were full mediators between the intervention and physical violence outcomes among those who did not witness parental IPV. Amount of training and endorsement of violence norms were partial mediators for psychological DV victimization among those who did not witness parental IPV. Among those who did witness parental IPV, evidence was found for full mediation for victimization outcomes, whereas partial mediation was present for perpetration outcomes.

Conclusions and Implications: This bystander intervention approach works to reduce violence in the later phases of implementation, largely because of reductions in violence observed among youth who witnessed parental IPV. These effects are fully or partially mediated by amount of training received and endorsement of violent norms, indicating that social workers should aim to develop and implement bystander programs which train as many people as possible, focus on reducing violence acceptance, and tailor content toward youth who witnessed parental IPV. Reducing violent outcomes among marginalized youth is an important step in achieving social justice for society.