A Successful Sexual Assault Resistance Program Also Reduced Intimate Partner Violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite several parallels between intimate partner violence (IPV) and sexual assault (SA), programs designed to reduce either of these forms of violence against women rarely evaluate the impact on both IPV and SA. Accordingly, we investigated whether one such program (the Enhanced Assess, Acknowledge, Act (EAAA) Sexual Assault Resistance program), designed to help university-aged women resist SA, could also reduce subsequent IPV. Women university students who were enrolled in the Sexual Assault Resistance Education (SARE) randomized controlled trial examining the impact of the EAAA program on SA, were recruited immediately after completing the last survey in the SARE trial. From this trial, 153 women completed the IPV substudy, which included an additional survey. Occurrence of IPV was assessed using the Composite Abuse Scale. Of the 93 new relationships reported by 66 women in the control group, the 1-year risk of IPV was 26.8%. In contrast, of the 113 new relationships reported by 87 women in the EAAA program group, the 1-year risk of IPV was 12.2%. Effectively, the EAAA program significantly reduced the 1-year risk of IPV by 54.4% ( p = .037, 95% CI [2.9%, 79.8%]). Our findings suggest that the EAAA program is effective in reducing the risk of IPV and highlights the generalizability of programming that targets the foundational underpinning of multiple forms of gender-based violence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".