Campus sexual misconduct: Prevention education, training, and coordinated response teams.
Saved in:
| Title: | Campus sexual misconduct: Prevention education, training, and coordinated response teams. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Mumford, Elizabeth A., Alfaro Hudak, Katelin, O'Leary, Meghan, Watson, Lesley |
| Source: | Journal of American College Health. May2025, Vol. 73 Issue 5, p2138-2148. 11p. |
| Subjects: | Policy sciences, Sex crimes, Executives, Task performance, Research funding, Universities & colleges, Evaluation of human services programs, Questionnaires, Structural equation modeling, Public relations, Sexual harassment, Health education |
| Abstract: | Objective: To investigate patterns of campus sexual misconduct prevention education and response coordination. Participants: Administrative staff from the campus health and wellness and the campus safety and security sectors were recruited from 830 institutions of higher education (IHEs). Methods: Each sector received a separate web-based survey module. Recipients were encouraged to consult with colleagues within their sector to provide responses. Latent class analyses of eight indicators of campus policies and protocols, as reported by the surveyed administrative staff, were conducted. Results: Analyses revealed a three-class model describing IHEs with Cross-Cutting Policies (inclusive of education and training, supported by SART/Taskforces; 63%), Prevention Education and Training Policies only (34%), or SART/Taskforces only (3%). Administrative staff from both sectors provided consistent information about protocols related to sexual misconduct prevention and response on a given campus. A majority of IHEs reported at least some prevention education as well as staff participation in coordinated response teams. Conclusion: Sexual misconduct prevention education and response coordination is reasonably widespread, and about half of IHEs reported coordination among response teams. Because sexual misconduct remains a significant problem, these structural protocols would appear to require refinement within a broader ecological approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of American College Health is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Objective: To investigate patterns of campus sexual misconduct prevention education and response coordination. Participants: Administrative staff from the campus health and wellness and the campus safety and security sectors were recruited from 830 institutions of higher education (IHEs). Methods: Each sector received a separate web-based survey module. Recipients were encouraged to consult with colleagues within their sector to provide responses. Latent class analyses of eight indicators of campus policies and protocols, as reported by the surveyed administrative staff, were conducted. Results: Analyses revealed a three-class model describing IHEs with Cross-Cutting Policies (inclusive of education and training, supported by SART/Taskforces; 63%), Prevention Education and Training Policies only (34%), or SART/Taskforces only (3%). Administrative staff from both sectors provided consistent information about protocols related to sexual misconduct prevention and response on a given campus. A majority of IHEs reported at least some prevention education as well as staff participation in coordinated response teams. Conclusion: Sexual misconduct prevention education and response coordination is reasonably widespread, and about half of IHEs reported coordination among response teams. Because sexual misconduct remains a significant problem, these structural protocols would appear to require refinement within a broader ecological approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 07448481 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/07448481.2025.2467323 |
