EFFECTIVENESS OF TO IN SEXUAL HARRASSMENT IN USA

FINAL DISSERTATION

ABOUT EFFECTIVENESS OF TO

IN SEXUAL HARRASSMENT IN USA

by Stacey Wilson

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Women fear being raped more than anything except murder (Day, 1994). Sexual violence affects every woman whether or not she has been a victim of assault or rape. This is because sexual violence exists on a continuum that ranges from sexist jokes and harassment to assault and rape and can affect every aspect of a woman’s life (Berman, McKenna, Arnold, Taylor, & MacQuarrie, 2000; Leidig, 1992; Ogletree, 1993).

Women tend to experience sexual violence more often than men. While men have been known to be victims of sexual violence, this study focused primarily on women as victims. One in six women have experienced a rape or attempted rape during their lifetime as compared with one in 33 men, and 6 million women as compared to 1.4 million men are stalked annually (Tjaden & Thonnes, 1998). On a daily basis, women have to be careful about where they walk, whom they talk to, how they dress, and how they will defend themselves should it be needed. Once a woman falls victim to sexual violence, she is at risk for developing several physical and mental side affects (Benson, Charlton, & Goodhart, 1992). According to Leidig (1992), women who have experienced sexual violence use medical services 35% more often than do women who have not been victims. Additionally, women who have been victimized engage more often in negative health behaviors such as self-mutilation and eating disorders. They also suffer from reproductive and sexual problems (Finley & Corty, 1993; Frazier, Valtinson, & Candell, 1994; Leidig, 1992).

College aged women appear to be at greater risk than other populations of women. Sexual victimization among women 16-24 years of age has been shown to be three times greater than in other populations of women (Benson et al., 1992; Hanson & Gidycz, 1993; Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewski, 1987; Meilman, Riggs, & Turco, 1990). Thirty percent of female graduate and undergraduate students were sexually harassed sometime during their college career (Dziech & Weiner, 1990; Rubin & Borgers, 1990). Sexually violent acts have even become more common than theft on campuses and thus more of a campus security issue at some campuses (Reilly, Lott, Caldwell, & Deluca, 1992).

Victims of sexual violence frequently experience several emotional and mental problems such as of anxiety, depression, and interpersonal problems (Finley & Corty, 1993; Frazier et al., 1994). Victims may also develop severe psychological disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder or personality disorders (Leidig, 1992). Indirectly, sexual violence often causes women a loss in work, education, leisure activities, and freedom due to their physical and psychological symptoms (Day, 1994). Clearly, sexual violence has an impact on every aspect of a woman’s life.

The problem with addressing and preventing sexual violence is that the crime is multi-dimensional (McCall, 1993). While some see rape as the problem to be addressed, others see the culture that embraces sexist jokes and harassment as that which leads to the tolerance of rape. If it is the culture we live in that perpetuates sexual violence, then it is the culture that needs to be addressed.

Various programs have been developed for the prevention of sexual violence. Risk reduction is the most common, although probably not the most effective (McCall, 1993). This type of prevention focuses on the victim and what she can do to prevent the crime from happening to her. Other programs focus on how to change the attitudes of possible offenders in order to prevent sexual violence from happening (Berkowitz, 1992; Foubert & McEwen, 1998; Foubert & Marriott, 1997). Mentoring programs have been developed enabling men to serve as role models for other men regarding appropriate behaviors pertaining to violence (Kaufman, 2000). Another popular approach is mixed-gender programming and interactive learning. These programs focus on communication skills, the discussion of the beliefs that perpetuate sexual violence, and the definition of gender roles. Men and women often become divided over this issue. Mixed gender workshops allow women and men to share perceptions and come together to prevent sexual violence.

The following study was designed to evaluate the immediate affects of an interactive Forum Theatre presentation targeting sexual violence on a mixed gender audience. Augusto Boal developed Forum Theatre in Brazil as a medium to obtaining justice for the oppressed people in the country of Brazil. It is potentially effective because it addresses the cultural norms, increases communication skills, and addresses systematic oppression as well as personalized oppression. Forum Theatre and other types of theatre have been shown to be successful in other studies involving health issues such as sexual health education, mental health, and violence (Black, Weisz, Coats, & Patterson, 2000; Frazier et al., 1994; Heppner, Humphrey, Hillenbrand-Gunn, & DeBord, 1995; Seguin & Rancourt, 1996).

Statement of the Problem

Past preventive programming has focused on women and risk reduction skills. Some consider this type of programming victim blaming because it insinuates that women who do not act in a safe manner deserve to be a victim of sexual violence. Few programs exist that focus on changing a culture that allows sexual violence to continue, and there has been little effort to evaluate such programs in order to assess their effectiveness.

Purpose of the Study

The overall purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a Forum Theatre performance aimed at challenging and potentially changing incoming University of Northern Iowa (UNI) students’ attitudes and behaviors regarding sexual violence. This study also examined whether gender, treatment, or the central route processing of information impacted the effectiveness of the performance on challenging attitudes and behaviors regarding sexual violence.

Significance of the Study

Over one in four women on the UNI campus has been sexually victimized, thus it is important to prevent additional victimization (UNI Department of Justice, 2000). In order to prevent further victimization, however, large numbers of students need to be addressed. The Forum Theatre presentation appeared to be the best way to address larger audiences and make an impact. This type of program has the potential for allowing people to explore gender issues and develop communication skills which are important steps to addressing and changing a culture that allows sexual violence to continue (Hong, 2000).

Delimitations

The delimitations of this study were as follows:

1. The majority of participants were Midwest freshman, and two of the five presentations were selected to be compared in the study.

2. Self-report surveys were used including the College Date Rape Attitude and Behavior Survey (CDRABS), the Sexual Harassment Attitude Scale (SHAS), and the Elaboration Likelihood Model Questionnaire.

3. Pre-test and Post-test were given to the same groups of people

4. A chance to win a 75-dollar gift certificate was offered to participants who completed the surveys.

Limitations

The following limitations were identified for this study:

1. Because the majority of participants were freshman, the findings can only be generalized to other freshman populations from the Midwest.

2. The sample was not randomly selected; thus, the results may not apply to all freshman at UNI.

3. The topics addressed by the surveys were of a sensitive nature; thus, participants may not have been honest in their answers.

4. Because a pre-test and post-test were administered to the same groups, the pre-test may have introduced bias.

5. The audience size was very large, thereby limiting the amount of audience interaction.

Assumptions

This study was conducted under the following assumptions:

1. Subjects answered the surveys honestly and correctly.

2. The subjects were representative of UNI freshman.

3. The instruments were valid in measuring attitudes and experiences regarding sexual violence.

4. The theatre troupe was able to utilize the tools of Forum Theatre correctly.

Research Questions

In this study, the following specific research questions were examined:

1. Is Forum Theatre effective in changing attitude and behaviors regarding sexual violence?

2. Does the impact of a performance aimed at rape differ from the impact of a performance aimed at harassment in changing attitudes and behaviors related to sexual violence?

3. Do the effects of the Forum Theatre performance on attitudes and behaviors related to sexual violence differ by gender?

4. Do higher levels of central route processing during the presentation increase attitude and behavior change toward sexual violence?

Definition of Terms

The following terms were used in the discussion of this study:

1. Forum Theatre: An interactive theatre created by Augusto Boal. The audience witnesses a scene that stops before the climax. Audience members are encouraged to discuss and join into the play to address possible solutions to the problems occurring in the scene. Unlike psychodrama, Forum Theatre is not a form of therapy.

2. Sexual Violence: Refers to the continuum of violence that spans from sexist jokes to completed rape (Leidig, 1992). Although sexist jokes may not be considered violent, the mentality behind these jokes may escalate into more serious acts such as harassment and stalking or violent acts such as rape.

3. Sexual Harassment: The harassment of a person based on gender or sexual orientation.

4. Rape: Using physical or psychological pressure or force in order to engage in sexual intercourse with another person without consent.

5. Attempted Rape: The same conditions as rape without completion of intercourse.

6. Rape Myth: A set of beliefs and attitudes, which contribute to the likelihood that sexual violence will occur.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

The overall purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a Forum Theatre performance to challenge and potentially change the attitudes and behaviors of incoming students at the University of Northern Iowa toward the issue of sexual violence. Sexual violence is a growing problem on many college campuses (Benson et al., 1992; Hanson & Gidycz, 1993; Koss et al., 1987; Meilman et al., 1990). Often it is gender roles or norms which men and women have been socialized to accept that give men permission to gain sex from a woman (Berkowitz, 1992). Many times sexual intentions becomes unclear, and men do not realize that they are forcing sex upon a woman. While this does not excuse a man for rape or any sexual violence, it may shed more light on how so few perpetrators could reasonably believe that they are not guilty of their crimes and how women come to blame themselves for their own victimization. Intervention programs need to be developed that deal with the norms that foster victimization and give people the ability to change them.

This literature review will address the issues that are key to developing this type of program. This review will elaborate on the continuum on which sexual violence exists as well as a theoretical framework for the study. Then the Rape Myth and past programming efforts will be introduced.

Continuum of Sexual Violence

Sexual violence and the fear of sexual violence have an impact on every woman in society today. The National Violence Against Women survey reports that 2.1 million women are raped and/or physically assaulted and 6 million women are stalked annually in the United States (Tjaden & Thonnes, 1998). While many people think only of rape when they hear the term sexual violence, there is actually a continuum of sexual violence. This continuum can range from unwanted name-calling, jokes, leering, and offensive words to sexual assault and battery (Leidig, 1992; Ogletree, 1993; Reilly et al., 1992; Roark, 1987). Often times a victim may consider an action harassment while others see it as only a joke or a prank (Pezza, 1995). Although not all women have experienced sexual violence, most have known someone who has. According to Roark (1987), 61% of college students personally knew someone who had experienced some type of sexual violence. Because of this reality, college women are forced to make

choices that restrict their own freedom in order to avoid all types of sexual violence (Benson et al., 1992).

Leidig (1992) has outlined a number of actions that constitute sexual violence including street hassling, sexual harassment, attempted rape, and rape. She defines street hassling as comments, whistles, stares or catcalls that make a woman feel embarrassed coerced, and fearful. Sexual harassment is characterized as actions that subject a woman to sexual coercion, comments, and advances from individuals, and rape as sexual activity forced upon a woman against her will through threats or assault (Leidig, 1992).

While many people will maintain that a sexist comment or joke is harmless, others will argue that these comments and jokes are the underlying foundation of assault and rape against women because they create a cultural in which women are belittled everyday (Leidig, 1992; Pezza, 1995). In order to stop sexual violence, programs must equally address the issues of harassment and rape. This study will focus on Leidig’s (1992) concepts of harassment, attempted rape, and rape. For the purposes of this study, however, sexual harassment will be defined as a combination of what Leidig (1992) defines as street hassling and sexual harassment.

Theoretical Framework

This study is based on social learning theory and the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). There are different ways of approaching violence prevention. Traditional methods include risk reduction, victim-advocacy, and attempts to make the campus environment physically safer with lights, phones, etc. A newer approach, although also considered traditional and somewhat ineffective by Hong (2000), is educational workshops that address misperceived sexual cues, the Rape Myth, and obtaining positive consent for sexual advances. However, this type of programming does not address the larger cultural issue that has concerned so many researchers (Day, 1994; Earle, 1996; Hong, 2000). According to Hong (2000), traditional sexual violence prevention may create a foundation for prevention; however, it does not fundamentally change the culture in which we live.

Social Learning Theory and Violence Prevention

Social learning theory provides a framework for fundamental change in attitudes and behaviors related to sexual violence. Changes in attitudes and behaviors are based on expectancies, skill building, observational learning, modeling, self-efficacy, and reinforcement of behavior (Lanier, Elliot, Martin, & Kapadia, 1998; White, 1995). People tend to behave in a manner that they expect will result in a positive outcome. They have learned this through observing the behaviors, including sexual behaviors, of others. Men may be fearful of falling outside of a strict definition of masculinity; thus, they may use sexual violence in order to prove their masculinity (Hong, 2000). Women who do not want to appear prudish or “square” may put themselves in situations that can lead to sexual violence. A program based on social learning theory may be able to model more appropriate behaviors, thereby changing what is considered the norm. Lanier and colleagues (1998) report that social learning theory has been used as the basis for several programs addressing health issues; however, it has seldom been used in sexual violence prevention programs.

Forum Theatre and Social Learning Theory.

Using certain types of theatre in violence prevention programming can take social learning theory a step further. While social learning theory relies heavily on observational learning, Forum Theatre or role-play encourages participants to become verbally and physically involved in the learning process. Interactive exercises give people the chance to truly understand what is being taught by allowing them to actively participate rather than listen passively (Mitchell, 2000).

Forum Theatre is often seen as very similar to psychodrama. Specific elements of psychodrama include creating and improving self-awareness, empathy, communication skills, and conflict resolution skills through role-play (Blatner, 2000; Brown & Gillespie, 1999). However, psychodrama generally focuses on an individual in a therapeutic environment. According to Augusto Boal (1992), psychotherapy seeks to conform people to an existing situation, whereas Forum Theatre enables one to act in protest, to change an oppressive situation (Feldhendler, 1994). It is a theatrical game with the players being an antagonist and a protagonist (Boal, 1992). It is not a form of therapy.

Forum Theatre was developed in Brazil by Augusto Boal. Many of his ideas were derived from the work of Paulo Freire. Freirian-based education places the teacher at the side of students, allowing teacher and student to learn together (Gadotti & Torres; Heaney, 1995). Teachers generally represent “power,” and Freirian pedagogy insists that the learning process is hindered when there is authoritative power involved (Heaney, 1995). According to Heany (1995), “The power is shared, not the power of a few, but the power of the many who find strength and purpose in a common vision” (p. 2). This type of learning allows students to increase their ability to participate in dialogue with others as well as themselves (Heaney, 1995).

The concept of Forum Theatre allows the teacher (actors) and the students (spectators) to interact with and learn from each other. According to Fisher (1994), “it bridges the gap between theory and action” (p. 185). People are able to develop self-awareness and discover how they can act out against certain things (Brown & Gillespie, 1999). Forum Theatre presents a scenario of a problem in its unsolved form. These scenarios are generally derived from common experiences of the audience. It is at this point that spectators are transformed into what Boal refers to as spect-actors (Boal, 1992). The audience is invited to suggest, discuss, and enact solutions to the problem. This is similar to what takes place with social learning theory because it models behaviors and involves skill building (Lanier et al., 1998; White, 1995). In acting out against what is oppressive in the scenarios, participants are engaging in “practice” for their everyday life; it builds on their self-confidence and enables them to feel empowered in an oppressive situation (Boal, 1992; Polin, 1993).

Forum Theatre has been used in many areas of health promotion (Seguin & Rancourt, 1996). The Canadian Institute for Adult Education collaborated with several groups to organize a project between Mali and Quebec women about women’s health issues. Despite some of the language barriers, Forum Theatre was effective in bringing these women together. Through enacting different concerns, the women involved realized that they shared some common worries and solutions (Seguin & Rancourt, 1996). The ideas that seemed effective were then taken back to the villages and passed on to the women who lived there.

In rural Quebec, Forum Theatre was used with patients suffering from severe mental disorders. These patients felt that Forum Theatre allowed for much needed self-expression (Seguin & Rancourt, 1996). Those who attended the performance usually left with a much clearer understanding of the mentally ill and their needs as basic human beings. The patients themselves often felt that they had freed themselves from the prejudices that society held of them. Officials in Quebec made a video of the process for training workshops throughout Quebec.

Forum Theatre was also used as a tool for AIDS education in Sherbrooke, Quebec. The goals of this project were to develop positive attitudes towards safe sex, strengthen the capacity for communication of women at risk, and provide information on safe sex (Seguin & Rancourt, 1996). The use of Forum Theatre for this purpose was effective because it enabled participants to take a first step toward transforming their sexual practices. They were able to go from thinking about solutions to practicing solutions in role playing situations. These programs were not subject to statistical analysis; however, the observations suggest that Forum Theatre allowed dialogue to occur around topics that many people do not discuss (Seguin & Rancourt, 1996). Because discussion was an important part of breaking down barriers, myths and norms, it seems likely that discussion would do the same for sexual violence prevention.

Theatre, Forum or otherwise, is a popular method of health education. It has been proven to be an effective educational tool for changing attitudes and behaviors in many studies addressing sexual violence (Black et al., 2000; Frazier et al., 1994; Heppner et al., 1995). Even when people simply watch a performance about these types of issues, the performance can make a difference. According to the National Institute of Justice, theatrical presentations can teach, entertain, and adapt to the needs of the audience (Black et al., 2000).

Elaboration Likelihood Model

While social learning theory and Forum Theatre provide a good framework for violence prevention, an additional theoretical framework is necessary to improve the likelihood of immediate and long term impact. In order to create a more lasting change, the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) suggests that one must process information using central route processing as opposed to peripheral route processing (Foubert & McEwen, 1998). Processing information peripherally does not take much thought; however, central route processing takes careful, elaborative cognitive thought and leads to a more stable change in attitudes and behavior (Bauserman, 1998; Petty & Wegener, 1998).

Central route processing of information depends on many things. For example, motivation to hear information and the ability to understand that information is very important to central route processing (Petty & Cacioppo, 1986; Petty & Wegener, 1998). According to Petty and Wegener (1998), levels of motivation may stem from a number of things including the desire to hold the correct opinion, the importance of a particular message to the listener, or the self-confidence that one can understand the information. If a person does not find the message appealing or persuasive, they may be less motivated to focus on and evaluate the information being presented.

One’s ability to understand the message also hinges on several things. A person must have the actual intelligence to understand what is being said or done; however, ability can also be affected by the amount of distraction that is encountered throughout the presentation of information (Petty & Wegener, 1998). If a person has the intellect to understand the message but is continually distracted by the person sitting next to him or her, they will have a harder time focusing on the information at hand.

Motivation and ability are both necessary factors in processing information centrally; however, neither of them are sufficient factors (Petty & Wegener, 1998). Even if people find certain information to be very important or relevant to their lives, it will be of no use if the presenters are using language skills far above that of the listener. Likewise, if the presentation is given at the “level” of the audience but the topic has no relevance to their lives, they are less likely to truly pay attention to and evaluate the information. In either case, the probability of centrally processing the information is small as is the probability of behavior and/or attitude change.

Several researchers have used ELM as a theoretical framework in studies involving gender roles, sexual aggression, social status, and rape attitudes (Bauserman, 1998; Brooks-Harris, Heesacker, & Mejia-Millan, 1996; Foubert & McEwen, 1998; Heppner et al., 1995; Tasaki, Kim, & Miller, 1999). While it is a popular and seemingly legitimate theory, behavior and attitude change are not dependent on cognitive elaboration alone (Bauserman, 1998). Bauserman (1998) suggests that reinforcement of a behavior or an attitude may play a role in the adoption of that behavior or attitude. If the result is a negative effect, the attitude or behavior is not likely to be adopted.

Because centrally processing information is a key component to changing attitudes and behaviors, the ELM framework is an important element of this study. However, because central processing is not the only component to change (Bauserman, 1998), it was important to include the social learning theory as well. This theory addresses norms and reinforcements that may contribute to the central route processing of information.

Figure 1 represents the way these theories were used in this study. Forum Theatre is used as a way to implement elements of the social learning theory such as skill building, problem solving, modeling, and others (Lanier et al., 1998; White, 1995). The ELM framework is then being used to determine the level of central route processing used to process the information presented in the program. If the levels of central route processing are high, attitude and behavior change related to sexual violence is likely to be greater than if levels of central route processing are low (Petty & Wegener, 1998).

The Rape Myth and the Normalization of Rape

Sexual violence has been increasingly viewed from a sociocultural perspective (Earle, 1996). For example, sexual violence stems from men’s sexist attitudes towards women (Benson et al., 1992; Earle, 1996). A sociocultural perspective theorizes that perpetration of sexual violence occurs as a result of a normal socialization process in which men are supposed to dominate women (Benson et al., 1992; Berkowitz, 1992). This encourages the dominance and abuse of women and even other men. Studies have shown that large numbers of ordinary male students have victimized women in some way (Reilly et al., 1992). However, the National Institute of Mental Health found that while 1 in 12 men had committed rape, they did not see themselves as a rapist due in part to cultural norms (Harrison, Downes, & Williams, 1991).

The literature continues to support the idea that women who do deviate from the social norms are to blame for their victimization (Benson et al., 1992; Berkowitz, 1992; Day, 1994; Harrison et al., 1991). Many of these norms regarding gender date back as far as the 19^th century when there was a distinct separation of the public and private sectors (Day, 1994). Although the line between the public and private sectors is not so distinctly drawn, many of the expectations for the appropriate behavior of women are still in place. Women are expected to be “lady-like,” dress appropriately, avoid strange areas, and the like.

Social Learning Theory

Observational Learning

Skill Building

Self-efficacy

Forum Theatre

Skill Building

Role Playing

Problem Solving

Elaboration Likelihood Model

Thoughtful Evaluation + Motivation =

Central Route Processing

Figure 1. The Theoretical Framework for the Present Study.

The current sociocultural model convinces men and women to value the idea that women need to be self-restrictive (Day, 1994). According to Day (1994), even women who no longer value such constructs continue to live by them due to the fear that deviating from them will result in some form of sexual violence. A man’s belief in these norms is often an indicator of his willingness to commit a sexual crime (Berkowitz, 1992). These norms have been labeled by rape prevention activists as “the Rape Myth.” The Rape Myth is an ideology that is used to justify rape and other sexual violence. According to Leidig (1992) and Benson and colleagues (1992), the Rape Myth includes but is not limited to the following:

1. “No” means “yes.”

2. Women secretly desire to be raped.

3. A woman can’t be raped against her will.

4. Women provoke rape.

5. Only certain types of women are raped.

6. Rape is a crime of passion.

7. Women falsely report rapes.

8. Women are responsible for prevention.

9. Rape can be justified.

Belief in the Rape Myth allows men, and even women, to take sexual violence less seriously. On one hand, men feel justified in perpetrating or ignoring sexual violence because either the woman wants it, deserves it, or is lying about it if she does report it. On the other hand, it creates a false sense of safety for women because they convince themselves that if they do everything right, then there is no risk of being sexually victimized. Acceptance of the Rape Myth allows for the trivialization of pranks, jokes, and phone calls because, according to the myth, women who are victims of this type of harassment are deserving of it (Leidig, 1992). Essentially, the Rape Myth denies women the right to a safe environment because people won’t take seriously that dangers exist outside of women’s control.

Violence Prevention Efforts

The conceptualization of sexual violence is either too confined (i.e. rape) or overly ambiguous, and prevention efforts of sexual violence can suffer from these multiple definitions of sexual violence (McCall, 1993). Sexual violence is a serious crime; however, it also has the potential for causing serious physical and mental health problems. This begs the question of whether violence prevention is a law enforcement or a public health problem. Current crime control programs have done little to reduce violent crimes, including sexually violent crimes (McCall, 1993). These formal control strategies are ineffective due to the fact that many women don’t formally report the crime (Dekeseredy, Schwartz, & Alvi, 2000). The government estimates that for every 1 rape that is reported to the police as many as 10 rapes actually occur (Meilman & Haygood-Jackson, 1996). Perpetrators cannot be apprehended if the crime is not reported.

The majority of efforts, aside from punishment, for preventing sexual violence have focused primarily on the victim (McCall, 1993; Roark, 1987). Disguised as a primary prevention tactic, methods of opportunity reduction such as self-defense courses and avoidance of dangerous situations are not prevention at all. Women who have the advantage of attending such programs may have reduced their risk of being attacked; however, women who have not attended a prevention program are still targets for potential perpetrators. According to McCall (1993), these tactics only delay the onset of the crime rather than prevent the crime all together.

Arming women with the tools to avoid or escape from a problematic situation is a positive notion. In fact, studies (Hanson & Gidycz, 1993; Meilman & Haygood-Jackson, 1996) indicate that risk reduction programs aimed at women can be successful. However, these programs are problematic because they simply do not address the entire problem, and they reinforce gender roles (Day, 1994; Earle, 1996). No emphasis is put on the men because “men will be men” (Hanson & Gidycz, 1993). In continuing with traditions of the past, it is the responsibility of the woman to protect herself from unwanted sexual activity. This only increases the fear in women because they are considered solely responsible for their safety and may be blamed if they are sexually victimized (Day, 1994). What many are beginning to see as the most appropriate form of prevention is one that does not restrict the freedom of women (Day, 1994).

Primary prevention, or the prevention of a crime before it ever occurs, is the preferred level of prevention by most programmers. Prevention needs to include several aspects in order to truly be effective. Potter, Krider, and McMahon (2000), proposed a Public Health Model of Sexual Violence Prevention which includes the following strategies:

1. Focus on the benefits of healthy relationships.

2. Increase and improve communication skills.

3. Focus on gender role awareness and the power in relationships.

4. Address the mythology behind sexual violence (Rape Myth).

5. Include men and male responsibility.

6. Focus on risk reduction strategies.

7. Discuss the dangers of alcohol and sex (Meilman et al., 1990)

This model addresses sexual violence as a problem involving the population as a whole (men and women) rather than focusing on the individual (woman) at risk. Although risk reduction is still included in this model, it is but one element of a much larger model. The Public Health Model of Sexual Violence prevention addresses several issues that may contribute either directly or indirectly to the occurrence of sexual violence. As discussed earlier, issues such as miscommunication and adherence to gender roles can often contribute to belief in the Rape Myth which in turn promotes the perpetration of rape (Benson et al., 1992; Berkowitz, 1992; Day, 1994).

Many believe that more programs need to be aimed directly at men, challenging them to change their definition of masculinity. Masculinity is generally defined by sexist norms existing in a patriarchal (male-driven) society and needs to be replaced with a more positive definition of masculinity (Dekeseredy et al., 2000). Because men generally define themselves in terms of masculinity and are the offenders of the majority of sexually violent crimes, it is society’s definition of masculinity that requires changing.

Often men feel alienated from the topic of sexual violence against women because they feel as if they are being blamed for the problem. Kaufman (2000) suggests that programs need to create a way for men to feel connected to the fight against violence. It is important for them to understand that working to stop violence is beneficial for themselves as well as women. While men are most often the perpetrators of violence, they are also a significant proportion of the victims of violence (Hong, 2000).

Creating empathy for victims has been a used by some programs in order to decrease rape supportive attitudes and behaviors. Foubert and Marriott (1997) evaluated a program that focused on how men could help a survivor of sexual violence. Information and discussion were presented as a helping workshop which may have offered the men the connection they needed in order to feel like they were part of the fight against violence (Foubert & Marriott, 1997; Kaufman, 2000). The program was considered successful due to the fact that post-test scores were lower than pre-test scores with lower scores representing fewer adherences to rape supportive attitudes and beliefs (Foubert & Marriott, 1997).

One of the more recent programs for men is a student organization called Men Against Violence (MAV; Hong, 2000). This program can serve to prevent many elements of the violence continuum because it is based on university campuses and focuses on changing cultural and group norms relating to masculinity and interpersonal relationships with both men and women (Hong, 2000). These men serve to create a network in which men can come together and talk about issues that arise in their daily lives. According to Hong (2000), MAV creates a network of males who model a new masculinity that is non-violent. They also participate in education efforts with fraternities, residence halls, high schools, and others (Hong, 2000).

According to Kaufman (2000), programs need to begin dismantling these patriarchal power structures by redefining masculinity without alienating men. Allowing men to help decide the content of discussions and type of activities can aid in the learning process while avoiding alienation (Heany, 1995; Kaufman, 2000).

Due to the sensitive nature of the topic, one might think that sexual violence is a topic that should be addressed through single gender programming. However, after surveying two different mixed gender programs, a significant difference was found between the group that participated in the program and the group that did not participate in the program at post-test (Holcomb, Sarvela, Sondag, & Holcomb, 1993; Holcomb, Sondag, & Holcomb, 1993). Only 8% of the group that participated in a mixed gender program reported feeling uncomfortable discussing the topic with the other gender, and 97% of the participants agreed that date rape was a worthy topic for a workshop. It appears, at least in this study, that men and women did not feel uncomfortable with discussing sexual violence and that mixed gender programming did not deter them from participating.

Whether programs are done in single or mixed gender format, it is clear that gender does affect attitudes towards sexual violence. Women consistently show less adherence than their male counterparts on pre-tests addressing attitudes toward sexual violence (Borden, Karr, & Caldwell-Colbert, 1988; Holcomb, Sarvela, et al., 1993; Holcomb, Sondag, et al., 1993; Smith & Welchans, 2000). While they may continue to score better (less adherence to the Rape Myth) than men on post-tests addressing the same issue, the change in score is often not as great (Borden et al., 1988; Smith & Welchans, 2000). In fact, Smith and Welchans (2000) found that females changed negatively on some post-test items, whereas males improved on all items of the test. Overall, however, scores for females indicated less adherence to the Rape Myth on pre-test and post-test than did the males’ scores (Smith & Welchans, 2000).

Sexual violence prevention is not a simple task. A program needs to take into account all aspects of sexual violence and acknowledging that sexual violence exists on a continuum (Leidig, 1992). Programming rarely addresses the continuum of violence, rather it focuses on rape prevention. Some workplaces and college campuses have started addressing the issue with harassment policies; however, that does not take the place of a prevention program targeting other forms of sexual violence (Moore, Gatlin-Watts, & Cangelosi, 1998). The UNI program hopes to address both harassment and rape through the use of Forum Theatre. By using Forum Theatre the program can more adequately address the more relevant issues such as gender norms, communication, and education on both the individual and group levels (Potter et al., 2000).

CHAPTER THREE

METHODS

The overall purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a forum theatre performance aimed at changing the attitudes and behaviors relative to sexual violence of incoming students at the UNI. This study also examined whether gender, treatment, or the central route processing of information impacted the effectiveness of the performance on challenging attitudes and behaviors regarding sexual violence.

The violence prevention effort at UNI incorporates many different programs such as increased safety precautions on campus, a male focused program, and the Forum Theatre presentations. The Forum Theatre program was shown to freshman and other incoming students before the semester began. Anyone in attendance was encouraged to discuss and enact solutions to the problems they were faced with during the session to better prepare them for what they may encounter during their time at UNI.

Study Design

A quasi-experimental field study was used to answer the major research questions of this study. Two groups of incoming UNI freshman attended two different performances, one being aimed at rape prevention and the other at sexual harassment prevention. A pre-test/post-test design with follow-up was used to determine the overall effectiveness of the presentation. Additional comparisons based on gender, treatment, and whether the information was centrally processed were also made.

Subjects

A purposively selected sample of incoming UNI freshman attending two of the five performances was used for this study. Students attending the harassment prevention performance (Appendix A) were residents of Dancer Hall and Rider Hall. Students attending the rape prevention performance (Appendix B) were residents of Bartlett Hall, Hagemann Hall, and Campbell Hall. This population was chosen because both men and women live in these halls, and it is important to include both genders in the program (Foubert & Marriott, 1997; Foubert & McEwen, 1998). A total of approximately 3100 students, who were mostly freshman, attended all of the performances, and approximately

1378 students attended the chosen performances under consideration in this study. Using a table of recommended sample sizes, it was determined that a minimum of 302 completed surveys would be needed for a representative sample size of this population (Patten, 2000, p. 132).

Measures

This study employed a variety of existing scales to assess relevant attitudes and behaviors pertaining to sexual violence. Out of the 1378 students who attended the performance, 758 surveys were returned.

Adherence to the Rape Myth was assessed using items from the College Date Rape Attitudes and Behavior Scale (CDRABS; Lanier & Elliot, 1997). Representative items for the Rape Myth asked respondents, “a man is entitled to intercourse if his partner had agreed to it but at the last moment changed her mind” or “in the majority of date rapes the victim is promiscuous or has a bad reputation.” For the actual instrument see Appendix C, Questions 14-33. Response categories for this scale were strongly agree, agree, neither agree or disagree, disagree, and strongly disagree. A previous study by Lanier and Elliot (1997) indicated that the Rape Myth Scale has good internal consistency ( = .86). Estimated reliability in the current sample was good as well ( = .83).

Items from the CDRABS were also used to assess sexual behavior. For example, respondents were asked, “I stop the first time my date says no to sexual activity” or “I have sex when I am intoxicated.” For the actual instrument, see Appendix C, Questions 34-40. Question 40 was eliminated from the analyses because it did not measure actual sexual behavior. Response categories were never, rarely, sometimes, most of the time, and always. Previous studies found the internal consistency to be average with a Cronbach’s alpha of .67 (Lanier & Elliot, 1997). The estimated reliability for this sample was nearly the same ( = .68).

Because behavior can only change over time, the sexual behavior questions were also adapted to assess planned behavior in the future. For example, respondents were asked, “it is likely that I will stop the first time my date says no to sexual activity” or “it is likely that I will have sex when I am intoxicated.” Response categories were never, rarely, sometimes, most of the time, and always. See Appendix C, Questions 41-46 for the complete instrument. Question 47 was eliminated from this scale just as question 40 was from the previous scale. The estimated reliability for this sample was  = .70.

Sexual harassment was measured using the Sexual Harassment Attitude Scale (Ford & Donis, 1996; Fouli & McCabe, 1997; Reilly et al., 1992). Representative items from this scale asked respondents, “an attractive woman has to expect sexual advances and should learn to handle them” or “A lot of what people call sexual harassment is just normal flirtation.” Response categories were strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and strongly agree. For the actual instrument, see Appendix C, Questions 48-62. Previous studies have found this scale to have good internal consistency with a Cronbach’s alpha of .86 (Ford & Donis, 1996; Fouli & McCabe, 1997; Reilly et al., 1992). Estimated reliability in the current sample was  = .77.

Central route processing was assessed using the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) scale (Heppner, Good, Hillenbrand-Gunn, & Hawkins, 1995). Respondents were asked questions such as “during the presentation I was distracted from thinking about the topic” or “how motivated were you to listen to this presentation.” Responses were in the form of a scale from one to five. Actual response categories depended on the question being asked. For the actual instrument, please see Appendix D, Questions 50-61. The estimated reliability for this was  = .74.

Demographic statistics were also gathered regarding audience characteristics. Questions about age, race, sexual orientation, and others were asked. For the complete instrument, see Appendix C, Questions 1-13.

Procedures

Approval for the study was obtained from the UNI Institutional Review board. The study was done as one part of a violence prevention grant obtained by researchers at UNI. As an incentive, participants who completed all surveys, both pre- and post-performance, were entered to win a $75.00 gift certificate to College Square Mall. The informed consent form, the drawing entry form, the demographics survey, the College Date Rape Attitudes and Behaviors Scale (CDRABS), the questions adapted for behavioral intention, and the Sexual Harassment Attitude Scale (SHAS) were administered at the theatre before the performance began (Appendix C). Students were asked to write their student numbers on their survey packet. The surveys were designed to take 30 minutes total to complete. Participants were told of the chance to win a gift certificate for completing the questionnaire. After completing the surveys, the participants were asked to place them in the envelopes provided. Immediately following the performance students completed the post-test survey (Appendix D) and placed it in the envelope with their pre-test survey. They handed in the envelopes with the surveys as they exited the performance.

The Registrar’s Office was asked to provide the names and addresses of the participants in order to send out the follow-up surveys. Three weeks after the participants’ orientation session participants were mailed a follow-up packet. The packet consisted of a cover letter, the CDRABS, the SHAS, the ELM scale, a return address label, and the drawing entry form (Appendix E). Participants were reminded of the gift certificate incentive for completing the surveys. The surveys and drawing entry envelope were placed in the envelope they received them in and sent back through campus mail using the provided address label.

Data Description and Analysis

The mean age of the audience, percentage of males, females, and trans-gendered were reported using information obtained form the demographics questionnaire. The percentages of race, sexual orientation, social economic status, year in college, and relationship status were also be reported.

Research Question 1 was answered by using a paired t-test to compare pre-test and post-test scores. A Repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare pre-test, post-test, and follow-up scores. Research Questions 2, 3, and 4 were answered by regressing the amount of attitude and behavioral change on gender, performance (i.e. harassment versus rape skit), and level of central processing.

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS

The overall purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a Forum Theatre performance aimed at challenging and potentially changing the attitudes and behaviors relative to sexual violence of incoming students at the University of Northern Iowa (UNI). This study also examined whether gender, treatment, or the central route processing of information impacted the effectiveness of the performance on challenging attitudes and behaviors regarding sexual violence.

Pre-Test/Post-Test Results

Of those who returned their surveys, the majority of students attending the performances were white (96.6%) and heterosexual (97.9%) with a mean age of 18.75 years old. Approximately two thirds (66.9%) of all respondents were female; however, the performance aimed at rape had disproportionately more females than did the harassment performance (79.3%, n = 256 and 60.5%, n = 498 respectively). Overall, 38% of students knew a female who had been sexually assaulted but not raped, and approximately 34% of students reported knowing a female who has been raped. See Table 1 for a complete list of univariate descriptive statistics divided by performance.

The first research question examined in this study was whether or not Forum Theatre serves as an effective tool for changing attitudes and behaviors related to sexual violence. See Table 2 for pre-test and post-test mean scores. It appears that all areas except current behavior changed after seeing the performances. Attitudes regarding rape, sexual harassment, and intended sexual behavior were significantly lower at time two.

Table 1

Descriptive Statistics of Respondents

Note: *Results in terms of percentage and represent the mode score.

**Results in terms of percentage.

The lower scores indicate less adherence to rape and harassment supportive attitudes and behaviors. Because the surveys were completed immediately before and after the performance, there was no time for behavior to change.

The mean scores reported in Table 2 were calculated by using the surveys of those who completed both pre- and post-performance surveys. However, analyses indicated that individuals who did not complete the post-test survey fully or in part differed from individuals with complete information at both pre-test and post-test. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a clear pattern of non-response at post-test to all of the outcomes of interest. Due to this, separate pre-test mean comparisons were conducted for the four main variables regarding sexual violence. Comparing pre-tests for those with complete information and those with pre-test only on the Rape Myth scale indicated that pre-test only subjects reported consistently higher values on all of the outcomes of interest (see Table 3). Non-respondents at post-test for each of the other outcomes also reported significantly higher levels of unsafe or threatening sexual behavior at pre-test. Because these participants chose not to respond to all questions on the survey, it is important to note that the information gathered from the surveys may not be representative of all students attending the performances.

Questions two, three, and four examined the association between the magnitude of change in mean scores in attitudes and behaviors related to sexual violence and gender, type of intervention, and central processing scores (See Table 4). Question two related specifically to gender. There was a significant association between gender and change in intended sexual behavior indicating that females changed more than men from pre-test to post-test. Question three addressed the type of intervention, specifically a scene involving rape versus a scene involving sexual harassment.

Table 2

Changes in Mean Scores from Pre-Test to Post-Test.

There was only a trend level (p < .10) association between the type of intervention and changes in attitudes (See Table 4). Analyses indicated that the scene portraying sexual harassment may have yielded more change in harassment supportive attitudes than did the rape scene.

Question four examined the effect of central processing on change in attitudes and behavioral intention related to sexual violence. A significant association was found between central processing and change in rape myth scores. Using more central processing was associated with more change on the Rape Myth scale.

Overall, when comparing pre-test and post-test scores, it appears that Forum Theatre made a positive impact on changing attitudes and intended behaviors regarding sexual violence. Mean scores were lower at post-test which indicates a positive change regarding these behaviors and attitudes. Because the post-test was taken right after the performance, a follow-up survey was sent out to the subjects about four weeks later to determine whether the change was lasting.

Follow-Up Results

It is important to note that the following results are fairly limited. Out of the original 754 respondents only 102 responded to the follow-up survey. The majority of respondents was female (84%) and over half had attended the performance addressing rape (56%). Because of the number and characteristics of the respondents, information gained from the follow-up must be interpreted conservatively.

Separate mean scores were calculated for the four main variables regarding sexual violence at all three points in time (see Table Five). Although scores for rape and harassment supportive attitudes were significantly lower at post-test, they appear to have gone back to baseline at follow-up. Scores regarding current sexual behavior did not change from pre-test to post-test, however, after the follow-up survey these scores were significantly higher. These higher scores indicate that respondents are engaging in dangerous or threatening sexual behavior more so than at pre-test or post-test. This is hard to interpret considering that scores for intended sexual behavior significantly decreased at both post-test and follow-up (see Figure 2). This decrease in the mean score for behavioral intention suggests that respondents intend to act in a safer manner regarding sexual activity. Possible explanations could lie in respondents being more aware of how they act due to the presentations. However, as noted before this information may not represent the entire picture due to the characteristics and number of respondents.

Figure 2. Estimated Mean Scores for Behavioral Intention at Pre-Test, Post-Test and Follow-Up.

Table 3

Mean Comparisons of Primary Sexual Violence Outcomes Between Individuals with Complete Responses and Those with Time One Responses Only.

Table 4

Ordinary Least Squares Estimates of the Association Between Type of Intervention, Gender, and Central Processing and the Degree of Change in Attitudes and Beliefs Related to Sexual Violence.

Note: + p < .10

* p < .05

** p <. 01

Table 5

Mean Scores from Pre-test, Post-test, and Follow-up Surveys

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION

The overall purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a Forum Theatre performance aimed at challenging and potentially changing the attitudes and behaviors relative to sexual violence of incoming students at the University of Northern Iowa (UNI). This study also examined whether gender, treatment, or the central route processing of information impacted the effectiveness of the performance on challenging attitudes and behaviors regarding sexual violence.

Summary

Three of the four research questions in this study were answered with significant results. Forum Theatre was shown to have a significant effect on attitudes and intended behaviors immediately following the performances. Gender and levels of central processing were also shown to have a significant association with change in scores from pre-test to post-test. Type of intervention (i.e., rape script versus harassment script) had only a trend level affect on change in scores.

The demographics for these groups were as expected. Because UNI is a predominantly white, mid-western university, it was not surprising that the large majority of the respondents were white, heterosexual students. Females also tended to respond more often than men which tends to be the case in other mixed-gender programs (Black et al., 2000; Frazier et al., 1994). This may be due to the fact that sexual violence is a topic that directly affects women more often than men (Berkowitz, 1992; Day, 1994; Thonnes & Tjaden, 1998).

Research Questions

Overall, the program was successful in significantly lowering post-test scores. This is a fairly common finding among violence prevention studies addressing both single and mixed gender groups regarding attitudes and behaviors related to sexual violence (Foubert & Marriott, 1997; Frazier et al., 1994; Hanson & Gidycz, 1993). However, in these studies, scores had increased again at follow-up. This was the case in the present study as well for most of the scores; however, scores for behavioral intent did decrease at both post-test and the follow-up. This suggests that respondents may be planning to act in a safer manner regarding sexual behavior.

It is important to remember that only 100 of the original participants (87% female) responded to the follow-up survey, thus the results may not be representative of the whole group. Although this group of 100 may not be representative of the entire group, it is worth speculating why scores returned to baseline at the follow-up. More than likely, freshman students are going to need more than one program aimed at the prevention of sexual violence to create a lasting change (Frazier et al., 1994). Students live in a culture that endorses risky behavior as a good time. Certainly one type of program at the beginning of the year cannot change this culture.

What was most surprising was the significant increase in scores for current sexual behavior. Respondents to the follow-up survey reported participating in more dangerous or threatening sexual activity than they did at pre-test or post-test. It is possible that the program made them realize that certain behaviors they engage in are actually dangerous; however, that does not explain why they did not realize this at post-test. Another reason may be that for most college students, freshman year is the first time away from home and “house rules.” It is possible that even after seeing the performance, the respondents participated in risky behaviors simply because they were able to do so without the risk of getting in trouble. For whatever reason these scores increased, it is apparent that more programs are needed throughout the year in order to prevent this type of behavior.

In order to continue to reach everyone, programs need to be developed that can be integrated into “a day in the life” at UNI. Poster campaigns, guest speakers, and presentations by groups such as the Forum Theatre troupe are examples of these programs. Mandatory events, possibly as a requirement for classes, participation in sports, or membership in Greek organizations, should be worked into the program as well in order to reach those who may choose not to participate in or attend the programs that are offered.

Research questions two, three, and four examined the degree of change from pre-test to post-test differed by gender, intervention, and central processing scores. Women changed more from pre-test to post-test on behavioral intention scores. Often women will score lower (less adherence to rape and harassment supportive beliefs) than men on pre-tests and post-test, but will not produce a significant change from pre-test to post-test. This happens because men tend to hold more rape and harassment supportive attitudes than women (Harrison et al., 1991). Thus, men have more room for change, while women may already hold the “correct” attitudes regarding sexual violence.

In this study, gender played a role in only one of the four variables. Women appeared to change more than men did on their scores regarding future sexual behavior. Scores suggest that women planned to act in a safer or less threatening manner when being sexual with someone. It is likely that women had a greater change in scores for intended behavior from pre-test to post-test because rape affects women more than men. As discussed earlier, women fear being raped more than anything except murder (Day, 1994). Thus, female respondents in this study may have realized that in a sexual situation, they need to act in a way that will ensure their safety.

The lack of difference between men and women in the other variables may attribute to the type of student that attends UNI. Most UNI students are from small towns in the Midwest, which may cause neither women nor men to view sexual violence as a real problem if they have not been exposed to these types of crimes. After a life-time of living with the perception that sexual violence does not happen in small town Iowa, one performance was probably not enough to convince students otherwise.

The programs were divided into two types of interventions. One performance focused on rape, and the other performance focused on harassment. Because there has not been much research done on Forum Theatre, it was thought that it might be interesting to test the effects of one scenario versus another. However, there was only a trend level association between intervention and change in scores regarding harassment. Those who saw the harassment scenario had more change in attitudes than those who saw the rape scenario. However, it is important to keep in mind that this was only a trend level change.

It was also predicted that higher levels of central processing would produce more change from pre-test to post-test. Higher levels of central processing indicate several things about the participant. They are more likely to be paying attention to and understand the presentation. The topic of the performance is probably more important to those who have higher levels of central processing as well. In this study, central processing had a significant association with change in rape supportive attitudes. Higher levels of central processing were associated with more change in rape supportive attitudes. This was not the case with harassment supportive attitudes, which may be a result of the culture by which we are surrounded. Because harassment is often thought of as “just teasing or joking,” the participants in this may have been less likely to pay attention to the information addressing harassment or consider it worthwhile (Leidig, 1992; Pezza, 1995).

It has been shown that higher levels of central processing result in a greater and often longer lasting change in attitudes suggesting this program may have created a lasting change in attitudes related to rape (Heany, 1986; Petty & Wegener, 1998). However, when looking at the follow-up for this study, this was not the case, as scores regarding rape supportive attitudes went back to baseline.

Limitations

Like most studies, the present study encountered a variety of methodological and design limitations. A large numbers of students were assessed in a short period of time. Due to limited time and space, participants completed the pre-test and post-test surveys right before and after the performances. Students were given the surveys as they came into the auditorium and began filling them out as they waited for everyone to get there. This posed a problem because directions for and the purpose of the survey were not explained to them before they began. Once everyone was there, the large audience and lack of a microphone made it very hard for everyone in a group of 600 or more to hear all of the directions.

Some participants started completing the post-test survey during the performance. This was problematic because participants who began filling out the surveys early were focusing less attention on the performances, and their answers were not necessarily a result of seeing the performances. Participants were informed that the post-test survey was similar to the pre-test. They were urged to try and answer the survey as if it were the first time they were seeing it. As data analysis was done, it was found that several respondents did not complete the surveys possibly due to the similarity of the surveys.

If the pre-test surveys could have been done in the residence halls at some time before the participants came to the performances, they would have been in smaller groups and the survey could have been explained more clearly. This would have also put more time between the pre-test and post-test surveys possibly eliminating some of the repetitiveness in the surveys and the systematic (i.e., using the same response for every question) responses or lack of responses that often resulted.

The instruments themselves may have posed limitations to the study as well. The sections addressing current and intended sexual behavior were very short and may not have addressed truly dangerous activity in the minds of the respondents. It is possible that “making out in cars in remote areas” may be the only option for students who want to engage in sexual activity. It may also make a difference who the respondent has in mind as a partner when answering these questions. It is possible to “have sex while intoxicated” without being in danger if the persons having sex are in a serious relationship. Future assessments of risky sexual behavior should contain more situational questions that address sexual activity with a stranger, acquaintance, and dating partner.

The size of the groups also posed a problem for the performance. Because one of the purposes of Forum Theatre is to create a dialogue (Boal, 1992), a group of 600 makes it very difficult if not impossible to include everyone. Smaller groups would have been more intimate and people may have gotten to know each other better, perhaps creating the community to which the presenters continued to refer during the program. It was also observed that those in the back began to stop paying attention to the presentation. Responses to an open-ended question on the survey indicated that microphones should have been used because not everyone could hear what was happening on stage. Smaller groups may have eliminated this problem as well.

Implications

As discussed earlier, the program needs to be expanded or incorporated in to a more comprehensive program in order to reach those who would be most affected. If the goal of the program is to reach those who truly need to change their attitudes and behaviors, it is going to take more than a one-time performance (Frazier et al., 1991). Change hinges on several things such as the perceived benefits of change, the desire to hold the right attitudes and beliefs, and the motivation and ability to change (Petty & Wegener, 1998). Moreover, if the social structure in which a person lives does not support the change these types of programs are encouraging, lasting change is unlikely (Hong, 2000; Lanier et al., 1998).

Many studies have suggested targeting audiences with specific needs (Frazier et al., 1991; Hanson & Gidycz, 1993; Harrison et al., 1991). Within the group of 700 or more students, there may have been a wide range of exposure to the topic of sexual violence. For some the topic may have never crossed their minds, while others may be highly active in anti-violence efforts. These people are at a different level of readiness for change. When looking at the Transtheoretical Model of Change, these levels of change can range anywhere from precontemplation (i.e., not ready for change) to maintenance (i.e., the stabilization of a behavior; Kohler, Grimley, & Reynolds, 1999).

Things such as decision making and self-efficacy are factors in behavior and attitude change and the development of these factors often depends on the stage of change in which people find themselves (Kohler et al., 1999). Not all people will benefit from focusing on the same issues, problems, or skills. By identifying the stage in which a person or group may be and assessing the needs of different groups, programmers can target these specific needs in the intervention rather than skimming over several different needs (Frazier et al., 1991; Kohler et al., 1999).

Related to dividing participants into target groups, these groups should also be smaller for future presentations. In order to engage everyone in the discussion revolving around the program, it is important that everyone feels like they are part of the group. This is hard to do with a group of six hundred with some sitting on the main floor and others in the balcony.

The fact that there was a significant difference between pre-test and post-test scores indicates that there was an immediate change, although it may have been short term. If this is the case, programmers may want to consider running the program right before high-risk events such as homecoming weekend or spring break. Even if the change is not lasting, it may help to prevent violence for the duration of the event.

Conclusion

When Augusto Boal first created Forum Theatre, it was used in a public space and allowed people to fight against their oppressors (Boal, 1992). It was created to challenge people’s beliefs about who they were and what they could do with their lives under oppressive circumstances. Similarly, Forum Theatre at UNI has attempted to challenge the beliefs held by students regarding sexual violence on campus. The use of Forum Theatre for the purposes of education seemed appropriate due to the similar qualities it shares with the social learning theory. Although Forum Theatre is not based in social learning theory, both perspectives highlight observational learning, modeling, skill building, self-efficacy, and problem solving to help the learning process take place (Boal, 1992; Lanier et al., 1998). This study was an attempt to quantify the learning process by assessing any changes in students’ attitudes and behaviors regarding sexual violence as a result of Forum Theatre.

While the Forum Theatre presentation did seem to change attitudes and intended behaviors in a positive manner directly following the performance, it is not clear whether it was helpful in maintaining change. There were not enough follow-up responses to generalize the findings to the entire group. However, those that did participate in the follow-up survey did return to their baseline scores. Troubling results did occur in the follow-up regarding current sexual behavior. These scores rose significantly among those who completed follow-up surveys. Whether these scores are due to an actual increase in negative behavior or an increased awareness of the way they behave due to the performance is unclear. More in-depth questions regarding behavior may be needed; however, a larger follow-up response rate is also important in order to determine whether these scores are representative to the entire group.

If the follow-up scores are representative of the entire group for either the return to baseline or the increase in negative current sexual behavior, the Forum Theatre program should be implemented more often with more variety. Because change did occur initially, continued exposure to the messages in the program could likely prolong the change (Heppner et al., 1995). Due to the fact that type of intervention did not have an significant effect on change in attitude or behavior, it is not necessary to limit the scenarios to one type of sexual violence. Addressing the continuum of sexual violence in the scenarios will allow for more creativity among the actors, generate a diverse dialogue among the participants, and help to create a more lasting change (Black et al., 2000).

REFERENCES

Bauserman, R. (1998). Egalitarian, sexist, and aggressive sexual materials: Attitude effects and viewer responses. The Journal of Sex Research, 35, 244-254.

Benson, D., Charlton, C., & Goodhart, F. (1992). Acquaintance rape on campus: A literature review. Journal of American College Health, 40, 157-163.

Berkowitz, A. (1992). College men as perpetrators of acquaintance rape and sexual assault: A review of recent research. Journal of American College Health, 40, 175-180.

Berman, H., McKenna, K., Arnold, C., Taylor, G., & MacQuarrie, B. (2000). Sexual harassment: Everyday violence in the lives of girls and women. Advances in Nursing Science, 22, 32.

Black, B., Weisz, A., Coats, S., & Patterson, D. (2000). Evaluating a psycho educational sexual assault prevention program incorporating theatrical presentation, peer education, and social work. Research on Social Work Practice, 10,589-606.

Blatner, A. (2000). Foundation of psychodrama: History, theory, and practice. New York: Springer Publishing Company.

Boal, A. (1992). Games for actors and non-actors (A. Jackson, trans.). London: Routledge.

Borden, L., Karr, S., & Calwell-Colbert, A. (1988). Effects of a university rape prevention program on attitudes and empathy toward rape. Journal of College Student Development, 29, 133-135.

Brooks-Harris, J., Heesacker, M., & Mejia-Millan, C. (1996). Changing men’s male gender-role attitudes by applying the elaboration likelihood model of attitude change. Sex Roles, 35, 563-581.

Brown, K., & Gillespie, D. (1999). Responding to moral distress in the university: Augusto Boal’s theatre of the oppressed, Change, 31, 34-39.

Day, K. (1994). Conceptualizing women’s fear of sexual assault on campus. A review of causes and recommendations for change. Environment and Behavior, 26, 742-763.

Dekeseredy, W., Schwartz, M., & Alvi, S. (2000). The role of pro-feminist men in dealing with woman abuse on the Canadian college campus. Violence Against Women, 6 , 918-935.

Dziech, B., & Weiner, L. (1990). The lecherous professor: Sexual harassment on campus (2^nd ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Earle, J. (1996). Acquaintance rape workshops: Their effectiveness in changing the attitudes of first year college men. NASPA Journal, 34, 2-15.

Feldhendler, D. (1994). Augusto Boal and Jacob L. Moreno: Theatre and therapy. In M. Schutzman & J. Cohen-Cruz (Eds.), Playing Boal: Theatre, therapy, activism (pp. 87-108). London: Routledge.

Finley, C., & Corty, E. (1993). Rape on campus: The prevalence of sexual assault while enrolled in college. Journal of College Student Development, 34, 113-117.

Fisher, B. (1994). Feminist acts: Women, pedagogy, and theatre of the oppressed. In M. Schutzman & J. Cohen-Cruz (Eds.), Playing Boal: Theatre, therapy, activism (pp. 185-197). London: Routledge.

Ford, C., & Donis, F. (1996). The relationship between age and gender in workers’ attitudes toward sexual harassment. Journal of Psychology, 130, 627-634.

Foubert, J., & Marriott, K. (1997). Effects of a sexual assault peer education program on men’s belief in rape myths. Sex Roles, 36, 259-267.

Foubert, J., & McEwen, M. (1998). An all male rape prevention peer education program: Decreasing fraternity men’s behavioral intent to rape. Journal of College Student Development, 39, 548-555.

Fouli, D., & McCabe, M. (1997). Sexual harassment: Factors affecting attitudes and perceptions. Sex Roles, 37, 773-796.

Frazier, P., Valtinson, G., & Candell, S. (1994). Evaluation of a coeducational interactive rape prevention program. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 153-157.

Gadotti, M., & Torres, C. (n.d). Paulo Freire: A homage. Retrieved January 22, 2001, from http://nlu.nl.edu/ace/Homage.html

Hanson, K., & Gidycz, C. (1993). Evaluation of a sexual assault prevention program. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 1046-1052.

Harrison, P., Downes, J., & Williams, M. (1991). Date and acquaintance rape: Perceptions and attitude change strategies. Journal of College Student Development, 32, 131-139.

Heaney, Tom. (1995). Issues in Freirean Pedagogy. Retrieved from http://nlu.nl.edu/ace/ Resources/Documents/FreireIssues.html

Heppner, M., Good, G., Hillenbrand-Gunn, T., & Hawkins, A. (1995). Examining sex differences in altering attitudes about rape: A test of the elaboration likelihood model. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 640.

Holcomb, D., Sarvela, P., Sondag, A., & Holcomb, L. (1993). An evaluation of a mixed gender date rape prevention workshop. Journal of American College Health, 41, 159-164.

Holcomb, D., Sondag, A., & Holcomb, L. (1993). Health dating: A mixed gender date rape workshop. Journal of American College Health, 41, 155-157.

Hong, L. (2000). Toward a transformed approach to prevention: Breaking the link between masculinity and violence. Journal of American College Health, 48, 269.

Kaufman, M. (2000). Working with men and boys to challenge sexism and end men’s violence. In I. Breines, R. Connell, & I. Eide (Eds.), Male roles, masculinities and violence: A culture of peace perspective (pp. 213-222). Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.

Kohler, C., Grimley, D., & Reynolds, K. (1999). Theoretical approaches guiding the development and implementation of health promotion programs. In D. Raczynski & C. DiClemente (Eds.), Handbook of health promotion and disease prevention (pp. 23-49). New York: Plenum Publishers.

Koss, M., Gidycz, C., & Wisniewski, N. (1987). The scope of rape: Incidence and prevalence of sexual aggression and victimization in a national sample of higher education students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 162-170.

Lanier, C., & Elliot, M. (1997). A new instrument for the evaluation of a date rape prevention program. Journal of College Student Development, 38, 673-676.

Lanier, C., Elliott, M., Martin, D., & Asha, K. (1998). Evaluation of an intervention to change attitudes toward date rape. College Teaching, 46, 76-79.

Leidig, M. (1992). The continuum of violence against women: Psychological and physical consequences. Journal of American College Health, 40, 149-155.

McCall, G. (1993). Risk factors and sexual assault prevention. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 8, 277-295.

Meilman, P., & Haygood-Jackson, D. (1996). Data on sexual assault from first two years of a comprehensive campus prevention program. Journal of American College Health, 44, 157-164.

Meilman, P., Riggs, P., & Turco, J. (1990). A college health service’s response to sexual assault issues. Journal of American College Health, 39, 145-147.

Mitchell, G. (2000). Simulated public argument as a pedagogical play on worlds. Argumentation and Advocacy, 36, 134.

Moore, H., Gatlin-Watts, R., & Cangelosi, J. (1998). Eight steps to a sexual harassment free workplace. Training & Development, 52, 12-14.

Ogletree, R. (1993). Sexual coercion experience and help seeking behavior of college women. Journal of American College Health, 41, 149-152.

Patten, M. (2000). Understanding research methods. Los Angeles: Pyrczak Publishing.

Petty, R., & Cacioppo, J. (1986). The Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 19 (pp. 123-205). Orlando, FL: Academic Press, Inc.

Petty, R., & Wegener, D. (1998). The Elaboration Likelihood Model: Current status and controversies. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 41-72). New York: The Guilford Press.

Pezza, P. (1995). College campus violence: The nature of the problem and its frequency. Educational Psychology Review, 7 (1), 93-103.

Polin, J. (1993). Casting call for leaders: The role of theatre education. Arts Education Policy Review, 94, 25-28.

Potter, R., Krider, J., & McMahon, P. (2000). Examining elements of campus sexual violence policies. Violence Against Women, 6, 1345-1362.

Reilly, M., Lott, B., Caldwell, D., & Deluca, L. (1992). Tolerance for sexual harassment related to self-reported sexual victimization. Gender and Society, 6, 122-138.

Roark, M. (1987). Preventing violence on college campuses. Journal of Counseling and Development, 65, 367-370.

Rubin, L., & Borgers, S. (1990). Sexual harassment in universities during the 1980’s. Sex Roles, 23, 397-411.

Seguin, A., & Rancourt, C. (1996). The theatre: An effective tool for health promotion. World Health Forum, 17, 64-69.

Smith, P., & Welchans, S. (2000). Does focusing on male responsibility change sexual assault attitudes? Violence Against Women, 6, 1255-1268.

Tasaki, K., Kim, M., & Miller, M. (1999). The effects of social status on cognitive elaboration and post-message attitude: Focusing on self-construals. Communication Quarterly, 47, 196.

Tjaden, P., & Thoennes, N. (1998). Prevalence, incidence, and consequences of violence against women: Findings from the national violence against women survey. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. NIJ Grant No.93-IJ-CX-0012, 1-16.

UNI Department of Justice Grants to Combat Violent Crimes Against Women on Campuses. (2000). Cedar Falls: University of Northern Iowa.

White, W. (1995). The search for the truth about “good” teaching. Education, 116, 70-74.

APPENDIX A

Harassment Performance Scripts

Scene One

Three upperclassmen men are talking (vulgarly) in a bar about targeting freshman women for a sexual encounter. A freshman, Karle, is dressed provocatively at the bar getting a drink. As she walks past the men, they yell at her making comments about her body. She walks over to her friends not knowing how to react to such comments. Katy observed the situation and believes that Karle deserves the comments because of the way she is dressed. Tara is on the fence, and Sarah is suggesting that she tell the men that their actions were unacceptable.

The men come over to the table and begin making comments to all of the women. Karle finds the comments somewhat complimentary, but Sarah is very angry and tries to tell the guys off. After a heated discussion, the guys ask the girls to come with them and to leave Sarah behind because she is being a “bitch.”

Scene Two

Tara is a freshman who broke up with her high school boyfriend, J.R., before coming to college. J.R. continually calls and leaves her email messages, some of them kind of creepy. Her roommate Katie and friend Sarah are there to witness some of the calls and emails. He indicates that he may be in town soon and can’t wait to see her. Sarah and Katy tell her it is not big deal.

Later a classmate, Tim, comes over to study with Tara. As they are studying, J.R. arrives at Tara’s dorm room. When he sees Tim there he explodes, assuming that Tara and Tim are dating. He is angry because he is in denial about he and Tara’s break-up. After a very heated argument about who Tim is and the status of their relationship, Tara turns to go back into her room without J.R. J.R. grabs her by the arm and says that they will be together forever.

APPENDIX B

Rape Prevention Performance

Scene One

Sarah, a freshman, is doing laundry on a Friday night because no one else does laundry then. Her friend Tara helps her for a while, but her boyfriend Justin picks her up to go to a movie. Sarah is left alone in the basement laundry room. A man, Kevin, comes in to the laundry room, but they don’t really acknowledge each other. A few friends stop by looking for Tara and Justin and ask Sarah if she wants to come to the movie, but Sarah says she has way too much laundry to do. After her friends leave, Sarah asks Kevin if he has a quarter she could borrow. This gets them to talking and they realize that they may have been in orientation together.

Kevin offers to help carry some of her laundry up to her room. Because she has so much, she accepts. They pass her Resident Assistant, Jana, as they head to her room. Jana reminds Sarah of a hall meeting. Sarah unlocks her door and walks into the room. Kevin follows behind her and gets her keys out of her door for her. He locks the door behind him. He expresses some interest in her room and photos on her dresser. Once they are far enough into the room Kevin begins to touch Sarah. Sarah is uncomfortable and asks him to stop. Kevin pushes Sarah onto the bed.

Scene Two

Tara and Brian live together. Tara sets up Brian’s sister, Katy, with someone she knows from class. Katy is getting ready for her date and talking with Tara and Brian about how nervous she is. Katy arrives at a bar and has a drink while waiting for her date, Tim. He gets there and they order another drink. Katy excuses herself to the bathroom.

There is a group of people sitting at a table in the bar as well. One of them heads over to the bar and asks the bartender for some cigarettes. As he is waiting, he sees Tim messing with Katy’s drink. Although he finds it weird, he says nothing. Katy comes back to the bar and she and Tim begin to talk about things. Katy begins to get really hot and “out of it.” The waitress and bartender notice that she is acting kind of weird. Tim offers to give Katy a ride if she is not feeling well. Once they leave the waitress asks the bartender what was going on. The bartender thought it was kind of weird because she had only had two drinks and seemed very drunk.

The next morning, Katy is at Tara and Brian’s house very upset. She does not remember what happened, but is very bruised and sore. When Brian sees the bruises he get very angry with Tara. He wants to know what kind of guy she has set his sister up with. Tara is confused and wonders if maybe Katy just drank too much. Katy leaves because of the arguing, and Brian wants to find Tim and hurt him.

APPENDIX C

Pre-Test Survey Packet

Un’ I Playback Theatre Evaluation Project

Informed Consent Letter to Participants

You are invited to participate in a research project being completed by a graduate at the University of Northern Iowa. The following information is provided in order to help you make an informed decision on whether or not you would like to participate. If you have any questions at any point during this study, please do not hesitate to ask.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate Forum Theatre as a violence prevention tool. Participation in this study will require approximately 15-20 minutes of your time, and is not considered part of your class or course requirements. You will be asked to answer a number of survey questions pertaining to your attitudes and beliefs regarding sexual practices, harassment and rape.

There are no risks or discomforts associated with this research. Your answers to these survey questions are strictly confidential and your identity will NOT be revealed. ALL participants' identities will be held strictly confidential. Answers given on the surveys will not refer to you, and specific names will not be used in the report. As an added precaution individual surveys will be kept under lock and key, then destroyed when they are no longer needed.

There is the chance to win gift certificates to College Square Mall if you choose to complete all surveys associated with this study. There will be two surveys to complete today, and a follow-up survey 2 weeks from today. Although there is very little risk associated with this research, answering questions about yourself and your beliefs may make you feel uncomfortable. You do not have to answer any question in the survey that you are uncomfortable with.

You are free to decide not to participate in this study or to withdraw at any time without adversely affecting your relationship with the investigators or the University of Northern Iowa. Your decision will not result in any loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You are voluntarily making a decision whether or not to participate in this research study. Your signature certified that you have decided to participate having read and understood the information presented. You will be given a copy of this consent form to keep. You may ask any questions concerning the research before agreeing to participate or while completing the survey by contacting the primary investigators. Also, if you have any questions about your rights as a research participant that have not been answered by the investigator, you may contact the University of Northern Iowa Human Subjects Board, telephone (319) 273-2748.

I am fully aware of the nature and extent of my participation in this project as stated above and the possible risks arising from it. I hereby agree to participate in this project. I acknowledge that I have received a copy of this consent statement. Please hand this form in separately from your surveys in order to maintain your anonymity.

Entry Form

Please fill out the form below for a chance to win a $25 gift certificate to College Square Mall. The winner will be announced and contacted in late September. Please place your form in the blank envelope. It will be separated from your survey before it is opened so that your survey remains nameless. Thank you.

Name:

School Address:

School Phone Number:

Un’ I Playback Theatre Evaluation Project

Student Number:_________________

Please circle or answer the questions to the best of your ability. Your answers will be kept confidential. Thank you.

1. Gender: Male Female Trans-gendered

2. Year of Birth:

3. Relationship Status:

a. Single/Divorced	d. Married
b. Casual Dating	e. Widowed
c. Serious Dating	f. Other:

4. Ethnicity:

a. African-American/Black	d. Native American/Pacific Islander
b. Asian	e. Hispanic
c. Caucasian	f. Other:

5. Sexual Orientation:

a. Heterosexual	d. Bisexual
b. Gay	e. Unsure
c. Lesbian	f. Other:

6. What is the highest level of education completed by your mother or the woman who raised you?

a. High School	d. Graduate Study
b. Community/Technical College	e. Graduate Degree
c. Four-Year College or University	f. Other:

7. What is the highest level of education completed by your father or the man who raised you?

a. High School	d. Graduate Study
b. Community/Technical College	e. Graduate Degree
c. Four-Year College or University	f. Other:

8. Do you know a woman who has been raped? Yes No

9. Do you know a man who has been raped? Yes No

10. Do you know a woman who has been sexually assaulted but not raped? Yes No

11. Do you know a man who has been sexually assaulted but not raped? Yes No

12. Have you ever been sexually assaulted but not raped? Yes No

13. Have you ever been raped? Yes No

This next section is designed to determine how you view different situations that may occur during a date or with the opposite sex. There are no wrong answers and your answers to the questions cannot be held against you. These surveys will be kept completely confidential.

Please use the scale below to answer the following questions.

Please use the scale below to answer the next set of questions. These questions ask about your current behaviors.

• • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

• • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

For the questions below, please consider your actions or behaviors in the future. Please use the scale below

• • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

• • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

Please use the scale below to answer the following questions

• • • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

• • • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

Thank you for completing this survey.

Please place this survey in the envelope that was provided.

Enjoy the Show!

APPENDIX D

Post-Test Survey Packet

Un’ I Playback Theatre Evaluation Project

Now that you have seen today’s performances, we would like some additional information about your views and thoughts about sexual violence. Please complete the following questions. Some of the questions may be familiar from the first survey, but we would like you to complete them anyway. Please be honest and sincere. There are no wrong answers and your answers to the questions cannot be held against you. These surveys will be kept completely confidential.

Please use the scale below to answer the following questions.

Please use the scale below to answer the next set of questions. These questions ask about your current behaviors.

• • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

• • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

For the questions below, please consider your actions or behaviors in the future. Please use the scale below

• • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

• • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Never	Rarely	Sometimes	Most of the Time	Always
        1	2	3	4	5

Please use the scale below to answer the following questions

• • • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

• • • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

  • • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

    • • Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
        1	2	3	4	5

Please take a few minutes and respond to the following questions. Using the key above each question, please circle the number along the continuum that indicates which answer best describes your opinion for each statement

62. Please indicate the Residence Hall in which you are living this fall semester___________________

63. When you think about today’s program, how did you participate? Please circle the answer that best describes your level of participation

1. observation only

2. observation and discussion

3. observation, discussion and participation on stage

4. no participation at all

64. As you watched today’s performance(s), we are interested in learning about any

thoughts that you may have had regarding what you saw or learned today. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________

Thank you for completing this survey. Please place this survey in the envelope that was provided.

APPENDIX E

Follow-up Survey Packet

University of Northern Iowa

Violence Against Women Project

Dear Student,

We hope your semester is going well so far. We want to thank you for taking the time to attend the violence prevention program at the beginning of the semester. Your input from the survey you filled out has been helpful in determining the success of the program.

The reason we are writing you today is to ask a favor. We know surveys are not the most entertaining things to fill out, but we are hoping that you will take the time to complete the enclosed survey. The purpose of this survey is to see how you perceive some of the issues discussed in the program now that you have been in school for a few weeks. By completing this survey, you have another chance to win a $75.00 gift certificate to College Square Mall. Just fill out the survey and the drawing entry form.

If you have time now, please sit down now and think back to the program and your thoughts about it. Some of these questions are similar to the first survey. We are interested in whether your thoughts on these issues are the same or have changed now that you have been at UNI for several weeks. Please answer the items as honestly as possible. We know that schedules get busy and crazy, and that it is easy to set a survey like this to the side to get to it later. Please try and take a few minutes now to complete the survey and return it to us within the next day or two. Please remember the surveys are completely voluntary and confidential. You may choose not to answer any or all of the questions. We have included your student identification number only so we can link it to the survey you previously completed at the performance. After we have done this, your student identification number will be removed from all of your responses. Again, we assure you that your responses are completely confidential and no individual responses are shared with anyone.

Please mail your survey through campus mail by using the mailing label provided and placing it over your address on the envelope in which you received this information. We thank you so much for your time, patience, and honesty. If you have any questions please feel free to contact Dr. Michael Fleming at 273-6301 or Dr. Joe Grzywacz at 273-3528.

Sincerely,

Stacy Wilson

Graduate Student

Wm. Michael Fleming Ph.D.

Assistant Professor

Joe Grywacz Ph.D.

Assistant Professor

Entry Form

Please fill out the form below for a chance to win a $25 gift certificate to College Square Mall. The winner will be announced and contacted in late September. Please place your form in the blank envelope. It will be separated from your survey before it is opened so that your survey remains nameless. Thank you.

Name:

School Address:

School Phone Number:

U n’ I SAVE Forum Theatre Evaluation Project

Please circle your answer to the questions below. Your answers will be kept confidential.

1. Since the program, how much have you discussed the issues addressed in the program?

1. Discussed right after the program but not since.

2. Discussed a few times since the program.

3. Discussed several times since the program.

4. Did not discuss with anyone.

2. If you have discussed the program, to whom did you discuss it with (check all that apply)

3. Please use the scale below to respond to the following questions.

4. Do you know a woman who has been sexually assaulted but not raped? Yes No

5. Do you know a woman who has been raped? Yes No

6. Do you know a man who has been sexually assaulted but not raped? Yes No

7. Do you know a man who has been raped? Yes No

8. Have you been sexually assaulted but not raped? Yes No

9. Have you been raped? Yes No

10.Please discuss any thoughts, ideas, problems, suggestions, etc. that you may have about the program or your experiences below.

Please Continue

Please use the scale below to answer the following questions.