Skip to content

Development and Pilot Trial of an Intervention to Reduce Disclosure Recipients Negative Social Reactions and Victims Psychological Distress and Problem Drinking

Development and Pilot Trial of an Intervention to Reduce Disclosure Recipients Negative Social Reactions and Victims Psychological Distress and Problem Drinking

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03488927
Enrollment
1268
Registered
2018-04-05
Start date
2018-09-10
Completion date
2019-06-10
Last updated
2020-10-19

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Alcohol Abuse, Alcohol Drinking, Alcohol; Harmful Use, Coping Behavior, Coping Skills, Depression, Drinking, College, Empathy, Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, Self-Criticism, Social Behavior, Social Norms, Social Responsibility, Social Skills, Social Stigma

Keywords

Sexual Violence, Interpersonal Violence, Prevention, Mixed-Methods, Randomized Controlled Trial, Outcome Evaluation, College Students, Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, Alcohol, Sexual Assault, Disclosure, Social Reactions, Coping, Depression, Intervention

Brief summary

The purpose of this randomized controlled trial is to evaluate an intervention, Supporting Survivors and Self: An Intervention for Social Supports of Survivors of Partner Abuse and Sexual Aggression (SSS). SSS trains potential recipients of IPV or SA disclosure on the best methods of responding to a victim's disclosure. Consenting college students will be randomized into the SSS intervention or a wait-list control condition. Evaluation data will be multi-informant (i.e., data from both informal supports and victims) and multi-method (i.e., qualitative and quantitative). The investigators hypothesize that individuals receiving the SSS intervention, compared to individuals in the wait-list control condition, will provide less negative and more positive social reactions to victims' disclosure.

Detailed description

Intimate partner violence (IPV) and sexual assault (SA) are public health issues that impact the vast majority of college students in some capacity (as a victim and/or disclosure recipient). Most (75+%) victims disclose to informal supports, such as friends. Unfortunately, over 80% of victims' disclosures are met with negative social reactions (e.g., blame) from informal supports (used interchangeably with disclosure recipients). Negative social reactions predict deleterious psychological (e.g., posttraumatic stress disorder) and behavioral (e.g., problem drinking) health outcomes in victims. Although recent research has shed light on the factors (e.g., victim attributions) that predict informal supports' negative (e.g., egocentric and blaming statements) and positive (e.g., providing emotional support) social reactions, there is no intervention to date that targets potential recipients of IPV and SA disclosure to inform these individuals of the best methods of responding to an IPV or SA disclosure. This type of intervention, if effective in reducing negative social reactions in informal supports, could reduce problem drinking and related outcomes in victims. Thus, in the current study, the investigators evaluate an intervention (i.e., Supporting Survivors and Self \[SSS\]) created for potential informal support disclosure recipients. College students are the target population for the initial version of the SSS intervention given the high rates of SA, IPV, and alcohol misuse among this demographic. The interactive, two-session intervention teaches potential disclosure recipients what to say and not to say and ways to promote healthy coping and discourage unhealthy coping in victims. The role of alcohol in risk for and outcomes associated with IPV and SA as well as alcohol-specific social reactions are addressed in the SSS intervention because alcohol is involved in most situations of IPV and SA among college students, and drinking to cope is common among victims. This study is a small-scale, yet rigorous, initial evaluation of the SSS intervention that includes a prospective (i.e., intervention prior to potential disclosure) and experimental (i.e., randomized control trial) methodology. Outcome data will be multi-informant (i.e., data from both informal supports and victims) and multi-method (i.e., qualitative and quantitative). The investigators will: 1. Implement and evaluate the effectiveness of the SSS intervention compared to a wait-list control condition among potential informal supports. Hypothesis 1a: Individuals receiving the SSS intervention (N=450) compared to individuals in the wait-list control condition (N=450) will report fewer IPV and SA rape myths as well as greater intentions to provide positive social reactions and fewer intentions to provide negative social reactions. Hypothesis 1b: Individuals who receive SSS intervention and are subsequent disclosure recipients (n=100) will report providing less negative social reactions and more positive social reactions than individuals in the control condition who are subsequent disclosure recipients (n=100); mediators (e.g., low victim blame) and moderators (e.g., victim alcohol use at time of assault) of outcomes will be examined. Hypothesis 1c: Individuals who receive the SSS intervention and are subsequent victims of IPV and/or SA (n=60) will report less self-blame, PTSD, depression, drinking to cope, and problem drinking compared to individuals in the control condition who are subsequent victims of IPV and/or SA (n=60); mediators (e.g., engagement in healthy coping) and moderators (e.g., gender) will be explored. Methodology: A random sample of college students from a public university will be invited to participate in a pre-test (all participants), SSS intervention (only participants randomly assigned to this condition), and six-month post-test (all participants). A subsample of disclosure recipients in the SSS intervention condition will be invited to participate in a qualitative exit interviews (after the post-test) to enrich findings and inform SSS revisions. 2. Determine the feasibility in recruiting victims who disclosed to individuals in the SSS and control conditions to complete outcome surveys and gather preliminary effectiveness data on the SSS intervention. Hypothesis 2a: Victims who disclose to an individual in the SSS intervention (n=50) will report trends towards receiving more positive social reactions to disclosure, less negative social reactions to disclosure, and fewer symptoms of PTSD, depression, drinking to cope, and negative alcohol-related consequences compared to individuals who disclose to an individual in the control condition (n=50).

Interventions

BEHAVIORALSupporting Survivors and Self: An Intervention for Social Supports of Survivors of Partner Abuse and Sexual Aggression (SSS)

The SSS intervention consists of a two-hour session followed by a 90-minute booster session a month following the initial program session. The SSS intervention is delivered in groups of approximately 20 students facilitated by peer educators. The SSS intervention provides participants with specific information on the reasons why positive social reactions are important and negative social reactions can be harmful, examples of what to say and what not to say (including ways to promote healthy coping and discourage unhealthy coping, e.g., drinking to cope), opportunities for roleplay, and an emphasis on the importance of self-care and ways in which self-care can be balanced with the needs of IPV and SA victims.

Sponsors

University of Illinois at Chicago
CollaboratorOTHER
University of South Florida
CollaboratorOTHER
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)
CollaboratorNIH
University of New Hampshire
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Randomized control intervention trial with a wait-list control condition, randomized at the individual level

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 24 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* undergraduate student at University of New Hampshire * read and understand English * able to independently complete online surveys

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Negative Social ReactionsSix monthsAs measured by the Social Reactions Questionnaire (at six month follow-up). This scale is measured from 1 to 6, with higher mean scores representing a less desirable outcome.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Positive Social ReactionsSix monthsAs measured by the Social Reactions Questionnaire (at six month follow-up). This scale is measured from 1 to 6, with higher mean scores representing a less desirable outcome.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Intervention-Attend
This arm was invited to and attended the intervention, followed by a six-month follow-up evaluation. Supporting Survivors and Self: An Intervention for Social Supports of Survivors of Partner Abuse and Sexual Aggression (SSS): The SSS intervention consists of a two-hour session followed by a 90-minute booster session a month following the initial program session. The SSS intervention is delivered in groups of approximately 20 students facilitated by peer educators. The SSS intervention provides participants with specific information on the reasons why positive social reactions are important and negative social reactions can be harmful, examples of what to say and what not to say (including ways to promote healthy coping and discourage unhealthy coping, e.g., drinking to cope), opportunities for roleplay, and an emphasis on the importance of self-care and ways in which self-care can be balanced with the needs of IPV and SA victims.
305
Wait-list Control
This arm was be invited to attend the intervention after a six-month follow-up evaluation.
432
Intervention-Nonattend
This aim was invited to but did not attend the intervention, and completed the same six-month follow-up evaluation.
531
Total1,268

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject44118217

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicIntervention-AttendWait-list ControlIntervention-NonattendTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
305 Participants432 Participants531 Participants1268 Participants
Age, Continuous19.50 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.17
19.51 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.27
19.64 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.23
19.56 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.23
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
10 Participants20 Participants33 Participants63 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
294 Participants409 Participants489 Participants1192 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
1 Participants3 Participants9 Participants13 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
1 Participants1 Participants1 Participants3 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
18 Participants15 Participants24 Participants57 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
2 Participants9 Participants7 Participants18 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
9 Participants11 Participants13 Participants33 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
2 Participants3 Participants8 Participants13 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
273 Participants393 Participants478 Participants1144 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
305 participants432 participants531 participants1268 participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Man
63 Participants154 Participants174 Participants391 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Self-identify or No answer
3 Participants2 Participants6 Participants11 Participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Woman
239 Participants276 Participants351 Participants866 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 3050 / 4320 / 531
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 3050 / 4320 / 531
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 3050 / 4320 / 531

Outcome results

Primary

Negative Social Reactions

As measured by the Social Reactions Questionnaire (at six month follow-up). This scale is measured from 1 to 6, with higher mean scores representing a less desirable outcome.

Time frame: Six months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Intervention-AttendNegative Social Reactions1.25 Mean of actual negative reactions scaleStandard Deviation 0.37
Wait-list ControlNegative Social Reactions1.28 Mean of actual negative reactions scaleStandard Deviation 0.4
Intervention-NonattendNegative Social Reactions1.35 Mean of actual negative reactions scaleStandard Deviation 0.56
Secondary

Positive Social Reactions

As measured by the Social Reactions Questionnaire (at six month follow-up). This scale is measured from 1 to 6, with higher mean scores representing a less desirable outcome.

Time frame: Six months

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Intervention-AttendPositive Social Reactions4.05 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.68
Wait-list ControlPositive Social Reactions3.87 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.82
Intervention-NonattendPositive Social Reactions3.87 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.74

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026