Sexual and Relationship Violence Among LGBTQ+ College Students: A Scoping Review

Universal Sexual Violence Intervention Effects in a Cluster-Randomized Trial: Moderation by Sexual Orientation

Sexual minority (e.g., gay/lesbian, bisexual, and queer) students are more likely than their heterosexual peers to experience sexual violence (SV) during college. Interventions that prevent SV and improve SV care-seeking behaviors for sexual minority students are lacking. Giving Information for Trauma Support and Safety (GIFTSS) is an evidence-based universal SV intervention implemented by providers during college health and counseling visits. Compared to controls, GIFTSS participants reported greater self-efficacy to use SV harm reduction strategies and SV disclosure during clinical visits. However, GIFTSS' effectiveness for sexual minority participants is unknown. The current study examines whether sexual orientation moderates GIFTSS' effects on numerous SV-related outcomes (i.e., to test whether intervention effects at 4 and 12 months differed based on sexual orientation). Across 28 college campuses in Pennsylvania and West Virginia, 2,291 students participated in a two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial. We used mixed models with two- and three-way interaction terms to test whether sexual orientation modified GIFTSS' effects at 4- and 12-month follow-up on participants': SV recognition; knowledge of and self-efficacy to enact SV harm reduction strategies; intentions to intervene; knowledge of and self-efficacy to use SV-related services; SV disclosure during visits; and recent SV exposure. Overall, 22.1% of participants were sexual minorities (n = 507). Sexual orientation moderated GIFTSS effectiveness as indicated by significant three-way interaction (p = .01) at 12-month follow-up, and knowledge of SV services decreased for heterosexual participants (β = -.23) but increased for sexual minority participants (β = .23). Our study indicates that universal provider-based education may promote greater knowledge of SV services among sexual minority than heterosexual participants, and population-specific interventions are needed that reduce sexual minority students' SV exposure, service utilization, and other critical aspects of SV prevention on university campuses.Clinical Trial Registration: Registry name: College Health Center-based Alcohol and Sexual Violence Intervention (GIFTSS), Registration number: NCT02355470, Web link: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02355470, Deidentified individual participant data will not be made available.

3-month prevalence of unwanted sexual contact victimization in a national sample of college students: differences by race, gender identity, and sexual identity

IMPORTANCE

Most unwanted sexual contact victimization (USCV) research utilizes predominantly white, cisgender, heterosexual college student samples. Estimates of USCV prevalence and demographic variation can determine the need for dedicated funding and culturally relevant campus services for students in high-risk groups.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the national prevalence and demographic variation in self-reported USCV within the first three months of college.

DESIGN

Data are from the Sexual Assault Prevention for Undergrads (SAPU) (2020-2021) dataset. SAPU is an online intervention program administered to students on more than 600 college campuses in the United States (N = 250,359). Group differences were assessed by race/ethnicity, gender identity, and sexual identity, and then stratified by gender to assess within-gender group differences.

SETTING

The SAPU dataset includes public and private institutions and 2-year and 4-year colleges with varying sizes of enrollment.

PARTICIPANTS

The sample is demographically diverse, and consists of newly matriculated U.S. college students, most of whom complete the SAPU program within the first three months of enrollment.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome measure is self-reported USCV within the first three months of college enrollment, analyzed for subgroup differences. We hypothesized that USCV would be higher among students from racial/ethnic, gender, and sexual minority populations.

RESULTS

Nearly 8% of transgender men reported USCV, followed by 7.4% of transgender women, 7.4% of genderqueer/gender non-conforming students, 4.5% of women, and 1.5% of men. Several subgroups reported exceedingly high rates of USCV, including Black students who identified as transgender women (35.7%) and American Indian/Alaska Native/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander students who identified as trans men (55.6%) or genderqueer/gender non-conforming (41.7%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Universal and targeted (selective and indicated) intervention programs are needed to lessen USCV, particularly among gender minority students who also identify as Black, Indigenous, other person of color, or as a sexual minority.

An ecological approach to understanding the impact of sexual violence: a systematic meta-review

Aim

A systematic meta-review was conducted to examine (1) the broad range of negative and positive individual and interpersonal changes following adult sexual violence, as well as (2) the risk/protective factors at multiple levels of the social ecology (e.g., individual, assault, and micro/meso/exo/macro/chronosystem factors)-influencing the impact of sexual violence.

Methods

Searches of Web of Science, Pubmed, and ProQuest resulted in inclusion of 46 systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Review findings were extracted for summary and a deductive thematic analysis was conducted.

Results

Experiencing sexual violence is associated with many negative individual and sexual difficulties as well as revictimization risk. Only a limited number of reviews reported on interpersonal and positive changes. Factors at multiple levels of the social ecology play a role in the intensity of these changes. Reviews including macrolevel factors were non-existent, however.

Conclusion

Reviews on sexual violence are fragmented in nature. Although the use of an ecological approach is often lacking, adopting such a perspective in research is necessary for a fuller understanding of the multiple influences on survivor outcomes. Future research should evaluate the occurrence of social and positive changes following sexual violence, as well as the role of macrolevel factors in influencing post-assault outcomes.

Sexual Victimization Among Sexual and Gender Minoritized Groups: Recent Research and Future Directions

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Sexual victimization is a significant public health concern. Compared to heterosexual and cisgender peers, sexual and gender minoritized (SGM) individuals are at elevated risk for sexual victimization. Prominent theories suggest that this risk is due in part to the stigma SGM individuals face when navigating heteronormative cultures. The goal of this article is to review the prevalence, risk factors, and consequences of sexual victimization in SGM individuals.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies continue to show that SGM individuals-bisexual and/or gender minoritized in particular-are at higher risk for sexual victimization. Little work has focused on risk factors, though recent research continues to highlight post-victimization disparities among SGM individuals. Emerging studies also point to theoretically informed factors that may influence victimization risk and recovery, including sexual and gender-related stigma. To inform prevention and intervention efforts, future research would benefit from streamlining assessment, methodology, and dissemination practices.

LGBTQ+-Affirming Campus Sexual and Relationship Violence Prevention: A Qualitative Study

LGBTQ+ (e.g., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, nonbinary, queer) people are often left out of campus sexual and relationship violence (SRV) prevention efforts despite experiencing higher rates of SRV. To inform LGBTQ+-affirming prevention efforts, we use a practice-to-research approach to aggregate wisdom from 32 LGBTQ+ professionals working to address campus SRV among LGBTQ+ college students garnered through semi-structured interviews. Participants shared four approaches to including or excluding LGBTQ+ students in campus SRV prevention programs as well as recommendations to cultivate more LGBTQ+-affirming campus SRV prevention efforts. We summarize recommendations for possible action steps at individual, relationship, community, and policy levels of the social ecological model for LGBTQ+-affirming campus SRV prevention.