Do You Know Your Campus's Sexual Assault Red Zones?

Most schools concentrate their substance-abuse and sexual-violence prevention efforts during the first six weeks of the academic year, a period called the "red zone."  First-year women are believed to be at the highest risk for sexual assault during these first six weeks because they are unfamiliar with college social life and thus vulnerable to sexual predators.

Though research does show that first-year women are at greater risk for sexual assault than other undergraduates, no studies (that we're aware of) have shown that the first six weeks of school are the highest-risk period for them.

Researchers, however, have found evidence for other "red zones." These red zones, researchers suggest, are particular to schools and are the result of local factors, such as rush periods, big games, or other important social events.

In a 2008 study, William Flack and his colleagues found that second-year women at one college were at a higher risk for sexual assault between the end of the first month of school and fall break.  Flack tentatively attributed this spike in risk to the fact that many second-year women were pledging local sororities before fall break. The high number of parties and heavier drinking during pledge week, Flack suggested, put the young women at greater risk for sexual assault.

Flack concluded: "Risk for unwanted sex associated with the academic calendar year may have more to do with the available range of types of social events in which students engage...the contexts within which those events take place, and the sometimes intense pressures on students to conform to campus social mores, than with students’ inexperience of college social life per se."

Other research, meanwhile, has found that the risk of sexual victimization is evenly spread out across the school year (Fisher et al., 94-95).

Taken together, this research suggests that schools should consider spacing their prevention effects across the entire first year instead of frontloading prevention efforts in the first six weeks of school.

To determine the timing of the programming, administrators might identify major campus events that put students at greater risk for sexual violence or substance abuse and then schedule programming around those events.

Schools could also develop follow-up programming and re-orientations for students in their second, third, and fourth years. These follow ups could present students with new information that is more relevant to their experience -- such as upcoming rush or pledge weeks -- thus allowing students to continue a discussion that often seems to end after first-year orientation. After all, though women may be at a relatively lower risk of sexual assault later in their college careers, programming should be addressed to potential bystanders and perpetrators as well.

Indeed, spreading programming out isn't just consistent with research about red zones, it's also good pedagogy. Spacing any kind of practice across time (rather than massing it in one long event) promotes better long-term retention of material.

Sexual violence is not just a problem in the first six weeks of school and it's not just a first year problem. All students are responsible for preventing sexual violence.

Further Reading

Fisher, B.S., Cullen, F.T., Turner, M.G. (1999) "Extent and Nature of the Sexual Victimization of College Women: A National-Level Analysis." Washington, DC: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.

Flack, W.F., Jr., Caron, M.L., Leinen, S.J., et al. (2008) "'The Red Zone': Temporal Risk for Unwanted Sex Among College Students," Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 1177-1196.

Kimble, M., Neacsiu, A.D., Flack, W.F., Jr. and Horner, J. "Risk of Unwanted Sex for College Women: Evidence for a Red Zone." Journal of American College Health, 57, 331-337.

Thalheimer, Will. (2006) Spacing Learning Events Over Time: What the Research Says. Work-Learning Research, Inc. Accessed 18th November 2013 <http://www.work-learning.com/catalog.html>

Court Rejects Ban on Alcohol Advertising in College Papers

Until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit's recent decision limited its reach, the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage Control Board's (ABC) regulations banned all college newspapers from running alcohol advertising. The ban is part of a comprehensive strategy aimed at reducing underage drinking.

Many colleges and universities take a similar "environmental" or "community-level" approach to combat high-risk drinking. These interventions often enlist retailers and advertisers as allies in prevention efforts. 

But in 2006 two college newspapers affected by the regulation, The University of Virginia's Cavalier Daily and Virginia Tech's Collegiate Daily, sued the ABC, claiming the ban violated their First Amendment free speech rights.

The newspapers pointed out that a majority of their readership were over 21 (59-60% of the Collegiate Times' and 64% of The Cavalier Daily's readers). Therefore, while Virginia had a government interest in preventing underage drinking, the papers' wide distribution to people over 21 meant that the scope of the regulation was too broad.

In its decision, the Court sided with the college newspapers, acknowledging the state's interest but rejecting the regulation's overbroad reach.

"While commercial speech is protected by the First Amendment, there is a 'commonsense distinction' between commercial speech and other varieties of speech...[therefore] a regulation of commercial speech will be upheld if (1) the regulated speech concerns lawful activity and is not misleading; (2) the regulation is supported by a substantial government interest; (3) the regulation directly advances that interest; and (4) the regulation is not more extensive than necessary to serve the government’s interest."

Under this analysis, the Court concluded, "the challenged regulation fails...because it prohibits large numbers of adults who are 21 years of age or older from receiving truthful information about a product that they are legally allowed to consume...Accordingly, the challenged regulation is unconstitutionally overbroad."

The court also rejected the ABC's rejoinder that the regulation was justified by the state's more general interest in combatting abusive drinking, whether by underage or of-age drinkers. The Court cited a previous case that determined "states may not 'seek to remove a popular but disfavored product from the marketplace by prohibiting truthful, non-misleading advertisements.'"

The ruling, however, did not overturn the regulation itself. It only rejected the regulation as applied to these four-year college newspapers. As commentators have pointed out, where a paper's underage readership is the majority of its readership, the ban might still apply. A paper at two-year college, for instance, might still be subject to the regulation.

Critics of the ban have lauded the decision as a victory for free speech. Indeed, because school papers operate under tight budgets, the ban had a significant impact on the papers' finances and thus affected their primary mission of news reporting. According to estimates in The Cavalier Daily, lifting the prohibition would raise advertising revenue by 5 to 8%.

And while harm-reduction specialists may lament the loss of another valuable tool, the research is still divided on the effects of advertising on alcohol consumption.