The author(s) shown below used Federal funding provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice to prepare the following resource: 

Document Title: Effects of a Middle School Social-Emotional 

Learning Program on Bullying, Teen Dating 

Violence, Sexual Violence, and Substance 

Use in High School, Final Report 

Author(s): Dorothy L. Espelage, Ph.D., Kristen Bub, 

Ph.D., Mark Van Ryzin, Melissa K. Holt 

Document Number: 251740

Date Received: June 2018 

Award Number: 2013-VA-CX-0008

This resource has not been published by the U.S. Department of 

Justice. This resource is being made publically available through the 

Office of Justice Programs’ National Criminal Justice Reference 

Service. 

Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and 

do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. 

Department of Justice. 
FINAL REPORT 

Effects of a Middle School Social-Emotional Learning Program on Bullying, Teen Dating 

Violence, Sexual Violence, and Substance Use in High School 

October 2, 2017 

Report submitted to the National Institute of Justice 

Grant #2013-VA-CX-0008

Dorothy L. Espelage, Ph.D., University of Florida 

Kristen Bub, Ph.D., University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign 

Mark Van Ryzin, University of Oregon 

Melissa K. Holt, Boston University 

What are the major goals and objectives of the project? 

This proposed study leveraged an existing RCT of The Second Step anti-bullying program, which 

was implemented when the sample of students was in middle school, by measuring related aggressive 

behaviors (e.g., bullying, cyberbullying, sexual violence) during the high school years. Our specific aims 

were (1) to determine treatment effects of the Second Step middle school program on reductions in youth 

aggression (including bullying), sexual violence, substance use, and teen dating violence when in high 

school; (2) to evaluate middle school belonging as a mediator of these treatment effects on trajectories of 

bullying, victimization, homophobic teasing, sexual harassment, substance use, and teen dating violence 

in high school. School belonging was examined as potential mediator between treatment effects and high 

school aggression, violence, and substance use outcomes because of two reasons. First, the socialemotional learning programs focuses on building positive, prosocial relationships among peers. Second, 

belonging to school is a documented predictors of aggression and correlated outcomes (Losel & 

Farrington, 2012).

Methods 

Participants, Procedure, & Measures 

Participants consisted of 1,565 students from 15 middle schools within the state of Illinois who 

were followed into six high schools. School districts were contacted by the principal investigators in each 

state to introduce the project and to identify schools that would be interested in participating. Schools had 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
to agree to random assignment and not to implement other school-wide bully prevention programming for 

the three year study. Males accounted for 52% of the sample; 22% identified as white, 31% as AfricanAmerican, 33% as Hispanic, and 11% as Biracial etc. Mean age of students was 11 years of age at wave 

1. See other studies for more detail (Espelage, Van Ryzin, Low, & Polanin, 2015; Espelage, Low,

Polanin, & Brown, 2015). The university review board and the school district agreed to the use of a 

waiver of active (passive) parental consent. Parents received information about the study through several 

outlets, including electronic newsletters, presentations to parent-teacher associations, email blasts from 

school administration, and family information nights. Information letters were sent to all parents of sixth 

graders in the participating districts. Parents could opt their child out of the study by calling the school or 

the researcher, or returning the signed parent form. Non-consented youth did not complete the survey and 

were removed from the room during the administration. Of note, active parental consent was used in 

Chicago schools (n = 9). However, non-consented youth did take part in the SEL program. Students 

provided assent to participate by signing the front page of the survey. An 86% participation rate was 

achieved in schools in the analyses reported here. Teams of researchers administered the survey, and this 

team included advanced psychology graduate students, a faculty member, and several trained 

undergraduate research assistants. There was a total of seven waves of data (4 middle school, 3 high 

school). to determine whether students who were part of the intervention group in a randomized control 

trial of Second Step in middle school demonstrated reductions in youth aggression (including bullying), 

sexual violence, and substance use, and teen dating violence when in high school 

Analysis Plan 

To examine the effect of treatment on various longitudinal outcomes (i.e., bullying perpetration 

and victimization, sexual harassment perpetration and victimization, homophobic perpetration and 

victimization, cyberbullying perpetration and victimization, cyber sexual harassment perpetration and 

victimization, and teen dating violence) we fit path models to examine the direct and indirect effects of 

treatment. Specifically, we examined the extent to which treatment was associated with linear growth in 

school belonging during the time of the prevention program (T1 – T4). We then used linear growth in 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Treatment

School Belonging 

Slope (Waves 1-4)

C Path Outcome 

Slope (Waves 5-7)

school belonging during the prevention program (T1 – T4) to predict linear growth in outcomes after the 

prevention ended (T5 – T7). Following, we examined the mediation between school belonging and 

outcome variables and outcome variables respectively. Final models use the treatment variable to predict 

linear growth in school belonging during middle school (prevention period), and then used linear growth 

in school belonging to predict linear growth in outcomes during high school (after the prevention period) 

to examine the extent to which effects of the prevention program sustained into high school. We then 

tested the mediation by multiplying the effect of treatment on school belonging (A path) with the effect of 

school belonging on the outcome (B path). The figure below presents our analytic path model.

Mediation: A Path * B Path

All models were run using Mplus 7.4. Full Information Maximum Likelihood (FIML) was 

used to address missing data. Unlike listwise deletion that removes participants with missing data, 

FIML allows individuals to contribute whatever information they have available to the likelihood 

function without the need to remove anyone from the analysis. To address non-normality all models 

were run using the Robust Maximum Likelihood (MLR) estimator.

Results

Bullying Perpetration and Victimization

We examined the extent to which the prevention program was associated with reductions in 

bullying perpetration and victimization respectively. For bullying perpetration, there was no direct effect of 

the treatment on reductions in bullying perpetration in high school (b = .012, p = .187), however, there was 

an indirect effect. That is, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher levels of

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
growth in school belonging from T1 – T4 (b = .013, p = .042), growth in school belonging was in turn 

associated with reductions in growth in bullying perpetration from T5 – T7 (b = -.147, p = .067). More 

specifically, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher growth in school belonging 

during middle school (T1 – T4), in turn, growth in school belonging was associated with significantly 

lower rates of bullying perpetration in high school (T5 – T7). We then examined the mediation however 

the mediation was not found to be statistically significant (b = -.002, p = .174). 

For bullying victimization, there was no direct effect of treatment on reduction in bullying 

victimization in high school (b = .027, p = .121), however, the indirect effect was significant. That is, 

individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher levels of growth in school belonging from 

T1 – T4 (b = .013, p = .042), growth in school belonging was in turn associated with reduction in growth 

in bullying victimization from T5 – T7 (b = -.434, p < .001). More specifically, individuals in the 

treatment group reported significantly higher growth in school belonging during middle school (T1 – T4), 

in turn, growth in school belonging was associated with significantly lower rates of bullying victimization 

in high school (T5 – T7). A significant mediation was found (p < .10) indicating a suppression effect of 

school belonging on bullying victimization (b = -.005, p = .086). 

Sexual Harassment Perpetration and Victimization 

We examined the extent to which individuals that received the prevention program were 

associated with reductions in sexual harassment perpetration and victimization respectively. For sexual 

harassment perpetration, there was not direct effect of the treatment on reductions in sexual harassment 

perpetration in high school (b = -.001, p = .828). Additionally, the indirect effect was not significant 

either. That is, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher levels of growth in school 

belonging from T1 – T4 (b = .013, p = .033), however, growth in school belonging was not associated 

with reductions in growth in sexual harassment perpetration from T5 – T7 (b = -.039, p = .297). More 

specifically, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher growth in school belonging 

during middle school (T1 – T4), however, growth in school belonging was not associated with 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
significantly lower rates of sexual harassment perpetration in high school (T5 – T7). The mediation was 

also not found to be statistically significant (b = -.001, p = .347). 

For sexual harassment victimization, there was no direct effect of treatment on reduction in 

sexual harassment victimization in high school (b = -.005, p = .653), however, the indirect effect was 

significant. That is, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher levels of growth in 

school belonging from T1 – T4 (b = .012, p = .048), growth in school belonging was in turn associated 

with reduction in growth in sexual harassment victimization from T5 – T7 (b = -.337, p < .001). More 

specifically, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher growth in school belonging 

during middle school (T1 – T4), in turn, growth in school belonging was associated with significantly 

lower rates of sexual harassment victimization in high school (T5 – T7). A significant mediation was 

found (p < .10) indicating a suppression effect of school belonging on sexual harassment victimization (b 

= -.004, p = .088). 

Homophobic Teasing Perpetration and Victimization 

We examined the extent to which the prevention program was associated with reductions in 

homophobic teasing perpetration and victimization respectively. For homophobic teasing perpetration, 

there was no direct effect of the treatment on reductions in homophobic teasing perpetration in high 

school (b = -.001, p = .946), however, the indirect effect was significant. That is, individuals in the 

treatment group reported significantly higher levels of growth in school belonging from T1 – T4 (b = 

.013, p = .036), growth in school belonging was in turn associated with reductions in growth in 

homophobic teasing perpetration from T5 – T7 (b = -.365, p = .003). More specifically, individuals in the 

treatment group reported significantly higher growth in school belonging during middle school (T1 – T4), 

in turn, growth in school belonging was associated with significantly lower rates of homophobic teasing 

perpetration in high school (T5 – T7). A significant mediation was found (p < .10) indicating a 

suppression effect of school belonging on homophobic teasing perpetration (b = -.005, p = .086). 

For homophobic teasing victimization, there was no direct effect of treatment on reduction in 

homophobic teasing victimization in high school (b = .007, p = .489), however, the indirect effect was 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
significant. That is, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher levels of growth in 

school belonging from T1 – T4 (b = .013, p = .037), growth in school belonging was in turn associated 

with reduction in growth in homophobic teasing victimization from T5 – T7 (b = -.339, p < .001). More 

specifically, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher growth in school belonging 

during middle school (T1 – T4), in turn, growth in school belonging was associated with significantly 

lower rates of homophobic teasing victimization in high school (T5 – T7). A significant mediation was 

found (p < .10) indicating a suppression effect of school belonging on homophobic teasing victimization 

(b = -.004, p = .074). 

Cyberbullying Perpetration and Victimization 

We examined the extent to which the prevention program were associated with reductions in 

cyberbullying perpetration and victimization respectively. For cyberbullying perpetration, there was no 

direct effect of the treatment on reductions in cyberbullying perpetration in high school (b = .016, p = 

.089). Additionally, there was no indirect effect either. That is, individuals in the treatment group reported 

significantly higher levels of growth in school belonging from T1 – T4 (b = .013, p = .038), however, 

growth in school belonging was not associated with reductions in growth in cyberbullying perpetration 

from T5 – T7 (b = .058, p = .399). More specifically, individuals in the treatment group reported 

significantly higher growth in school belonging during middle school (T1 – T4), however, growth in 

school belonging was not associated with significantly lower rates of cyberbullying perpetration in high 

school (T5 – T7). The mediation was not found to be statistically significant (b = .001, p = .444). 

For cyberbullying victimization, there was no direct effect of treatment on reduction in 

cyberbullying victimization in high school (b = -.022, p = .063), however, the indirect effect was 

significant. That is, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher levels of growth in 

school belonging from T1 – T4 (b = .013, p = .038), growth in school belonging was in turn associated 

with reduction in growth in cyberbullying victimization from T5 – T7 (b = -.336, p = .003). More 

specifically, individuals in the treatment group reported significantly higher growth in school belonging 

during middle school (T1 – T4), in turn, growth in school belonging was associated with significantly 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
lower rates of cyberbullying victimization in high school (T5 – T7). A significant mediation was found (p

< .10) indicating a suppression effect of school belonging on cyberbullying victimization (b = -.004, p = 

.086). 

Teen Dating Violence Perpetration and Victimization & Substance Use 

We examined the extent to which the prevention program were associated with reductions in teen 

dating violence perpetration and victimization and substance use. No direct or indirect effects were found. 

 Clinical and Policy Implications 

 Results indicated that the social-emotional learning middle school program improved students 

sense of belonging across the middle school years in comparison to students who were in the control 

schools. This increase in school belonging was associated with decreases in multiple forms of aggression 

and victimization as these students transitioned into high school. Given research that indicates that middle 

school is a developmental period in which attachment to school decreases and aggression increases, it is 

promising that the social-emotional learning program prevented the normative decline in school 

belonging. However, school belonging increases in middle school were not associated with teen dating 

violence involvement or substance use. Teen dating violence was not directly addressed in the middle 

school program, which may have contributed to these non-significant findings. Programs need to address 

teen dating violence more directly in middle school in order to impact these behaviors in high school. In 

contrast, the middle school program did address alcohol and drug use prevention, but there were not 

treatment effects when these youths transitioned to high school. 

List of Peer-Reviewed Articles 

Van Ryzin, M., & Espelage, D.L. (revise & resubmit). Trajectories of teen dating violence 

(TDV) victimization and links to substance use in high school. Aggressive Behavior. We found that 

both verbal and relational TDV victimization increased during high school (i.e., from 9th to 11th grade). 

We also found that females tended to experience more verbal TDV victimization than males, but there 

were no sex differences in relational TDV victimization. Finally, we found that verbal and relational TDV 

victimization are significant risk factors for escalating rates of substance use between 9th and 11th grade. 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
With regards to prevention, our findings suggest that both verbal and relational TDV represent significant 

risk factors for later substance use and indicates that substance use prevention should include discussions 

of TDV experiences.

Holt, M.K., Espelage, D.L., Van Ryzin, M., & Bowman, C. (in press). Peer victimization and sexual 

risk taking among adolescents. Journal of School Health. Latent difference score models indicated that 

bullying victimization was not related to sexual risk taking behaviors. Baseline levels of cyberbullying 

and verbal teen dating violence, however, were both associated with more sex under the influence of 

alcohol at Wave 2. Futher, findings revealed that changes over time in verbal teen dating violence 

victimization were associated with changes over time in sex under the influence of alcohol. Given links 

between peer victimization exposures and sexual risk taking behaviors, school-based prevention and 

intervention efforts should address these in concert with one another.

Rinehart, S., Espelage, D.L., & Bub, K. (2017). Longitudinal effects of gendered harassment 

perpetration and victimization on mental health outcomes in adolescence. Psychology of Violence. 

Results indicated that increases from age 13 to 17 years in sexual harassment perpetration and 

victimization as well as homophobic name-calling perpetration and victimization predicted increases in 

depression symptoms and substance use. Gender did not moderate these pathways. These findings 

highlight that negative outcomes are associated with gendered harassment for all involved and emphasize 

the importance of prevention efforts. School-wide policies that promote gender equity and are intolerant 

of gendered harassment are associated with decreased sexual harassment (Espelage, 2016). These policies 

therefore should include clear language regarding teachers’ responsibility for intervening when 

harassment s witnessed, and proactive teaching regarding the unacceptability of gendered harassment. 

Professional development regarding the impact of these acts, which are often normalized and ignored, is 

needed so that teachers and other school professionals can better understand the importance of intervening 

when harassment occurs and can be empowered to employ prevention efforts within their classrooms. 

School psychologists need to be aware of the potential involvement of gendered harassment when a 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
student presents with depression or substance use issues; psychologists can therefore assess for gendered 

harassment involvement when they are working with a student with these mental health outcomes. 

Hatchel, T., Espelage, D.L., & Huang, Y. (2017). Sexual harassment victimization, school belonging, 

and internalizing symptoms among LGBQ adolescents: Temporal and intersectional insights. 

Journal of Orthopsychiatry. Results demonstrated that both males and females reported comparable 

levels of harassment and school belonging, but females reported high levels of internalizing symptoms. 

An indirect model was used to examine the predictive role of sexual harassment victimization (time 1), 

the mediating role of school belonging (time 2), and subsequent internalizing symptoms (time 3). 

Internalizing symptoms at time 1 were used as covariates as to suggest directionality among study 

variables. The indirect effect from sexual harassment victimization through school belonging to 

internalizing symptoms was significant. Analyses also demonstrated that sexual harassment victimization 

appeared to be an antecedent to internalizing symptoms for LGBQ youth. As schools are increasingly 

being asked to adhere to their obligations under Title IX (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil 

Rights, 2010), effective prevention and intervention efforts will have to consider that LGBQ youth are 

experiencing sexual harassment and these experiences lead to distress over time. Recently, The Office of 

Civil Rights (OCR) in the U.S. Department of Education noted the legal obligations (in their “Dear 

Colleagues” letter) of schools to protect their students from gender-based harassment under Title IX. This 

protection extends to the prevention of sexual/gendered harassment; thus, given the results presented here, 

high school administrators should monitor closely the experiences of their LGBQ youth. Because school 

belongingness was found to mediate the association between peer victimization and depression, schools 

should pay particular attention to how LGBQ are being supported. One potential avenue to promote their 

sense of belonging is to support programs like gay-straight alliances (GSAs) given the fact that 

adolescents attending schools with LGBTQ support groups have been found to exhibit lower rates of 

victimization and subsequently diminished suicidality (Espelage, 2016). 

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Espelage, D.L., Van Ryzin, M., & Holt, M.K. (2017). Trajectories of bully perpetration across early 

adolescence: Static risk factors, dynamic covariates and longitudinal outcomes 

Psychology of Violence. Group-based semiparametric mixture modeling yielded five distinct trajectories 

of bullying perpetration emerged: 1) Low (37.8% of the sample); 2) Moderate Flat (51.3% of the sample); 

3) High Declining (3.4%); 4) Middle School Peak (4.2%); and 5) Moderate Escalating (3.4%). Early 

family relations and intervention status were found to be predictors of trajectory membership. Peer 

victimization, impulsivity, and depression as dynamic covariates predicted positive deviations from the 

bullying perpetration trajectories (i.e., increases in bullying), while empathy predicted negative 

deviations. Trajectory membership was differentially predictive of antisocial behavior, peer affiliation, 

and school belonging outcomes in the 10th grade. 

References 

Espelage, D. L. (2016). Sexual orientation and gender identity in schools: A call for more 

 research in school psychology—no more excuses. Journal of School Psychology, 54, 5 – 8.

Espelage, D.L., Low, S., Polanin, J., & Brown, E. (2015). Clinical trial of Second Step© 

middle-school program: Impact on aggression & victimization. Journal of Applied 

Developmental Psychology, 37, 52-63. 

Espelage, D.L., Van Ryzin, M., Low, S., & Polanin, J. (2015). Clinical trial of Second Step© middle 

-school Program: Impact on bullying, cyberbullying, homophobic teasing & sexual harassment 

Losel, F. & Farrington, D.P. (2012). Direct protective and buffering protective factors in the 

development of youth violence. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 43(2S1), S8–S23.

This resource was prepared by the author(s) using Federal funds provided by the U.S. 

Department of Justice. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not 

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.