Overview
I am a social psychologist with an interest in violence prevention.
Areas of expertise: aggressive behaviour, violence prevention, bystander interventions, systematic reviews, qualitative and quantitative research in social sciences.
As part of my PhD I am involved in the Bystander Intervention in Football and Sports project as one of the researchers.
I am also the current Postgraduate Research Representative for the Institute of Health Research at the University of Exeter Medical School, and work as the Postgraduate Teaching Assistant at the College of Life and Environmental Sciences.
I am the PsyPAG Representative to the BPS South West of England Branch.
Outside of work, my interests include travelling, playing ukulele, and painting.
I am also the University Coordinator of the Pint of Science Festival 2019 and 2020 in Exeter, and the Chair of the organising committee of the SWDTP Conference 2018 in Bristol.
Qualifications
MSc Social and Organisational Psychology (University of Exeter)
Mini-MBA (Management & Marketing Universal Business School)
BA (Hons) Psychology and Social Work (Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv)
Career
In 2012 I obtained my BA in Psychology and Social Work from Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. During my study, I was employed as a Trade Union Organiser at the University. To satisfy my training needs in social psychology, I then applied to the University of Exeter. During my MSc at the University of Exeter, I developed a particular interest in aggressive behaviour and bystander approach to violence regulation.
After graduation, I returned to Ukraine where I was working as a Social Media Marketing Manager and Administrator for a UK-based company. In 2014 I obtained an intensive mini-MBA from MMU Business School (online short course) and received my News Presenter Certificate. It took me 4 years to understand that academia was my calling in life. In 2017 I have successfully applied for the Exeter International Excellence Scholarship for Postgraduate Research and am now part of the Institute of Health Research at the University of Exeter Medical School. It is hoped this research will promote safer behaviour among young adults.
Research group links
Research
Research interests
In Anastasiia’s PhD project she focuses on bystander approach to violence prevention.
PhD Supervision: Professor Charles Abraham, Doctor Siobhan O'Dwyer, Professor Mark Levine and Doctor Rachel Fenton.
Research projects
Kovalenko, A. G., Abraham, C., Graham-Rowe, E., Levine, M., & O’Dwyer, S. (2020). What Works in Violence Prevention Among Young People?: A Systematic Review of Reviews. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838020939130
Levine, M., Philpot, R., Kovalenko A.G. (2019). Rethinking the Bystander Effect in Violence Reduction Training Programs, Social Issues and Policy Review, 0(00), 1-24. DOI: 10.1111/sipr.12063
A whole-system multi-agency approach to serious violence prevention. A resource for local system leaders in England. (2019). Retrievable from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/preventing-serious-violence-a-multi-agency-approach
Publications
Key publications | Publications by category | Publications by year
Publications by category
Journal articles
Johnson R, Kovalenko AG, Blakeman T, Panagioti M, Lawton M, Dawson S, Duncan P, Fraser SD, Valderas JM, Chilcott S, et al (2023). Treatment burden in multiple long-term conditions: a mixed-methods study protocol.
BJGP OpenAbstract:
Treatment burden in multiple long-term conditions: a mixed-methods study protocol.
BACKGROUND: Treatment burden represents the work patients undertake because of their health care, and the impact of that effort on the patient. Most research has focused on older adults (aged >65 years) with multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity) (MLTC-M), but there are now more younger adults (aged 18-65 years) living with MLTC-M and they may experience treatment burden differently. Understanding experiences of treatment burden, and identifying those most at risk of high treatment burden, are important for designing primary care services to meet their needs. AIM: to understand the treatment burden associated with MLTC-M, for people aged 18-65 years, and how primary care services affect this burden. DESIGN & SETTING: Mixed-methods study in up to 33 primary care practices in two UK regions. METHOD: the following two approaches will be used: (i) in-depth qualitative interviews with adults living with MLTC-M (approximately 40 participants) to understand their experiences of treatment burden and the impact of primary care, with a think-aloud aspect to explore face validity of a novel short treatment burden questionnaire (STBQ) for routine clinical use in the initial 15 interviews; (ii) cross-sectional patient survey (approximately 1000 participants), with linked routine medical record data to examine the factors associated with treatment burden for people living with MLTC-M, and to test the validity of STBQ. CONCLUSION: This study will generate in-depth understanding of the treatment burden experienced by people aged 18-65 years living with MLTC-M, and how primary care services affect this burden. This will inform further development and testing of interventions to reduce treatment burden, and potentially influence MLTC-M trajectories and improve health outcomes.
Abstract.
Author URL.
Levine M, Philpot R, Kovalenko AG (2020). Rethinking the Bystander Effect in Violence Reduction Training Programs.
Social Issues and Policy Review,
14(1), 273-296.
Abstract:
Rethinking the Bystander Effect in Violence Reduction Training Programs
Many violence prevention programs include a focus on the role of bystanders and third parties in violence prevention training. Central to this work has been the classic social psychological research on the “bystander effect”. However, recent research on bystander behavior shows that the bystander effect does not hold in violent or dangerous emergencies. Meta-analyses of the literature show that the presence of others can facilitate as well as inhibit intervention in emergencies. Studies of real-life bystander behavior captured on CCTV cameras shows that some bystander intervention is the norm and that the likelihood of bystanders being victimized is low. One reason for the limited effectiveness of violence reduction programs may be their approach to bystanders. We argue that violence reduction programs should: recognize that some intervention is likely (although it may not always be successful); see the group as a route to successful intervention rather than a threat to the likelihood of any single individual becoming an intervener; inform bystanders of the real risks of victimization; utilize the power of social relations between bystanders, victims, and perpetrators to enhance successful intervention; seek to deliver bystander intervention training in situ, rather than away from the context of the aggression or violence.
Abstract.
Kovalenko AG, Abraham C, Graham-Rowe E, Levine M, O’Dwyer S (2020). What Works in Violence Prevention Among Young People?: a Systematic Review of Reviews.
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse,
23(5), 1388-1404.
Abstract:
What Works in Violence Prevention Among Young People?: a Systematic Review of Reviews
Violence prevention programs aim to raise awareness, change attitudes, normative beliefs, motivation, and behavioral responses. Many programs have been developed and evaluated, and optimistic claims about effectiveness made. Yet comprehensive guidance on program design, implementation, and evaluation is limited. The aim of this study was to provide an up-to-date review of evidence on what works for whom. A systematic search of PsycINFO, MEDLINE, ERIC, and Sociology Collection ProQuest identified 40 reviews and meta-analyses reporting on the effectiveness of violence prevention programs among young people (age 15–30) in educational institutions, published before October 2018. These included reviews of programs designed to reduce (i) bullying, (ii) dating and relationship violence, (iii) sexual assault, and (iv) antisocial behavior. Only evaluations that reported on behavioral outcomes such as perpetration, victimization, and bystander behavior were included. The reviewed evaluations reported on programs that were mainly implemented in high-income countries in Europe and North America. The majority found small effects on violence reduction and victimization and increases in self-reported bystander behavior. Our findings expose critical gaps in evaluation research in this area and provide recommendations on how to optimize the effectiveness of future programs.
Abstract.
Publications by year
2023
Johnson R, Kovalenko AG, Blakeman T, Panagioti M, Lawton M, Dawson S, Duncan P, Fraser SD, Valderas JM, Chilcott S, et al (2023). Treatment burden in multiple long-term conditions: a mixed-methods study protocol.
BJGP OpenAbstract:
Treatment burden in multiple long-term conditions: a mixed-methods study protocol.
BACKGROUND: Treatment burden represents the work patients undertake because of their health care, and the impact of that effort on the patient. Most research has focused on older adults (aged >65 years) with multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity) (MLTC-M), but there are now more younger adults (aged 18-65 years) living with MLTC-M and they may experience treatment burden differently. Understanding experiences of treatment burden, and identifying those most at risk of high treatment burden, are important for designing primary care services to meet their needs. AIM: to understand the treatment burden associated with MLTC-M, for people aged 18-65 years, and how primary care services affect this burden. DESIGN & SETTING: Mixed-methods study in up to 33 primary care practices in two UK regions. METHOD: the following two approaches will be used: (i) in-depth qualitative interviews with adults living with MLTC-M (approximately 40 participants) to understand their experiences of treatment burden and the impact of primary care, with a think-aloud aspect to explore face validity of a novel short treatment burden questionnaire (STBQ) for routine clinical use in the initial 15 interviews; (ii) cross-sectional patient survey (approximately 1000 participants), with linked routine medical record data to examine the factors associated with treatment burden for people living with MLTC-M, and to test the validity of STBQ. CONCLUSION: This study will generate in-depth understanding of the treatment burden experienced by people aged 18-65 years living with MLTC-M, and how primary care services affect this burden. This will inform further development and testing of interventions to reduce treatment burden, and potentially influence MLTC-M trajectories and improve health outcomes.
Abstract.
Author URL.
2020
Levine M, Philpot R, Kovalenko AG (2020). Rethinking the Bystander Effect in Violence Reduction Training Programs.
Social Issues and Policy Review,
14(1), 273-296.
Abstract:
Rethinking the Bystander Effect in Violence Reduction Training Programs
Many violence prevention programs include a focus on the role of bystanders and third parties in violence prevention training. Central to this work has been the classic social psychological research on the “bystander effect”. However, recent research on bystander behavior shows that the bystander effect does not hold in violent or dangerous emergencies. Meta-analyses of the literature show that the presence of others can facilitate as well as inhibit intervention in emergencies. Studies of real-life bystander behavior captured on CCTV cameras shows that some bystander intervention is the norm and that the likelihood of bystanders being victimized is low. One reason for the limited effectiveness of violence reduction programs may be their approach to bystanders. We argue that violence reduction programs should: recognize that some intervention is likely (although it may not always be successful); see the group as a route to successful intervention rather than a threat to the likelihood of any single individual becoming an intervener; inform bystanders of the real risks of victimization; utilize the power of social relations between bystanders, victims, and perpetrators to enhance successful intervention; seek to deliver bystander intervention training in situ, rather than away from the context of the aggression or violence.
Abstract.
Kovalenko AG, Abraham C, Graham-Rowe E, Levine M, O’Dwyer S (2020). What Works in Violence Prevention Among Young People?: a Systematic Review of Reviews.
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse,
23(5), 1388-1404.
Abstract:
What Works in Violence Prevention Among Young People?: a Systematic Review of Reviews
Violence prevention programs aim to raise awareness, change attitudes, normative beliefs, motivation, and behavioral responses. Many programs have been developed and evaluated, and optimistic claims about effectiveness made. Yet comprehensive guidance on program design, implementation, and evaluation is limited. The aim of this study was to provide an up-to-date review of evidence on what works for whom. A systematic search of PsycINFO, MEDLINE, ERIC, and Sociology Collection ProQuest identified 40 reviews and meta-analyses reporting on the effectiveness of violence prevention programs among young people (age 15–30) in educational institutions, published before October 2018. These included reviews of programs designed to reduce (i) bullying, (ii) dating and relationship violence, (iii) sexual assault, and (iv) antisocial behavior. Only evaluations that reported on behavioral outcomes such as perpetration, victimization, and bystander behavior were included. The reviewed evaluations reported on programs that were mainly implemented in high-income countries in Europe and North America. The majority found small effects on violence reduction and victimization and increases in self-reported bystander behavior. Our findings expose critical gaps in evaluation research in this area and provide recommendations on how to optimize the effectiveness of future programs.
Abstract.
Anastasiia_Kovalenko Details from cache as at 2023-09-30 16:29:12
Refresh publications
Teaching
Social Psychology; Cognitive Psychology.
