Sexual assault is a widespread problem on college campuses. In response, many institutions are developing policies mandating that certain employees report any student disclosure of sexual assault to university officials (and, in some cases, to police), with or without the survivor's consent. These policies, conceptualized here as , have been prompted and shaped by federal law and guidance, including Title IX and The Clery Act. Proponents of compelled disclosure assert that it will increase reports-enabling universities to investigate and remedy more cases of sexual assault-and will benefit sexual assault survivors, university employees, and the institution. However, many questions remain unanswered. How broad (or narrowly tailored) are contemporary compelled disclosure mandates in higher education? Do any empirical data support assumptions about the benefits of these policies? Are there alternative approaches that should be considered, to provide rapid and appropriate responses to sexual violence while minimizing harm to students? The current article begins with an overview of federal law and guidance around compelled disclosure. Next, a content analysis of a stratified random sample of 150 university policies provides evidence that the great majority require most, if not all, employees to report student sexual assault disclosures. A review of the literature then suggests that these policies have been implemented despite limited evidence to support assumptions regarding their benefits and effectiveness. In fact, some findings suggest negative consequences for survivors, employees, and institutions. The article concludes with a call for survivor-centered reforms in institutional policies and practices surrounding sexual assault. (PsycINFO Database Record

Theories of human aggression can inform research, policy, and practice in organizations. One such theory, victim precipitation, originated in the field of criminology. According to this perspective, some victims invite abuse through their personalities, styles of speech or dress, actions, and even their inactions. That is, they are partly at fault for the wrongdoing of others. This notion is gaining purchase in industrial and organizational (I-O) psychology as an explanation for workplace mistreatment. The first half of our article provides an overview and critique of the victim precipitation hypothesis. After tracing its history, we review the flaws of victim precipitation as catalogued by scientists and practitioners over several decades. We also consider real-world implications of victim precipitation thinking, such as the exoneration of violent criminals. Confident that I-O can do better, the second half of this article highlights alternative frameworks for researching and redressing hostile work behavior. In addition, we discuss a broad analytic paradigm—perpetrator predation—as a way to understand workplace abuse without blaming the abused. We take the position that these alternative perspectives offer stronger, more practical, and more progressive explanations for workplace mistreatment. Victim precipitation, we conclude, is an archaic ideology. Criminologists have long since abandoned it, and so should we.

Sexual assault is a prevalent problem in higher education, and despite the increasing availability of formal supports on college campuses, few sexual assault survivors use them. Experiencing sexual assault can have devastating consequences on survivors' psychological and educational wellbeing, which may intensify if survivors do not receive adequate care. Drawing from existing theoretical frameworks and empirical research, this study used a mixed methodological approach to examine why survivors did not use three key campus supports-the Title IX Office, the sexual assault center, and housing staff-and if these reasons differed across the three supports. Using data from 284 women who experienced sexual assault in college, our qualitative findings identified four overarching themes, including logistical issues (e.g., lacking time and knowledge), feelings, beliefs, and responses that made it seem unacceptable to use campus supports, judgments about the appropriateness of the support, and alternative methods of coping. Quantitative findings revealed that survivors' reasons for not seeking help differed across supports. Collectively, our findings suggest that community norms and institutional policies can make it challenging for survivors to use campus supports. We propose several suggestions for institutional change (e.g., taking a stronger stance against "less serious" forms of sexual assault, reducing a quasi-criminal justice approach to investigation and adjudication, limiting mandated reporting).

The current study investigated men's experiences of sexual harassment in the workplace, including sexually advancing harassment (e.g., unwanted touching) and gender harassment (e.g., derogatory comments). We examined the associations among engaging in feminist activism, being a sexual minority (e.g., gay, bisexual), and working in an organizational context that tolerates sexual harassment in predicting men's experiences of harassment. Moreover, we examined whether activism was protective against negative personal and professional harassment-related outcomes. Our study utilized survey data from 326 working adult men. According to results, engaging in feminist activism and working in an organizational context that tolerates sexual harassment were significant predictors of the sexual harassment of men. Sexual orientation was not a significant predictor alone, although sexual minority men were more likely to engage in feminist activism. Sexual advance and gender harassment were both associated with decreased psychological well-being and job satisfaction, but engaging in feminist activism was protective for men's psychological well-being. These findings support theoretical conceptualizations of sexual harassment as a form of punishment for men who deviate from the prescriptions of traditional masculinity. Our results suggest that organizations would benefit from comprehensive and gender-fair policies and trainings related to workplace sexual harassment.

Objective: Military Sexual Trauma (MST) can be a harmful aspect of military life. Despite the availability of resources, Service members may encounter barriers that impede help-seeking for sexual assault (i.e., encountering logistical constraints, anticipating stigma). We examined how such barriers undermine wellbeing (i.e., exacerbate symptoms of depression and posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD]) among MST survivors, both women and men. Additionally, we investigated how these barriers aggravate depression among Service members who feel unsafe from sexual assault. Method: The current study was a secondary analysis of the 2010 Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members (WGRA; N = 26,505). Personnel who had experienced MST (n = 542) and those who felt unsafe from sexual assault (n = 1,016) were included in the analyses. Results: The most commonly endorsed barriers were fears that they would be seen as weak, their leaders may treat them differently, and their coworkers might have less confidence in them. As expected, both MST survivors and those feeling unsafe reported more negative psychological symptoms as a function of help-seeking barriers. Conclusions: Results suggest that removal of these barriers may be helpful for the protection of mental health—among assault victims and nonvictims alike. For instance, efforts could be taken to reduce logistical barriers (e.g., allowing time for health care visits) and stigma (e.g., enhancing training for all personnel who work with MST survivors).