Gender differences in evaluating social-sexual conduct in the workplace

Deviant Behavior in Computer-Mediated Communication: Development and Validation of a Measure of Cybersexual Harassment

“…Additional analyses were done to examine gender differences in the CSH and OE scales given the ample evidence of gender differences in the perception and perpetration of face‐to‐face SH (e.g., Biber et al, ; Baird et al, ; Dougherty et al, ; Fitzgerald & Ormerod, ; Gohann & Thacker, ; Gutek, ; Gutek, Morasch, & Kohen, ; Hurt, Wiener, Russell, & Mannen, ; Keyton & Rhodes, ; Rotundo, Nguyen, & Sackett, ; Summers, ). As we have seen in the case of gender role orientation, correlates of CSH may differ from correlates of face‐to‐face SH, and exploring gender differences in perceptions of the OE and in the propensity to engage in harassing behaviors online can give us a better idea of how CSH compares to traditional (face‐to‐face) conceptualizations of this construct.…”

Using concept mapping as a planning tool: Child welfare citizen review panels

“…These authors reported a number of explicit benefits in terms of planning, including permitting participants to pay explicit attention to processes. Other applications of this method have been made in areas of child welfare (Brown, 2008), education (Stoyanov & Kirschner, 2004;Truscott, Paulson, & Everall, 1999), physical health care (Baldwin, Kroesen, Trochim, & Bell, 2004;Gonzalez-Block, Rouvier, Becerril, & Sesia, 2011), mental health and well-being (Bedi, 2006;Biegel, Johnsen, & Shafran, 1997) and organizational and workforce culture (Hurt, Wiener, Russell, & Mannen, 1999;Kolb & Shepherd, 1997), to name a few. Kane and Trochim (2007) explicated a six-step CM process: (1) study planning; (2) conducting brainstorming-type focus groups to generate ideas; (3) sorting and rating the ideas collected during the brainstorming phase; (4) analyzing data (multidimensional scaling, hierarchical cluster analysis, etc.…”

Tolerance of Sexual Harassment: A Laboratory Paradigm

“…In addition, tolerance for behaviors consistent with sexual harassment increased when observers were exposed to a female victim employed in a traditional male occupation compared to a female victim working in a traditional female occupation (Golden, Johnson, & Lopez, 2001). Further, male employees appear to consider the workplace norms while women consider the intent of the perpetrator when determining the extent to which a behavior is sexual harassment (Hurt, Wiener, Russell, & Mannen, 1999;Russell & Trigg, 2004).…”