Situational and Individual Influences on Judgments of Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment¹

Abstract

The current research examines the judgment processes of third‐party evaluators of sexual harassment situations. Four situational variables were hypothesized to influence ratings of situation appropriateness and judgments of sexual harassment. The evaluator's gender and personality also were hypothesized to influence both ratings. Participants were 73 male and 51 female undergraduate students. Results indicated that behavior severity and victim response significantly influenced ratings. The frequency of the behavior influenced appropriateness ratings, but interacted with behavior severity for harassment judgments. The effects of the gender of the evaluator were mediated by the evaluator's level of tolerance for harassment. The effects of the power relationship and rater personality were not significant.

Club Drug Use and Intentionality in Perceptions of Rape Victims

“…Understanding the factors that may affect attributions about sexual victimization can be relevant for understanding the decision making process of third parties (e.g., law enforcement, judicial) where these individuals must determine whether or not sexual victimization has occurred (Hurt et al 1999).…”

The Continuation of Perpetrator Behaviors that Influence Perceptions of Sexual Harassment

“…Studies that have concerned the frequency of harassment are perhaps the most relevant in this regard. Generally, the more frequent the harassing behavior, the more likely the behavior is to be perceived as inappropriate and sexually harassing (Ellis, Barak, & Pinto, 1991;Hurt et al, 1999;Thomann & Weiner, 1987). Two such investigations included scenarios that manipulated the perpetrator's harassing behavior and the victim's response, in addition to the frequency of the harassing behavior.…”

“…Two such investigations included scenarios that manipulated the perpetrator's harassing behavior and the victim's response, in addition to the frequency of the harassing behavior. After describing a perpetrator's socio-sexual behavior, Hurt et al (1999) presented some scenarios that described its frequency ("he has done this several times before"), followed by the victims' response ("ignores his behavior and changes the subject"). However, it is not clear that the victim ever directly asked the perpetrator to stop on any occasion.…”

“…Generally, research shows that any type of resistance from the victim, such as saying "stop," strengthens perceptions of sexual harassment (Henry & Meltzoff, 1998;Hurt, Maver, & Hofmann, 1999;Jones & Remland, 1992;Jones, Remland, & Brunner, 1987;Remland & Jones, 1985;York, 1989). However, there may be certain situations in which saying "stop" is not sufficient to convince individuals that sexual attention is unwanted because other factors may override or counter the verbal resistance.…”

“…L. Blakely, E. H. Blakely, & Moorman, 1995;Burgess & Borgida, 1997;Corr & Jackson, 2001;Dougherty, Turban, Olson, Dwyer, & Lapreze, 1996;Gervasio & Ruckdeschel, 1992;Icenogle, Eagle, Ahmad, & Hanks, 2002;Loredo, Reid, & Deaux, 1995;Matsui, Kakuyama, Onglatco, & Ogutu, 1995;McKinney, 1992;Soloman & Williams, 1997;Tata, 1993;Terpstra & Baker, 1987;Williams, Brown, Lees-Haley, & Price, 1995). A smaller number of studies concern perceptions of harassment based on the victim's response to the perpetrator's harassing behavior (Henry & Meltzoff, 1998;Hurt et al, 1999;Jones & Remland, 1992;Jones et al, 1987;Remland & Jones, 1985;York, 1989). Whereas researchers have manipulated initial harassing behavior and victims' responses to those behaviors, investigations of perceptions of harassment based on the perpetrator's behavior immediately following the victim's resistance are lacking in the literature.…”