Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

The Effects of Subtle Sexual Harassment on Women’s Performance in a Job Interview

Abstract

Although we now know about the long-term consequences of moderate to severe sexual harassment, little is known about the immediate effects of more subtle harassment. The present study was designed to examine real-time consequences of subtle sexual harassment in a job interview using objective indicators of job performance. Fifty women were recruited for a job interview. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two interview conditions during which they were asked either three sexual or non-sexual questions interspersed with standard interview questions. In the former, women applicants spoke less fluently, gave lower quality answers, and asked fewer job relevant questions than did those in the non-sexual interview. It thus appears that even relatively mild harassment disrupts immediate performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 256–274.

  2. Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 431–441.

  3. Arvey, R. D. (1979). Unfair discrimination in the employment interview: Legal and psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 736–765.

  4. Barling, J., Rogers, A. G., & Kelloway, E. K. (2001). Behind closed doors: In-home workers’ experience of sexual harassment and workplace violence. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 255–269.

  5. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

  6. Collinson, D. L., & Collinson, M. (1989). Sexuality in the workplace: The domination of men’s sexuality. In J. Hearn & D. L. Sheppard (Eds.), The sexuality of organizations (pp. 91–109). London: Sage.

  7. Conte, A. (1997). Legal theories of sexual harassment. In W. O’Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 50–83). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

  8. Crosby, F. (1982). Relative deprivation and working women. New York: Oxford University Press.

  9. Crosby, F. (1984). The denial of personal discrimination. American Behavioral Scientist, 27, 371–386.

  10. Crull, P. (1982). Stress effects of sexual harassment on the job: Implications for counseling. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 52, 539–544.

  11. Dansky, B. S., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (1997). Effects of sexual harassment. In W. O’Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 152–174). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

  12. Du Bois, J. W., Schuetze-Coburn, S., Cumming, S., & Paolino, D. (1993). Outline of discourse transcription. In J. A. Edwards & M. D. Lampert (Eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research (pp. 45–89). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

  13. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1980). Title 29—Labor, Chap XIV, Part 1604, Guidelines on Discrimination Because of Sex under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, as Amended Adoption of Interim Interpretive Guideline. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

  14. Faley, R. H., Knapp, D. E., Kustis, G. A., & Dubois, C. L. Z. (1999). Estimating the organizational costs of sexual harassment: The case of the U.S. army. Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, 461–484.

  15. Fear, R. A., & Chiron, R. J. (1990). The evaluation interview (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

  16. Fitzgerald, L. F., Drasgow, F., Hulin, C. L., Gelfand, M. J., & Magley, V. J. (1997). Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: A test of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 578–589.

  17. Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J., & Drasgow, F. (1995). Measuring sexual harassment: Theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 425–445.

  18. Fitzgerald, L. F., Swan, S., & Magley, V. J. (1997). But was it really sexual harassment?: Legal, behavioral, and psychological definitions of the workplace victimization of women. In W. O’Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 5–28). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

  19. Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206.

  20. Fredrickson, B. L., Roberts, T., Noll, S. M., Quinn, D. M., & Twenge, J. M. (1998). That swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 269–284.

  21. Glomb, T. M., Munson, L. J., Hulin, C. L., Bergman, M. E., & Drasgow, F. (1999). Structural equation models of sexual harassment: Longitudinal explorations and cross-sectional generalizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 14–28.

  22. Gosselin, H. L. (1986). Sexual harassment on the job: Psychological, social, and economic repercussions. Canadian Mental Health, 32, 21–24.

  23. Gruber, J. E. (1992). A typology of personal and environmental sexual harassment: Research and policy implications for the 1990s. Sex Roles, 26, 447–464.

  24. Gruber, J. E., & Bjorn, L. (1982). Blue-collar blues: The sexual harassment of women autoworkers. Work and Occupations, 9, 271–298.

  25. Gutek, B. A. (1985). Sex and the workplace: Impact of sexual behavior and harassment on women, men, and organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  26. Hanisch, K. A., & Hulin, C. L. (1991). General attitudes and organizational withdrawal: An evaluation of a causal model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 39, 110–128.

  27. Jensen, I., & Gutek, B. (1982). Attributions and assignment of responsibility for sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 38 (4), 121–136.

  28. Livingston, J. A. (1982). Responses to sexual harassment on the job: Legal, organizational, and individual actions. Journal of Social Issues, 38 (4), 5–22.

  29. Magley, V. J., Hulin, C. L., Fitzgerald, L. F., & DeNardo, M. (1999). Outcomes of self-labeling sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 390–402.

  30. Magley, V. J., Waldo, C. R., Drasgow, F., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1999). The impact of sexual harassment on military personnel: Is it the same for men and women? Military Psychology, 11, 283–302.

  31. Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson. (1986). 477 U.S. 57, 40 FEP Case 1822.

  32. Olian, J. D., Schwab, D. P., & Haberfeld, Y. (1988). The impact of applicant gender compared to qualifications on hiring recommendations: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 41, 180–195.

  33. Piotrkowski, C. S. (1998). Gender harassment, job satisfaction, and distress among employed white and minority women. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 33–43.

  34. Robinson v. Jacksonville Shipyards. (1991). 760 F. Supp. 1486 (M.D. Fla.).

  35. Satterfield, A. T., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (1997). Shaken confidence: The effects of an authority figure’s flirtatiousness on women’s and men’s self-rated creativity. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 395–416.

  36. Schneider, K. T., Swan, S., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1997). Job-related and psychological effects of sexual harassment in the workplace: Empirical evidence from two organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 401–415.

  37. Schneider, K. T., Tomaka, J., & Palacios, R. (2001). Women’s cognitive, affective, and physiological reactions to a male coworker’s sexist behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1995–2018.

  38. Schultz, V. (1998). Reconceptualizing sexual harassment. The Yale Law Journal, 107, 1683–1805.

  39. Sczesny, S., & Stahlberg, D. (2000). Sexual harassment over the telephone: Occupational risk to call centres. Work and Stress, 14, 121–136.

  40. Scott v. Sears, Roebuck, & Co. (1986). 605 F Supp. 1047.

  41. Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797–811.

  42. Stockdale, M. S. (1998). The direct and moderating influences of sexual harassment pervasiveness, coping strategies, and gender on work-related outcomes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 521–535.

  43. Till, F. J. (1980). Sexual harassment: A report on the sexual harassment of students. Washington, DC: National Advisory Council on Women’s Educational Program.

  44. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (USMSPB). (1981). Sexual harassment of federal workers: Is it a problem? Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

  45. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board (USMSPB). (1987). Sexual harassment of federal workers: An update. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

  46. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of a brief measure of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1071.

  47. Word, C. O., Zanna, M. P., & Cooper, J. (1974). The nonverbal mediation of self-fulfilling prophecies in interracial interaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 109–120.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Julie A. Woodzicka.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Woodzicka, J.A., LaFrance, M. The Effects of Subtle Sexual Harassment on Women’s Performance in a Job Interview. Sex Roles 53, 67–77 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-4279-4

Download citation

Key Words

  • sexual harassment
  • performance
  • interview