Sex Roles

, Volume 70, Issue 1–2, pp 14–27 | Cite as

Who Cares What She Thinks, What Does He Say? Links between Masculinity, In-Group Bonding and Gender Harassment

  • Christopher John HuntEmail author
  • Karen Gonsalkorale
Original Article


Previous research has linked threats to masculinity and gender harassment, the most pervasive form of sexual harassment. Using a computer harassment paradigm, an ingroup bonding explanation of this link was directly examined. The study was conducted with heterosexual male undergraduate students from an inner city Australian university. Participants received a threat to masculinity before being exposed to an ostensible gender ingroup member whose reaction to sexist jokes was manipulated. Data from 74 participants revealed that men high on conformity to masculine norms altered their behavior to correspond with feedback from the gender ingroup member after a masculinity threat, whereas men low on conformity to masculine norms rejected gender ingroup feedback after a masculinity threat. A variable examining reported liking of the gender ingroup member produced a similar pattern, while no changes were observed in reported liking of a gender outgroup member These results suggest that the perceived response of other members of the gender ingroup, but not members of the gender outgroup, influence men’s proclivity to enact gender harassing behaviors.


Masculinity Gender harassment Ingroup bonding Gender roles Conformity 


  1. Australian Human Rights Commission. (2012). Working without fear: Results of the sexual harassment national telephone survey. Sydney: Australia: Retrieved from
  2. Bauer, D. J., & Curran, P. J. (2005). Probing interactions in fixed and multilevel regression: Inferential and graphical techniques. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 373–400. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr4003_5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berdahl, J. L. (2007a). Harassment based on sex: Protecting social status in the context of gender hierarchy. The Academy of Management Review, 32, 641–658. doi: 10.2307/20159319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berdahl, J. L. (2007b). The sexual harassment of uppity women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 425–437. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.425.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brannon, L. (2011). Gender: Psychological perspectives (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  6. Brewer, M. B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love and outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429–444. doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown, J., & Graham, D. (2008). Body satisfaction in gym-active males: An exploration of sexuality, gender, and narcissism. Sex Roles, 59, 94–106. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9416-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cadinu, M. R., & Cerchioni, M. (2001). Compensatory biases after ingroup threat: ‘Yeah, but we have a good personality’. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 353–367. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Connell, R. W. (1998). Introduction: Studying Australian masculinities. Journal of Interdisciplinary Gender Studies, 3, 1–8.Google Scholar
  10. Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  11. Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity. Gender & Society, 19, 829–859. doi: 10.1177/0891243205278639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Estrada, A. X., & Berggren, A. W. (2009). Sexual harassment and its impact for women officers and cadets in the Swedish armed forces. Military Psychology, 21, 162–185. doi: 10.1080/08995600902768727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fabiano, P. M., Perkins, H. W., Berkowitz, A., Linkenbach, J., & Stark, C. (2003). Engaging men as social justice allies in ending violence against women: Evidence for a social norms approach. Journal of American College Health, 52, 105–112. doi: 10.1080/07448480309595732.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fine, C. (2010). Delusions of gender: The real science behind sex differences. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  15. 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 and Bacon.Google Scholar
  16. Glick, P., Gangl, C., Gibb, S., Klumpner, S., & Weinberg, E. (2007). Defensive reactions to masculinity threat: More negative affect toward effeminate (but not masculine) gay men. Sex Roles, 57, 55–59. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9195-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guthrie, R., Taplin, R., & Oliver, J. (2009). Workplace harassment–A health issue: Anti-discrimination cases and workers’ compensation claims. International Journal of Discrimination and the Law, 10, 163–190. doi: 10.1177/135822910901000402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hand, J. Z., & Sanchez, L. (2000). Badgering or bantering?: Gender differences in experience of, and reactions to, sexual harassment among U.S. high school students. Gender & Society, 14, 718–746. doi: 10.1177/089124300014006002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hitlan, R. T., Pryor, J. B., Hesson-McInnis, M. S., & Olson, M. (2009). Antecedents of gender harassment: An analysis of person and situation factors. Sex Roles, 61, 794–807. doi: 10.1007/s11199-009-9689-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hunt, C. J., Gonsalkorale, K., & Murray, S. B. (2013). Threatened masculinity and muscularity: An experimental examination of multiple aspects of muscularity in men. Body Image, 10, 290–299. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.02.007.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ilies, R., Hauserman, N., Schwochau, S., & Stibal, J. (2003). Reported incidence rates of work-related sexual harassment in the United States: Using meta-analysis to explain reported rate disparities. Personnel Psychology, 56, 607–631. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2003.tb00752.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jetten, J., Spears, R., & Manstead, A. S. (1997). Distinctiveness threat and prototypicality: Combined effects on intergroup discrimination and collective self-esteem. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 635–657. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199711/12)27:6<635::AID-EJSP835>3.0.CO;2-#.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Johnson, K. (2010). Sexual harassment in the workplace: A case study of Nigeria. Gender & Behaviour, 8, 2903–2918. doi: 10.4314/gab.v8i1.54708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Krings, F., & Facchin, S. (2009). Organizational justice and men’s likelihood to sexually harass: The moderating role of sexism and personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 501–510. doi: 10.1037/a0013391.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Maass, A., Cadinu, M., Guarnieri, G., & Grasselli, A. (2003). Sexual harassment under social identity threat: The computer harassment paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 853–870. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.853.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Maass, A., & Cadinu, M. R. (2006). Protecting a threatened identity through sexual harassment: A social identity interpretation. In R. Brown & D. Capozza (Eds.), Social identities : Motivational, emotional, cultural influences (pp. 109–131). Hove: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  27. Mahalik, J. R., Locke, B. D., Ludlow, L. H., Diemer, M. A., Scott, R. P., Gottfried, M., et al. (2003). Development of the conformity to masculine norms inventory. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4, 3–25. doi: 10.1037/154-9220.4.1.3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Murrie, L. (1998). The Australian legend: Writing Australian masculinity/writing ‘Australian’ masculine. Journal of Australian Studies, 22, 68–77. doi: 10.1080/14443059809387361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interaction effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437–448. doi: 10.3102/10769986031004437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pryor, J. B., Giedd, J. L., & Williams, K. B. (1995). A social psychological model for predicting sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 69–84. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01309.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rowe, D., & Gilmour, C. (2009). Lubrication and domination: Beer, sport, masculinity, and the Australian gender order. In L. A. Wenner & S. J. Jackson (Eds.), Sport, beer, and gender: Promotional culture and contemporary social life (pp. 203–221). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
  32. Rudman, L. A., & Fairchild, K. (2004). Reactions to counterstereotypic behavior: The role of backlash in cultural stereotype maintenance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 157–176. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.2.157.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rudman, L. A., & Glick, P. (2008). The social psychology of gender: How power and intimacy shape gender relations. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  34. Saunders, K. A., & Senn, C. Y. (2009). Should I confront him? Men’s reactions to hypothetical confrontations of peer sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 61, 399–415. doi: 10.1007/s11199-009-9638-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schmitt, M. T., & Branscombe, N. R. (2001). The good, the bad, and the manly: Threats to one’s prototypicality and evaluations of fellow in-group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 510–517. doi: 10.1006/jesp.2001.1476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Siebler, F., Sabelus, S., & Bohner, G. (2008). A refined computer harassment paradigm: Validation, and test of hypotheses about target characteristics. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 22–35. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00404.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smiler, A. P. (2006). Conforming to masculine norms: Evidence for validity among adult men and women. Sex Roles, 54, 767–775. doi: 10.1007/s11199-006-9045-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Strangio, P. (2011). Politics of hate takes aim at PM. Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from
  39. Summers, A. (2012). Who would dare to be our second female PM?. Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from
  40. Talley, A. E., & Bettencourt, B. (2008). Evaluations and aggression directed at a gay male target: The role of threat and antigay prejudice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 647–683. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00321.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Toker, Y., & Sumer, H. (2010). Workplace sexual harassment perceptions in the Turkish context and the role of individual differences. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 59, 616–646. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2010.00420.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Van Vugt, M., & Hart, C. M. (2004). Social identity as social glue: The origins of group loyalty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 585–598. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.86.4.585.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wesselmann, E. D., & Kelly, J. R. (2010). Cat-calls and culpability: Investigating the frequency and functions of stranger harassment. Sex Roles, 63, 451–462. doi: 10.1007/s11199-010-9830-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Willness, C. R., Steel, P., & Lee, K. (2007). A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment. Personnel Psychology, 60, 127–162. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00067.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of PsychologyThe University of SydneyDarlingtonAustralia

Personalised recommendations