Sex Roles

, Volume 75, Issue 9–10, pp 476–489 | Cite as

Touchy Subjects: Sex in the Workplace on Broadcast, Cable, and Internet Television

  • Laramie D. Taylor
  • Cassandra Alexopoulos
  • Jannath Ghaznavi
Original Article

Abstract

A content analysis of workplace sexual interactions, informed by past research on sexual harassment in televised workplaces, was conducted of 100 U.S. broadcast, cable, and Internet television programs that featured work or a workplace as a prominent setting. Although sexual interactions were relatively common, they were generally depicted in ways that did not clearly communicate harassment. Sexual talk and behavior in the workplace were generally met with either reciprocation or no response. Workplace sexual behavior was more frequent in situation comedies than in other genres of entertainment television content and more common in programs produced for distribution over the Internet than in programs produced for distribution through cable channels or broadcast networks. Results are discussed in terms of likely consequences of viewing, particularly noting that theories of media influence suggest that viewing such programming is likely to contribute to greater tolerance of sexual talk and behavior in the actual workplace.

Keywords

Television Sexual harassment Content analysis Sexual attitudes Quality of work life 

Supplementary material

11199_2016_642_MOESM1_ESM.doc (101 kb)
ESM 1(DOC 101 kb)

References

  1. Aggarwal, A., & Gupta, M. (2000). Sexual harassment in the workplace (3rd ed.). Vancouver: Butterworths.Google Scholar
  2. Andsager, J. L., Bemker, V., Choi, H. L., & Torwel, V. (2006). Perceived similarity of exemplar traits and behavior effects on message evaluation. Communication Research, 33, 3–18. doi:10.1177/0093650205283099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aubrey, J. S., Harrison, K., Kramer, L., & Yellin, J. (2003). Variety versus timing: Gender differences in college students’ sexual expectations as predicted by exposure to sexually oriented television. Communication Research, 30, 432–460.Google Scholar
  4. Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models’ reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 589–595.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  6. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media Psychology, 3(3), 265–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bandura, A. (2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Applied Psychology, 51, 269–290. doi:10.1111/1464-0597.00092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bandura, A. (2003). Social cognitive theory for personal and social change by enabling media. In A. Singhal, M. J. Cody, E. M. Rogers, & M. Sabido (Eds.), Entertainment-education and social change: History, research, and practice (pp. 75–96). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(1), 3–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Burkhardt, M., & Nathaniel, A. (1998). Ethics and issues in contemporary nursing. Albany: Delmar Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Consumer News and Business Channel. (2009). Porn at work: Recognizing a sex addict. Retrieved from http://www.cnbc.com/id/31922685.
  12. European Commission. (1991). Commission recommendation of 27 November 1991 on the protection of the dignity of women and men at work. Official Journal of the European Communities, L049, 0001–0008. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/.Google Scholar
  13. Farrar, K. M. (2006). Sexual intercourse on television: Do safe sex messages matter? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50, 635–650. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem5004_4.
  14. Fineran, S., & Bennett, L. (1999). Gender and power issues of peer sexual harassment among teenagers. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 14(6), 626–641. doi:10.1177/088626099014006004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Friedman, A. R. (1992). Rape and domestic violence: The experience of refugee women. Women & Therapy, 13, 65–78. doi:10.1300/J015V13N01_07.
  16. Gelfand, M. J., Fitzgerald, L. F., & Drasgow, F. (1995). The structure of sexual harassment:A confirmatory analysis across cultures and settings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 47(2), 164–177. doi:10.1006/jvbe.1995.1033.
  17. Gerding, A., & Signorielli, N. (2014). Gender roles in tween television programming: A content analysis of two genres. Sex Roles, 70, 43–56. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0330-z.
  18. Grauerholz, E., & King, A. (1997). Prime time sexual harassment. Violence Against Women, 3, 129–148. doi:10.1177/1077801297003002003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Hoffner, C., & Buchanan, M. (2005). Young adults’ wishful identification with television characters: The role of perceived similarity and character attributes. Media Psychology, 7(4), 325–351. doi:10.1207/S1532785XMEP0704_2.
  20. Jacobs, L., Claes, E., & Hooghe, M. (2015). The occupational roles of women and ethnic minorities on primetime television in Belgium: An analysis of occupational status measurements. Mass Communication and Society, 18, 498–521. doi:10.1080/15205436.2014.1001908.
  21. Kunkel, D., Eyal, K., Finnerty, K., Biely, E., & Donnerstein, E. (2005). Sex on TV 4: A Kaiser Family Foundation report. Retrieved from KFF.org.
  22. Lampman, C., Rolfe-Maloney, B., David, E. J., Yan, M., McDermott, N., Winters, S., & Lathrop, R. (2002). Messages about sex in the workplace: A content analysis of primetime television. Sexuality and Culture, 6, 3–22.Google Scholar
  23. Levine, K. J., & Hoffner, C. A. (2006). Adolescents’ conceptions of work: What is learned from different sources during anticipatory socialization? Journal of Adolescent Research, 21, 647–669. doi:10.1177/0743558406293963.
  24. MacKinnon, C. A. (1979). Sexual harassment of working women: A case of sex discrimination (No. 19). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Martino, S. C., Collins, R. L., Kanouse, D. E., Elliott, M., & Berry, S. H. (2005). Social cognitive processes mediating the relationship between exposure to television’s sexual content and adolescents’ sexual behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 914–924. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.914.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. McCann, D. (2005). Sexual harassment at work: National and international responses. Geneva: International Labour Office.Google Scholar
  27. McDonald, P. (2012). Workplace sexual harassment 30 years on: A review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14, 1–17. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00300.x.
  28. Montemurro, B. (2003). Not a laughing matter: Sexual harassment as ‘material’ on workplace-based situation comedies. Sex Roles, 48, 433–445. doi:10.1023/A:1023578528629.
  29. Moyer-Guse, E., & Nabi, R. L. (2011). Comparing the effects of entertainment and educational television programming on risky sexual behavior. Health Communication, 26, 416–426. doi:10.1080/10410236.2011.552481.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Oliver, M. B. (2008). Tender affective states as predictors of entertainment preference. Journal of Communication, 58(1), 40–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Osborn, J. L. (2012). When TV and marriage meet: A social exchange analysis of the impact of television viewing on marital satisfaction and commitment. Mass Communication and Society, 15, 739–757. doi:10.1080/15205436.2011.618900.
  32. Parents Television Council. (2016). Worst show of the week. Retrieved from http://w2.parentstv.com/.
  33. Perry, D. G., & Bussey, K. (1979). The social learning theory of sex differences: Imitation is alive and well. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(10), 1699–1712.Google Scholar
  34. Pryor, J. B. (1995). The phenomenology of sexual harassment: Why does sexual behavior bother people in the workplace? Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 47, 160–168.Google Scholar
  35. Rubinstein, M. (1987). The dignity of women at work: Report on the problem of sexual harassment in the member states of the European community. Brussels: Publication Office of the European Community.Google Scholar
  36. Russell, B. L., & Trigg, K. Y. (2004). Tolerance of sexual harassment: An examination of gender differences, ambivalent sexism, social dominance, and gender roles. Sex Roles, 50, 565–573. doi:10.1023/B:SERS.0000023075.32252.fd.
  37. Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of Educational Research, 57, 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Signorielli, N. (1993). Television and adolescents’ perceptions about work. Youth and Society, 24, 314–341. doi:10.1177/0044118X93024003004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Signorielli, N., & Bacue, A. (1999). Recognition and respect: A content analysis of prime-time television characters across three decades. Sex Roles, 40, 527–544.Google Scholar
  40. Snyder, J. A., Scherer, H. L., & Fisher, B. S. (2012). Social organization and social ties: Their effects on sexual harassment victimization in the workplace. Work, 42, 137–150.Google Scholar
  41. Taco Bell. (2007). Restaurant orientation handbook. Retrieved from tacoonline.yum.com.
  42. Taylor, L. D. (2012). Cads and dads on screen: Do film representations of partner scarcity affect partner trait preferences? Communication Research, 39, 523–542. doi:10.1177/00936502111405647.
  43. Taylor, L. D. (2013). Male partner selectivity and romantic confidence and media depictions of partner scarcity. Evolutionary Psychology, 11, 36–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Television Academy. (2015). Emmy award nominees and winners. Retrieved from www.emmys.com.
  45. Till, F. (1980). Sexual harassment: A report on the sexual harassment of students. Washington: National Advisory Council on Women’s Educational Programs.Google Scholar
  46. U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1990). Policy guidance on employer liability under title VII for sexual favoritism. Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/sexualfavor.html.
  47. v. Feilitzen, C., & Linné, O. (1975). Identifying with television characters. Journal of Communication, 25, 51–55. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1975.tb00638.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vault.com. (2014). Love is in the air: Vault’s 2014 office romance survey. Retrieved from http://www.vault.com.
  49. Waldeck, N. E. (2009). The relationship between television exposure and individual work expectations: An empirical study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 208–234. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2008.00436.x.
  50. Walmart. (2016). Walmart: Global statement of ethics. Retrieved from www.walmartethics.com.
  51. Williams, C. L., Giuffre, P. A., & Dellinger, K. (1999). Sexuality in the workplace: Organizational control, sexual harassment, and the pursuit of pleasure. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 73–93.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laramie D. Taylor
    • 1
  • Cassandra Alexopoulos
    • 1
  • Jannath Ghaznavi
    • 1
  1. 1.Communication DepartmentUniversity of California DavisDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations