Sexuality & Culture

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 191–216 | Cite as

Context Effects on Women’s Perceptions of Stranger Harassment

Original Paper

Abstract

The current research suggests that perceptions of stranger harassment experiences (i.e., experiencing unwanted sexual attention in public) are altered by the context of the situation. Study one investigated which elements of the situation (context) might be most influential in increasing fear and enjoyment of the catcalling experience. Attractiveness and age of the perpetrator, time of day, and whether the victim was alone or with friends were some of the categories that were selected as influencing both fear and enjoyment. Study two used a perspective taking methodology to ask women to predict a target character’s emotions, fears, and behaviors in harassment situations that varied by context. Results mirror the sexual harassment literature and suggest that harassment by younger and attractive men is viewed as less harassing. Exploratory analyses were also conducted with women’s personal experiences with stranger harassment as well as gender differences in perceptions. Context plays a vital role in interpretation of stranger harassment.

Keywords

Stranger harassment Street harassment Sexual harassment Context effects 

References

  1. Baker, D. D., Terpstra, D. E., & Larntz, K. (1990). The influence of individual characteristics and severity of harassing behavior on reactions to sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 22(5–6), 305–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baston, C. D., Early, S., & Salvarani, G. (1997). Perspective taking: Imagining how another feels versus imaging how you would feel. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(7), 751–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowman, C. G. (1993). Street harassment and the informal ghettoization of women. Harvard Law Review, 106, 517–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cartar, L., Hicks, M., & Slane, S. (1996). Women’s reactions to hypothetical male sexual touch as a function of initiator attractiveness and level of coercion. Sex Roles, 35(11/12), 737–750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davis, M. H., Conklin, L., Smith, A., & Luce, C. (1996). Effect of perspective taking on the cognitive representation of persons: A merging of self and other. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(4), 713–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Elkins, T. J., & Velez-Castrillon, S. (2008). Victims’ and observers’ perceptions of sexual harassment: Implications for employers’ legal risk in North America. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(8), 1435–1454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fairchild, K. (2009). Everyday stranger harassment: Frequency and consequences. Doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.Google Scholar
  8. Fairchild, K., & Rudman, L. A. (2008). Everyday stranger harassment and women’s objectification. Social Justice Research, 21(3), 338–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Faley, R. (1982). Sexual harassment: A critical review of legal cases with general principles and preventive measures. Personnel Psychology, 35, 583–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fisher, B. S., & Sloan, J. J. (2003). Unraveling the fear of victimization among college women: Is the “shadow of sexual assault hypothesis” supported? Justice Quarterly, 20(3), 633–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fitzgerald, L. F. (1990, March). Assessing strategies for coping with sexual harassment: A theoretical/empirical approach. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Women in Psychology, Tempe, AZ.Google Scholar
  12. Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J., Drasgow, F. (1995). Measuring sexual harassment: Theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17(4), 425–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Golden, J. H., III, Johnson, C. A., & Lopez, R. A. (2001). Sexual harassment in the workplace: Exploring the effects of attractiveness on perception of harassment. Sex Roles, 45(11/12), 767–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Granello, D. H., & Wheaton, J. E. (2004). Online data collection: Strategies for research. Journal of Counseling and Development, 82, 387–393.Google Scholar
  15. Grossman, A. J. (2008, May 14). Catcalling: Creepy or a compliment? Retrieved May 15, 2008, from http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/personal/05/14/lw.catcalls/index.html.
  16. Hickman, S. E., & Muehlenhard, C. L. (1997). College women’s fears and precautionary behaviors relating to acquaintance rape and stranger rape. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 527–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Katz, R. C., Hannon, R., & Whitten, L. (1996). Effects of gender and situation on the perception of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 34(1/2), 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. LaRocca, M. A., & Kromrey, J. D. (1999). The perception of sexual harassment in higher education: Impact of gender and attractiveness. Sex Roles, 40(11/12), 921–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lott, B., Reilly, M. E., & Howard, D. (1982). Sexual assault and harassment: A campus community case study. Signs, 8, 296–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Netemeyer, R. G., Burton, S., & Lichtenstein, D. R. (1995). Trait aspects of vanity: Measurement and relevance to consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 612–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pryor, J. B. (1985). The lay person’s understanding of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 13(5/6), 273–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Stop Street Harassment. (2009, September 11). A trip to the store. Retrieved September 22, 2009, from http://streetharassment.wordpress.com/2009/09/11/a-trip-to-the-store/.
  23. Terpstra, D. E., & Baker, D. D. (1986). A framework for the study of sexual harassment. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 7(1), 17–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Trope, Y. (1986). Identification and inferential processes in dispositional attribution. Psychological Review, 93, 239–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Trope, Y., & Alfieri, T. (1997). Effortfulness and flexibility of dispositional judgment processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 662–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tuten, T. L., Urban, D. J., & Bosnjak, M. (2002). Internet surveys and data quality: A review. In B. Batinic, U. D. Reips, & M. Bosnjak (Eds.), Online social sciences (pp. 7–26). Seattle: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.Google Scholar
  27. Waldo, C. R., Berdahl, J. L., & Fitzegerald, L. F. (1998). Are men sexually harassed? If so, by whom? Law and Human Behavior, 22(1), 59–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyManhattan CollegeRiverdaleUSA

Personalised recommendations