Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Impact of Psychological Injuries on Sexual Harassment Determinations

  • Published:
Psychological Injury and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although a plethora of studies focus on jury decision making in sexual harassment cases, few studies examine damage award assessments in such suits, and even fewer explore the impact of psychological injury on jurors’ liability and damage award assessments. In the present study, 342 undergraduates read a hostile environment sexual harassment case that manipulated the plaintiff’s psychological injury level (severe vs. mild vs. control) to investigate whether males and females made different damage decisions. Males using a reasonable person standard found more liability as the severity of the plaintiff’s psychological injury increased. However, males using a reasonable woman standard found less liability with the addition of any psychological injury information. Similarly, for mild and severe injuries, males using the reasonable woman standard awarded lower damages than males using the reasonable person standard. Females tended to find more harassment than males, but psychological injury and legal standard had little impact on females’ legal decisions. We discuss these findings in light of the positive relationship often observed between the plaintiff’s injury severity level and pro-plaintiff verdicts.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Blumenthal, J. A. (1998). The reasonable woman standard: A meta-analytic review of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 33–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bordens, K. S. & Horowitz, I. A. (1998). The limits of sampling and consolidation in mass tort trials: Justice improved or justice altered? Law and Psychology Review, 22, 43–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bornstein, B. H. (1998). From compassion to compensation: The effect of injury severity on mock jurors’ liability judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1477–1502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornstein, B. H. (1999). The ecological validity of jury simulations: Is the jury still out? Law and Human Behavior, 23, 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornstein, B. H. & Rajki, M. (1994). Extra-legal factors and product liability: The influence of mock jurors’ demographic characteristics and intuitions about the cause of an injury. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 12, 127–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998)

  • Cass, S. A., Levett, L. M. & Kovera, M. (2010). The effects of harassment severity and organizational behavior on damage awards in a hostile work environment sexual harassment case. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 28, 303–321.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cather, C., Greene, E. & Durham, R. (1996). Plaintiff injury and defendant reprehensibility: Implications for compensatory and punitive damage awards. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 189–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charney, D.A., & Russell, R.C. (1994). An overview of sexual harassment. Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 10–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000 (a)(1) (1964).

  • Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42U.S.C. S 1981a(b)(3)

  • Concise Restatement of Torts (2000). St. Paul, MN: The American Law Institute

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, S. S. (1997). Illuminations and shadows from jury simulations. Law and Human Behavior, 21(5), 561–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, S. S., Saks, M. J. & Landsman, S. (1998). Juror judgments about liability and damages: Sources of variability and ways to increase consistency. DePaul Law Review, 48, 301–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • EEOC, 29 CFR 1609.1 (1993).

  • Ellison v. Brady, 924 F.2d 872 (9th Cir. 1991).

  • Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998)

  • Fischhoff, B. (1975). Hindsight≠foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 104, 288–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, L. F., Buchanan, N. T., Collinsworth, L. L., Magley, V. J. & Ramos, A. M. (1999). Junk logic: The abuse defense in sexual harassment litigation. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 730–759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foote, W.E., & Goodman-Delahunty, J.G. (2005). Evaluating sexual harassment: Psychological, social, and legal considerations in forensic examinations. Washington: American Psychological Association

  • Glick, P. & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, E. & Bornstein, B. H. (2003). Determining damages: The psychology of jury awards. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, E., Goodman, J. & Loftus, E. F. (1991). Jurors’ attitudes about civil litigation and the size of damage awards. American University Law Review, 40, 805–820.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, E., Johns, M. & Bowman, J. (1999). The effects of injury severity on jury negligence decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 675–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutek, B. A. & Koss, M. P. (1993). Changed women and changed organizations: Consequences of and coping with sexual harassment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 28–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutek, B. A. & O’Connor, M. (1995). The empirical basis for the reasonable woman standard. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 151–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutek, B. A., O’Connor, M. A., Melancon, R., Stockdale, M. S., Geer, T. M. & Done, R. S. (1999). The utility of the reasonable woman legal standard in hostile environment sexual harassment cases: A multimethod, multistudy examination. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 596–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris v. Forklift Systems, 510 U.S. 17 (1993).

  • Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F.2d 897 (11th Cir. 1982). Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 10–17.

  • Koch, W. J., Douglas, K. J., Nicholls, T. L. & O’Neil, M. L. (2006). Psychological injuries: Forensic assessment, treatment, and law. American Psychology-Law Society Series (p. 318). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kovera, M. B., McAuliff, B. D. & Hebert, K. S. (1999). Reasoning about scientific evidence: Effects of juror gender and evidence quality on juror decision in a hostile work environment case. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 362–375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kovera, M. B., & Cass, S. A. (2002). Compelled mental health examinations, liability decisions, and damage awards in sexual harassment cases: Issues for jury research. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8(1), 96–114. doi:10.1037/1076-8971.8.1.96

  • Loy, P. H. & Stewart, L. P. (1984). The extent and effects of the sexual harassment of working women. Sociological Focus, 17, 31–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986).

  • Miller v. Bank of America, 600 F. 2d. 211 (9th Cir. 1979).

  • O'Donohue, W., & Bowers, A. H. (2006). Pathways to false allegations of sexual harassment. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 3(1), 47–74. doi:10.1002/jip.43

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neil, K., Penrod, S. & Bornstein, B. (2003). Web-based research: Methodological variables’ effects on dropout and sample characteristics. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 35(2), 217–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, E.L., Kulik, C.T., & Bourhis, A.C. (2004). The reasonable woman standard: Effects on sexual harassment court decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 9–27. doi:10.1023/B:LAHU.0000015001.07732.8e

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabidue v. Osceola Refining Co., 805 F.2d 611 (6th Cir. 1986).

  • Robbennolt, J. K. (2000). Outcome severity and judgments of “responsibility”: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 2575–2609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robbennolt, J. K. & Studebaker, C. A. (1999). Anchoring in the courtroom: The effects of caps on punitive damages. Law and Human Behavior, 23(3), 353–373.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rotundo, M., Nguyen, D. H. & Sackett, P. R. (2001). A meta-analytic review of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 914–922.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shaver, K. G. (1970). Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14(2), 101–113. doi:10.1037/h0028777

    Google Scholar 

  • Shupe, E. I., Cortina, L. M., Ramos, A., Fitzgerald, L. F. & Salisbury, J. (2002). The incidence and outcomes of sexual harassment among Hispanic and non-Hispanic White women: A comparison across levels of cultural affiliation. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(4), 298–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart v. Cartessa Corp., 771 F. Supp.876 (1990).

  • United States Merit Systems Protection Board (1981). Sexual harassment of federal workers: Is it a problem? Washington: US Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Merit Systems Protection Board (1987). Sexual harassment in the federal workplace: An update. Washington: US Government Printing Office, Office of Merit Systems Review and Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidmar, N. & Rice, J. J. (1993). Assessments of non-economic damage awards in medical negligence: A comparison of jurors with legal professionals. Iowa Law Journal, 78, 883–927.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viscusi, W. K. (1988). Pain and suffering in product liability cases: Systematic compensation or capricious awards? International Review of Law and Economics, 8, 203–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wayne, J. H., Riordan, C. M. & Thomas, K. M. (2001). Is all sexual harassment viewed the same? Mock juror decisions in same and cross-gender cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 179–187.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, R. L., & Hurt, L. E. (1999). An interdisciplinary approach to understanding social sexual conduct at work. In R. Wiener & B. Gutek (Eds.), Advances in sexual harassment research, theory, and policy. Special Edition of Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 556-595.

  • Wiener, R. L. & Hurt, L. E. (2000). How do people evaluate social sexual conduct at work? A psycholegal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 75–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, R. L., Hurt, L., Russell, B., Mannen, K. & Gasper, C. (1997). Perceptions of sexual harassment: The effects of gender, legal standard, and ambivalent sexism. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 71–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, R. L. & Winter, R. J. (2007). Totality of circumstances in sexual harassment decisions: A decision-making model. In R. L. Wiener, B. H. Bornstein, R. Schopp & S. L. Willborn (Eds.), Social consciousness in legal decision making: Psychological perspectives (pp. 171–195). New York: Springer Science + Business Media.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wiener, R. L., Winter, R., Rogers, M. & Arnot, L. (2004). The effects of prior workplace behavior on subsequent sexual harassment judgments. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 47–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wissler, R. L., Evans, D. L., Hart, A. J., Morry, M. M. & Saks, M. J. (1997). Explaining “pain and suffering” awards: The role of injury characteristics and fault attributions. Law and Human Behavior, 21, 181–207.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woody, W. D. (2008). The influence of liability information, severity of injury, and attitudes toward vengeance on damage awards. Psychological Reports, 102(1), 239–258. doi:10.2466/PR0.102.1.239-258

    Google Scholar 

  • Wyatt, G. E. & Riederle, M. (1995). The prevalence and context of sexual harassment among African American and White American women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10(3), 309–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Florida International University, University Park Campus, DM 256, 11200 SW 8th Street, Miami, FL, 33199, USA

    Ryan J. Winter

  2. University of Pittsburgh at Greensburg, Greensburg, PA, 15601, USA

    Jonathan P. Vallano

Authors
  1. Ryan J. Winter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonathan P. Vallano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ryan J. Winter.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Winter, R.J., Vallano, J.P. The Impact of Psychological Injuries on Sexual Harassment Determinations. Psychol. Inj. and Law 5, 208–220 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-012-9135-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-012-9135-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation