This study was conducted to examine factors associated with blaming the target of sexual harassment. Participants' experiences of sexual harassment, sexist attitudes, gender, gender role identity, age, worker or student status, and belief in a just world were included as independent variables. Level of blame was evaluated using a series of 12 vignettes that manipulated the gender of the target and harasser as well as the seriousness of the harassing behavior. The sample comprised 30 female and 32 male workers from two workplaces, whose ages ranged from 18 to 65 (M = 35) years, and 102 female and 18 male university students whose ages ranged from 17 to 40 (M = 21) years. Approximately 70% of the sample were from Anglo Australian background, and 30% from European, Middle Eastern or Asian background. Females experienced more sexual harassment than males did, although the male rate was higher than expected. Although the majority of subjects attributed little blame to the target, males blamed the target of sexual harassment more than females did, and workers blamed the target of harassment more than university students did. Worker status, sexist attitudes, and gender significantly predicted blame for the total sample. Gender-typing increased the blame of the target by males but not by females. Attribution of blame was significantly influenced by worker versus student status, which supports the social psychological perspective that gender-related behavior is context dependent. The findings from this study suggest that organisational culture and environment influence respondents' attitudes to sexually harassing behavior.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Adams, J. W., Kottke, J. L., & Padgitt, J. S. (1983). Sexual harassment of university students. Journal of College Student Personnel, 24, 484-490.
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. California: Sage Publications.
Andersen, S. M. (1978). Sex-role typing as related to acceptance of self, acceptance of others, and discriminatory attitudes toward women. Journal of Research in Personality, 12, 410-415.
Antill, J. K., Cunningham, J.D., Russell, G., & Thompson, N. L. (1981). AnAustralian Sex-Role Scale. Australian Journal of Psychology, 33, 169-183.
Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. (1984). The Sex Discrimination Act 1984: Sexual harassment—knowing your rights. Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Australia.
Baker, D. B., Terpstra, D. E., & Cutler, B. D. (1990). Perceptions of sexual harassment: A re-examination of gender differences. The Journal of Psychology, 124, 409-416.
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, 305-325.
Bartling, C. A., & Eisenman, R. (1993). Sexual harassment proclivities in men and women. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 31, 189-192.
Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155-162.
Charney, D. A., & Russell, R. C. (1994). An overview of sexual harassment. American Journal of Psychiatry, 151, 10-17.
Deaux, K., & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of genderrelated behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 369-389.
Ellison v. Brady, 924 F. 2d 871 (9th Cir. 1991)
Fitzgerald, L. F., Shullman, S. L., Bailey, N., Richards, M., Swecker, J., Gold, Y., Ormerod, M., & Weitzman, L. (1988). The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32, 152-175.
Foulis, D., & McCabe, M. P. (1997). Sexual harassment: Factors affecting attitudes and perceptions. Sex Roles, 37, 773-798.
Garner, H. (1995). The first stone: Some questions about sex and power. Sydney: Macmillan.
Gutek, B. A., Morasch, B., & Cohen, A.G. (1983). Interpreting social-sexual behavior in a work setting. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 22, 30-48.
Gutek, B. A., & O'Connor, M. (1995). The empirical basis for the reasonable woman standard. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 151-166.
Hyland, M. E., & Dann, P. L. (1987). Exploratory factor analysis of the just world scale using British undergraduates. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 73-77.
Jensen, I. W., & Gutek, B. A. (1982). Attributions and assignment of responsibility in sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 38, 55-74.
Johnson, C. B., Stockdale, M. S., & Saal, F. E. (1991). Persistence of men's misperceptions of friendly cues across a variety of interpersonal encounters. Psychology ofWomen Quarterly, 15, 463-475.
Kenig, S., & Ryan, J. (1986). Sex differences in levels of tolerance and attribution of blame for sexual harassment on a university campus. Sex Roles, 15, 535-549.
Kleinke, C. L., & Meyer, C. (1990). Evaluation of rape victim by men and women with high and low belief in a just world. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 343-353.
Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum.
Lipkus, I. (1991). The construction and preliminary validation of a global belief in a just world scale and the exploratory analysis of the multidimensional belief in a just world scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 1171-1178.
Malovich, N. J., & Stake, J. E. (1990). Sexual harassment on campus: Individual differences in attitudes and beliefs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 63-81.
Marsh, H. W. (1987). Masculinity, femininity and androgyny: Their relations with multiple dimensions of self-concept. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 22, 91-118.
Mazer, D. B., & Percival, E. F. (1989). Ideology or experience? The relationship among perceptions, attitudes, and experiences of sexual harassment in university students. Sex Roles, 20, 135-137.
Powell, G. N. (1986). Effects of sex role identity and sex on definitions of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 14, 9-19.
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.
Pryor, J. B., LaVite, C. M., & Stoller, L. M. (1993). A social psychological analysis of sexual harassment: The person/situation interaction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 68-83.
Rubin, L. J., & Borgers, S. B. (1990). Sexual harassment in universities during the 1980s. Sex Roles, 23, 397-411.
Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1975). Who believes in a just world? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 65-89.
Shaver, K. G. (1970). Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned to accidents. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 101-113.
Terpstra, D. E., & Baker, D. D. (1986). A framework for the study of sexual harassment. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 7, 17-34.
Tinsley, H. E. A., & Stockdale, M. S. (1993). Sexual harassment in the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 1-4.
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. (1981). Sexual harassment in the federal workplace: Is it a problem? Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Valentine-French, S., & Radtke, H. L. (1993). Attributions of responsibility for an incident of sexual harassment in a university setting. Sex Roles, 21, 545-555.
Villemez, W. J., & Touhey, J. C. (1977). A measure of individual differences in sex stereotyping and sex discrimination: The ‘macho’ scale. Psychological Reports, 41, 411-415.
Walker, W. D., Rowe, R. C., & Quinsey, V. L. (1993). Authoritarianism and sexual aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1036-1045.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
De Judicibus, M., McCabe, M.P. Blaming the Target of Sexual Harassment: Impact of Gender Role, Sexist Attitudes, and Work Role. Sex Roles 44, 401–417 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011926027920
- Organisational Culture
- Male Rate
- Gender Role
- Environment Influence
- Sexual Harassment