This paper reviews and critiques the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ), “...a self-report inventory representing the first attempt to assess the prevalence of sexual harassment in a manner that met traditional psychometric standards” (Fitzgerald, Gelfand, & Drasgow, 1995, p. 427). Widely used by its developers and others as a measure of sexual harassment, the SEQ is not a finished product, has a number of problems, and has weak psychometric properties. Because of inconsistencies (e.g., in time frame, number of items, wording of items), the SEQ lacks the advantages of standardized measures, such as the ability to assess changes over time. It defines sexual harassment very broadly, having the effect of distorting findings about sexual harassment. Most importantly, it is not clear what or whose definition of sexual harassment the SEQ assesses.
This is a preview of subscription content,to check access.
Access this article
Arvey, R. D., & Cavanaugh, M. A. (1995). Using surveys to assess the prevalence of sexual harassment: Some methodological problems. Journal of Social Issues, 51(1), 39–52.
Barak, A., Fisher, W. A., & Houston, S. (1992). Individual difference correlates of the experience of sexual harassment among female university students. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22,17–37.
Barak, A., Pitterman, Y., & Yitzhaki, R. (1995). An empirical test of the role of power differential in originating sexual harassment. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17,497–517.
Brooks, L., & Perot, A. R. (1991). Reporting sexual harassment: Exploring a predictive model. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15,31–47.
Cortina, L. M. (2001). Assessing sexual harassment among Latinas: Development of an instrument. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7(2), 164–181.
Cortina, L. M., Swan, S., Fitzgerald, L. F., & Waldo, C. (1998). Sexual harassment and assault: Chilling the climate for women in academia. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22,419–441.
Donovan, M. A., & Drasgow, F. (1999). Do men's and women's experiences of sexual harassment differ? An examination of the differential test functioning of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire. Military Psychology, 11(3), 265–282.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1980). Guidelines on discrimination because of sex. (Sect 1604.11). Federal Register, 45,74676–74677.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1993). Policy guidelines. 29 C.F.R. 1609.1, Washington DC: US Government Printing Office.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1997). Guidelines on discrimination because of sex. 29, (Sect 1604.11) (b). Federal Register, 62,12033–12051.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Dial Corporation. (2002). Northern District, Ill., No. 99 C 3356.
Fitzgerald, L. F. (1990). Assessing strategies for coping with harassment: A theoretical/empirical approach.Paper presented at the Midwinter Conference of the Association forWomen in Psychology, Tempe, Arizona (cited in Fitzgerald et al., 1995).
Fitzgerald, L. F., Drasgow, F., Hulin, C. L., Gelfand, M. J., & Magley, V. J. (1997). Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations:Atest of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82,578–589.
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.
Fitzgerald, L. F., & Hesson-McInnis, M. (1989).The dimensions of sexual harassment:Astructural analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 35,309–326.
Fitzgerald, L. F., Magley, V. J., Drasgow, F., & Waldo, C. R. (1999). Measuring sexual harassment in the military: The Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ-DoD). Military Psychology, 11,243–263.
Fitzgerald, L. F., & Shullman, S. (1985). The development and validation of an objectively scored measure of sexual harassment.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles. (cited in Fitzgerald, et al., 1988 and Fitzgerald, Gelfand, et al., 1995).
Fitzgerald, L. F., Shullman, S. L., Bailey, N., Richards, M., Swecker, J., Gold,Y., et al. (1988). The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32,152–175.
Fitzgerald, L. F., Swan, S., & Fischer, C. (1995). Why didn't she just report him? The psychological and legal implications of women's responses to sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 51,117–138.
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, treatment(pp. 5–28). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Frazier, P., Cochran, C. C., & Olson, A. M. (1995). Social science research on lay definitions of sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 51,21–38.
Gelfand, M. J., Fitzgerald, L. F., & Drasgow, F. (1995). The structure of sexual harassment:Aconfirmatory analysis across cultures and settings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 47,164–177.
Ghiselli, E. E., Campbell, J. P., & Zedeck, S. (1981). Measurement theory for the behavioral sciences. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Glomb, T. M., Munson, L. J., Hulin, C. L., Bergman, M. E., & Drasgow, F. (1999). Structural equation models of sexual harassment: Longitudinal explorations and cross-sectional generalizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84,14–28.
Glomb, T. M., Richman, W. L., Hulin, C. L., Drasgow, F., Schneider, K. T., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1997). Ambient sexual harassment: An integrated model of antecedents and consequences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71,309–328.
Gruber, J. E. (1989). How women handle sexual harassment: A literature review. Sociology and Social Research, 74,3–9.
Gruber, J. E., & Bjorn, L. (1982). Blue-collar blues. Work and Occupations, 9,271–298.
Gutek, B. A. (1985). Sex and the workplace.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Gutek, B. A., & Done, R. (2001). Sexual harassment. In R. K. Unger (Ed.), Handbook of the psychology of women and gender(pp. 367–387). New York: Wiley.
Gutek, B. A., Done, R., Swindler, S., & Stockdale, M. S. (2002). A short measure of sexual harassment.Manuscript in preparation, University of Arizona.
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.
Gutek, B. A., Nakamura, C. Y., Gahart, M., Handschumacher, I., & Russell, D. (1980). Sexuality in the workplace. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1,255–265.
Hay, M. S., & Elig, T. W. (1999). The 1995 Department of Defense Sexual Harassment Survey: Overview and methodology. Military Psychology, 11(3), 233–242.
Houston, S., & Hwang, N. (1996). Correlates of the objective and subjective experiences of sexual harassment in high school. Sex Roles, 34,189–204.
Kidder, L., & Judd, C. M. (1986). Research methods in social relations(5th ed.). New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston.
Knapp, D. E., Faley, R. H., Ekeberg, S. E., & DuBois, C. L. Z. (1997). Determinants of target responses to sexual harassment: A conceptual framework. Academy of Management Review, 22,687–729.
Lengnick-Hall, M. L. (1995). Sexual harassment research: A methodological critique. Personnel Psychology, 48,841–864.
Lott, B., Reilly, M. E., & Howard, D. (1982). Sexual assault and harassment: A campus community case study. Signs, 8,296–318.
Magley, V. J., Hulin, C. L., Fitzgerald, L. F., & DeNardo, M. (1999). Outcomes of self-labeling sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84,390–402.
Mazzeo, S. E., Bergman, M. E., Buchanan, N. T., Drasgow, F., & Fitzgerald, L. (2001). Situation-specific assessment of sexual harassment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59,120–131.
Murray, B. (1998). Psychology's voice in sexual harassment law. American Psychological Association Monitor, 29(8). (We use quotations from forensic psychologist Laura Brown published in this article).
Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory(3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.
O'Connell, C. E., & Korabik, K. (2000). Sexual harassment: The relationship of personal vulnerability, work context, perpetrator status, and type of harassment to outcomes. Journal ofVocational Behavior, 56,299–329.
O'Donohue, W. (Ed.). (1997). Sexual harassment: Theory, research, treatment(pp. 5–28). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
O'Hare, E. A., & O'Donohue, W. (1998). Sexual harassment: Identifying risk factors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27,561–580.
Reilly, M. E., Lott, B., & Gallogly, S. M. (1986). Sexual harassment of college students. Sex Roles, 15,333–358.
Schneider, K. T., Swan, S., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1997). Job-related and psychological effects of sexual harassment in the workplace: Empirical evidence from two organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 401–415.
Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Lancaster, A. R., Drasgow, F., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (2002). Toward standardized measurement of sexual harassment: Shortening the SEQ-DoD using item response theory. Military Psychology, 14(1), 49–72.
Stockdale, M. S. (Ed.). (1996). Sexual harassment in the workplace. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Thurstone, L. L. (1947). Multiple factor analysis. Chicago: University Press.
Till, F. J. (1980). Sexual harassment: A report on the sexual harassment of students. Washington, DC: National Advisory Council of Women's Educational Programs, 35 pages.
United States Merit Systems Protection Board. (1995). Sexual harassment in the federal workplace: Trends, progress, continuing challenges. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Waldo, C. R., Berdahl, J. L., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1998). Are men sexually harassed? If so, by whom? Law and Human Behavior, 22,59–79.
Wasti, S. A., Bergman, M. E., Glomb, T. M., & Drasgow, F. (2000).Test of the cross-cultural generalizability of a model of sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 766–778.
Welsh, S. (1999). Gender and sexual harassment. Annual Review of Sociology, 24,169–190.
Wiener, R. L., & Hurt, L. (2000). How do people evaluate social sexual conduct at work? A psycholegal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 5(1), 75–85.
About this article
Cite this article
Gutek, B.A., Murphy, R.O. & Douma, B. A Review and Critique of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ). Law Hum Behav 28, 457–482 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:LAHU.0000039335.96042.26