Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Antecedents of Gender Harassment: An Analysis of Person and Situation Factors

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two laboratory studies examined the impact of person and situation factors in the prediction of gender harassment. Male undergraduates from a mid-sized Midwestern university in the U.S. were recruited based on an assessment of sexist attitudes. It was predicted that, across two studies, characteristics of one’s personality (sexist attitudes) and situational characteristics (sexual priming and masculine identity threat) would produce unique and interactive effects in the prediction of gender harassment, defined behaviorally as the number of sexist questions asked of women during a mock job interview, and cognitively as negative evaluations of the female interviewee. Across both studies, results support the predictions that both person and situation factors are important to understanding gender harassment.

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

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Banaji, M. R., & Hardin, C. D. (1996). Multiple regression: testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A. (1990). Auto-motives: Preconscious determinants of social interaction. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (Vol. 2, pp. 93–130). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastian, L. D., Lancaster, A. R., & Reyst, H. E. (1996). Department of defense 1995 sexual harassment survey. Arlington, VA: Defense Manpower Data Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, I. V., & Banaji, M. R. (1996). Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 1142–1163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, N. A., & Beehr, T. A. (2006). Workplace harassment from the victim’s perspective: a theoretical model and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 998–1012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: ingroup love or outgroup hate? Journal of Social Issues, 55, 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, M. B., & Brown, R. J. (1998). Intergroup relations. In L. Gardner, D. T. Gilbert & S. Fiske (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 554–594). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. (1998). Aspects of discriminatory treatment of women police officers serving in forces in England and Wales. British Journal of Criminology, 38, 265–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, P. L., Ash, A. S., Friedman, R. H., Szalacha, L., Barnett, R. C., Palepu, A., et al. (2000). Faculty perceptions of gender discrimination and sexual harassment in academic medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine, 132, 889–896.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colbert, A. E., Mount, M. K., Harter, J. K., Witt, L. A., & Barrick, M. R. (2004). Interactive effects of personality and perceptions of the work situation on workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 599–609.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeCoster, S., Estes, S. B., & Mueller, C. W. (1999). Routine activities and sexual harassment in the workplace. Work and Occupations, 26, 21–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dekker, I., & Barling, J. (1998). Personal and organizational predictors of workplace sexual harassment of women by men. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 7–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (1993). Stereotypes and evaluative intergroup bias. In D. M. Mackie & D. L. Hamilton (Eds.), Affect, cognition and stereotyping: Interactive processes in group perception (pp. 167–193). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faludi, S. (1994, September 5). The naked Citadel. The New Yorker, 62–81.

  • Fitzgerald, L. F., Gelfand, M. J., & Drasgow, F. (1995). Measuring sexual harassment: theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 425–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaertner, S. L., Mann, J., Murrel, A., & Dovidio, J. F. (1989). Reducing intergroup bias: the benefits of recategorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 239–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 164–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, D., & Gonzalez, R. (1995). Correlational analysis of dyad-level data in the exchangeable case. Psychological Bulletin, 118, 430–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, J. E. (1998). The impact of male work environments and organizational policies on women’s experiences of sexual harassment. Gender & Society, 12, 301–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, J. E., & Bjorn, L. (1982). Blue-collar blues: the sexual harassment of women autoworkers. Work and Occupations, 9, 271–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, J. E., & Smith, M. D. (1995). Women’s responses to sexual harassment: a multivariate analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 543–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutek, B. (1985). Sex and the workplace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, D. L., & Sherman, J. W. (1994). Stereotypes. In R. S. Wyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (2nd ed., pp. 1–68). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (in press). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression. Behavior Research Methods.

  • Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: accessibility, applicability, and salience. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133–168). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, P., & Neyman, J. (1936). Test of certain linear hypotheses and the application to some educational problems. Statistical Research Memoirs, 1, 57–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linville, P. W., Fischer, G. W., & Salovey, P. (1989). Perceived distributions of the characteristics of in-group and out-group members. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 165–188.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, S. (1990). On the move: The status of women in policing. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maass, A., Cadinu, M., Guarnieri, G., & Grasselli, A. (2003). Sexual harassment under social identity threat: the computer harassment paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 853–870.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McConahay, J. (1986). Modern racism, ambivalence and the Modern Racism scale. In J. F. Dovidio and S. L Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, Discrimination and Racism, (pp. 99–125). Orlando Florida: Academic Press, Inc.

  • McKenzie-Mohr, D., & Zanna, M. P. (1990). Treating women as sexual objects: look to the gender schematic male who has viewed pornography. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 296–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 of Vocational Behavior, 56, 299–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, S. K., & Griffin, M. A. (2002). What is so bad about a little name-calling? Negative consequences of gender harassment for over-performance demands and distress. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, 195–210.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Piotrkowski, C. S. (1998). Gender harassment, job satisfaction, and distress among employed White and minority women. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 33–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pryor, J. B., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (2003). Sexual harassment research in the United States. In S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace: International perspectives in research and practice (pp. 79–100). London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pryor, J. B., & Whalen, N. J. (1997). A typology of sexual harassment: Characteristics of harassers and the social circumstances under which sexual harassment occurs. In W. O’Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 129–151). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pryor, J. B., LaVite, C., & Stoller, L. (1993). A social psychological analysis of sexual harassment: the person/situation interaction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 68–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, B. (2002). Sexual harassment and masculinity: the power and meaning of “Girl Watching”. Gender and Society, 16, 386–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1995). Antecedents and work-related correlates of reported sexual harassment: an empirical investigation of competing hypotheses. Sex Roles, 32, 429–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L., & Borgida, E. (1995). The afterglow of construct accessibility: the behavioral consequences of priming men to view women as sexual objects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 493–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmader, T., & Major, B. (1999). The impact of ingroup vs. outgroup performance on personal values. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 47–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sears, D. O. (1988). Symbolic racism. In P. A. Katz & D. A. Taylor (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy (pp. 53–85). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swim, J. K., & Cohen, L. L. (1997). Overt, covert, and subtle sexism: a comparison between the attitudes toward women and modern sexism scales. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 103–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swim, J. K., & Hyers, L. L. (1999). Excuse me—What did you just say?!: Women’s public and private responses to sexist remarks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 68–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swim, J. K., Aiken, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: old fashioned and modern prejudices. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 199–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swim, J. K., Mallett, R., & Stangor, C. (2004). Understanding subtle sexism: detection and use of sexist language. Sex Roles, 51, 117–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C., Hogg, M., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, England: Basil, Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Merit Systems Protection Board. (1995). Sexual harassment in the Federal Government: Trends, progress, continuing challenges. Washington, D. C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsh, S. (1999). Gender and sexual harassment. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 169–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodzicka, J. A., & LaFrance, M. (2005). The effects of subtle sexual harassment on women’s performance in a job interview. Sex Roles, 53, 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Ana Couri, Brooke Daitchman, Jennifer DeStefano, Annette Edwards, Mandy Erickson, Jennifer Eberle, Jaimee Foster, Amanda Goldstein, Eric Hart, Kerry Herbert, Julie Hoffman, Ravi Kalani, Tracey Little, Stephanie Meyer, Michelle Morse, Shana Peterson, Bonnie Schieber, Scott Seely, Valerie Snell, Emannuela Sprizzi, Ann Szpytek, Wolfgang Viechtbauer, Michelle Weiss, and Jackie Woods for their able assistance in conducting these studies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, 50614, USA

    Robert T. Hitlan

  2. Illinois State University, Normal, IL, USA

    John B. Pryor & Matthew S. Hesson-McInnis

  3. University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA

    Michael Olson

Authors
  1. Robert T. Hitlan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John B. Pryor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthew S. Hesson-McInnis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Olson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert T. Hitlan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hitlan, R.T., Pryor, J.B., Hesson-McInnis, M.S. et al. Antecedents of Gender Harassment: An Analysis of Person and Situation Factors. Sex Roles 61, 794–807 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9689-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-009-9689-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation