Tolerance of sexual harassment: a laboratory paradigm

An Evaluation of the Methodological Underpinnings of a Laboratory Paradigm for the Study of Sexual Violence

Ethically constructed laboratory paradigms can provide behaviorally based opportunities to study sexual violence as an addition to questionnaires. One such paradigm invites male participants to watch and show sexual materials to a female confederate as an analog of sexual perpetration. However, there has been inconsistency in the confederate's presentation, such that she either expresses a dislike of sexual material or her preferences are omitted. Some researchers have also questioned whether an expressed dislike is analogous to an expressed nonconsent. As such, the primary goal of the current study was to determine whether confederate expressions of dislike, nonconsent, or the omission of a preference, differentially affect male participants' behavior within a well-established paradigm. That is, we attempted to clarify the appropriate methodology for future researchers (i.e., the validity of the paradigm) and determine the impact of such a situational manipulation on laboratory-based sexual violence. Participants were 276 adult men, who were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (1) dislike, (2) nonconsent, or (3) said nothing (the omission of a preference) and then asked to show a brief video clip to the female confederate who expressed these preferences. Overall, exposure to experimental condition predicted sexual video-showing over and above that of social desirability, hostile sexism (HS), and sexual violence history, suggesting that situational variables can play a significant role in laboratory-based sexual violence. Greater HS was associated with greater likelihood of sexual video-showing in the nonconsent condition relative to the dislike condition. Sexual video-showing was most frequent in the said nothing condition. In sum, researchers should be mindful of the confederate expression (or lack thereof) of preferences for sexual materials when using the sexual imposition paradigm.

In the eye of the beholder: Decision-making of lawyers in cases of sexual harassment

Objective

The purpose of the present study was to examine the effect of deliberative vs. intuitive thinking styles on forensic judgments of legal professionals. Two hypotheses were tested: (a) that low deliberative thinking would be related to judgmental biases (b) that lawyers would report a greater tendency and preference toward deliberative thinking in comparison to students and make more rational judgments.

Method

Ninety-one lawyers and 120 undergraduate students, who served as controls, were asked to read a criminal case depicting sexual harassment (SH) and judge victim and offender blame, whether the case constitutes SH, and the damage for the victim.

Results

Deliberative thinking of lawyers was higher than students, and higher than their intuitive thinking style, supporting the more rational blame attributions of the former. In addition, higher deliberative thinking was related to a stronger perception of the event as SH. Nevertheless, all the participants were more inclined to perceive the case as SH when the victim was a woman instead of a man.

Conclusions

The results suggest that gender stereotypes and bias may persist despite high deliberative thinking and may even be manifested through deliberative thinking processes. Awareness of legal professionals of these biases as well as the development of more objective tools which will help make the judging process less subjective—will ensure more accurate assessment of victims, offenders, and cases.

Perception and experiences of sexual harassment among women working in hospitality workplaces of Bahir Dar city, Northwest Ethiopia: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Workplace sexual harassment is a public health problem that depends on gender, context, and perceived ideology. Although studies have documented the prevalence and consequences of workplace sexual harassment worldwide, victims' perceptions and experiences are still poorly understood in low and middle-income countries, particularly Ethiopia. Female workers in the hospitality industry, including hotels, bars, restaurants, fast-food restaurants, and cafeterias, are particularly affected. Hence, this study aimed to explore sexual harassment perceptions and experiences among women working in these workplaces.

METHODS

An exploratory qualitative study was conducted from 1 January to 30 August 2019. Data were collected from female employees and key informants from several hospitality workplaces in Bahir Dar City. Data were collected through focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, and key-informant interviews. Women who experienced sexual harassment were selected using the snowball method, and key informants were recruited purposefully. Six focus group discussions, ten in-depth interviews, and thirteen key informant interviews were conducted. Data were analysed using the ATLAS ti version 8.4.24.

RESULTS

In this study, most participants perceived that sexual harassment is pressuring, threatening, touching, abducting sexual advances, and experiencing verbal, physical, and non-verbal types. Similarly, the perceived risk factors were related to the organisations, the customers, and the victims, with the consequences being work-related, health-related, financial-related, and family-related.

CONCLUSIONS

Workplace sexual harassment in hospitality workplaces is poorly understood, but many women experience it. A variety of factors also caused it, and it influenced both organisations and people. Public awareness programs, pre-service preparation, in-service training, prevention, and psychosocial support are needed. Similarly, policies and strategies for the organisations should be developed and implemented.

Is It Harassment? Perceptions of Sexual Harassment Among Lawyers and Undergraduate Students

This study examined differences between lawyers (n = 91) and undergraduate students (n = 120) regarding their evaluation of behavior as sexual harassment (SH) and blame attributions toward offender and victim. The current study used a cross-sectional, comparative, independent measures design. Also examined was the correlation between these perceptions and belief in a just world (BJW) hypothesis. The respondents were presented with case descriptions of SH that were identical in all aspects but the perpetrator and victim's gender (alternately depicted as male/female and female/male). Results showed that both lawyers and students agreed that the described event comprised SH, yet gender bias was evident. Both lawyers and students were more inclined to regard the behavior as SH when the vignette description depicted the perpetrator as a man (i.e., female victim) than as a woman (male victim). Gender bias was also evident in the examination of blame attributions, which were higher toward a male (vs. female) harasser. Nonetheless, the findings indicate that lawyers were less biased than students, manifested in less victim-blame and higher perpetrator blame attributions. No correlation between BJW and perceiving the vignette as SH and blame attribution was found. The findings indicate discriminatory judgments of SH based on gender. Gender-related stereotypes and sociocultural explanations are discussed.