1932

Abstract

With the rise of the #MeToo movement, there has been a groundswell of attention to sex-based harassment. Organizations have pressured high-level personnel accused of harassment to resign, or fired them outright, and they have created or revised their anti-harassment policies, complaint procedures, and training programs. This article reviews social science and legal scholarship on sex-based harassment, focusing on definitions and understandings of sexual (and sex-based) harassment, statistics on its prevalence, the consequences of harassment both for those who are subjected to it and for organizations, and explanations for why sex-based harassment persists. We then discuss the various steps that organizations have taken to reduce sex-based harassment and the social science literature on the effectiveness of those steps. We conclude that many organizational policies prevent liability more than they prevent harassment, in part because courts often fail to distinguish between meaningful compliance and the merely symbolic policies and procedures that do little to protect employees from harassment.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-031820-122129
2020-10-13
2024-04-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/16/1/annurev-lawsocsci-031820-122129.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-031820-122129&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Adams JW, Kottke JL, Padgitt JS 1983. Sexual harassment of university students. J. Coll. Student Pers. 24:484–90
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ali R. 2011. Sexual violence Dear Colleague Lett., April 4, Off. Civ. Rights, US Dep Educ., Off. Civ. Rights Washington, DC:
  3. Ayres I. 2018. Targeting repeat offender NDAs. Stanford Law Rev 71:76–87
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bacharach SB, Bamberger PA, McKinney VM 2007. Harassing under the influence: the prevalence of male heavy drinking, the embeddedness of permissive workplace drinking norms, and the gender harassment of female coworkers. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 12:3232–50
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Barling J, Dekker I, Loughlin CA, Kelloway EK, Fullagar C, Johnson D 1996. Prediction and replication of the organizational and personal consequences of workplace sexual harassment. J. Manag. Psychol. 11:54–25
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Barling J, Rogers AG, Kelloway EK 2001. Behind closed doors: in-home workers’ experience of sexual harassment and workplace violence. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 6:3255–69
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Barnes v. Costle 561 F.2d 983 (DC Cir 1977.
  8. Battle S, Wheeler TE II 2017. Dear Colleague Letter on transgender students Lett., Off. Civ. Rights and Dep. Justice Civ. Rights Div., Dep. Educ Washington, DC:
  9. Baynard VL, Potter SJ, Cares AC, Williams LM, Moynihan MM, Stapleton JG 2018. Multiple sexual violence prevention tools: doses and boosters. J. Aggress. Confl. Peace Res. 10:145–55
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Begany JJ, Milburn MA. 2002. Psychological predictors of sexual harassment: authoritarianism, hostile sexism, and rape myths. Psychol. Men Masc. 3:2119–26
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Berdahl JL. 2007. Harassment based on sex: protecting social status in the context of gender hierarchy. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32:641–58
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Berdahl JL, Moore C. 2006. Workplace harassment: double jeopardy for minority women. J. Appl. Psychol. 91:2426–36
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bergman ME, Drasgow F. 2003. Race as a moderator in a model of sexual harassment: an empirical test. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 8:2131–45
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Berrey E, Nelson RL, Nielsen LB 2017. Rights on Trial: How Workplace Discrimination Law Perpetuates Inequality Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  15. Bingham SG, Scherer LL. 2001. The unexpected effects of a sexual harassment educational program. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 37:2125–53
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Bisom-Rapp S. 2001. An ounce of prevention is a poor substitute for a pound of cure: confronting the developing jurisprudence of education and prevention in employment discrimination law. Berkeley J. Employ. Labor Law 22:1101–46
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Blackstone A, Uggen C, McLaughlin H 2009. Legal consciousness and responses to sexual harassment. Law Soc. Rev. 43:3631–68
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Bond MA. 2014. Sexual harassment. Encyclopedia of Primary Prevention and Health Promotion T Gullotta, M Bloom 1807–17 Boston, MA: Springer
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Bond MA, Punnett L, Pyle JL, Cazeca D, Cooperman M 2004. Gendered work conditions, health, and work outcomes. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 9:128–45
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Brodsky C. 1976. The Harassed Worker Washington, DC: Lexington Books
  21. Brownmiller S. 1975. Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape New York: Random House
  22. Bumiller K. 1988. The Civil Rights Society: The Social Construction of Victims Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ.
  23. Bundy v. Jackson 641 F.2d 934 (DC Cir 1981.
  24. Burgess D, Borgida E. 1997. Refining sex-role spillover theory: the role of gender subtypes and harasser attributions. Soc. Cogn. 15:291–311
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth 524 US 742 1998.
  26. Cabrera J. 2020. Feminist mandated reporters question the Title IX system: when civil rights programs adopt managerial logics and protect institutional interests. The Research Handbook on Gender, Sexuality, and the Law C Ashford 330–40 Law Soc. Ser Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Chamberlain LJ, Crowley M, Tope D, Hodson R 2008. Sexual harassment in organizational context. Work Occup 35:3262–95
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Cockburn C. 1991. In the Way of Women: Men's Resistance to Sex Equality in Organizations Ithaca, NY: ILR
  29. Colvin AJS. 2017. The growing use of mandatory arbitration: Access to the courts is now barred for more than 60 million American workers Rep., Apr. 6, Econ. Policy Inst Washington, DC:
  30. Cortina LM, Berdahl JL. 2008. Sexual harassment in organizations: a decade of research in review.. The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 1. Micro Approaches SR Clegg, CL Cooper 469–97 London: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Cortina LM, Fitzgerald LF, Drasgow F 2002. Contextualizing Latina experiences of sexual harassment: preliminary tests of a structural model. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 24:4259–311
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Cortina LM, Magley VJ. 2003. Raising voice, risking retaliation: events following interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 8:4247–65
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Culbertson AL, Rosenfeld P. 1994. Assessment of sexual harassment in the active-duty Navy. Mil. Psychol. 6:269–93
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Dansky BS, Kilpatrick DG. 1997. Effects of sexual harassment. Sexual Harassment: Theory, Research, and Treatment W O'Donohue 152–74 Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Das A. 2009. Sexual harassment at work in the United States. Arch. Sex. Behav. 38:909–21
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education 526 US 629 1999.
  37. De Haas S, Timmerman G, Hoing M 2009. Sexual harassment and health among male and female police officers. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 14:4390401
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Dekker I, Barling J. 1998. Personal and organizational predictors of workplace sexual harassment of women by men. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 3:17–18
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Dobbin F, Kalev A. 2017. Are diversity programs merely ceremonial? Evidence-free institutionalization. The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism R Greenwood, C Oliver, TB Lawrence, RE Meyer 808–28 London: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Dobbin F, Kalev A. 2018. Why doesn't diversity training work? The challenge for industry in America. Anthropol. Now 10:248–55
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Dobbin F, Kalev A. 2019. The promise and peril of sexual harassment programs. PNAS 116:2512255–60
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Dobbin F, Kelly EL. 2007. How to stop harassment: professional construction of legal compliance in organizations. Am. J. Sociol. 112:41203–43
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Dobbin F, Sutton R. 1998. The strength of a weak state: the rights revolution and the rise of human resource management divisions. Am. J. Sociol. 104:2441–76
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Duffy J, Wareham S, Walsh M 2004. Psychological consequences for high school students of having been sexually harassed. Sex Roles 50:11–12811–21
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Edelman LB. 1992. Legal ambiguity and symbolic structures: organizational mediation of civil rights law. Am. J. Sociol. 97:61531–76
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Edelman LB. 2016. Working Law: Courts, Corporations, and Symbolic Compliance Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  47. Edelman LB. 2018. How HR and judges made it almost impossible for victims of sexual harassment to win in court. Harvard Business Review Aug. 22. https://hbr.org/2018/08/how-hr-and-judges-made-it-almost-impossible-for-victims-of-sexual-harassment-to-win-in-court
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Edelman LB, Cahill M. 1998. How law matters in disputing and dispute processing (or, the contingency of legal matter in alternative dispute resolution). How Law Matters BG Garth, A Sarat 15–44 Evanston, IL: Northwest. Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Edelman LB, Erlanger HS, Lande J 1993. Internal dispute resolution: the transformation of civil rights in the workplace. Law Soc. Rev. 27:3497–534
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Edelman LB, Fuller SR, Mara-Drita I 2001. Diversity rhetoric and the managerialization of law. Am. J. Sociol. 106:61589–641
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Edelman LB, Krieger LH, Eliason SR, Albiston CR, Mellema V 2011. When organizations rule: judicial deference to institutionalized employment structures. Am. J. Sociol. 117:888–954
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Edelman LB, Uggen C, Erlanger H 1999. The endogeneity of legal regulation: grievance procedures as rational myth. Am. J. Sociol. 105:2406–54
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Edwards R. 1993. Rights at Work: Employment Relations in the Post-Union Era Washington, DC: Brookings Inst.
  54. Fain TC, Anderton DL. 1987. Sexual harassment: organizational context and diffuse status. Sex Roles 17:291–311
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Faragher v. City of Boca Raton 524 US 775 1998.
  56. Farley L. 1978. The Sexual Shakedown: The Sexual Harassment of Women on the Job New York: McGraw-Hill
  57. Feuer A. 2017. Justice Department says rights law doesn't protect gays. New York Times, Jul. 27. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/27/nyregion/justice-department-gays-workplace.html
  58. Fisher BS, Cullen FT, Turner MG 2000. The Sexual Victimization of College Women Washington, DC: US Dep. Justice
  59. Fiske ST, Glick P. 1995. Ambivalence and stereotypes cause sexual harassment: a theory with implications for organizational change. J. Soc. Issues 51:197–115
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Fitzgerald LF. 1991. Sexual harassment: the definition and measurement of a construct. Ivory Power: Sexual Harassment on Campus MA Paludi 21–44 SUNY Ser. Psychol. Women Albany: State Univ. N.Y. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Fitzgerald LF, Drasgow F, Hulin CL, Gelfand MJ, Magley VJ 1997a. Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: a test of an integrated model. J. Appl. Psychol. 82:4578–89
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Fitzgerald LF, Gelfand MJ, Drasgow F 1995. Measuring sexual harassment: theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 17:4425–45
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Fitzgerald LF, Magley V, Drasgow F, Waldo CR 1999. Measuring harassment in the military: the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ-DoD). Mil. Psychol. 11:3243–63
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Fitzgerald LF, Shullman SL, Bailey N, Richards M, Swecker J et al. 1988. The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplace. J. Vocat. Behav. 32:4152–75
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Fitzgerald LF, Swan S, Magley VJ 1997b. But was it really sexual harassment? Legal, behavioral, and psychological definitions of the workplace victimization of women. Sexual Harassment: Theory, Research, and Treatment W O'Donohue 5–28 Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District 524 US 274 1998.
  67. Glick P, Fiske ST. 1996. The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 70:491–512
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Glick P, Fiske ST. 2001. Ambivalent sexism. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 33:115–88
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Glomb TM, Munson LJ, Hulin CL, Bergman ME, Drasgow F 1999. Structural equation models of sexual harassment: longitudinal explorations and cross-sectional generalizations. J. Appl. Psychol. 84:114–28
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Glomb TM, Richman WL, Hulin CL, Drasgow F, Schneider KT, Fitzgerald LF 1997. Ambient sexual harassment: an integrated model of antecedents and consequences. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 72:309–28
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Gloucester County School Board vs. G.G. Ex Rel. Grimm 137 S.Ct 1239 2017.
  72. Gough MD. 2014. The high costs of an inexpensive forum: an empirical analysis of employment discrimination claims heard in arbitration and civil litigation. Berkeley J. Employ. Labor Law 35:91–112
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Grauerholz E. 1989. Sexual harassment of women professors by students: exploring the dynamics of power, authority, and gender in a university setting. Sex Roles 21:11–12789–801
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Grimm v. Gloucester County School Board 400 F.Supp.3d 444 (E.D. Va 2019.
  75. Gruber JE. 1998. The impact of male work environments and organizational policies on women's experiences of sexual harassment. Gend. Soc. 12:3301–20
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Gutek BA. 1992. Disputes and dispute processing in organizations. Stud. Law Politics Soc. 12:31–52
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Gutek BA. 1995. How subjective is sexual harassment? An examination of rater effects. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 17:4447–67
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Gutek BA, Cohen AG, Konrad AM 1990. Predicting social-sexual behavior at work: a contact hypothesis. Acad. Manag. J. 33:3560–77
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Gutek BA, Dunwoody V. 1987. Understanding sex in the workplace. Women and Work: An Annual Review 2 AH Stromberg, L Larwood, BA Gutek 249–69 Newbury Park, CA: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Gutek BA, Morasch B, Cohen AG 1983. Interpreting social-sexual behavior in a work setting. J. Vocat. Behav. 22:30–48
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Gutek BA, Murphy RO, Douma B 2004. A review and critique of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ). Law Hum. Behav. 28:4457–82
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Hall v. Gus Construction Co. 842 F.2d 1010 (8th Cir 1988.
  83. Harned MS, Ormerod AJ, Palmieri PA, Collinsworth LL, Reed M 2002. Sexual assault by workplace personnel and other types of sexual harassment: a comparison of antecedents and consequences. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 7:2174–88
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Hemel D, Lund DS. 2018. Sexual harassment and corporate law. Columbia Law Rev 118:61583–680
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Hill C, Silva E. 2005. Drawing the line: sexual harassment on campus Rep., Am. Assoc. Univ. Women Educ. Found Washington, DC:
  86. Hitlan RT, Schneider KT, Walsh BM 2006. Upsetting behavior: reactions to personal and bystander sexual harassment experiences. Sex Roles 55:187–95
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Holland KJ, Cortina LM. 2013. When sexism and feminism collide: the sexual harassment of feminist working women. Psychol. Women Q. 37:2192–208
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Huerta M, Cortina LM, Pang JS, Torge CM, Magley VJ 2006. Sex and power in the academy: modeling sexual harassment in the lives of college women. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 32:5616–28
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Ilies R, Hauserman N, Schwochau S, Stibal J 2003. Reported incidence rates of work-related sexual harassment in the United States: using meta-analysis to explain reported rate disparities. Pers. Psychol. 56:3607–31
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Johnson CB, Stockdale MS, Saal FE 1991. Persistence of men's misperceptions of friendly cues across a variety of interpersonal encounters. Psychol. Women Q. 15:463–75
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Kabat-Farr D, Cortina LM. 2014. Sex-based harassment in employment: new insights into gender and context. Law Hum. Behav. 38:158–72
    [Google Scholar]
  92. Kalof L, Kimberly KE, Matheson JL, Kroska RJ 2001. The influence of race and gender on student self-reports of sexual harassment by college professors. Gend. Soc. 15:2282–302
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Kanter RM. 1977. Men and Women of the Corporation New York: Basic Books
  94. Katz RC, Hannon R, Whitten L 1996. Effects of gender and situation on the perception of sexual harassment. Sex Roles 34:35–42
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Kihnley J. 2006. Unraveling the ivory fabric: institutional obstacles to the handling of sexual harassment complaints. Law Soc. Inq. 25:169–90
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Krieger LJ, Fox C. 1985. Evidentiary issues in sexual harassment litigation. Berkeley J. Gend. Law Justice 1:1115–39
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Lach DH, Gwartney-Gibbs PA. 1993. Sociological perspectives on sexual harassment and workplace dispute resolution. J. Vocat. Behav. 42:1102–15
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Lee VE, Croninger RG, Linn E, Chen X 1996. The culture of sexual harassment in secondary schools. Am. Educ. Res. J. 33:2383–417
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Lengnick-Hall ML. 1995. Sexual harassment research: a methodological critique. Pers. Psychol. 48:4841–64
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Lerum K. 2004. Sexuality, power, and camaraderie in service work. Gend. Soc. 18:756–76
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Leskinen EA, Cortina LM, Kabat DB 2011. Gender harassment: broadening our understanding of sex-based harassment at work. Law Hum. Behav. 35:25–39
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Lhamon CE, Gupta V. 2016. 2016 Dear Colleague Letter Lett., Off. Civ. Rights and Dep. Justice Civ. Rights Div., Dep. Educ Washington, DC:
  103. Lim S, Cortina LM. 2005. Interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace: the interface and impact of general incivility and sexual harassment. J. Appl. Psychol. 90:3483–96
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Lipsett v. University of Puerto Rico 864 F.2d 881 (1st Cir. 1988.
  105. Lonsway KA, Cortina LM, Magley VJ 2008. Sexual harassment mythology: definition, conceptualization, and measurement. Sex Roles 58:599–615
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Maass A, Cadinu M, Galdi S 2014. Sexual harassment: motivations and consequences. Sage Handbook of Gender and Psychology MK Ryan, NR Branscombe 341–58 Los Angeles, CA: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Maass A, Cadinu M, Guarnieri G, Grasselli A 2003. Sexual harassment under social identity threat: the computer harassment paradigm. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 85:5853–70
    [Google Scholar]
  108. MacKinnon CA. 1979. Sexual Harassment of Working Women: A Case of Sex Discrimination New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  109. Magley VJ, Hulin CL, Fitzgerald LF, DeNardo M 1999. Outcomes of self-labeling sexual harassment. J. Appl. Psychol. 84:390–402
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Magley VJ, Shupe EI. 2005. Self-labeling sexual harassment. Sex Roles 53:3–4173–89
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Marshall AM. 2003. Injustice frames, legality, and the everyday construction of sexual harassment. Law Soc. Inq. 28:3659–89
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Marshall AM. 2005. Idle rights: employees’ rights consciousness and the construction of sexual harassment policies. Law Soc. Rev. 39:183–124
    [Google Scholar]
  113. McCann C, Tomaskovic-Devey D, Lee Badgett MV 2018. Employers’ responses to sexual harassment Doc., Cent. Employ. Equity, Univ. Mass Amherst: https://www.umass.edu/employmentequity/employers-responses-sexual-harassment
  114. McLaughlin H, Uggen C, Blackstone A 2012. Sexual harassment, workplace authority, and the paradox of power. Am. Sociol. Rev. 77:4625–47
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Meares MM, Oetzel JG, Torres A, Derkacs D, Ginossar T 2004. Employee mistreatment and muted voices in the culturally diverse workplace. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 32:14–27
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson 477 US 57 1986.
  117. Morgan LA, Martin KA. 2006. Taking women professions out of the office: the case of women in sales. Gend. Soc. 20:108–28
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Morgan PA. 1999. Risking relationships: understanding the litigation choices of sexually harassed women. Law Soc. Rev. 33:167–92
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Murrell AJ, Dietz-Uhler BL. 1993. Gender identity and adversarial sexual beliefs as predictors of attitudes toward sexual harassment. Psychol. Women Q. 17:169–75
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Nakamura B, Edelman LB. 2019. Bakke at 40: how diversity matters in the employment context. UC Davis Law Rev 52:2627–79
    [Google Scholar]
  121. Natl. Acad. Sci. Eng. Med. (NASEM) 2018. Sexual Harassment of Women: Climate, Culture, and Consequences in Academic Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
  122. Natl. Inst. Justice (NIJ) 2007. The Campus Sexual Assault (CSA) Study: Final Report Washington, DC: US Dep. Justice
  123. O'Connell CE, Korabik K. 2000. Sexual harassment: the relationship of personal vulnerability, work context, perpetrator status, and type of harassment to outcomes. J. Vocat. Behav. 56:3299–329
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services 523 US 7580 1998.
  125. Ormerod AJ. 1987. Perceptions of sexual harassment Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association New York: Aug .
  126. Padavic I, Orcutt JD. 1997. Perceptions of sexual harassment in the Florida legal system: a comparison of dominance and spillover explanations. Gend. Soc. 11:5682–98
    [Google Scholar]
  127. Perilloux C, Duntley JD, Buss DM 2012. The costs of rape. Arch. Sex Behav. 41:1099–106
    [Google Scholar]
  128. Piotrkowski CS. 1998. Gender harassment, job satisfaction, and distress among employed white and minority women. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 3:133–43
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Potter SJ. 2012. Using a multimedia social marketing campaign to increase active bystanders on the college campus. J. Am. Coll. Health 60:282–95
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Potter SJ, Moynihan MM, Stapleton JG 2011. Using social self-identification in social marketing materials aimed at reducing violence against women on campus. J. Interpers. Violence 26:971–90
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Pryor JB. 1987. Sexual harassment proclivities in men. Sex Roles 17:269–90
    [Google Scholar]
  132. Pryor JB, LaVite C, Stoller L 1993. A social psychological analysis of sexual harassment: the person/situation interaction. J. Vocat. Behav. 42:68–83
    [Google Scholar]
  133. Quick JC, McFadyen MA. 2017. Sexual harassment: Have we made any progress. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 22:3286–98
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Quinn B. 2000. The paradox of complaining: law, humor, and harassment in the everyday work world. Law Soc. Inq. 25:41151–85
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Rabelo VC, Cortina LM. 2014. Two sides of the same coin: gender harassment and heterosexist harassment in LGBQ work lives. Law Hum. Behav. 38:4378–91
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Raver JL, Gelfand MJ. 2005. Beyond the individual victim: linking sexual harassment, team processes, and team performance. Acad. Manag. J. 48:3387–400
    [Google Scholar]
  137. Reskin B, Padavic I. 1994. Women and Men at Work Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge
  138. Resnik J. 2015. Diffusing disputes: the public in the private of arbitration, the private in courts, and the erasure of rights. Yale Law J 124:32804–939
    [Google Scholar]
  139. Rogers J, Henson K. 1997. “Hey, why don't you wear a shorter skirt?” Structural vulnerability and the organization of sexual harassment in temporary clerical employment. Gend. Soc. 11:2215–37
    [Google Scholar]
  140. Roos PA, Reskin BF. 1984. Institutional factors contributing to sex segregation in the workplace. Sex Segregation in the Workplace: Trends, Explanations, Remedies BF Reskin 235–60 Washington, DC: Comm. Women Employ. Relat. Soc. Issues, Natl. Acad. Sci., Natl. Res. Counc.
    [Google Scholar]
  141. Rosenthal MN, Smidt AM, Freyd JJ 2016. Still second class: sexual harassment of graduate students. Psychol. Women Q. 40:3364–77
    [Google Scholar]
  142. Rospenda KM, Richman JA, Nawyn SJ 1998. Doing power: the confluence of gender, race, and class in contrapower sexual harassment. Gend. Soc. 12:140–60
    [Google Scholar]
  143. Russell BL, Trigg KY. 2004. Tolerance of sexual harassment: an examination of gender differences, ambivalent sexism, social dominance, and gender roles. Sex Roles 50:565–73
    [Google Scholar]
  144. Schneider KT, Swan S, Fitzgerald LF 1997. Job-related and psychological effects of sexual harassment in the workplace: empirical evidence from two organizations. J. Appl. Psychol. 82:3401–15
    [Google Scholar]
  145. Schultz V. 1998. Reconceptualizing sexual harassment. Yale Law J 107:1683–732
    [Google Scholar]
  146. Schultz V. 2003. The sanitized workplace. Yale Law J 112:2061–193
    [Google Scholar]
  147. Schultz V. 2018. Reconceptualizing sexual harassment, again. Yale Law J 128:24–66
    [Google Scholar]
  148. Segrave K. 1994. The Sexual Harassment of Women in the Workplace, 1600 to 1993 Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co.
  149. Short J. 2005. Creating peer sexual harassment: mobilizing schools to throw the book at themselves. Law Policy 28:131–59
    [Google Scholar]
  150. Siegel RB. 2004. A short history of sexual harassment. Directions in Sexual Harassment Law CA MacKinnon, RB Siegel 1–39 New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  151. Silverman D 1976–1977. Sexual harassment: working women's dilemma. Quest 3:15–24
    [Google Scholar]
  152. Sojo VE, Wood RE, Genat AE 2016. Harmful workplace experiences and women's occupational well-being: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Women Q. 40:110–40
    [Google Scholar]
  153. Soucek B, Schultz V. 2019. Sexual harassment by any other name. Univ. Chicago Legal Forum 2019:229–61
    [Google Scholar]
  154. Sperino SF, Thomas SA. 2017. Unequal: How America's Courts Undermine Discrimination Law Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  155. Till F. 1980. Sexual Harassment: A Report on the Sexual Harassment of Students Washington, DC: Natl. Advis. Counc. Women's Educ. Program
  156. Tinkler JE. 2007. A social psychological analysis of resistance to sexual harassment law: implications for equal opportunity PhD Thesis, Dep. Sociol., Stanford Univ Stanford, CA:
  157. Tinkler JE. 2012. Resisting the enforcement of sexual harassment law. Law Soc. Inq. 37:11–24
    [Google Scholar]
  158. Tinkler JE, Li YE, Mollborn S 2007. Can legal interventions change beliefs? The effect of sexual harassment policies on gender beliefs. Soc. Psychol. Q. 70:480–94
    [Google Scholar]
  159. Uggen C, Blackstone A. 2004. Sexual harassment as a gendered expression of power. Am. Sociol. Rev. 69:164–92
    [Google Scholar]
  160. Univ. Calif. San Diego Cent. Gend. Equity Health (UCSD) 2019. Measuring #MeToo: a national study on sexual harassment and assault Rep., UCSD San Diego, CA:
  161. US Dep. Educ. (DOE) 2001. Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance: Harassment of Students by School Employees, Other Students, or Third Parties Washington, DC: Off. Civ. Rights
  162. US Dep. Educ. (DOE) 2018. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Washington, DC: Off. Civ. Rights
  163. US Equal Employ. Oppor. Comm. (EEOC). n.d Sexual harassment https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm
  164. US Equal Employ. Oppor. Comm. (EEOC) 2016. Report of the Co-Chairs of the EEOC Select Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace Washington, DC: EEOC
  165. Vance v. Ball State University 133 S. Ct. 2434 2013.
  166. Wasti SA, Bergman ME, Glomb TM, Drasgow F 2000. Test of the cross-cultural generalizability of a model of sexual harassment. J. Appl. Psychol. 85:5766–78
    [Google Scholar]
  167. Welsh S. 1999. Gender and sexual harassment. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 25:169–90
    [Google Scholar]
  168. Whittock M. 2002. Women's experiences of non-traditional employment: Is gender equality in this area a possibility. Constr. Manag. Econ. 20:449–56
    [Google Scholar]
  169. Williams v. Saxbe 413 F. Supp. 654 (D.D.C 1976.
  170. Willness CR, Steel P, Lee K 2007. A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace harassment. Personal. Psychol. 60:1127–62
    [Google Scholar]
  171. Woods KC, Buchanan NT, Settles IH 2009. Sexual harassment across the color line: experiences and outcomes of cross- versus intraracial sexual harassment among Black women. Cult. Divers. Ethn. Minor. Psychol. 15:167–76
    [Google Scholar]
  172. Woodzicka JA, LaFrance M. 2005. The effects of subtle sexual harassment on women's performance in a job interview. Sex Roles 53:67–77
    [Google Scholar]
  173. Yoder JD, Aniakudo P. 1996. When pranks become harassment: the case of African American women firefighters. Sex Roles 35:253–70
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-031820-122129
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error