1932

Abstract

This article reviews research on sexual harassment, particularly that pertaining to academia, to understand its underlying causes. Arguing that sexual harassment is an ethical issue, we draw on the field of behavioral ethics to structure our review. We first review ethical climate antecedents at the individual, leader, organizational, and environmental levels and examine their effects on both the occurrence of and responses to sexually harassing behaviors. This discussion is followed by an exploration of research that speaks to the cognitive processes of bounded ethicality—including ethical fading, motivated blindness, and the slippery slope—and their role in facilitating and perpetuating sexual harassment. We conclude by highlighting the value to be gained from integrating research on sexual harassment with research on behavioral ethics and identifying several practical steps that can be taken to curb sexual harassment in academia.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102945
2019-01-04
2024-06-13
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/psych/70/1/annurev-psych-010418-102945.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102945&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Adams-Roy J, Barling J 1998. Predicting the decision to confront or report sexual harassment. J. Organ. Behav. 19:329–36
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aguinis H, Nesler MS, Quigley BM, Lee SJ, Tedeschi JT 1996. Power bases of faculty supervisors and educational outcomes for graduate students. J. High. Educ. 67:267–97
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Am. Assoc. Univ. Prof. 2016. The history, uses, and abuses of Title IX. AAUP Bull. 2016:69–99
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Barak A, Fisher W, Houston S 1992. Individual difference correlates of the experience of sexual harassment among female university students. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 22:17–37
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bartlett T, Gluckman N 2018. She left Harvard. He got to stay. The Chronicle of Higher Education Feb. 27. https://www.chronicle.com/interactives/harvard-harassment
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Batty D, Weale S, Bannock C 2017. Sexual harassment ‘at epidemic levels’ in UK universities. The Guardian March 5. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/mar/05/students-staff-uk-universities-sexual-harassment-epidemic
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bazerman MH, Tenbrunsel AE 2011. Blind Spots: Why We Fail to Do What's Right and What to Do About It Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bell MP, Mclaughlin ME, Sequeira JM 2002. Discrimination, harassment and the glass ceiling: women executives as change agents. J. Bus. Ethics 37:65–76
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Berdahl JL 2007.a Harassment based on sex: protecting social status in the context of gender hierarchy. Acad. Manag. Rev. 32:641–58
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Berdahl JL 2007.b The sexual harassment of uppity women. J. Appl. Psychol. 92:425–37
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Berdahl JL, Moore C 2006. Workplace harassment: double jeopardy for minority women. J. Appl. Psychol. 91:426–36
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Berdahl JL, Raver JL 2011. Sexual harassment. APA Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 3 S Zedeck 641–69 Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bergman M, Langhout RD, Palmieri P, Cortina LM, Fitzgerald LF 2002. The (un)reasonableness of reporting: antecedents and consequences of reporting sexual harassment. J. Appl. Psychol. 87:230–42
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Bever L, Ohlheiser A 2017. Time's Person of the Year: “the Silence Breakers” for speaking out against sexual harassment. The Washington Post Dec. 6. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2017/12/06/times-person-of-the-year-the-silence-breakers-for-speaking-out-against-sexual-harassment/?utm_term=.6bf7e7eaf9ac
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Blackstone A, Uggen C, McLaughlin H 2009. Legal consciousness and responses to sexual harassment. Law Soc. Rev. 43:631–68
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Bowes-Sperry L, O'Leary-Kelly AM 2005. To act or not to act: the dilemma faced by sexual harassment observers. Acad. Manag. Rev. 30:288–306
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Bowes-Sperry L, Powell GN 1999. Observers’ reactions to social-sexual behavior at work: an ethical decision-making perspective. J. Manag. 25:779–802
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Brown ME, Treviño LK, Harrison DA 2005. Ethical leadership: a social learning perspective for construct development and testing. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 97:117–34
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Buchanan NT, Settles IH, Hall AT, O'Connor RC 2014. A review of organizational strategies for reducing sexual harassment: insights from the U.S. military. J. Soc. Issues 70:687–702
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Cantalupo NC, Kidder WC 2018. A systematic look at a serial problem: sexual harassment of students by university faculty. Utah Law Rev 2018:671–786
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Cantor D, Fisher B, Chinbnall S, Townsen R, Lee H et al. 2015. Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct Rep., Univ. Penn. Philadelphia: http://www.upenn.edu/ir/surveys/AAU/Report%20and%20Tables%20on%20AAU%20Campus%20Climate%20Survey.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Chappell SF, Bowes-Sperry L 2015. Improving organizational response to sexual harassment using the Giving Voice to Values approach. Organ. Manag. J. 12:236–48
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Clancy KBH, Nelson RG, Rutherford JN, Hinde K 2014. Survey of academic field experiences (SAFE): trainees report harassment and assault. PLOS ONE 9:7e102172
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Comm. Women Sci. Eng. Med. 2017. Sexual harassment of women: climate, culture, and consequences in academic sciences, engineering, and medicine News Release, Natl. Acad. Sci. Eng. Med http://sites.nationalacademies.org/pga/cwsem/shstudy/index.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Connor-Smith JK, Compas BE, Wadsworth ME, Thomsen AH, Saltzman H 2000. Responses to stress in adolescence: measurement of coping and involuntary stress responses. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 68:97–92
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Cortina LM, Berdahl JL 2008. Sexual harassment in organizations: a decade of research in review. Handbook of Organizational Behavior CL Cooper, J Barling 469–97 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Cortina LM, Swan S, Fitzgerald LF, Waldo C 1998. Sexual harassment and assault: chilling the climate for women in academia. Psychol. Women Q. 22:419–41
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Cortina LM, Wasti SA 2005. Profiles in coping: responses to sexual harassment across persons, organizations, and cultures. J. Appl. Psychol. 90:182–92
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Curtis J 2014. The employment status of instructional staff members in higher education, fall 2011 Rep., Am. Assoc. Univ. Prof. Washington, DC: https://www.aaup.org/sites/default/files/files/AAUP-InstrStaff2011-April2014.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  30. De Coster S, Estes SB, Mueller CW 1999. Routine activities and sexual harassment in the workplace. Work Organ 26:21–49
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Delker BC, Smith CP, Rosenthal MN, Bernstein RE, Freyd JJ 2018. When home is where the harm is: betrayal and posttraumatic outcomes in young adulthood. J. Aggress. 27:720–43
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Desai SD, Chugh D, Brief AP 2014. The implications of marriage structure for men's workplace attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors toward women. Admin. Sci. Q. 59:330–65
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Desai SD, Kouchaki M 2017. Moral symbols: a necklace of garlic against unethical requests. Acad. Manag. J. 60:7–28
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Diekmann KA, Sillito-Walker S, Galinsky AD, Tenbrunsel AE 2013. Double victimization in the workplace: why observers condemn passive victims of sexual harassment. Organ. Sci. 24:614–28
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Dobbin F, Kelly EL 2007. How to stop harassment: professional construction of legal compliance in organizations. Am. J. Soc. 112:1203–43
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Doucleff M 2015. Sexual harassment case shines light on science's dark secret. NPR Oct. 16. https://www.npr.org/2015/10/16/448944541/sexual-harrassment-case-shines-light-on-sciences-dark-secrect
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Dougherty DS 2017. The omissions that make so many sexual harassment policies ineffective. Harvard Business Review May 31. https://hbr.org/2017/05/the-omissions-that-make-so-many-sexual-harassment-policies-ineffective
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Eyal T, Liberman N 2012. Morality and psychological distance: a construal level theory perspective. The Social Psychology of Morality: Exploring the Causes of Good and Evil M Mikulincer, PR Shaver 185–202 Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Feldblum CR, Lipnic VA 2016. Select task force on the study of harassment in the workplace: report of co-chairs Chai R. Feldbum & Victoria A. Lipnic—executive summary and recommendations Rep., Equal Employ. Oppor. Comm. Washington, DC: https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/task_force/harassment/report_summary.cfm
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Fitzgerald LF 1993. Sexual harassment: violence against women in the workplace. Am. Psychol. 48:1070–76
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Fitzgerald LF, Drasgow F, Hulin CL, Gelfand MJ, Magley VJ 1997. Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: a test of an integrated model. J. Appl. Psychol. 82:578–89
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Fitzgerald LF, Gelfand MJ, Drasgow F 1995.a Measuring sexual harassment: theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 17:435–45
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Fitzgerald LF, Swan S, Fischer K 1995.b Why didn't she just report him? The psychological and legal implications of women's responses to sexual harassment. J. Soc. Issues 51:117–38
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Fredrickson C 2017. When will the “Harvey effect” reach academia?. The Atlantic Oct. 30. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/10/when-will-the-harvey-effect-reach-academia/544388/
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Fujita K, Trope Y, Liberman N, Levin-Sagi M 2006. Construal levels and self-control. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 90:351–67
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Galinsky AD, Magee JE, Inesi E, Gruenfeld DH 2006. Power and perspectives not taken. Psychol. Sci. 17:1068–74
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Gentile MC 2010. Giving Voice to Values: How to Speak Your Mind When You Know What's Right New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Gino F, Bazerman MH 2009. When misconduct goes unnoticed: the acceptability of gradual erosion in others’ unethical behavior. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 45:708–19
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Glick P, Fiske ST 1996. The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 70:491–512
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Graham J, Nosek BA, Haidt J, Iyer R, Koleva S, Ditto PH 2011. Mapping the moral domain. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 101:366–85
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Gruber JE 1998. The impact of male work environments and organizational policies on women's experiences of sexual harassment. Gender Soc 12:301–20
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Guinote A 2017. How power affects people: activating, wanting, and goal seeking. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 68:353–81
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Halper LR, Rios K 2018. Feeling powerful but incompetent: fear of negative evaluation predicts men's sexual harassment of subordinates. Sex Roles In press
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Harned MS, Ormerod AJ, Palmieri PA, Collinsworth LL, Reed M 2002. Sexual assault and other types of sexual harassment by workplace personnel: a comparison of antecedents and consequences. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 7:174–88
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Harper CA, Harris AJ 2017. Applying moral foundations theory to understanding public views of sexual offending. J. Sex. Aggress. 23:111–23
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Hartcollis A 2016. Professors’ group says efforts to halt sexual harassment have stifled speech. The New York Times March 24. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/24/us/professors-group-says-efforts-to-halt-sexual-harassment-have-stifled-speech.html
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Hofstede G 1984. The cultural relativity of the quality of life concept. Acad. Manag. Rev. 9:389–98
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Huerta M, Corina LM, Pan JS, Torges CM, Magley VJ 2006. Sex and power in the academy: modeling sexual harassment in the lives of college women. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 32:616–28
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Hulin CL, Fitzgerald LF, Drasgow F 1996. Organizational influences on sexual harassment. Sexual Harassment in the Workplace 5 M Stockdale 127–50 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Ilies R, Hauserman NN, Schwochau S, Stibal J 2003. Reported incidence of rates of work-related sexual harassment in the United States: using meta-analysis to explain reported rate disparities. Personal. Psychol. 56:607–31
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Iyer L, Mani A, Mishra P, Topalova P 2012. The power of political voice: women's political representation and crime in India. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 4(4):165–93
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Jagst R, Griffith KA, Jones R, Perumalswami CR, Ubel MD, Stewart A 2016. Sexual harassment and discrimination experiences of academic medical faculty. JAMA 315:2120–21
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Kabat-Farr D, Cortina LM 2014. Sex-based harassment in employment: new insights into gender and context. Law Hum. Behav. 38:58–72
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Kaiser CR, Major B, Jurcevic I, Dover TL, Brady LM, Shapiro JR 2013. Presumed fair: ironic effects of organizational diversity structures. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 104:504–19
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Kang J, Banaji M 2006. Fair measures: a behavioral realist revision of affirmative action. Calif. Law Rev. 94:1063–118
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Kelsky K 2017. A crowdsourced survey of sexual harassment in the academy. The Professor Is In Dec. 1. https://theprofessorisin.com/2017/12/01/a-crowdsourced-survey-of-sexual-harassment-in-the-academy/
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Keltner D, Gruenfeld DH, Anderson C 2003. Power, approach and inhibition. Psychol. Rev. 110:265–84
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Kennedy JA, Anderson C 2017. Hierarchical rank and principled dissent: how holding higher rank suppresses objection to unethical practices. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 139:30–49
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Kihnley J 2000. Unraveling the ivory fabric: institutional obstacles to the handling of sexual harassment complaints. Law Soc. Inq. 25:69–90
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Kitchener C 2018. The Nassar investigation that never made headlines. The Atlantic Jan. 29. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2018/01/the-nassar-investigation-that-never-made-headlines/551717/
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Knapp DE, Faley RH, Ekeberg SE, DuBois CLZ 1997. Determinants of target responses to sexual harassment: a conceptual framework. Acad. Manag. Rev. 22:687–729
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Krings F, Facchin S 2009. Organizational justice and men's likelihood to sexually harass: the moderating role of sexism and personality. J. Appl. Psychol. 94:501–10
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Kunstman JW, Maner JK 2010. Sexual over-perception: power, mating motives, and biases in social judgment. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 100:282–94
    [Google Scholar]
  74. LaCampagne A 2015. Office for the Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination: report of investigation and findings Rep., Univ. Calif. Berkeley: https://www.law.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Choudhry-Investigation-Report-7-7-15-REDACTED.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Lee K, Gizzarone M, Ashton MC 2003. Personality and the likelihood to sexually harass. Sex Roles 29:59–69
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Libarkin J 2016. Not a fluke: that case of academic sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual misconduct, stalking, violations of dating policies, violations of campus pornography policies, and similar violation is not an isolated incident!. Geocognition Research Laboratory Feb. 3. https://geocognitionresearchlaboratory.com/2018/08/20/the-academic-sexual-misconduct-database/
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Libarkin J 2017. Sexual harassment in academia: a call to action Lect. Abstr., Univ. Mich. Ann Arbor: https://lsa.umich.edu/earth/news-events/all-events.detail.html/37025-6121772.html
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Maass A, Cadinu M, Guarnieri G, Grasselli A 2003. Sexual harassment under social identity threat: the computer harassment paradigm. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 85:853–70
    [Google Scholar]
  79. MacKinnon CA 1979. Sexual Harassment of Working Women New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Magee JC, Smith PK 2013. The social distance theory of power. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 17:158–86
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Magley VJ, Hulin CL, Fitzgerald LF, DeNardo M 1999. Outcomes of self-labeling sexual harassment. J. Appl. Psychol. 84:390–402
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Marshall A 2005. Idle rights: employees’ rights consciousness and the construction of sexual harassment policies. Law Soc. Rev. 39:83–124
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Martin SR 2016. Stories about values and valuable stories: a field experiment of the power of narratives to shape newcomers’ actions. Acad. Manag. J. 59:1707–24
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Mayer DM 2014. A review of the literature on ethical climate and culture. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Climate and Culture B Schneider, KM Barbera 415–40 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Mayer DM, Kuenzi M, Greenbaum R, Bardes M, Salvador RB 2009. How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 108:1–13
    [Google Scholar]
  86. McDonald P 2012. Workplace sexual harassment 30 years on: a review of the literature. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 14:1–17
    [Google Scholar]
  87. McKinney K 1990. Sexual harassment of university faculty by colleagues and students. Sex Roles 23:421–38
    [Google Scholar]
  88. McLaughlin H, Uggen C, Blackstone A 2012. Sexual harassment, workplace authority and the paradox of power. Am. Soc. Rev. 77:625–47
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Megaree EI 1969. Influence of sex roles on the manifestation of leadership. J. Appl. Psychol. 53:377–82
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Messick DM, Tenbrunsel AE 1996. Codes of Conduct: Behavioral Research into Business Ethics New York: Russell Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Niemi L, Young L 2016. When and why we see victims as responsible: the impact of ideology on attitudes toward victims. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 42:1227–42
    [Google Scholar]
  92. O'Connor M, Gutek BA, Stockdale M, Geer TM, Melancon R 2004. Explaining sexual harassment judgments: looking beyond gender of the rater. Law Hum. Behav. 28:69–95
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Offermann L, Malamut A 2002. When leaders harass: the impact of target perceptions of organizational leadership and climate on harassment reporting and outcomes. J. Appl. Psychol. 87:885–93
    [Google Scholar]
  94. O'Leary-Kelly AM, Bowes-Sperry L 2001. Sexual harassment as unethical behavior: the role of moral intensity. Hum. Res. Manag. Rev. 11:73–92
    [Google Scholar]
  95. O'Leary-Kelly AM, Bowes-Sperry L, Bates CA, Lean ER 2009. Sexual harassment at work: a decade (plus) of progress. J. Manag. 35:503–36
    [Google Scholar]
  96. O'Leary-Kelly AM, Paetzold RL, Griffin RW 2000. Sexual harassment as aggressive behavior: an actor based perspective. Acad. Manag. Rev. 25:372–88
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Orbe MP 1998. Constructing Co-Cultural Theory: An Explication of Culture, Power, and Communication Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Packer DJ, Fujita K, Herman S 2013. Rebels with a cause: a goal conflict approach to understanding when conscientious people dissent. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49:927–32
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Page TE, Pina A 2015. Moral disengagement as a self-regulatory process in sexual harassment perpetration at work: a preliminary conceptualization. Aggress. Violence Behav. 21:73–84
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Perrigo B 2017. “We are heartbroken”: read Savannah Guthrie and Hoda Kotb's response to Matt Lauer's firing. Time Nov. 29. http://time.com/5040635/savannah-guthrie-hoda-kotb-matt-lauer-statement-transcript/
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Pierce CA, Aguinis H, Adams SKR 2000. Effects of a dissolved workplace romance and rater characteristics on responses to a sexual harassment accusation. Acad. Manag. J. 43:869–80
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Pierce CA, Broberg BJ, McClure JR, Aguinis H 2004. Responding to sexual harassment complaints: effects of a dissolved workplace romance on decision making standards. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 95:66–82
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Powell C 2017. How #MeToo has spread like wildfire around the world. Newsweek Dec. 15. http://www.newsweek.com/how-metoo-has-spread-wildfire-around-world-749171
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Pryor JB, LaVite CM, Stroller LM 1993. A social psychological analysis of sexual harassment: the person/situation interaction. J. Vocat. Behav. 42:68–83
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Rees T 2002. The politics of “mainstreaming” gender equality. The Changing Politics of Gender Equality in Britain E Breitenbach, A Brown, F Mackay, J Webb 45–69 London: Palgrave Macmillan
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Riger S 1991. Gender dilemmas in sexual harassment policies and procedures. Am. Psychol. 46:497–505
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Rogers JK, Henson KD 1997. “Hey, why don't you wear a shorter skirt?” Structural vulnerability and the organization of sexual harassment in temporary clerical employment. Gender Soc 11:215–37
    [Google Scholar]
  108. Rosenthal MN, Smidt AM, Freyd JJ 2016. Still second class: sexual harassment of graduate students. Psychol. Women Q. 40:364–77
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Rotundo M, Nguyen DH, Sackett PR 2001. A meta-analytic review of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. J. Appl. Psychol. 86:914–22
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Rowley DJ, Sherman H 2003. The special challenges of academic leadership. Manag. Decis. 41:1058–63
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Rudman LA, Borgida E, Robertson BA 1995. Suffering in silence: procedural justice versus gender socialization issues in university sexual harassment grievance procedures. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 17:519–41
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Rudman LA, Mescher K 2012. Of animals and objects: men's implicit dehumanization of women and male sexual aggression. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 38:734–46
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Sapiro V, Campbell D 2018. Report on the 2017 APSA survey on sexual harassment at annual meetings. Political Sci. Politics 51:197–206
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Schneider B, Ehrhart MG, Macey WH 2013. Organizational climate and culture. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 64:361–88
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Settles IH, Cortina LM, Malley J, Stewart AJ 2006. The climate for women in academic science: the good, the bad, and the changeable. Psychol. Women Q. 30:47–58
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Sigal J, Gibbs MS, Goodrich C, Rashid T, Anjum A et al. 2005. Cross-cultural reactions to academic sexual harassment: effects of individualist versus collectivist culture and gender of participants. Sex Roles 52:201–15
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Simon LK 2018. Letter to MSU community, Jan. 19, 2018 Lett., Mich. State Univ. East Lansing: https://msu.edu/ourcommitment/news/2018-01-19-Simon-Letter.html
    [Google Scholar]
  118. Smith-Crowe K, Zhang T 2016. On taking the theoretical substance of outcomes seriously: a meta-conversation. Organizational Wrongdoing DA Palmer, R Greenwood, K Smith-Crowe, pp. 17–46 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Spahr J, Young S 2018. The paradox of protecting students. The Chronicle of Higher Education Jan. 9. https://www.chronicle.com/article/The-Paradox-of-Protecting/242191?utm_content=buffer689bc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Stockdale MS, Vaux A, Cashin J 1995. Acknowledging sexual harassment: a test of alternative models. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 17:469–96
    [Google Scholar]
  121. Tata J 2000. She said, he said: the influence of remedial accounts on third-party judgments of coworker sexual harassment. J. Manag. 26:1133–56
    [Google Scholar]
  122. Tenbrunsel AE, Diekmann KA, Wade-Benzoni KA, Bazerman MH 2010. The ethical mirage: a temporal explanation as to why we aren't as ethical as we think we are. Res. Organ. Behav. 20:153–73
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Tenbrunsel AE, Messick DM 2004. Ethical fading: the role of self-deception in unethical behavior. Soc. Justice Res. 17:223–36
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Tenbrunsel AE, Smith-Crowe K 2008. Ethical decision making: where we've been and where we're going. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2:545–607
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Terry K 2012. Sexual Offenses and Offenders: Theory, Practice and Policy Boston, MA: Cengage Learn.
    [Google Scholar]
  126. Thomas AM 2004. Politics, policies and practice: assessing the impact of sexual harassment policies in UK universities. Br. J. Soc. Educ. 25:143–60
    [Google Scholar]
  127. Treviño LK, Brown ME 2004. Managing to be ethical: debunking five business ethics myths. Acad. Manag. Exec. 18:69–81
    [Google Scholar]
  128. Treviño LK, Youngblood SA 1990. Bad apples in bad barrels: a causal analysis of ethical decision-making behavior. J. Appl. Psychol. 75:345–78
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Uggen C, Blackstone A 2004. Sexual harassment as a gendered expression of power. Am. Soc. Rev. 69:64–92
    [Google Scholar]
  130. van Houwelingen G, van Dijke M, De Cremer D 2015. Getting it done and getting it right: Leader disciplinary reactions to Followers' moral transgressions are determined by construal level mindset. Leadersh. Q. 26:878–91
    [Google Scholar]
  131. van Kleef GA, Oveis C, van der Lowe I, Luokogan A, Goetz J, Keltner D 2008. Power, distress, and compassion: turning a blind eye to the suffering of others. Psychol. Sci. 19:1316–22
    [Google Scholar]
  132. Vijayasiri G 2008. Reporting sexual harassment: the importance of organizational context and trust. Gender Issues 25:43–61
    [Google Scholar]
  133. Wasti SA, Bergman ME, Glomb TM, Drasgow F 2000. Test of the cross-cultural generalizability of a model of sexual harassment. J. Appl. Psychol. 85:766–78
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Wasti SA, Cortina LM 2002. Coping in context: sociocultural determinants of responses to sexual harassment. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 83:394–405
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Weiner RL, Hurt LE 2000. How do people evaluate social sexual conduct at work? A psychological model. J. Appl. Psychol. 85:75–85
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Welsh DT, Ordóñez LD, Snyder DG, Christian MS 2015. The slippery slope: how small ethical transgressions pave the way for larger future transgressions. J. Appl. Psychol. 100:114–27
    [Google Scholar]
  137. Welsh S 1999. Gender and sexual harassment. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 25:169–90
    [Google Scholar]
  138. Wilkerson J 1999. The impact of job level and prior training on sexual harassment labeling and remedy choice. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 29:1605–23
    [Google Scholar]
  139. Willness CR, Steel P, Lee K 2007. A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment. Personal. Psychol. 60:127–62
    [Google Scholar]
  140. Wood JT 1992. Telling our stories: narratives as a basis for theorizing sexual harassment. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 20:349–62
    [Google Scholar]
  141. York K 1989. Defining sexual harassment in workplaces: a policy-capturing approach. Acad. Manag. J. 32:830–50
    [Google Scholar]
  142. Zeigler-Hill V, Besser A, Morag J, Campbell WK 2016. The dark triad and sexual harassment proclivity. Personal. Indiv. Differ. 89:47–54
    [Google Scholar]
  143. Zimbardo PG 2004. A situationist perspective on the psychology of evil: understanding how good people are transformed into perpetrators. The Social Psychology of Good and Evil: Understanding Our Capacity for Kindness and Cruelty A Miller 21–50 New York: Guilford
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102945
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