The effect of harasser performance status and complainant tolerance on reactions to a complaint of sexual harassment

Journal of Vocational Behavior

Volumn 49, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 53-67

  Summers, Russel J ^a  

^a SAINT MARY S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030210194     PISSN: 00018791     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jvbe.1996.0033     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Baker, D. D., Terpstra, D. E., & Lantz, K. (1990). The influence of individual characteristics and severity of harassing behavior on reactions to sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 22, 305-325.
2. Clarke, L. W. (1988). Women supervisors experience sexual harassment, too. In S. Rose and L. Larwood (Eds.), Women's careers: Pathways and pitfalls (pp. 179-191). New York: Praeger.
3. Cohen, A. G., & Gutek, B. A. (1985). Dimensions of perceptions of social-sexual behavior in a work setting. Sex Roles, 13, 317-327.
4. Coles, F. S. (1986). Forced to quit: Sexual harassment complaints and agency response. Sex Roles, 14(1/2), 81-95.
5. Dedrick, E. J., & Dobbins, G. H. (1991). The influence of subordinate age on managerial actions: An attributional analysis. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 12, 367-377.
6. Dobbins, G. H., Sgro, J. A., & Smith, E. (1990). The effects of attributions and costs of corrective actions on leaders' implementation of control policy: An extension of the attributional model of leadership. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 11, 45-60.
7. Dobbins, G. H., & Russell, J. M. (1986). The biasing effects of subordinate likeableness on leaders' responses to poor performers: A laboratory and a field study. Personnel Psychology, 39, 759-777.
8. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson.
9. Fitzgerald, L. F., & Shullman, S. L. (1993). Sexual harassment: A research analysis and agenda for the 1990s. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 5-27.
10. Green, S. G., & Liden, R. C. (1980). Contextual and attributional influences on control decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 453-458.
11. Griffitt, W., & Jackson, T. (1973). Simulated jury decisions: The influence of jury-defendant attitude similarity-dissimilarity. Social Behavior and Personality, 1, 1-7.
12. Gutek, B. A. (1985). Sex and the workplace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
13. Gutek, B. A. (1989). Sexuality in the workplace: Key issues in social research and organizational practice. In J. Hearn, D. L. Sheppard, P. Tancred-Sheriff, & G. Burrell (Eds.), The sexuality of organization. London, UK: Sage Publications.
14. Hartnett, J. J., Robinson, D., & Singh, B. (1989). Perceptions of males and females toward sexual harassment and acquiescence. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4, 291-298.
15. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.
16. Jaschik, M. L., & Fretz, B. R. (1991). Women's perceptions and labeling of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 25, 19-23.
17. Jensen, I. W., & Gutek, B. A. (1982). Attributions and assignment of responsibility in sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 38, 121-136.
18. Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 220-266). New York: Academic Press.
19. Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1972). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. In E. Jones, D. Kanouse, H. Kelley, R. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 79-94). Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
20. Kenig, S., & Ryan, J. (1986). Sex differences in level of tolerance and attribution of blame for sexual harassment on a university campus. Sex Roles, 15, 535-549.
21. Lafontaine, E., & Tredeau, L. (1986). The frequency, sources, and correlates of sexual harassment among women in traditional male occupations. Sex Roles, 15(7/8), 433-442.
22. Littler, B. S., Seidler-Feller, D, Opaluch, R. E. (1982). Sexual harassment in the workplace as a function of initiator's status: The case of airline personnel. Journal of Social Issues, 38, 137-148.
23. Livingston, J. A. (1982). Responses to sexual harassment on the job: Legal, organizational, and individual actions. Journal of Social Issues, 38, 5-22.
24. Mackillop, M. A. (1992, December). Let the punishment fit the crime. Human Resources Professional, 6-7.
25. Malovich, N. J., & Stake, J. E. (1990). Sexual harassment on campus: Individual differences in attitudes and beliefs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 14, 63-81.
26. Meyer, H. H. (1980). Self-appraisal of job performance. Personnel Psychology, 33, 291-295.
27. Mitchell, T. R. (1982). Attributions and actions: A note of caution. Journal of Management, 8, 65-74.
28. Mynatt, C. R., & Allgeier, E. R. (1990). Risk factors, self-attributions, and adjustment problems among victims of sexual coercion. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29, 130-153.
29. Popovich, P. M., Licata, B. J., Nokovich, D., Martelli, T., & Zoloty, S. (1986). Assessing the incidence and perceptions of sexual harassment behaviors among American undergraduates. The Journal of Psychology, 120, 387-396.
30. Powell, G. N. (1986). Effects of sex role identity and sex on definitions of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 14, 9-19.
31. Pryor, J. B., & Day, J. D. (1988). Interpretations of sexual harassment: An attributional analysis. Sex Roles, 18, 405-417.
32. Riger, S. (1991). Gender dilemmas in sexual harassment policies and procedures. American Psychologist, 46, 497-505.
33. Sandroff, R. (1992, June). Sexual harassment: The inside story. Working Woman, 47-51, 78.
34. Shaver, K. G. (1970). Defensive attribution: Effects of severity and relevance on the responsibility assigned for an accident. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 14, 101-113.
35. Shaw, J. I., & McMartin, J. A. (1977). Personal and situational determinants of attribution of responsibility for an accident. Human Relations, 30, 95-107.
36. Silverman, D. (1977). Sexual harassment: Working women's dilemma. Quest: A Feminist Quarterly, 3, 15-23.
37. Summers, R. J. (1991). Determinants of judgments of and responses to a complaint of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 25, 381-394.
38. Summers, R. J., & Myklebust, K. (1992). The influence of a history of romance on judgments and responses to a complaint of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 27, 345-357.
39. Terpstra, D. E., & Cook, S. E. (1985). Complainant characteristics and reported behaviors and consequences associated with formal sexual harassment charges. Personnel Psychology, 38, 559-574.
40. Thaker, R. A. (1992). A descriptive study of behavioral responses of sexual harassment targets: Implications for control theory. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 5, 155-171.
41. Thomann, D. A., & Wiener, R. L. (1987). Physical and psychological causality as determinants of culpability in sexual harassment cases. Sex Roles, 17, 573-591.
42. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. (1981). Sexual harassment in the federal workplace: Is it a problem? Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
43. U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. (1988). Sexual harassment in the federal government: An update. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
44. Valentine-French, S., & Radtke, H. L. (1989). Attributions of responsibility for an incident of sexual harassment in a university setting. Sex Roles, 21, 545-555.
45. Workman, J. E., & Johnson, K. K. P. (1991). The role of cosmetics in attributions about sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 24, 759-769.