Gendered constructions of power during discourse about sexual harassment: Negotiating competing meanings

Sex Roles

Volumn 54, Issue 7-8, 2006, Pages 495-507

  Dougherty, Debbie S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

Discourse; Gender; Power; Sexual harassment

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750970560     PISSN: 03600025     EISSN: 15732762     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11199-006-9012-4     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Bargh, J. A., & Raymond, P. (1995). The naive misuse of power: Nonconscious sources of sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 85-96.
2. Berryman-Fink, C., & Riley, K. V. (1997). The role of gender and feminism in perceptions of sexual and sexually harassing communication. Women's Studies in Communication, 20, 24-44.
3. Bingham, S. G. (1994). Introduction: Framing sexual harassment -defining a discursive focus of study. In S. G. Bingham (Ed.), Conceptualizing sexual harassment as discursive practice (pp. 1-14). Westport, CT: Praeger.
4. Booth-Butterfield, M. (1986). Recognizing and communicating in harassment-prone organizational climates. Women's Studies in Communication, 9, 42-51.
5. Booth-Butterfield, M. (1989). Perceptions of harassing communication as a function of locus of control, work force participation, and gender. Communication Quarterly, 37, 262-275.
6. Bowker, J. K. (1993). Reporting sexual harassment: Reconciling power, knowledge, and perspective. In G. L. Kreps (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Communication implications (pp. 171-195). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
7. Clair, R. P. (1994). Resistance and oppression as a self-contained opposite: An organizational communication analysis of one man's story of sexual harassment. Western Journal of Communication, 58, 235-262.
8. Clair, R. P. (1998). Organizing silence: A world of possibilities. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
9. Clegg, S. R. (1989). Radical revisions: Power, discipline, and organizations. Organization Studies, 10, 97-115.
10. Cleveland, J. N., & Kerst, M. E. (1993). Sexual harassment and perceptions of power: An under-articulated relationship. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 49-67.
11. Conrad, C., & Taylor, B. (1994). The contest(s) of sexual harassment: Power, silences, and academe. In S. G. Bingham (Ed.), Conceptualizing sexual harassment as discursive practice (pp. 45-58). Westport, CT: Praeger.
12. Creswell, J. W. (1997). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
13. De Coster, S., Estes, S. B., & Mueller, C. W. (1999). Routine activities and sexual harassment in the workplace. Work and Occupations, 26, 21-49.
14. Deetz, S., & Mumby, D. K. (1990). Power, discourse, and the workplace: Reclaiming the critical tradition. Communication Yearbook, 13, 18-47.
15. Dougherty, D. S. (1999). Dialogue through standpoint: Understanding women's and men's standpoints of sexual harassment. Management Communication Quarterly, 12, 436-468.
16. Dougherty, D. S. (2001). Sexual harassment as [dys]functional process: A feminist standpoint analysis. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 29, 372-402.
17. Firestone, J. M., & Harris, R. J. (1999). Changes in patterns of sexual harassment in the U.S. Military: A comparison of the 1988 and 1995 DoD surveys. Armed Forces and Society, 25, 613-632.
18. Foss, K. A., & Rogers, R. A. (1994). Particularities and possibilities: Reconceptualizing knowledge and power in sexual harassment research. In S. G. Bingham (Ed.), Conceptualizing sexual harassment as discursive practice (pp. 159-172). Westport, CT: Praeger.
19. Frey, L. R., Botan, C. H., Friedman, P. G., & Kreps, G. L. (1991). Investigating communication: An introduction to research methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
20. Greenbaum, T. L. (1987). The practical handbook and guide to focus group research. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
21. Hardy, C., & Clegg, S. R. (1996). Some dare call it power. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 622-641). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. Herndon, S. L. (1993). Using focus group interviews for preliminary investigation. In S. L. Herndon & G. L. Kreps (Eds.), Qualitative research: Applications in organizational communication (pp. 39-47). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
23. Jansma, L. L. (2001). Sexual harassment research: Integration, reformulation, and implications for mitigation efforts. Communication Yearbook, 23, 163-225.
24. Kellett, P. M. (1999). Dialogue and dialectics in managing organizational change: The case of a mission-based transformation. Southern Communication Journal, 64, 211-231.
25. Keyton, J., Ferguson, P., & Rhodes, S. C. (2001). Cultural indicators of sexual harassment. Southern Communication Journal, 67, 33-50.
26. Kilduff, M., & Mehra, A. (1996). Hegemonic masculinity among the elite: Power, identity, and homophily in social networks. In C. Cheng (Ed.), Masculinities in organizations (pp. 115-129). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27. Kitzinger, C., & Thomas, A. (1995). Sexual harassment: A discursive approach. In S. Wilkinson & C. Kitzinger (Eds.), Feminism and discourse: Psychological perspectives (pp. 32-48). London: Sage.
28. Lindlof, T. R. (1995). Qualitative communication research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. Magley, V. J., Hulin, C. L., Fitzgerald, L. F., & DeNardo, M. (1999). Outcomes of self-labeling sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 390-402.
30. Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
31. Morgan, D. L., & Spanish, M. T. (1984). Focus groups: A new tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Sociology, 7, 253-270.
32. Payne, K. E. (1993). The power game: Sexual harassment on the college campus. In G. L. Kreps (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Communication implications (pp. 133-148). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
33. Solomon, D. H., & Williams, M. L. M. (1997). Perceptions of social-sexual communication at work: The effects of message, situation, and observer characteristics on judgments of sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 25, 196-216.
34. Townsley, N. C., & Geist, P. (2000). The discursive enactment of hegemony: Sexual harassment and academic organizing. Western Journal of Communication, 64, 190-217.
35. Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
36. Waldo, C. R., Berdahl, J. L., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1998). Are men sexually harassed? If so, by whom? Law and Human Behavior, 22, 59-79.
37. Wayne, J. H. (2000). Disentangling the power bases of sexual harassment: Comparing gender, age, and position power. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57, 301-325.
38. Williams, C. W., Brown, R. S., & Lees-Haley (1995). An attributional (causal dimensional) analysis of perceptions of sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1169-1183.
39. Wood, J. T. (1992). Telling our stories: Narratives as a basis for theorizing sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 20, 349-362.
40. Wood, J. T. (1994). Saying it makes it so: The discursive construction of sexual harassment. In S. G. Bingham (Ed.), Conceptualizing sexual harassment as discursive practice (pp. 17-30). Westport, CT: Praeger.