Schematic responses to sexual harassment complainants: The influence of gender and physical attractiveness

Sex Roles

Volumn 56, Issue 3-4, 2007, Pages 223-230

  Madera, Juan M ^a   Podratz, Kenneth E ^a   King, Eden B ^b   Hebl, Michelle R ^a  

^a RICE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Expectancy violation theory; Physical attractiveness; Sexual harassment

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847259368     PISSN: 03600025     EISSN: 15732762     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11199-006-9165-1     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Baird, C. L., Bensko, N. L., Bell, P. A., Viney, W., & Woody, W. D. (1995). Gender influence on perceptions of hostile environment sexual harassment. Psychological Reports, 77, 79-82.
2. Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: An experimental and social study. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3. Bem, S. L. (1981). Gender schema theory: A cognitive account of sex typing. Psychological Review, 88, 354-364.
4. Burgess, D., & Borgida, E. (1997). Refining sex-role spillover theory: The role of gender subtypes and harasser attributions. Social Cognition, 15, 291-311.
5. Burgoon, M., Dillard, J. P., & Doran, N. E. (1983). Friendly or unfriendly persuasion: The effects of violations of expectations by males and females. Human Communication Research, 10, 283-293.
6. Burgoon, J., & Hale, J. (1988). Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors, Communication Monographs, 55, 58-79.
7. Cialdini, R. B. (2001). Influence: Science and practice. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
8. Cummings, K. M., & Armenta, M. (2002). Penalties for peer sexual harassment in an academic context: The influence of harasser gender, participant gender, severity of harassment, and the presence of bystanders. Sex Roles, 47, 273-280.
9. Darley, J. M., & Gross, P. H. (1983). A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 20-33.
10. DeSouza, E. R., & Solberg, J. (2004). Women's and men's reactions to man-to-man sexual harassment: Does the sexual orientation of the victim matter? Sex Roles, 50, 623-639.
11. Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285-290.
12. Eagly, A. H. (1987). Reporting sex differences, American Psychologist, 42, 755-756.
13. Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but... A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109-128.
14. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109, 573-598.
15. Eagly, A. H., Karau, S. J., & Makhijani, M. G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis, Psychological Bulletin, 117, 125-145.
16. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) (2003). Sexual harassment charges EEOC & FEPAs combined: FY 1991-FY 2003. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/harass.hlml.
17. Fiske, S. T. (1993). Social cognition and social perception. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 155-194.
18. Fitzgerald, L. F., Drasgow, F., Hulin, C. L., Gelfand, M. J., & Magley, V. J. (1997). Antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment in organizations: A test of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 578-589.
19. Golden, J. H., Johnson, C. A., & Lopez, R. A. (2001). Sexual harassment in the workplace: Exploring the effects of physical attractiveness on perception of harassment. Sex Roles, 45, 767-784.
20. Hand, J. Z., & Sanchez, L. (2000). Badgering or bantering? Gender differences in experience of, and reactions to, sexual harassment among U.S. high school students. Gender & Society, 14, 718-746.
21. Hatfield, E., & Sprecher, S. (1986), Mirror, mirror... The importance of looks in everyday life. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
22. Jussim, L., Coleman, L. M., & Lerch, L. (1987). The nature of stereotypes: A comparison and integration of three theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 536-546.
23. LaRocca, M. A., & Kromrey, J. D. (1999). The perception of sexual harassment in higher education: Impact of gender and attractiveness. Sex Roles, 40, 921-932.
24. Marin, A. J., & Guadango, R. E. (1999). Perceptions of sexual harassment victims as a function of labeling and reporting. Sex Roles, 41, 921-940.
25. Popovich, P. M., Gehlauf, D. N., Jolton, J. A., Everton, W. J., Godinho, R. M., Mastrangelo, P. M., et al. (1996). Physical attractiveness and sexual harassment: Does every picture tell a story or every story draw a picture? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 520-542.
26. Wayne, J. H., Riordan, C. M., & Thomas, K. M. (2001). Is all sexual harassment viewed the same? Mock juror decisions in same- and cross-gender cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 179-187.