Across two studies, we investigated the hypothesis that exposure to objectifying television in which women are shown as sexual objects increases the likelihood of harassing conduct. In both studies (Ns = 141; 120), male participants were exposed to one of the three TV clips in which women were portrayed (a) as sexual objects (objectifying TV), (b) in professional roles, or (c) excluded (a nature documentary). Study 1 showed that men exposed to objectifying TV reported greater proclivity to engage in sexual coercion and manifested more gender-harassing behavior than participants in the other conditions. Study 2 further demonstrated that exposure to objectifying TV increased participants’ conformity to masculine gender role norms, which, in turn, mediated the relation between experimental condition and gender harassment. Together, the two studies suggest that media content plays a central role in activating harassment-related social norms, which in turn encourage or inhibit harassing conduct.
American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. (2011). Crossing the line: Sexual harassment at school. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
AndsagerJ. L.RoeK. (1999). Country music video in country’s year of the woman. Journal of Communication, 49, 69–82.
3.
ArnettJ. J. (2002). The sounds of sex: Sex in teens’ music and music videos. In BrownJ.Walsh-ChildersK.SteeleJ. (Eds.), Sexual teens, sexual media (pp. 253–264). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
AshmoreR. D. (1981). Sex stereotypes and implicit personality theory. In HamiltonD. L. (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 333–353). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
AshmoreR. D.Del BocaF. K. (1981). Sex stereotypes and implicit personality theory toward a cognitive-social psychological conceptualization. Sex Roles, 5, 219–248.
6.
BarakA. (1997). Cross-cultural perspectives of sexual harassment. In O’DonohueW. (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 263–300). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
7.
BarakA. (2005). Sexual harassment on the internet. Social Science Computer Review, 23, 77–92.
8.
BarghJ. A.RaymondP.PryorJ.StrackF. (1995). Attractiveness of the underling: An automatic power sex association and its consequences for sexual harassment and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 768–781.
9.
BartkyS. L. (1990). Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression. New York, NY: Routledge.
10.
BartlingC. A.EisenmanR. (1993). Sexual harassment proclivity in men and women. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 31, 189–192.
11.
BerdahlJ. L. (2007a). Harassment based on sex: Protecting social status in the context of gender hierarchy. Academy of Management Review, 32, 641–658.
12.
BerdahlJ. L. (2007b). The sexual harassment of uppity women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 425–437.
13.
BrookesF.KellyP. (2009). Dolly girls: Tweenies as artefacts of consumption. Journal of Youth Studies, 12, 599–613.
14.
ChomaB. L.FosterM. D.RadfordE. (2007). Use of objectification theory to examine the effects of a media literacy intervention on women. Sex Roles, 56, 581–591.
15.
CialdiniR. B.TrostM. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity, and compliance. In GilbertD. T.FiskeS. T.LindzeyG. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 151–192). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
16.
CollinsA. M.LoftusE. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407–428.
Dall’AraE.MaassA. (2000). Studying sexual harassment in the laboratory: Are egalitarian women at higher risk?Sex Roles, 41, 681–704.
19.
DavisT. L.LiddellD. L. (2002). Getting inside the house: The effectiveness of a rape prevention program for college fraternity men. Journal of College StudentDevelopment, 43, 35–50.
20.
De JudicibusM.McCabeM. P. (2001). Blaming the target of sexual harassment: Impact of gender role, sexist attitudes, and work role. Sex Roles, 44, 401–417.
21.
DeSouzaE. R. (2011). Sexual harassment. In PaludiM. A.PaludiC. A.Jr.DeSouzaE. R. (Eds.), Praeger handbook on understanding and preventing workplace discrimination (pp. 227–249). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
22.
DillK. E.BrownB. P.CollinsM. A. (2008). Effects of exposure to sex-stereotyped video game characters on tolerance of sexual harassment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1402–1408.
23.
FiskeS. T.TaylorS. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
24.
FitzgeraldL. F.DrasgowF.WaldoC. R. (1999). Measuring sexual harassment in the Armed Forces: A test of an integrated model. Military Psychology, 11, 329–343.
25.
FitzgeraldL. F.GelfandM.DrasgowF. (1995). Measuring sexual harassment: Theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 425–445.
26.
FitzgeraldL. F.SwanS.MagleyV. J. (1997). But was it really sexual harassment? Legal, behavioral, and psychological definitions of the workplace victimization of women. In O’DonohueW. (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 5–28). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
27.
FoutsG.BurggrafK. (2000). Television situation comedies: Female weight, male negative comments, and audience reactions. Sex Roles, 42, 925–932.
28.
FredricksonB.RobertsT. A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206.
29.
FreedmanJ. L. (2002). Media violence and its effect on aggression: Assessing the scientific evidence. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
30.
GabbiadiniA.AndrighettoL.VolpatoC. (2012). Brief report: Does exposure to violent video games increase moral disengagement among adolescents?Journal of Adolescence, 35, 1403–1406.
GaldiS.GawronskiB.ArcuriL.FrieseM. (2012). Selective exposure in decided and undecided individuals: Differential relations to automatic associations and conscious beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 559–569.
33.
Global Media Monitoring Project. (2013). Who makes the news? The Global Media Monitoring Project. Retrieved fromhttp://www.whomakesthenews.org
34.
GrauerholzE.KingA. (1997). Prime time sexual harassment. Violence Against Women, 3, 129–148.
35.
GruberJ. E.BjornL. (1982). Blue-collar blues: The sexual harassment of women autoworkers. Work and Occupations, 9, 271–298.
36.
GruberJ. E.GrubeJ. W. (2000). Adolescent sexuality and the media: A review of current knowledge and implications. Western Journal of Medicine, 172, 210–214.
37.
HaferkampC. J. (1999). Beliefs about relationships in relation to television viewing, soap opera viewing, and self-monitoring. Current Psychology, 18, 193–204.
38.
HansenC. H.HansenR. (1988). How rock music videos can change what is seen when boy meets girl: Priming stereotypic appraisal of social interactions. Sex Roles, 19, 287–316.
39.
HayesA. F.PreacherK. J. (2013). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable [White paper]. Retrieved fromhttp://www.afhayes.com/
40.
HitlanR. T.PryorJ. B.Hesson-McInnisM. S.OlsonM. (2009). Antecedents of gender harassment: An analysis of person and situation factors. Sex Roles, 61, 794–807.
41.
IliesR.HausermanN.SchwochauS.StibalJ. (2003). Reported incidence rates of work-related sexual harassment in the United States: Using meta-analysis to explain reported rate disparities. Personnel Psychology, 56, 607–631.
42.
Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. (2010). Statistica report: Le molestie sessuali. Anni 2008-2009 [Statistical report: Sexual harassment. 2008-2009]. Retrieved from http://www.istat.it/it/archivio/statistica+report
43.
JoE.BerkowitzL. (1994). A priming effect analysis on media influences: An update. In BryantJ.ZillmanD. (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (pp. 43–60). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
44.
KeytonJ. (1996). Sexual harassment: A multidisciplinary synthesis and critique. In BurlesonB. (Ed.), Communication yearbook 19 (pp. 93–155). Thousand Oaks, CA: Lavoisier.
45.
LanghoutR. D.BergmanM. E.CortinaL. M.FitzgeraldL. F.DrasgowF.WilliamsJ. H. (2005). Sexual harassment severity: Assessing situational and personal determinants and outcomes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 975–1007.
46.
LanisK.CovellK. (1995). Images of women in advertisements: Effects on attitudes related to sexual aggression. Sex Roles, 32, 639–649.
47.
LeskinenE. A.CortinaL. M. (in press). Dimensions of disrespect: Mapping and measuring gender harassment in organizations. Psychology of Women Quarterly. doi:10.1177/0361684313496549
48.
LeskinenE. A.CortinaL. M.KabatD. B. (2011). Gender harassment: Broadening our understanding of sex-based harassment at work. Law and Human Behavior, 35, 25–39.
49.
LevantR. F.HirschL.CelentanoE.CozzaT.HillS.MacEachernM.SchnedekerJ. (1992). The male role: An investigation of norms and stereotypes. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 14, 325–337.
50.
LevantR. F.RichmondK. (2007). A review of research on masculinity ideologies using the Male Role Norms Inventory. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 15, 130–146.
51.
LevantR. F.SmalleyK. B.AupontM.HouseA.RichmondK.NoronhaD. (2007). Validation of the Male Role Norms Inventory-Revised. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 15, 85–100.
52.
LinC. A. (1998). Uses of sex appeals in prime-time television commercials. Sex Roles, 38, 461–475.
53.
LutharH.LutharV. (2007). A theoretical framework explaining cross-cultural sexual harassment: Integrating Hofstede and Schwartz. Journal of Labor Research, 28, 169–188.
54.
MaassA.CadinuM. (2006). Protecting a threatened identity through sexual harassment: A social identity interpretation. In BrownR.CapozzaD. (Eds.), Social identities: Motivational, emotional, cultural influences (pp. 109–131). Hove, England: Psychology Press.
55.
MaassA.CadinuM.GaldiS. (2013). Motivations and consequences of sexual harassment. In RyanM. K.BranscombeN. R. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of gender and psychology (pp. 341–358). London, England: Sage.
56.
MaassA.CadinuM.GuarnieriG.GrasselliA. (2003). Sexual harassment under social identity threat: The computer harassment paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 853–870.
57.
MacKayN. J.CovellK. (1997). The impact of women in advertisements on attitudes toward women. Sex Roles, 36, 573–583.
58.
Media Report to Women. (2001). More TV shows include sexual content; safe sex messages target teens. Media Report to Women, 29, 2–3.
59.
MeravigliaM. G.BeckerH.RosenbluthB.SanchezE.RobertsonT. (2003). The expect respect project: Creating a positive elementary school climate. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18, 1347–1360.
60.
MitchellD.HirschmanR.AngeloneD. J.LillyR. (2004). A laboratory analogue for the study of peer sexual harassment. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 194–203.
61.
MontemurroB. (2003). Not a laughing matter: Sexual harassment as “material” on workplace-based situation comedies. Sex Roles, 47, 433–445.
62.
O’HareE. A.O’DonohueW. (1998). Sexual harassment: Identifying risk factors. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27, 561–580.
63.
O’Leary-KellyA. M.Bowes-SperryL.Arens BatesC.LeanE. R. (2009). Sexual harassment at work: A decade (plus) of progress. Journal of Management, 35, 503–536.
64.
PavlouM.KnowlesA. (2001). Domestic violence: Attributions, recommended punishments and reporting behaviour related to provocation by the victim. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 8, 6–85.
65.
PinaA.GannonT. A.SaundersB. (2009). An overview of the literature on sexual harassment: Perpetrator, theory, and treatment issues. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14, 126–138.
66.
PleckJ. H. (1995). The gender role strain paradigm: An update. In LevantR. F.PollackW. S. (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 11–32). New York, NY: Basic Books.
67.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.
68.
PryorJ. (1987). Sexual harassment proclivities in men. Sex Roles, 17, 269–290.
69.
RudmanL. A.BorgidaE. (1995). The afterglow of construct accessibility: The behavioral consequences of priming men to view women as sexual objects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 493–517.
70.
ShepelaS. T.LevesqueL. L. (1998). Poisoned waters: Sexual harassment and the college climate. Sex Roles38, 589–611.
71.
SieblerF.SabelusS.BohnerG. (2008). A refined computer harassment paradigm: Validation, and test of hypotheses about target characteristics. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 22–35.
72.
SrullT.WyerR. S. (1989). Person memory and judgment. Psychological Review, 96, 58–83.
73.
StrouseJ. S.GoodwinM. P.RoscoeB. (1994). Correlates of attitudes toward sexual harassment among early adolescents. Sex Roles, 31, 559–577.
74.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (1980). Discrimination because of sex under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act as amended: Adoption of interim guidelines—Sexual harassment. Federal Register, 45, 25204–25025.
75.
WadeJ. C.Brittan-PowellC. (2001). Men’s attitude toward race and gender equity: The importance of masculinity ideology, gender-related traits, and reference group identity dependence. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 2, 42–50.
76.
WardL. M. (1995). Talking about sex: Common themes about sexuality in the prime-time television programs children and adolescents view most. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 24, 595–615.
77.
WardL. M. (2002). Does television exposure affect emerging adults attitudes and assumptions about sexual relationships? Correlational and experimental confirmation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 31, 1–15.
78.
WardL. M.HansbroughE.WalkerE. (2005). Contributions of music video exposure to Black adolescents’ gender and sexual schemas. Journal of Adolescent Research, 20, 143–166.
79.
WhiteB. H.KurpiusS. E. R. (2002). Effects of victim sex and sexual orientation on perceptions of rape. SexRoles, 46, 191–200.
80.
WillnessC. R.SteelP.LeeK. (2007). A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment. Personnel Psychology, 60, 127–162.
81.
ZanardoL. (2010). Il corpo delle donne [Women’s bodies]. Milano, Italy: Feltrinelli.
