The present study distinguishes between bothersome versus frightening sexual harassment appraisals and examines their relative strength as mediators of the relationship of sexual harassment intensity and perpetrator status with psychological distress. Using a sample of 6,304 men and women in the U.S. Armed Forces, the results indicated that sexual harassment intensity and perpetrator status were related to psychological distress. For men, bothersome appraisals mediated this relationship for two of the three sexual harassment subtypes examined and for perpetrator status; for women, bothersome appraisal was not a significant mediator. Frightening appraisals mediated the relationship for all sexual harassment subtypes and perpetrator status for both men and women, and accounted for significantly more of the relationship between sexual harassment intensity and distress than did bothersome appraisals for most analyses. However, mediating relationships were significantly stronger for men than for women. We discuss the utility of a multidimensional conceptualization of sexual harassment appraisals.
AntecolH.Cobb-ClarkD. (2001). Men, women, and sexual harassment in the U.S. military. Gender Issues, 19, 3–18.
2.
BastianL. D.LancasterA. R.ReistH. E. (1996). Department of Defense 1995 Sexual Harassment Survey. (Report No. 96–114). Arlington, VA: Defense Manpower Data Center.
3.
BerdahlJ. L. (2007). Harassment based on sex: Protecting social status in the context of gender hierarchy. Academy of Management Review, 32, 641–658.
4.
BerdahlJ. L.MagleyV.WaldoC. R. (1996). The sexual harassment of men? Exploring the concept with theory and data. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 527–547.
5.
BurkeC. (2004). Camp all-American, Hanoi Jane, and the high-and-tight: Gender, folklore, and changing military culture. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
6.
CollinsworthL. L. (2004). Individual and objective influences on psychological outcomes of sexual harassment: A preliminary examination(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign.
7.
CortinaL. M.BerdahlJ. L. (2008). Sexual harassment in organizations: A decade of research in review. In CooperC. L.BarlingJ. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 469–497). 1, Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
8.
CortinaL. M.FitzgeraldL. F.DrasgowF. (2002). Contextualizing Latina experiences of sexual harassment: Preliminary tests of a structural model. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 24, 295–311.
9.
CortinaL. M.MagleyV. J.WilliamsJ. H.LanghoutR. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6, 64–80.
10.
CortinaL. M.SwanS.FitzgeraldL. F.WaldoC. (1998). Sexual harassment and assault: Chilling the climate for women in academia. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 419–441.
11.
de HaasS.TimmermanG.HöingM. (2009). Sexual harassment and health among male and female police officers. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 390–401.
12.
Department of Defense. (2004, April). Task force report on care for victims of sexual assault. Washington, DC: Author.
13.
Department of Defense Inspector General. (2005). Report on sexual harassment and assault at the U.S. Air Force Academy. Washington, DC: Author.
14.
FitzgeraldL. F. (1996). Sexual harassment: The definition and measurement of a construct. In PaludiM. A. (Ed.), Sexual harassment on college campuses: Abusing the Ivory power (pp. 21–44). Albany, NY: University of New York Press.
15.
FitzgeraldL. F.BuchananN. T.CollinsworthL. L.MagleyV. J.RamosA. M. (1999). Junk logic: The abuse defense in sexual harassment litigation. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5, 730–759.
16.
FitzgeraldL. F.GelfandM. J.DrasgowF. (1995). Measuring sexual harassment: Theoretical and psychometric advances. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 17, 425–427.
17.
FitzgeraldL. F.MagleyV. J.DrasgowF.WaldoC. R. (1999). Measuring sexual harassment in the military: The sexual experiences questionnaire (SEQ-DoD). Military Psychology, 11, 243–263.
18.
FitzgeraldL. F.ShullmanS. L. (1993). Sexual harassment: A research analysis and agenda for the 1990s. Journal of Vocational Behavior. Special Issue: Sexual Harassment in the Workplace, 42, 5–27.
19.
FitzgeraldL. F.ShullmanS. L.BaileyN.RichardsM.SweckerJ.GoldY.WeitzmanL. (1988). The incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment in academia and the workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 32, 152–175.
20.
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). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
21.
FolkmanS.LazarusR. S.Dunkel-SchetterC.DeLongisA.GruenR. (1986). The dynamics of a stressful encounter: Cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 992–1003.
22.
FredricksonB. L. (2004). The broaden-and-build theory of emotions. Philosophical Transactions: The Royal Society of London, 359, 1367–1377.
23.
GlombS. M.EspelageD. L. (2005). The influence of restrictive emotionality in men’s emotional appraisal of sexual harassment: A gender role interpretation. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 6, 240–253.
24.
GunthertK. C.CohenL. H.ArmeliS. (1999). The role of neuroticism in daily stress and coping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1087–1100.
25.
HansenC. (2004, March/April). Filing a flight plan: Policy and social change to address sexual violence in the military. Sexual Assault Report, 7, 60–62.
26.
HastingG.SteadM. (2004). Fear appeals in social marketing: Strategic and ethical reasons for concern. Psychology and Marketing, 21, 961–986.
27.
Hesson-McInnisM. S.FitzgeraldL. F. (1997). Sexual harassment: A preliminary test of an integrative model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 877–901.
28.
HillmanE. L. (1999). The “good soldier” defense: Character evidence and military rank at courts-martial. The Yale Law Journal, 108, 879–911.
29.
HitlanR. T.SchneiderK. T.WalshB. M. (2006). Upsetting behavior: Reactions to personal and bystander sexual harassment experiences. Sex Roles, 55, 187–195.
30.
HuertaM.CortinaL. M.PangJ. S.TorgesC. M.MagleyV. J. (2006). Sex and power in the academy: Modeling sexual harassment in the lives of college women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 616–628.
31.
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.
32.
KinneyT. A. (2003). Themes and perceptions of written sexually harassing messages and their link to distress. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 22, 8–28.
33.
LanghoutR. D.BergmanM. E.CortinaL. M.FitzgeraldL. F.DrasgowF.Hunter WilliamsJ. (2006). Sexual harassment severity: Assessing situational and personal determinants and outcomes. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 975–1007.
34.
LazarusR. S.FolkmanS. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York, NY: Springer.
35.
LernerJ. S.KeltnerD. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 146–159.
36.
LipariR. N.LancasterA. R. (2004). Armed Forces 2002 Sexual Harassment Survey. Arlington, VA: Defense Manpower Data Center.
37.
MalamutA. B.OffermannL. F. (2001). Coping with sexual harassment: Personal, environmental, and cognitive determinants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1152–1166.
38.
MazzeoS. E.BergmanM.BuchananN. T.DrasgowF.FitzgeraldL. F. (2001). Situation-specific assessment of sexual harassment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59, 120–131.
39.
MorganP.GruberJ. (2005). In the company of men: Re-discovering the links between sexual harassment and male domination. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.
40.
MunsonL. J.HulinC.DrasgowF. (2000). Longitudinal analysis of dispositional influences and sexual harassment: Effects on job and psychological outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 53, 21–46.
41.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998–2007). Mplus user’s guide. (5th ed.).
Los Angeles, CA: Author.
42.
O’ConnellC. E.KorabikK. (2000). Sexual harassment: The relationship of personal vulnerability, work context, perpetrator status, and type of harassment to outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 299–329.
43.
PeacockE. J.WongP. T. P. (1990). The stress appraisal measure (SAM): A multidimensional approach to cognitive appraisal. Stress Medicine, 6, 227–236.
44.
ReedM. E. (2004). The psychological impact of sexual harassment and previous victimization in a sample of class action litigants(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign.
45.
RotundoM.NguyenD.SackettP. R. (2001). A meta-analytic review of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 914–922.
46.
RussellJ. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1161–1178.
47.
SalvatoreJ.SheltonJ. N. (2007). Cognitive costs of exposure to racial prejudice. Psychological Science, 18, 810–815.
48.
SettlesI. H.BuchananN. T.ColarB. K. (2011). The impact of race and rank on the sexual harassment of Black and White men in the military. Psychology of Men and Masculinity. Manuscript submitted for publication,
49.
StoeverC. J.SchmalingK. B.GutierrezC. A.BlumeA. W.FonsecaC. (2007). Predicting pay grade in the U.S. military by gender and ethnic minority status. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1667–1680.
50.
TangriS.HayesS. M. (1997). Theories of sexual harassment. In O’DonohueW. (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment. . Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
WaldoC. R.BerdahlJ. L.FitzgeraldL. F. (1998). Are men sexually harassed? If so, by whom?. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 59–79.
53.
WareJ. E.SherbourneC. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483.
54.
WillisE. J.MohamedS. G.LipariR. N. (2002). 2002 Status of the armed forces surveys—Workplace and gender relations: Administration, datasets, and codebook. (Report No. 2002-010). Arlington, VA: Defense Manpower Data Center.
55.
WillnessC. R.SteelP.LeeK. (2007). A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment. Personnel Psychology, 60, 127–247.
56.
WoodsK. C.BuchananN. T.SettlesI. H. (2009). Sexual harassment across the color line: Experiences and outcomes of cross- vs. intra-racial sexual harassment among Black women. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15, 67–76.
57.
WrightC. V.FitzgeraldL. F. (2007). Angry and afraid: Women’s appraisal of sexual harassment during litigation. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 73–84.
58.
WrightC. V.FitzgeraldL. F. (2009). Correlates of joining a sexual harassment class action. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 265–282.
59.
YsseldykR.MathesonK.AnsimanH. (2009). Forgiveness and the appraisal-coping process in response to relationship conflicts: Implications for depressive symptoms. Stress—The International Journal on the Biology of Stress, 12, 152–166.
