Factors Influencing Women’s Perceptions

of a Sexually Hostile Workplace

Nancy J. Amick
Richard C. Sorenson

SUMMARY. Factors influencing women’s perceptions of a sexually

hostile work environment including job type, gender mix of work con-
tacts, level of resourcefulness, and perception of male work contacts’ at-
titudes toward women were investigated to determine their relationship
with perceptions of a sexually hostile work environment. One hundred
seventy-seven working women participated in this investigation. Re-
sults suggest that a woman’s job type and the gender mix of those with
whom she works do not significantly influence her perception of a sexu-
ally hostile work environment. Rather, the more that women perceive
their male work contacts as having traditional attitudes toward women
and the less personally resourceful the women are, the more likely they
are to perceive a sexually hostile work environment. [Article copies avail-
able for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH.
E-mail address: <docdelivery@haworthpress.com> Website: <http://www.
HaworthPress.com> © 2004 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

Address correspondence to: Nancy J. Amick, PhD, P.O. Box 11628, Tempe, AZ
85284.
[Haworth co-indexing entry note]: “Factors Influencing Women’s Perceptions of a Sexually Hostile
Workplace.” Amick, Nancy J., and Richard C. Sorenson. Co-published simultaneously in Journal of Emo-
tional Abuse (The Haworth Maltreatment & Trauma Press, an imprint of The Haworth Press, Inc.) Vol. 4, No.
3/4, 2004, pp. 49-69; and: Aggression in Organizations: Violence, Abuse, and Harassment at Work and in
Schools (ed: Robert Geffner et al.) The Haworth Maltreatment & Trauma Press, an imprint of The Haworth
Press, Inc., 2004, pp. 49-69. Single or multiple copies of this article are available for a fee from The Haworth
Document Delivery Service [1-800-HAWORTH, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail address: docdelivery@
haworthpress.com].

http://www.haworthpress.com/web/JEA
© 2004 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
Digital Object Identifier: 10.1300/J135v04n03_04 49
50 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

KEYWORDS. Resourcefulness, sexual harassment, attitudes, hostile

workplace

Sexual harassment, unwarranted and unwelcome sexual attention, is a seri-

ous social problem. Estimates suggest that approximately one-half of all
women will be sexually harassed during the course of their academic or work-
ing lives, making sexual harassment more extensive than any other type of
sexual victimization (Cochran, Frazier, & Olson, 1997; Fitzgerald, 1993; Fitz-
gerald & Shullman, 1993). Sexual harassment is ubiquitous–it occurs to
women and men of all ages, occupations, and backgrounds. While research in-
dicates that it is not gender exclusive, the majority of victims are women ha-
rassed by men (United States Merit Systems Protection Board, 1988). In 2003,
85% of the 13,566 sexual harassment charges filed with the federal Equal Em-
ployment Opportunity Commission or corresponding state agencies were filed
by women (EEOC, 2004b). When compared to men, women are far more
likely to quit or lose their job as a direct result of sexual harassment (Gutek,
1985). Hence, sexual harassment poses a considerable barrier to the career ad-
vancement and opportunities of working women.
Sexual harassment has negative consequences for both individuals and or-
ganizations. Victims experience deleterious effects on their health, psycholog-
ical well being, and job satisfaction, while organizations suffer through
financial loss, which is incurred via absenteeism, job turnover, and decreased
work productivity (Jensen & Gutek, 1982). A large scale survey of over 8,500
Federally employed workers indicated that within a two-year period, sexual
harassment cost the Federal Government approximately 267 million dollars
(USMSPB, 1988).
Sexual harassment became illegal in 1980 when the United States Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) deemed it a violation of Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination based on gender
(Fitzgerald, 1993; Gutek, 1993). Therefore, it was not until 1980 that a legal
definition of sexual harassment was implemented. According to the EEOC,
the current definition reads:

Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other ver-
bal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment
when this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual’s em-
ployment, unreasonably interferes with an individual’s work perfor-
mance or creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environ-
ment. (EEOC, 2004a)
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 51

The definition of sexual harassment underscores its subjectivity since be-

haviors deemed “unwelcome” and conduct creating an “intimidating, hostile,
or offensive working environment” are dependent on the perception of the vic-
tim. As Hamada (1995, p. 163) notes, “Laws on sexual harassment focus pri-
marily on the victim’s perceptions rather than on the offender’s intention.
What is important is not the intent of the message being sent by the offender,
but what emotions and reactions it stirs in the mind of the victim.” Given the
current definition of sexual harassment, an examination of the factors that in-
fluence women’s perceptions of a sexually hostile work environment is imper-
ative.

BACKGROUND

Perceptions of a sexually hostile work environment. A focused research ap-

proach on the perceptions of sexual harassment is in order since it is the percep-
tions of sexual harassment that may relate more directly to negative outcomes
than the actual harassing behaviors themselves (Terpstra & Baker, 1986b). While
researchers have found that the frequency of sexual harassment is related to con-
sequences such as depression, anxiety, turnover, psychosomatic health com-
plaints, and dissatisfaction with coworkers and supervisors for female victims
(Barling, Dekker, Loughlin, Kelloway, Fullagar, & Johnson, 1996), Sorenson,
Mangione-Lambie, and Luzio (1998) found that sexual harassment is also devas-
tating to those who are bystanders. Specifically, in their study, both “bystanders”
and “victims” reported an increase in negative affect, motivation loss, and asser-
tive coping strategies as the severity of sexual harassment increased. Likewise,
Hulin, Fitzgerald, and Drasgow (1996) suggested that employees who perceive
no organizational consequences for sexual harassment might experience a stress-
ful work environment regardless of whether or not they have been sexually ha-
rassed directly. They reported, “waiting for the sexual harassment shoe to drop,
watching their colleagues be harassed with few or no sanctions for harassers, and
wondering when or if it will happen to them are only a few of the experiences that
may be nearly as stressful as being a direct target” (Hulin et al., 1996, p. 132).
Given the potential impact of sexual harassment not only on those who ex-
perience it directly, but also on those who are within its reach, this study exam-
ined variables that may influence individual perceptions of a sexually hostile
work environment regardless of whether or not sexual harassment has yet been
experienced directly. Since organizations seem to dictate which behaviors are
appropriate or inappropriate based on the negative or positive consequences
provided for any given action, employees in organizations that do not have
negative consequences for harassing behaviors will likely regard the organiza-
52 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

tion as tolerant of the dominance of certain groups over others. Therefore, to

assess the organizational climate for any given behavior, one can examine em-
ployees’ perceptions of whether or not the behavior results in organizational
reinforcements (Hulin et al., 1996; Schneider & Reichers, 1983; Zohar, 1980).
Specifically, in this study, women’s perceptions of a sexually hostile work en-
vironment were investigated using a scale developed by Hulin et al. (1996)
which examines individual perceptions of organizational tolerance for sexual
harassment.
Theory. Although sexual harassment research has been underway for over two
decades, there is not a predominant theory that has emerged in the literature. The
difficulty with theoretical advancements may be directly related to the subjective
nature of sexual harassment as evidenced by differing definitions, interpretations
and reactions not only between men and women, but also among women them-
selves. Some theories that have emerged in the literature include the Sex Role
Spillover Theory (Gutek, 1985; Gutek & Cohen, 1987; Gutek & Morasch, 1982;
Konrad & Gutek, 1986), Demographic Composition Theories (Konrad, Win-
ter, & Gutek, 1992), Person by Situation Interaction (Pryor, LaVite, & Stoller,
1993), the Organizational Model (Fitzgerald, Drasgow, Hulin, Gelfand, &
Magley, 1997), the Natural/Biological Model and the Socio-Cultural Model
(Tangri, Burt, & Johnson, 1982), and the Theory of Tokenism (Kanter, 1977a,
1977b, 1980).
Few theoretical models have been empirically tested, and few have consid-
ered a multifactor analysis encompassing the impact of several variables si-
multaneously on the perceptions of sexual harassment. In fact, with no clearly
identified theory of sexual harassment, many studies (including the current
study) are in the hypothesis-testing phase as a step towards the development of
a sound theoretical model. Kanter’s Theory of Tokenism suggests that the
gender ratio of the work group can influence both the attitudes and behaviors
of workers and impact how they interact with one another. In particular,
Kanter refers to women who are a numerical minority in a work group of men
as “tokens.” Her theory states that token females in a work group of males en-
counter three particular difficulties. First, due to their obvious differences, to-
ken women are more visible in an organization. Consequently, because gender
is their most salient characteristic, they tend to be perceived as members of the
category “women” rather than as individuals with unique characteristics and
contributions. Second, men may experience token women as a threat to their
work environment. As a result, they may behave in ways that exaggerate their
maleness in order to keep a clear boundary between them and those who are
different. For instance, they may enunciate displays of potency and aggression
by highlighting what they as men can do in contrast to women. They may also
tell sexual jokes or discuss sexual adventures in order to test women to see
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 53

how they respond to the male environment. Finally, Kanter states that in occu-
pations where men are not used to working with women, men tend to draw on
stereotypes and generalizations about women when interacting with the token
few in their work group. According to Kanter, drawing upon familiar ways of
relating to women decreases the uncertainty and ambiguity associated with
being in the presence of one who is different. Consequently, men may induct
women into stereotypical roles such as mother or sex object to preserve a fa-
miliar form of interaction (Kanter, 1977a, 1977b). When applied to sexual ha-
rassment, Kanter’s theory would predict that environmental factors such as
job type and gender mix of work contacts contribute to sex role stereotyping
and sexual harassment.
Models such as those proposed by Terpstra and Baker (1986a), Fitzgerald
and Shullman (1993), and Bill (1994) suggest the importance of an integrative
model of sexual harassment, which includes organizational, individual, and
environmental factors. Using Kanter’s Theory of Tokenism as a foundation,
the current study examined the influence of environmental, attitudinal, and in-
dividual factors on women’s perceptions of a sexually hostile work environ-
ment.

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS

A comprehensive study of sexual harassment includes an examination of

the environment within which it occurs–namely the job type (non-tradition-
ally female, traditionally female, and integrated) and the gender mix of work
contacts. Previous research indicates that job type can influence a woman’s
experience with sexual harassment. For instance, women employed in non-
traditionally female occupations report a higher instance of sexual harassment
than women in other job types (Gutek, 1985). Additionally, research on the
gender mix of work contacts suggests that a skewed gender mix in favor of
men also tends to increase a woman’s probability of being sexually harassed
(Baker, 1989; USMSPB, 1988). When applied to sexual harassment, the The-
ory of Tokenism suggests that non-traditionally employed women who work
predominantly with men are more likely to be the recipients of sexual harass-
ment as a result of their token status (Crocker & McGraw, 1984; Kanter,
1977a; Rosenberg, Perlstadt, & Phillips, 1993).
A study conducted by Baker (1989) highlights the importance of examin-
ing the gender mix of work contacts for traditionally employed women as
well. Among traditionally employed women, Baker found that women in
pink collar jobs (e.g., clerical) experienced greater levels of sexual harass-
ment than women in blue-collar jobs (e.g., factory work). Therefore, there
54 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

may be different degrees of being a token based upon the gender mix of
one’s work contacts. In other words, women in clerical positions may work
predominantly with men, whereas women in factory positions may work
predominantly with other women. The current study examined job type as
well as the gender mix of work contacts as predictors of women’s percep-
tions of a sexually hostile work environment.

ATTITUDINAL FACTORS

Few would dispute that traditionally a woman’s role has been that of
homemaker and a man’s role that of breadwinner. With the entrance of
many women into the workforce and into jobs that traditionally have been
depicted as male, the nature of the interaction between men and women is
changing. Due to these changes, there is considerable ambiguity as to what
constitutes appropriate social sexual behavior at work (Gutek, 1985;
Kanter, 1977a, 1980). As a result, gender roles, which are learned at a much
earlier age than work roles, typically influence to some extent how men and
women interact with one another (Gutek & Morasch, 1982; Kanter, 1977a,
1980; Konrad & Gutek, 1986). In occupations that have been traditionally
dominated by men, men may bring gender-based expectations into the
workplace, thereby resorting to familiar ways of relating to women
(Kanter, 1977a, 1980). Therefore, occupations considered atypical for
women are likely to be occupations where women are more apt to be the re-
cipients of gender stereotyping, thereby creating an environment prime for
sexual harassment to occur (Borgida, Rudman, & Manteufel, 1995; Kanter,
1977a, 1977b).
As our social conditions and sex role attitudes continue to be modified, up-
dated research is needed on how such factors affect women at work (Stafford,
1984). The present study examined women’s perceptions of their male work
contacts’ attitudes toward women. In particular, following the lines of
Kanter’s theory, it was expected that women employed in non-traditionally fe-
male occupations, and/or women who had predominantly male work contacts,
were more likely to work in environments that were not only prime for sex role
stereotyping but also for sexual harassment. Consequently, it was expected
that women working in these environments would be more likely to perceive
their male work contacts as having traditional (i.e., stereotypical) attitudes to-
ward women, and therefore they would be more likely to perceive a sexually
hostile work environment.
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 55

INDIVIDUAL FACTORS

Finally, the question arises, why do some women perceive certain behav-
iors as sexually harassing when others do not? Several studies have examined
the role of individual disposition. For instance, sex role orientation (Powell,
1986), gender role socialization (Barr, 1993), erotophobia, sexual experience,
attitudes towards women, defensive style, need for social approval, and rape
myth acceptance (Barak, Fisher, & Houston, 1992), as well as introversion,
self esteem, and religiosity (Terpstra & Baker, 1986b) appear to affect percep-
tions of sexual harassment. Although Kanter’s Theory of Tokenism does not
take into account any individual factors which may affect a woman’s percep-
tion of sexual harassment, one would expect that some women have a personal
disposition that contributes to their tendency to be resourceful in managing
sexual overtures at work, thereby reducing their potential for perceiving sex-
ual hostility in their working environment. The current study assessed one’s
ability to deal with noxious stimuli–also known as one’s level of learned re-
sourcefulness.
Learned resourcefulness refers to the skills and behaviors that aid a person
in regulating his or her internal responses to stressful situations so the internal
responses do not hinder his or her ability to respond effectively (Rosenbaum,
1990). According to Rosenbaum, learned resourcefulness is an enduring at-
tribute that is learned over time and based on one’s history and experience. He
also states that high levels of resourcefulness are not expected to change one’s
perception of a stressful situation but are expected to influence how well one is
able to manage his/her cognitions and affect in order to carry out the desired
behavior. The cognitive/behavioral skills promoting resourcefulness include:
(a) using cognitive self statements, (b) having a sense of self-efficacy, (c) de-
laying gratification, and (d) using problem solving techniques (Rosenbaum,
1980a). The current study examined learned resourcefulness as a moderator of
the relationship between the perception of male contacts’ attitudes toward
women and perception of a sexually hostile work environment.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to examine the factors influencing women’s
perceptions of a sexually hostile work environment while partially utilizing
the Theory of Tokenism as proposed by Kanter (1977a, 1977b, 1980) and
elaborated by Borgida et al. (1995). Past research examined various aspects
of Tokenism (Baker, 1989; Crocker & McGraw, 1984; Rosenberg et al.,
1993); however, most research has not focused on the integrated aspects of
56 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

the theory. Unlike previous studies, this study not only assessed the job
type and gender mix of work contacts, but also the stereotypical attitudes
(or perceptions of them) which Kanter reports are likely to flourish in work
environments where women are typically underrepresented. In addition,
although Kanter’s theory does not take into account individual factors
which may influence how a woman experiences her work environment, this
study attempted to elaborate on Kanter’s theory by assessing the individual
disposition of learned resourcefulness. The following hypotheses were
formed:

H-1: Women’s job type and work contacts and their interaction will
predict the degree to which women will perceive their male work con-
tacts as having traditional (i.e., stereotypical) attitudes toward
women.

H-2: Women in more non-traditional occupations for females (job

type) will perceive a sexually hostile work environment to a greater
degree than women in more traditionally female occupations.

H-3: Women with more predominantly male work contacts (gender

mix) will perceive a sexually hostile work environment to a greater
degree than women with predominantly female work contacts.

H-4: The dispositional factor of learned resourcefulness will moder-

ate the relationship between perception of male work contacts’ atti-
tudes toward women and perception of a sexually hostile work
environment such that individuals who perceive male work contacts
as traditional in their attitudes toward women will perceive their work
environment as less sexually hostile if they have a high versus low
level of learned resourcefulness.

H-5: The relationship of job type and gender mix of work contacts
with perception of a sexually hostile work environment will be medi-
ated by perception of male work contacts’ attitudes toward women.

METHODS

Participants

Participants in this study were 177 female volunteers between the ages
of 19 and 62 who were employed at least 30 hours per week in various job po-
sitions and work environments.
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 57

Procedures

The women involved in this study were for the most part recruited from a
weekend-long community fair and business exposition where the researchers
rented a booth for the purpose of data collection. After the fair, data were ob-
tained from an additional nine women employed in non-traditional occupa-
tions. Participants were given an envelope containing a form to indicate their
consent to participate and the following questionnaires in a randomly deter-
mined order: (a) a demographic questionnaire, (b) the Attitudes Toward
Women Scale, (c) the Self Control Scale, and (d) the Organizational Tolerance
for Sexual Harassment Scale. For all who participated in the study, two free
movie tickets were offered.

Measurements

Demographic questionnaire. Demographic information was gathered by way

of a self-report questionnaire. Participants were also asked if they had ever been
sexually harassed and if they had ever filed a sexual harassment complaint.
Job type. Job type was assessed by comparing a participant’s self reported job
title with current published data provided by the United States Bureau of Labor
Statistics (1994), which listed the percent of females typically represented in that
occupation. Job type then was used as a continuous variable in the analyses–a
high score indicating a traditional job for women.
Gender mix of work contacts. The gender mix of work contacts was addressed
in the demographic questionnaire. Participants were asked the following two
questions: (a) “Of all the people you interact with at work, are they predominantly
men or women? Please include peers, supervisors, subordinates, employees, pa-
tients, customers, vendors . . .” and (b) “At your current place of employment,
what percent of your time is spent interacting with men, and what percent of your
time is spent interacting with women? In your calculation, please include peers,
supervisors, subordinates, employees, patients, customers, vendors . . .” The total
percent of time interacting with males at work was used as a continuous variable
to assess gender mix of work contacts.
Attitudes Toward Women Scale-Short Form (AWS-Short Form). The AWS-
short form was used as a measure of how women perceive the men in their work
environment relative to liberal versus traditional attitudes toward women. The
AWS-Short Form, developed by Spence, Helmreich, and Strapp (1973) was de-
signed to assess attitudes toward women’s rights and roles in contemporary soci-
ety. The scale consists of 25 statements taken from the full length AWS to which
participants respond on a four point scale ranging from “agree strongly” to “dis-
agree strongly.” Additionally, 12 items are reverse coded and the items are
58 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

summed to yield a total score that falls between 25 and 100 (25 = extremely tradi-
tional and 100 = extremely liberal).
Items selected for inclusion in the AWS-Short Form were normed on a pop-
ulation of 241 female and male college students who were administered the
full length AWS. Based on their scores, students were divided into quartiles
and a separate item analysis was completed for each sex. The 25 items chosen
for inclusion in the AWS-short form discriminated best among the quartiles
for each sex and maintained the highest item-total correlations (Spence et al.,
1973).
The internal consistency reliability for the AWS-Short Form was estimated
by Stanley, Boots and Johnson (1975). Coefficient alpha was .81 for 99 girls
ages 12 to 16; .82 for 72 women; and .89 for 62 female and 88 male college
students.
Spence et al. (1973) assessed validity of the AWS-Short Form through corre-
lations with the full length AWS. Correlations were .97 for 241 college women,
.97 for 286 college men, .96 for 232 fathers of college students, and .97 for 292
mothers of college students.
Significant correlations were reported between scores on the AWS-Short
Form and on the Personal Attributes Questionnaire, a measure of masculinity-
femininity (Spence, Helmreich, & Strapp, 1975). Minnegerode (1976) also
found a significant correlation between the AWS-Short Form and the BEM
Sex Role Inventory.
In order to use this scale to assess how women perceive the men in their
work environment relative to liberal versus traditional attitudes toward
women, women were instructed to answer the questions the way they thought
most men they interacted with at work would answer them. A high score indi-
cates the strong perception that male coworkers have liberal, non-traditional
attitudes toward women.
Self Control Scale (SCS). The SCS is a self-report instrument that was used to
assess participants on the dispositional variable known as learned resourcefulness.
The SCS, developed by Rosenbaum (1980b), was designed to measure one’s abil-
ity and tendency to employ self-control techniques. It consists of 36 statements to
which participants respond on a six-point scale ranging from “very characteristic
of me, extremely descriptive” to “very uncharacteristic of me, extremely non-de-
scriptive.”
According to Rosenbaum and Ben-Ari (1985), the 36 statements that make
up the SCS were chosen from a pool of 60 statements based on content validity
as judged by two clinical psychologists. Following the item selection, the SCS
was administered to six groups of subjects to establish reliability and norma-
tive data (Rosenbaum, 1980b). Test-retest reliability indicated that the SCS
had high stability over a four-week period (r = .86, p < .01). The internal consis-
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 59

tency reliability for the SCS ranged from .78 to .84 for the various norming
groups. Kiefer, Rabin, and Sorenson (2002) studied a sample of 313 adult volun-
teers ranging in age from 18 to 75 and found the internal consistency reliability to
be .73 and the stability over a six-week interval to also be .73. They further found
that scores of males and females did not differ significantly, that the SCS scores
did not correlate significantly with age nor with social desirability response bias,
and that the SCS was significantly correlated with measures of healthy coping
strategies (r = .57, p < .01) and emotional intelligence (r = .40, p < .01); thus, pro-
viding evidence for the construct validity of the measure of resourcefulness. A
high score indicates more resourcefulness.
Organizational Tolerance for Sexual Harassment Scale (OTSH). The Organi-
zational Tolerance for Sexual Harassment Scale (OTSH) was used as a measure
of women’s perception of a sexually hostile work environment. The OTSH scale,
developed by Hulin et al. (1996) was designed to assess individual perceptions of
organizational tolerance for sexual harassment.
The scale consists of six scenarios that combine two types of harassers (su-
pervisor and co-worker) and three types of harassing behaviors (sexual coer-
cion, unwanted sexual attention, and gender harassment). Each scenario is
followed by three questions designed to assess: (a) perceptions of risk to a
woman who makes a formal complaint (1 = extremely risky and 5 = no risk);
(b) likelihood that she would be taken seriously (1 = no chance she would be
taken seriously and 5 = very good chance she would be taken seriously); and
(c) likelihood that something might be done to the harasser (1 = nothing and 5 =
very serious consequences to the harasser). Each item is weighted equally and
the item scores are added to yield a total score that falls between 18 and 90,
with higher scores indicating perception that an organization does not tolerate
sexual harassment, and thus a low value on sexually hostile workplace.
Internal consistency reliability for the OTSH scale was calculated by Hulin
et al. (1996) on a sample of 418 female employees. Coefficient alphas for each
of the three responses (perceived risk, taken seriously, and likelihood of sanc-
tions) were .94, .94, and .93, respectively. A coefficient alpha of .96 was ob-
tained for the overall OTSH. When compared to male employees, female
employees perceived the organization as more tolerant of sexual harassment.
Additionally, male and female employees perceived the organization to be
less tolerant of sexual harassment by employees than by supervisors. These
findings were in the direction expected, thereby providing evidence for the
construct validity of the OTSH.
The OTSH was administered to 697 males and 459 females who were em-
ployed in a Public Utility Company who reported actual experiences with sex-
ual harassment (as assessed by the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire). After
correction for unreliability, correlations with the sexual harassment criteria
60 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

were .51, .43, and .30 for the gender harassment, unwanted sexual attention,
and quid pro quo subscales, respectively.
Hulin et al. (1996) further assessed construct related validity by correlating
the OTSH scale with other scales. The OTSH positively correlated with mea-
sures of job life satisfaction, mental health, physical health conditions, and
health satisfaction, and negatively with withdrawal and posttraumatic stress
disorder.

RESULTS

Table 1 shows the intercorrelations among all of the primary research vari-
ables and the reliabilities of the scales. The reliabilities were all equal to or
greater than .80 and very similar to those found for these variables in previous
studies. The correlation between Job Type and Gender Mix was negative as
expected indicating that as the job became more feminine the contacts became
predominately female. The most interesting correlations demonstrated the re-
lationship of perceived attitude of women’s male work contacts and women’s
resiliency with perceptions of a sexually hostile work environment. Two sepa-
rate hierarchical regression analyses were conducted to assess the five hypoth-
eses. In the first analysis, Perception of Attitudes Toward Women served as
the outcome. In Step 1, Job Type and Gender Mix served as the predictors, and
in Step Two, the interaction of Job Type and Gender Mix was entered. The re-

TABLE 1. Pearson Correlations Among Predictor and Outcome Variable

Job Type Gender Mix OTSH AWS SCS Reliability

Job Type ⫺ ⫺.31*a ⫺.07 ⫺.07 ⫺.03 --
Gender Mix ⫺ ⫺.06 ⫺.03 .13 --
OTSH ⫺ .42*b .31*c .96
AWS ⫺ .13 .92
SCS ⫺ .80

Note: OTSH = Organizational Tolerance for Sexual Harassment; AWS = Perception of Attitudes Toward
Women; SCS = Self Control Scale.
a. As a job becomes more traditionally female, the percent of male work contacts decreases. The 90% con-
fidence interval for the correlation is 2.19, 2.42.
b. The more that women perceive their male work contacts as liberal and non-traditional in their attitudes to-
ward women, the less likely they are to perceive a sexually hostile work environment. The 90% confidence
interval for the correlation is .31, .52.
c. Women higher in resourcefulness are less likely to perceive a sexually hostile work environment. The
90% confidence interval for the correlation is .19, .42.
*p ⱕ .001.
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 61

sulting regression weight of each predictor was used to evaluate the hypothe-
sized relationship.
All three of these variables explained only a non-significant 1% of the vari-
ance in Perception of Attitudes Toward Women. Therefore, neither Job Type,
Gender Mix, nor their interaction significantly predicted Perception of Atti-
tudes Toward Women, and no support was found for Hypothesis 1.
In the second analysis, Perception of a Sexually Hostile Workplace served
as the outcome. In Step 1, Job Type and Gender Mix were entered. In Step 2,
Perception of Attitudes Toward Women was entered. In Step 3, Learned Re-
sourcefulness was entered, and in Step Four, the interaction of Learned Re-
sourcefulness and Perception of Attitudes Toward Women was entered. The
resulting beta weight for each predictor was used to evaluate the hypotheses.
In the second analysis, Job Type and Gender Mix explained only a non-signif-
icant 1% of the variance in Perception of a Sexually Hostile Workplace.
Therefore, neither Job Type nor Gender Mix significantly predicted Percep-
tion of a Sexually Hostile Workplace. However, Perception of Attitudes To-
ward Women significantly predicted 17% of the variance in Perception of a
Sexually Hostile Workplace scores beyond that which was accounted for by
Job Type and Gender Mix. Learned Resourcefulness significantly predicted
9% of the variance in Perception of a Sexually Hostile Workplace. No interac-
tion was found between Perceptions of Attitudes Toward Women and Learned
Resourcefulness in predicting Perception of a Sexually Hostile Workplace.
Therefore, although Hypotheses 2, 3, and 4 were not supported, the results do
suggest that Perception of Attitudes Toward Women and Learned Resource-
fulness had a direct influence on Perception of a Sexually Hostile Workplace
as shown in the model in Figure 1. Since Job Type and Gender Mix were not
related to the proposed mediator or to the dependent variable, we found no
support for the mediation hypothesis, Hypothesis 5.

CONCLUSION

In this study, the traditionality of job type and the gender mix of work con-
tacts did not significantly influence women’s perceptions of their male work
contacts’ attitudes toward women or their perception of a sexually hostile
work environment. However, women’s perceptions of their male work con-
tacts’ attitude toward women and their own level of learned resourcefulness
significantly influenced their perceptions of a sexually hostile work environ-
ment. In particular, the more that women perceive their male work contacts as
traditional in their attitudes toward women, the more likely the women are to
perceive a sexually hostile work environment. Additionally, the higher women
62 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

FIGURE 1. Resulting Model with Path Coefficients

Perception of Male
Work Contacts’
Attitudes
Perception of a
Sexually Hostile
Work Environment
Learned
Resourcefulness

(Path coefficients are beta weights. Although learned resourcefulness did not moderate the rela-
tionship between perception of male work contacts’ attitudes and perception of a sexually hostile
work environment, there was a direct effect between learned resourcefulness and perception of a
sexually hostile work environment.)

are in resourcefulness, the less likely they are to perceive a sexually hostile work
environment.

DISCUSSION

Summary and Interpretation of the Findings

The purpose of this study was to examine the factors influencing women’s
perceptions of a sexually hostile work environment while partially utilizing
the theory of Tokenism as proposed by Kanter (1977a, 1977b, 1980) and elab-
orated by Borgida et al. (1995). The results of this study provide both confirm-
ing and disconfirming support for the theoretical model suggested by Kanter’s
theory.
Based on Kanter’s theory, it was hypothesized that women employed in
non-traditional occupations for females, and women working predominantly
with men, would be more likely than other women in the study to perceive a
sexually hostile work environment due to their token status. These hypotheses
were not supported. There are several possible reasons why this study failed to
support these hypotheses. These findings may be due to the population of
women studied. In the current sample, non-traditionally employed women
were underrepresented, comprising only 12% of women studied. However,
the failure to find support for the gender mix hypothesis is consistent with
McKinney’s (1990) finding that prevalence of sexual harassment failed to dif-
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 63

fer significantly for female respondents in male-dominated and female-domi-

nated academic departments.
Based on Kanter’s theory, it was hypothesized that women employed in
non-traditionally female occupations, and women working predominantly
with men, would be more likely to perceive their male work contacts as having
traditional attitudes toward women. However, these hypotheses were not sup-
ported. Thus, if we assume women’s perceptions are accurate, these findings
failed to support Kanter’s assumption that stereotypical attitudes are likely to
flourish in occupations where women are typically under represented. Where-
as this assumption may once have been correct, the results of this study sug-
gest that it is no longer so.
Although the hypotheses regarding job type and gender mix were not sup-
ported, there was a significant direct effect between women’s perception of
their male work contacts as having traditional (i.e., stereotypical) attitudes to-
ward women, and women’s perceptions of their work environment as sexually
hostile. These findings partially support the assumptions of Kanter’s theory,
which suggest that gender stereotyping may influence a sexually hostile work
environment; although, her contention that these attitudes develop in environ-
ments where women are typically under represented was not supported. These
findings are related, however, to those of Weiner, Hurt, Russell, Mannen, and
Gasper (1997) who “. . . found that ambivalent sexist stereotypes play a deci-
sive role in judgments of what constitutes hostile work environment harass-
ment” (p. 90).
Some might argue that the direct effect between perception of attitudes and
perception of a sexually hostile work environment may be bi-directional, such
that a woman’s experience of her work environment may influence the way
she thinks about the men she works with. Although this correlational study
cannot determine the actual direction of this effect, previous research suggests
that it is likely that perception of attitudes predicts perception of a sexually
hostile work environment versus the converse (Borgida et al., 1995; Kanter,
1977a, 1977b). Additionally, Mazer and Percival (1989) found that women
who had experienced more sexual harassment were no different in their atti-
tudes toward men and women from women who had less experience with sex-
ual harassment, thereby suggesting women can separate their ideology from
their experience. Further, some may argue that the relationships found in this
research could have resulted from same source or method variance since the
data were collected at the same time and with the same questionnaire. How-
ever, Spector (2001, p. 16) in commenting on the possibility of same source or
mono-method variance states “. . . evidence that inflation generally occurs has
not been found” and “. . . general mono-method bias normally does not occur.”
64 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

We thought that women who perceived their male work contacts as tradi-
tional in their attitudes toward women would be less likely to perceive their
work environment as sexually hostile if they had a high versus a low level of
resourcefulness. It was expected that women high in resourcefulness would be
more adept at carrying out the behaviors necessary to successfully manage
sexual overtures at work. Although resourcefulness did not act as a moderator
in this process, there was a direct effect between level of resourcefulness and
perception of a sexually hostile work environment. In particular, as expected,
women high in resourcefulness were less likely to perceive a sexually hostile
work environment than women lower in resourcefulness.
Based on the assumptions underlying the Self Control Scale (i.e., learned
resourcefulness), resourceful women may be more adept at managing their
emotional reactions to sexual hostility, thereby permitting them to carry out
the desired behaviors necessary for managing the situation. The more re-
sourceful women may tend to make a more direct response (e.g., confronting
or reporting the harasser), which is often the less frequent action taken, but the
one leading to the greater satisfaction with the outcome (Cochran et al., 1997).
This relationship may be analogous to the findings that high self-esteem is as-
sociated with low frequency of psychological abuse in dating relationships
(Pipes & LeBov-Keeler, 1997), and with not having been raped as opposed to
being date raped (Shapiro & Shwarz, 1997), and the ability to resist pressured
sex (Zweig, Barber, & Eccles, 1997).

Implications for the Workplace

The findings from the current study have several important organizational
implications. If what influences women’s perceptions of a sexually hostile work
environment is their perception that male co-workers hold stereotypical atti-
tudes towards women, then interventions that focus on these attitudes may be
effective in changing the degree to which women perceive their work environ-
ment as sexually hostile. For instance, organizations may benefit from training
supervisors to identify sexist behaviors and to take action against such behav-
iors before they become a problem in the workplace. Organizations may also
benefit from educating employees about the traditional attitudes that may be
unintentionally offensive to women. Information could be demonstrated via a
video presentation depicting different exchanges between men and women in
order to clarify how certain attitudes and beliefs may appear to others.
Additionally, Hulin et al. (1996) noted that attitudes and behaviors of em-
ployees are likely reflective of what the organization tolerates or promotes.
In other words, employees know what is and is not tolerated by the rewards
or contingencies the organization administers for any given behavior. There-
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 65

fore, given that women in this study who perceived their male work contacts
as having stereotypical attitudes towards women perceived their work envi-
ronment to be more sexually hostile, management may wish to examine their
stance toward women employees and to regard themselves as examples of
how to treat women at work. As Fiske and Glick (1995) note, management
may wish to review their practices and procedures to see if they may be con-
tributing to the continuance of stereotypical attitudes toward women. For ex-
ample, do they give women traditional titles such as secretary? Do they ask
women to perform stereotypical jobs such as making the coffee or ordering
lunch? Do they provide information about the credentials of newly hired
women? In other words, do they provide information to refute potential ste-
reotypes?
Furthermore, an organization may wish to take action aimed at integrating
men and women in a manner that reduces the barriers between them. For in-
stance, Fiske and Glick (1995) suggest structuring the work environment
such that men and women depend on each other for work-related outcomes.
Relying on the expertise of others may help decrease stereotypes by provid-
ing ample evidence of what individuals can contribute uniquely to the orga-
nization.
The findings of the current investigation, which suggest resourceful
women are less likely to perceive a sexually hostile work environment, have
important implications. For instance, resourceful women may be better able
to cope with instances that might otherwise contribute to a sexually hostile
work environment, or they may directly or indirectly prevent such instances
from occurring to them. Still, one can speculate that if resourceful women
are better able to manage sexual hostility at work, then organizational train-
ing programs aimed at providing women with strategies for managing sexual
harassment, thereby increasing their resourcefulness, may prove useful.

Limitations of the Study

Although the current study employed reliable and valid methodology and
measures, there are some limitations that affect the interpretations of these
findings. First, given that women are reticent to report sexual harassment for
fear of job related consequences (Gutek, 1985; USMSPB, 1988), one might
expect women to be less willing to accurately report their work experiences.
However, participants in this study included women who attended a commu-
nity fair and business exposition; thus, they were not recruited from their place
of employment. In fact, they were not asked to disclose their place of employ-
ment, but rather were asked to list their job title. Thus, the environment se-
lected for this study was intentionally aimed at reducing concerns about
66 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

responding truthfully, which may not have occurred had the study been associ-
ated in any way with their employment sites.
Another potential limitation of this investigation concerns the general-
izability of the sample of women studied. First, data were collected predomi-
nantly among women who attended a community fair and business exposition
within a particular geographic region. However, it is important to note that
participants in this study had a wide range of occupational titles, ages, and ed-
ucational experience suggesting a reasonable degree of heterogeneity among
participants. Furthermore, this study was an improvement over some studies
of sexual harassment since it examined working women and did not rely solely
upon the reports of student samples.

Directions for Future Research

Future studies should attempt to confirm the current findings that neither
job type nor gender mix predicted perceptions of a sexually hostile work envi-
ronment–particularly since these findings are contrary to popular research of a
decade or two ago (Baker, 1989; Gutek, 1985; USMSPB, 1988). As Katz,
Hannon, and Whitten (1996) point out, some of the relationships involving
men and women at work are changing as men are becoming more aware of
sexual harassment, its definition, and its consequences. Additionally, since
this study demonstrated a relationship between women who are resourceful
and women who are less likely to perceive a sexually hostile work environ-
ment, future studies should investigate this issue further to assess for any posi-
tive effects to being a working woman with a high degree of resourcefulness.
In particular, an examination of resourceful women and how they manage sex-
ual harassment may be one area of consideration.

REFERENCES

Baker, N. L. (1989). Sexual harassment and job satisfaction in traditional and nontra-
ditional industrial occupations. Unpublished dissertation. California School of Pro-
fessional Psychology, Los Angeles.
Barak, A., Fisher, W. A., & Houston, S. (1992). Individual difference correlates of
the experience of sexual harassment among female university students. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 22(1), 17-37.
Barling, J., Dekker, I., Loughlin, C. A., Kelloway, E. K., Fullagar, C., & Johnson, D.
(1996). Prediction and replication of the organizational and personal conse-
quences of workplace sexual harassment. Journal of Managerial Psychology,
11(5), 4-25.
Barr, P.A. (1993). Perceptions of sexual harassment. Sociological Inquiry, 63(4),
460-470.
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 67

Bill, J. B. (1994, August). Sexual harassment as a work climate: Moving beyond the
reasonable gender approach. Paper presented at the Academy of Management an-
nual conference, Dallas, TX.
Borgida, E., Rudman, L. A., & Manteufel, L. L. (1995). On the courtroom use and
misuse of gender stereotyping research. Journal of Social Issues, 51(1), 181-192.
Cochran, C. C., Frazier, P. A., & Olson, A. M. (1997). Predictors of responses to un-
wanted sexual attention. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 207-226.
Crocker, J., & McGraw, K. M. (1984). What’s good for the goose is not good for the
gander: Solo status as an obstacle to occupational achievement for males and fe-
males. American Behavioral Scientist, 27(3), 357-369.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2004a). Sexual harassment. Re-
trieved June 16, 2004, from http://www.eeoc.gov/types/sexual_harassment.
html.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (2004b). Sexual harassment charges
EEOC and FEPA combined: FY 1992-FY1993. Retrieved June 16, 2004, from
http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/harass.html.
Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (1995). Ambivalence and stereotypes cause sexual harass-
ment: A theory with implications for organizational change. Journal of Social Is-
sues, 51(1), 97-115.
Fitzgerald, L. F. (1993). Sexual harassment: Violence against women in the work-
place. American Psychologist, 48(10), 1070-1076.
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(4),578-589.
Fitzgerald, L. F., & Shullman, S. L. (1993). Sexual harassment: A research analysis
and agenda for the 1990s. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 42, 5-27.
Gutek, B. A. (1985). Sex and the workplace: Impact of sexual behavior and harass-
ment on women, men, and organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Gutek, B. A. (1993). Sexual harassment: Rights and responsibilities. Employee Re-
sponsibilities and Rights Journal, 6(4), 325-340.
Gutek, B. A., & Cohen, A. G. (1987). Sex ratios, sex role spillover, and sex at work:
A comparison of men’s and women’s experiences. Human Relations, 40(2),
97-115.
Gutek, B. A., & Morasch, B. (1982). Sex-ratios, sex-role spillover, and sexual ha-
rassment of women at work. Journal of Social Issues, 38(4), 55-74.
Hamada, T. (1995). Inventing cultural others in organizations: A case of anthropo-
logical reflexivity in a multinational firm. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,
31(1), 162-185.
Hulin, C., Fitzgerald, L., & Drasgow, F. (1996). Organizational influences on sex-
ual harassment. In M. S. Stockdale (Ed.), Sexual Harassment in the workplace.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
Jensen, I. W., & Gutek, B. A. (1982). Attributions and assignment of responsibility
in sexual harassment. Journal of Social Issues, 38(4), 121-136.
Kanter, R. M. (1977a). Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
68 AGGRESSION IN ORGANIZATIONS

Kanter, R. M. (1977b). Some effects of proportions on group life: Skewed sex ra-
tios and responses to token women. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5),
965-990.
Kanter, R. M. (1980). A Tale of “O.” New York: Harper Row.
Katz, R. C., Hannon, R., & Whitten, L. (1996). Effects of gender and situation on
the perception of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 34(1/2), 35-42.
Kiefer, J., Rabin, A., & Sorenson, R. C. (2002, November). Psychometric properties of the
Self-Control Schedule and the Self-Control Questionnaire. Paper presented at the con-
vention of the Association for Advancement of Behavior Therapy, Reno, NV.
Konrad, A. M., & Gutek, B. A. (1986). Impact of work experiences on attitudes to-
ward sexual harassment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 422-438.
Konrad, A. M., Winter, S., & Gutek, B. A. (1992). Diversity in work group sex
composition: Implications for majority and minority members. Research in the
Sociology of Organizations, 10, 115-140.
Mazer, D. B., & Percival, E. F. (1989). Ideology or experience? The relationships
among perceptions, attitudes, and experiences of sexual harassment in univer-
sity students. Sex Roles, 20(3/4), 135-147.
McKinney, K. (1990). Sexual harassment of university faculty by colleagues and
students. Sex Roles, 23, (7/8), 421-438.
Minnegerode, F. A. (1976). Attitudes toward women, sex role stereotyping, and lo-
cus of control. Psychological Reports, 38, 1301-1302.
Pipes, R. B., & LeBov-Keeler, K. (1997). Psychological abuse among college
women in exclusive heterosexual dating relationships. Sex Roles, 36(9/10),
585-603.
Powell, G. N. (1986). Effects of sex role identity and sex on definitions of sexual
harassment. Sex Roles, 14(1/2), 9-19.
Pryor, J. B., LaVite, C. M., & Stoller, L. M. (1993). A social psychological analysis
of sexual harassment: The person/situation interaction. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 42, 68-93.
Rosenbaum, M. (1980a). Individual differences in self-control behaviors and toler-
ance of painful stimulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 89(4), 581-590.
Rosenbaum, M. (1980b). A schedule for assessing self-control behaviors: Prelimi-
nary findings. Behavior Therapy, 11, 109-121.
Rosenbaum, M. (1990). The role of learned resourcefulness in the self-control of
health behavior. In M. Rosenbaum (Ed.), Learned resourcefulness: On coping
skills, self-control, and adaptive behavior. New York: Springer Publishing Com-
pany.
Rosenbaum, M., & Ben-Ari, K. (1985). Learned helplessness and learned resource-
fulness: Effects of noncontingent success and failure on individuals differing in
self control skills. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(1), 198-215.
Rosenberg, J., Perlstadt, H., & Phillips, W. R. F. (1993). Now that we are here: Dis-
crimination, disparagement, and harassment at work and the experience of
women lawyers. Gender & Society, 7(3), 415-433.
Schneider, B., & Reichers, A. E. (1983). On the etiology of climates. Personnel Psy-
chology, 36, 19-39.
 Nancy J. Amick and Richard C. Sorenson 69

Shapiro, B.L., & Schwarz, J.C. (1997). Date rape: Its relationship to trauma symp-
toms and sexual self-esteem. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 3, 407-419.
Sorenson, R. C., Mangione-Lambie, M. G.,& Luzio, R. C (1998). Solving the
chronic problem of sexual harassment in the workplace: An empirical study of
factors affecting employee perceptions and consequences of sexual harassment.
California Western Law Review, 34, 457-491.
Spector, P. E. (2001). Research methods in industrial and organizational psychol-
ogy: Data collection and data analysis with special consideration to interna-
tional issues. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran
(Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology: Vol. 1. Person-
nel Psychology (pp. 10- 26). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Strapp, J. (1973). A short version of the attitudes
toward women scale (AWS). Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 2, 219-220.
Spence, J. T., Helmreich, R. L., & Strapp, J. (1975). Ratings of self and peers on sex
role attributes and their relation to self-esteem and conceptions of masculinity
and femininity. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 32, 29-39.
Stafford, I. P. (1984). Relation of attitudes toward women’s roles and occupational
behavior to women’s self-esteem. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31(3),
332-338.
Stanley, G., Boots, M., & Johnson, C. (1975). Some Australian data on a short ver-
sion of the attitudes toward women scale (AWS). Australian Psychologist, 10,
319-323.
Tangri, S. S., Burt, M. R., & Johnson, L. B. (1982). Sexual harassment at work:
Three explanatory models. Journal of Social Issues, 38(4), 33-54.
Terpstra, D. E., & Baker, D. D. (1986a). A framework for the study of sexual ha-
rassment. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 7(1), 17-34.
Terpstra, D. E., & Baker, D. D. (1986b). Psychological and demographic correlates
of perceptions of sexual harassment. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology
Monographs, 112(4), 461-478.
U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board. (1988). Sexual harassment in the federal gov-
ernment: An update. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1994). Statistical abstract of the United States,
1994. Washington, DC: Department of Commerce.
Weiner, R. L., Hurt, L., Russell, B., Mannen, K., & Gasper, C. (1997). Perceptions
of sexual harassment: The effects of gender, legal standard, and ambivalent sex-
ism. Law and Human Behavior, 21(1), 71-93.
Zohar, D. (1980). Safety climate in industrial organizations: Theoretical and ap-
plied implications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(1), 96-102
Zweig, J. M., Barber, B. L., & Eccles, J. S. (1997). Sexual coercion and well-being
in young adulthood: Comparison by gender and college status. Journal of Inter-
personal Violence, 12(2), 291-308.