Top

Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal

Published in:

01-09-2009

Assessing Liability for Sexual Harassment: Reactions of Potential Jurors to Email Versus Face-to-Face Incidents

Authors: Robyn A. Berkley, David M. Kaplan

Published in: Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal | Issue 3/2009

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

This paper investigates reactions of potential jurors to sexual harassment incidents. Email and face-to-face incidents are compared to determine the importance of context on decision-making. The paper considers juror decision-making for both guilt and level of award to randomly assigned scenarios involving multiple levels of harassment. Results found that email harassment was perceived more harshly, consistent with a context-based hypothesis. The paper concludes with organizational implications for better handling sexual harassment awareness training as well as Internet usage guidelines.

previous article In Sickness and in Health: Recent Judicial Developments in Americans with Disabilities Act Association Discrimination Cases

next article “The Worse You Behave, The More You Seem, to be Rewarded”: Bullying in Nursing as Organizational Corruption

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Available only for authorised users

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.CrossRef

Bem, S. L. (1978). Bem sex role inventory. Mountainview: Consulting Psychologists.

Borstorff, P., & Graham, G. (2006). E-harassment: employee perceptions of E-technology as a source of harassment. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 11(3), 51–67.

Burgess, D., & Borgida, E. (1997). Sexual harassment: an experimental test of sex-role spillover theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 63–75.CrossRef

Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554–571.CrossRef

Dennis, A. R., & Kinney, S. T. (1998). Testing media richness theory in the new media: the effects of cues, feedback, and task equivocality. Information Systems Research, 9(3), 256–274.CrossRef

Diamond, S. S. (1990). Scientific jury selection: what social scientists know and do not know. Judicature, 73, 178–183.

Diamond, S. S., & Casper, J. D. (1992). Blindfolding the jury to verdict consequences: damages, experts, and the civil jury. Law and Society Review, 26, 513–563.CrossRef

Glomb, S. M., & Espelage, D. L. (2005). The influence of restrictive emotionality in men's emotional appraisal of sexual harassment: a gender role interpretation. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 6, 240–253.CrossRef

Gowan, M. A., & Zimmerman, R. A. (1996). Impact of ethnicity, gender, and previous experience on juror judgments in sexual harassment cases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 596–617.CrossRef

Huntley, J. E., & Costanzo, M. (2003). Sexual harassment stories: testing a story-mediate model of juror decision-making in civil litigation. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 29–51.CrossRef

Jaschik, M. L., & Fretz, B. R. (1991). Women’s perceptions and labeling of sexual harassment. Sex Roles, 25, 19–23.CrossRef

Maass, A., Cadinu, M., Guarnieri, G., & Grasselli, A. (2003). Sexual harassment under social identity threat: the computer harassment paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 853–870.CrossRef

Mathis, R. & Jackson, J. (2008) Human resource management, 12th ed. Mason: Thomson, South-Western.

Perry, E. L., Kulik, C. T., & Bourhis, A. C. (2004). The reasonable woman standard: effects on sexual harassment court decisions. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 9–27.CrossRef

Pesta, B. J., Dunegan, K. J., & Hrivnak, M. W. (2007). Contrast and rater-perspective effects on judgments of sexual harassment severity: what he thinks she thinks, and vice versa. Journal of Business Psychology, 22, 155–165.CrossRef

Rice, R. E. (1984). The new media: Communication, research, and technology. Beverly Hills: Sage.

Robertson, L. G., & Unger, R. (1997). Reducing risky e-mail: there is no such thing as e-mail privacy. SRA Journal, 29(3/4), 3–12.

Robinson, Karyn-Siobhan (2001). Cyber-sex permeates the workplace. HR News, April 2001, pg 10.

Short, J. A., Williams, F., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. New York: Wiley.

Sipior, J. C., & Ward, B. T. (1999). The dark side of employee email. Association for Computing Machinery, Communications of the ACM, 42(7), 88–94.

Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492–1512.CrossRef

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, (2008). Sexual harassment. Retrieved, November 25, 2008 from http://www.eeoc.gov/types/sexual_harassment.html.

Towns, D. M., & Johnson, M. S. (2003). Sexual harassment in the 21st century—E-harassment in the workplace. Employee Relations Law Journal, 29(1), 7–24.

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.CrossRef

Weisband, S. P., & Reinig, B. A. (1995). Managing user perceptions of email privacy. Association for Computing Machinery, Communications of the ACM, 38(12), 40–47.

Wiener, R. L., & Hurt, L. E. (2000). How do people evaluate social sexual conduct at work? A Psychological model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 75–85.CrossRef

Williams, E. (1977). Experimental comparisons of face-to-face and mediated communication: a review. Psychological Bulletin, 84(5), 963–976.CrossRef

Title: Assessing Liability for Sexual Harassment: Reactions of Potential Jurors to Email Versus Face-to-Face Incidents
Authors: Robyn A. Berkley
David M. Kaplan
Publication date: 01-09-2009
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal / Issue 3/2009
Print ISSN: 0892-7545
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3378
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10672-009-9110-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Other articles of this Issue 3/2009

Expected Practices in Background Checking: Review of the Human Resource Management Literature

Waving, Not Drowning: Explaining and Exploring the Resilience of Labor Process Theory

From the Editor-in-Chief’s Desk: Job Loss as Status Passage for Workers During Recession—Advocating a “Compassionate Turn”

A Review of Spirituality in the Workplace

“The Worse You Behave, The More You Seem, to be Rewarded”: Bullying in Nursing as Organizational Corruption

Introduction to Symposium on the Frontiers of Labor Process Theory