Attributions of Blame and Responsibility in Sexual Harassment: Reexamining a Psychological Model
Kelley’s (Nebr Symp Motiv 15:192–238, 1967) attribution theory can inform sexual harassment research by identifying how observers use consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness information in determining whether a target or perpetrator is responsible for a sexual harassment situation. In this study, Kelley’s theory is applied to a scenario in which a male perpetrator sexually harasses a female target in a university setting. Results from 314 predominantly female college students indicate that consistency and consensus information significantly affect participants’ judgments of blame and responsibility for the situation. The authors discuss the importance of the reference groups used to derive consensus and distinctiveness information, and reintroduce Kelley’s attribution theory as a means of understanding observers’ perceptions of sexual harassment.
KeywordsSexual harassment Attribution Kelley Hostile environment Blaming the victim
We would like to thank Monica Reis-Bergan for her contributions to this manuscript.
- Cass, S. A., Levett, L. M., & Kovera, M. B. (2009). The effects of harassment severity and organizational behavior on damage awards in a hostile work environment sexual harassment case. Behavioral Sciences and the Law. doi: 10.1002/bsl.886.
- Ellison v. Brady, 924 F. 2d 872 (1991).Google Scholar
- Equal Opportunity Employment Commission. (2002). Facts about sexual harassment. Retrieved March 1, 2006 from http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/fs-sex.html.
- Fitzgerald, L. F., Swan, S., & Magley, V. J. (1997). But was it really sexual harassment? Legal, behavioral, and psychological definitions of the workplace victimization of women. In W. O’Donohue (Ed.), Sexual harassment: Theory, research, and treatment (pp. 5–28). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
- Gutek, B. A. (1993). Responses to sexual harassment. In S. Oskamp & M. Costanzo (Eds.), Gender issues in contemporary society (pp. 197–216). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
- Gutek, B. A., O’Connor, M. A., Melancon, R., Stockdale, M. S., Geer, T. M., & Done, R. S. (1999). The utility of the reasonable woman legal standard in hostile environment sexual harassment cases: A multimethod, multistudy examination. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 5(3), 596–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Henson v. City of Dundee, 682 F. 2d 897 (11th Cir. 1982).Google Scholar
- Hulin, C. L., Fitzgerald, L. F., & Drasgow, F. (1996). Organizational influences on sexual harassment. In M. S. Stockdale (Ed.), Sexual harassment in the workplace: Perspectives, frontiers, and response strategies (pp. 127–150). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Jones, E. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (1971). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. New York: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
- Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 15, 192–238.Google Scholar
- Lerner, M. (1980). The belief in a just world. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
- Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986).Google Scholar
- Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel & L. W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
- Wiener, R. L., Bornstein, B. H., Schopp, R., & Winborn, S. L. (Eds.). (2007). Social consciousness in legal decision-making: Psychological perspectives. New York: Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar