Physical attractiveness and perceptions of sexual harassment

Running head: PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS INFLUENCE SEXUAL HARASSMENT 1
Does Physical Attractiveness Influence Perceptions of Sexual Harassment?
Patricia Hill and Morgan Herrig
University of Tennessee

PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS INFLUENCE SEXUAL HARASSMENT 2
Abstract
This study was designed to examine if and how perceived level of physical attractiveness
of an aggressor influences perceptions of sexual harassment. Related variables being examined
include workplace satisfaction, length of employment at a specific workplace, and biological sex.
A quantitative approach was used to examine these variables via survey results. The same
supervisor/employer was used for all question sets. Our results showed no relationship between
physical attractiveness and perception of sexual harassment, no significant difference between
males and females on perception of sexual harassment, a weak non-significant correlation
between workplace satisfaction and perception of sexual harassment, and that employment time
in a specific workplace does not influence perception of sexual harassment. The conclusion for
this study was that physical attractiveness, length of employment, and workplace satisfaction did
not influence perception of sexual harassment.

Introduction
Imagine your physically attractive supervisor comes up behind and brushes his/her
fingers along your back and implies that you would be given a raise if you were to stay with
him/her over the weekend. Would you consider this sexual harassment? The purpose of this
study is to see if the level of perceived physical attractiveness can influence whether said
individual’s actions are considered sexual harassment or not and to what extent. For example, if
someone highly attractive were to flirtatiously compliment you along with physical touch, we
predict this would be considered more along the lines of flirting while it would be more likely
deemed sexual harassment if the individual were scored lower on the attractiveness scale. We
further would like to identify if workplace satisfaction influences perception of sexual
harassment. For example, is someone highly satisfied with his or her occupation more likely to
overlook sexual harassment than someone highly dissatisfied? We will also examine if biological
sex is a subsidizing element in perception of sexual harassment. We want to create a more
definite way to view sexual harassment by attempting to understand how it is assessed and what
factors influence determining it. While there is a great deal of research addressing sexual
harassment, physical attractiveness, and workplace satisfaction separately, little has been
conducted combining the three.
Rationale
Sexual harassment cases can hold a great deal of both emotional and legal weight. For
example, the high profile case adjoining former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson’s sexual
harassment suit came to a close Sept 7, 2016 when she reached a $20 million settlement with her
former supervisor Roger Ailes and 21st Century Fox, the parent company of Fox News (Wylie,
2016). Because of the frequency and significance of sexual harassment cases, it is essential that

research be done to better understand sexual harassment allegations. While we are only
examining how physical attractiveness of a harasser and work place satisfaction influence
perceptions of sexual harassment, we hope our research can further be used to identify how the
legal system and juries determine the verdict in sexual harassment cases. We hope to uncover
biases that prevent perpetrators from facing repercussions as a result of his or her actions.
Research Questions
RQ1. What is the relationship between physical attractiveness and perception of sexual
harassment?
RQ2. What is the difference between males and females on perception of sexual harassment?
RQ3. What is the relationship between workplace satisfaction and perception of sexual
harassment?
RQ4. Does the amount of employment time in a specific workplace influence perception of
sexual harassment?
Literature Review
Booth-Butterfield (1989) conducted a study to attempt to understand locus control, work
force participation, and gender in regards to perceiving sexual harassment. Participants read and
evaluated 21 descriptions of instructor behaviors that were either harassing, immediate, or
neutral. The findings showed that when individuals respond to sexual harassment scenarios they
are not seeing the act through the eyes of his or her gender. In addition, findings suggested
predisposition beliefs and experience influence perceptions. Female participants were able to
differentiate harassing and immediacy behaviors yet still deeming them inappropriate actions
compared to the men participants. (Booth-Butterfield, 1989). In regards to physical attractiveness

and sexual harassment, one study found that individuals believe that attractive individuals are
more likely to be harassed than unattractive beings (Seiter & Dunn, 2000).
We further examined a sexual harassment study that was created over the time period of
seven years from different major universities across the country that was documented and
published by Michela Larocca and Jeffrey Kromey (2006). Over the course of this experiment
both college grads and undergrads perceptions of attractiveness of a subject and judgements of
specific behaviors in a given situation were to be experimented with, tested, and recorded. This
study noted the same gender harassing was seen significantly more as sexual harassment than
opposite gender encounters (Larocca & Kromrey, 2006). The study further found both men and
women acknowledged female aggressors less harshly than male aggressors. (Larocca &
Kromrey, 2006). This study can also be compared to a study Wilbur Castellow, Karl Wuensch,
and Charles Moore conducted in 1990 that was very similar to the scenario given. Participants
looked over sexual harassment cases with pictures of the defendant and plaintiff on the case files.
The results found physical attractiveness has a big role in determining whether the defendant is
guilty or not (Castellow, Wuensch, & Moore, 1990).
Karl Wuensch and Charles Moore conducted another study in 2004 with 324 college
students who created a scenario to resemble a civil case. The college students were the mock
jurors and they were assigned a case where a male plaintiff accused a female defendant of sexual
harassment. The mock jurors were asked to decide if the female defendant was guilty and then to
rate their certainty of their decision. The study ranked attractiveness and guilt. The results found
that jurors felt more certain the defendant was guilty when the plaintiff was more attractive than
if they plaintiff had been deemed unattractive (Wuensch & Moore, 2004). Male jurors’ verdicts
were significantly affected by plaintiff attractiveness when the defendant was attractive but not

when she was unattractive. Plaintiff attractiveness significantly affected the female jurors’
verdicts when the defendant was unattractive but not when she was attractive. Female jurors
were more likely to believe sexual harassment had occurred than male jurors but only when the
plaintiff and defendant were different in attractiveness (Wuensch & Moore, 2004).
Furthermore, a Keyton and Rhodes study (2009) tested factors believed to identify the
verbal and nonverbal behaviors associated with flirting and sexual harassment. Their results
contradicted earlier findings that stated women are better at identifying social-sexual behavior
(Keyton & Rhodes, 2009). Their findings did not show any gender differences that correspond to
findings from Baker and Terpstra. They gave a sexual harassment questionnaire to a sample of
male and female workers and to a sample of male and female student with the goal of trying to
clarify conflicting evidence on the effects of biological sex perceptions of sexual harassment
(Baker & Terpstra, 1990). Their findings stated working men and women had similar results
while male and female students had similar results (Baker & Terpstra, 1990). Rather than
biological sex being a contributing factor, organizational background influenced perception.
In contrary to the previous noted lack of sex differences, multiple other researchers found
otherwise. The role of physical attractiveness in perceptions of sexual harassment was
investigated in two studies by Popovich, Gehlauf, Jolton, Everton, Godinho, Mastrangelo, and
Somers (1996). In the first study, 164 undergraduates were given a complainant's description of
either a verbal or physical incident of sexual harassment. Photographs varying physical
attractiveness of the harasser and victim were provided to the undergraduate student participants.
Results showed gender differences in perceptions of incident characteristics and an attractiveness
bias for both harasser and victim (Popovich et al., 1996). There was evidence that characteristics
of the setting affected ratings of physical attractiveness. A second study with 211

undergraduates, utilized a formal grievance paradigm with attractiveness varied through verbal
labels in the complaint. Results showed gender differences in perceptions, as well as a tendency
for subjects to identify more with same gender stimulus persons (Popovich et al., 1996). In
agreement to preceding findings, a study performed by Ekore intended to examine perceptions
toward sexual harassment by both male and female students found female respondents reported
more sexual harassment than male counterparts (Ekore, 2012). Ekore’s findings support our
hypothesis that females will perceive more sexual harassment than males.
To elaborate on previous research showing biological sex differences in perception of
sexual harassment Rotundo, Nguyen, and Sackett (2001) conducted a study to investigate
whether the magnitude of the female-male difference varied based on type of behavior. They
also predicted the female-male difference would be greater when the harasser is a peer, co-
worker, or fellow student of the harassed than when the harasser has formal authority over the
harassed (Rotundo, Nguyen, & Sackett, 2001). After a meta-analysis of 86 previous studies,
findings showed women perceive a broader range of social-sexual behaviors as harassing
(Rotundo, Nguyen, & Sackett, 2001). These findings agree with those from a study by
Dougherty (1999) claimed men and women have different standpoints on sexual harassment
(Dougherty, 1999). Further conclusions stated men and women may use the same language when
discussing sexual harassment, but they have different meanings (Dougherty, 1999).
A study conducted by Hendrix, Rueb, and Steel (1998) surveyed 568 individuals
regarding sexual harassment and how occupational status, biological sex of initiator, biological
sex of survey respondent, age of the initiator, position power of the initiator, success status of the
initiator, and attractiveness of the initiator influenced perceptions of sexual harassment (Hendrix,
Rueb, & Steel, 1998). All seven of the researchers’ hypotheses were supported with significant

results. Findings showed regardless of sex, full time employees perceived events as more
sexually harassing than students (Hendrix, Rueb, & Steel, 1998). Further results showed male
initiators were perceived as more sexually harassing than female initiators, female respondents
perceived events as more sexually harassing than male respondents, and older initiators were
rated significantly higher in perceived sexual harassment than were younger peers (Hendrix,
Rueb, & Steel, 1998). In addition, initiators in high power positions, for example, supervisors,
were perceived as significantly more sexually harassing than co-workers of lower power
positions (Hendrix, Rueb, & Steel, 1998). Findings also stated success status of the initiator
differed significantly with high success status being perceived as less sexually harassing
compared to low success status (Hendrix, Rueb, & Steel, 1998). Lastly, physically attractive
initiators were perceived as being significantly less sexually harassing than unattractive initiators
(Hendrix, Rueb, & Steel, 1998). Their results support previously noted findings stating that
organizational background, attractiveness, and biological sex all affect perceptions of sexual
harassment.
In correspondence to the previously stated results that power position of the initiator
influenced perception of sexual harassment, Popovich, Licata, Nokovich, Martelli, and Zoloty
found similar results. In their first study 209 undergraduates were given a questionnaire labeled
Job Experience Survey with a list of nine behaviors considered to be sexual harassment
(Popovich, Licata, Nokovich, Martelli, & Zoloty, 1986). Each behavior was to be rated on a 5-
point semantic differential scale ranging from always occurs to never occurs. In the second study
participants were given a questionnaire and asked to rate the degree to which they considered the
behaviors to be sexual harassment (Popovich et al., 1986). The scale used was also a 5-point
semantic differential scale with answers ranging from definitely sexual harassment to definitely

not sexual harassment. Significant results were found stating a behavior was considered to be
more definitely sexual harassment if it was exhibited by a supervisor rather than a co-worker
(Popovich et al., 1986).
Furthermore, findings from a recent study conducted by Michigan State University
researchers, suggests sexual harassment may have become so common for women that they have
built up resistance to harassing behavior they consider merely “bothersome” (Settle, Harrell,
Buchanan, &Yap, 2011). It is basically stating that it is so common women have become
immune to the ritual of “men will be men”. According Settles, this occurrence may be similar to
the way people build up immunity to infection or disease preceding exposure to a virus (Settle,
Harrell, Buchanan, & Yap, 2011). The study took into account how both men and women view
harassment in addition to whether they saw it as troublesome or upsetting. The study also
accounted for how the noted perceptions related to their psychological well-being. The survey
covered 16 types of verbal and physical harassment that included verbal acts such as offensive
stories and offensive jokes and physical acts such as touching that made the person
uncomfortable (Settle, Harrell, Buchanan, & Yap, 2011). For the study, the researchers examined
surveys of more than 6,000 women and men serving in all five branches of the U.S. military. The
study found sexual harassment was a problem for both sexes. More than 50 percent of women
and nearly 20 percent of men reported at least one incident of sexual harassment during a 12-
month period (Settle, Harrell, Buchanan, &Yap, 2011).
To examine our construct of workplace satisfaction and how it relates to sexual
harassment we looked to a study conducted by Nielsen, Bjørkelo, Notelaers, and Einarsen
(2010). Their study showed exposure to workplace sexual harassment is undoubtedly correlated
to increased mental health problems and reduced job satisfaction (Nielsen, Bjørkelo, Notelaers,

& Einarsen. 2010). The results confirmed noted previous findings on sexual harassment stating it
to be a severe social stressor that has significant penalties for those attacked (Nielsen et al.,
2010). Furthermore, a significant relationship was found between gender and harassment with
regard to job satisfaction. Additional findings show male targets in the sexually harassed cluster
reported significantly lower job satisfaction than female targets in the same cluster (Nielsen et
al., 2010). The article offered one explanation for this finding stating the case might be that
sexual harassment is more related to shame among men than women (Nielsen et al., 2010).
Because sexual harassment mainly has been observed as a phenomenon occurring amongst
women, men might find it more embarrassing and problematic to admit and talk about their
experience (Nielsen et al., 2010).
Findings from Malik, N., Malik, S., Qureshi, and Atta (2104) corresponded to the
previously stated results claiming sexual harassment would be a significant predictor of low job
satisfaction among nurses. Their regression analysis indicated sexual harassment is a strong
predictor of low job satisfaction among nurses (Malik, N., Malik, S., Qureshi, & Atta, 2104).
These findings supported their hypothesis. The article indicated their findings were consistent
with the findings of Valente and Bullough (2004) and Madison and Minichiello (2001) which
both stated sexual harassment at a workplace is linked with a weakening of interpersonal
relationships, reduced organizational commitment, lack of job motivation and low job
satisfaction and higher levels of job stress, work absence and turnover (Malik et al., 2014).
Method
This study regarding how perceived level of physical attractiveness, biological sex,
length of employment, and workplace satisfaction influence perception of sexual harassment was

conducted at the University of Tennessee via an online survey produced through Qualtrics. The
described survey was designed to test the following:
harassment?
harassment?
RQ4. Does the amount of employment time in a specific workplace influence perception of sexual
harassment?
Participants
Requirements to participate in the survey included participant must be 18 years or older
and currently be employed or have previously been employed within the past month. All surveys
were conducted online anonymously. Participants in this study could be of any sex or ethnicity.
Participants were recruited by snowball and convenience sampling, achieved through posting the
survey designed on Qualtrics on various social media accounts. The participants were composed
of 122 individuals, 93 being female and 29 being male. Participant ages ranged from 19 to 69
with a mean of 40.71, a median of 44.50 and a standard deviation of 16.33. The minimum length
of employment was 1 month, the average length of employment was 1.48 years, and the median
was 2 or more years at a specific place of employment.
Procedure
We designed a survey that we distributed via social networking sites, including Facebook
and Twitter. Any person not willing to complete the survey had the option exit the survey at any

time. Our survey was composed of three sections, each containing a set of questions from a
previously conducted research survey. The three sections were:
Physical Attractiveness. Our physical attractiveness survey was from McCroskey and
McCain (1974) with a Cronbach α = .80. Participants ranked perceived physical attractiveness of
a current or previous employer on a 7-interval semantic differential scale ranging from 1 being
strongly disagree to 7 being strongly agree. For example, “I find him/her very attractive
physically.” Two items were reverse coded in this scale After conducting a reliability test on the
scale from within our study, we found that it had a Cronbach’s alpha α = .90.
Sexual Harassment. Our sexual harassment scale was from a study conducted by Booth-
Butterfield (1989) with a Cronbach α = .84. Participants ranked hypothetical situations on a 7-
interval semantic differential scale ranging from 1 being extremely non-sexual harassment
communication to 7 being extremely sexual harassment communication. For example, “Your
Vice President’s eyes scan your body as you discuss a business arrangement.” The scale when
used within our study had a reliability Cronbach’s alpha α = .93.
Workplace Satisfaction. Our workplace satisfaction survey was from Macdonald and
MacIntyre (1997) with a Cronbach α = .77. Participants ranked job satisfaction through questions
such as, “I feel good about working for this company,” on 7-interval semantic differential scale
with 1 being strongly disagree and 7 being strongly agree. When we used this in our study, we
found it had a reliability Cronbach’s alpha α = .87.
Results
This study looked at the effects of perceived level of physical attractiveness, influencing
whether said individual’s actions were considered sexual harassment or not and to what extent.
Further variables examined were biological sex, workplace satisfaction, and length of

employment. We posed four research questions we sought to test through our survey composed
of three quantitative scales.
ResearchQuestion 1
A Pearson correlation was calculated examining the relationship between participants’
perception of physical attractiveness and perception of sexual harassment. There was a
nonsignificant correlation of -0.136 (p= n.s). Perception of sexual harassment is not related to
workplace satisfaction.
ResearchQuestion 2
An independent samples t-test was calculated comparing the mean score of males on
perception of sexual harassment and the mean score of females on perception of sexual
harassment. The mean of men (M= 126.897, sd= 19.762) and the mean of women (M= 132.602,
sd= 18.449) did not differ significantly on the perception of sexual harassment t(120)=-1.43,
p= n.s.
ResearchQuestion 3
A Pearson correlation was calculated examining the relationships between participants’
perception of sexual harassment and workplace satisfaction. A nonsignificant correlation of .04
(p= n.s.) was found. Perception of sexual harassment is not related to workplace satisfaction.
ResearchQuestion 4
RQ4 examined if the amount of employment time in a specific workplace influenced the
perception of sexual harassment. The regression analysis demonstrated that length of
employment in a particular workplace (β=.55, t= 5.2, p>.01) and perception of sexual harassment
(β =.028, t=.31, p>.01) were statistically nonsignificant (R2=0.001, F(1,120)=0.098, p>.05).
Therefore, the research question was not supported.

Discussion
Our goal with this study was to measure if the level of perceived physical attractiveness
can influence whether an individual’s actions are considered sexual harassment or not and to
what extent. Using a quantitative approach, we sought to test the research questions, that
conceptualizes perceived physical attractiveness, sexual harassment, biological sex, employment
length, and work satisfaction.
The following section reviews the results we obtained from our approaches and presents
areas of limitation along with directions for future research.
harassment?

In this research question, we sought out to determine if there was a relationship between
physical attractiveness and the perception of sexual harassment. Although this specific study did
not find a significant relationship between the previously stated constructs, other studies have
found significant findings. Castellow, Wuensch, & Moore found physical attractiveness has a big
role in determining whether a defendant is guilty or not. We did not find any relationship
between the two variables. We predict this to be due to the fact they supplied participants with
photographs of individuals in which researchers could manipulate the attractiveness. We only
asked participants to recall the appearance of a current or previous employer.
In addition, another study was conducted by Wuensch & Moore that ranked
attractiveness and guilt. The results found jurors felt more certain the defendant was guilty when
the plaintiff was more attractive than if they plaintiff had been deemed unattractive (Wuensch &
Moore, 2004). Findings showed male jurors’ verdicts were significantly affected by plaintiff
attractiveness when the defendant was attractive but not when she was unattractive. Furthermore,
plaintiff attractiveness significantly affected the female jurors’ verdicts when the defendant was
unattractive but not when she was attractive (Wuensch & Moore, 2004). Once again we see
research supporting the relationships between attractiveness and sexual harassment; however,
our findings did not correspond, most likely due to the fact that they supplied participants with
photographs as well.
RQ2 sought out to find a difference between males and females on the perception of
sexual harassment. The independent-samples t-Test conducted found no significant difference in
the mean scores of male and female perceptions of sexual harassment. Therefore, this study
found no relationship between male and females on the perception of sexual harassment. On the

contrary, Rotundo, Nguyen, & Sackett (2001) conducted a study to investigate whether the
magnitude of the female-male difference varied based on type of behavior. Their findings
showed that women perceive a broader range of social-sexual behaviors as harassing (Rotundo,
Nguyen, & Sackett, 2001). Our lack of parallelism in results could be due to the fact that they
conducted a meta-analysis of previous research while we conducted a new study with new
participants. In their meta-analysis they could have purposely omitted analyzing studies with
results differing from their intended outcomes.
Another study that contradicts our findings is one where Dougherty (1999) claimed men
and women have different standpoints on sexual harassment (Dougherty, 1999). Further
conclusions stated men and women may use the same language when discussing sexual
harassment, but they have different meanings (Dougherty, 1999). Our lack of correspondence in
results could be due to the fact that Dougherty conducted a meta-analysis as well. Baker,
Terpstra, and Cutler’s (1990) study results agreed with our study in that there are no biological
sex differences in the perception of sexual harassment.
harassment?
After running a Pearson Correlation test, our results showed no significant relationship
between workplace satisfaction and perception of sexual harassment. Our results are in contrast
to a study conducted by Nielsen, Bjørkelo, Notelaers, & Einarsen (2010) claimed exposure to
workplace sexual harassment is undoubtedly correlated to increased mental health problems and
reduced job satisfaction (Nielsen, Bjørkelo, Notelaers, & Einarsen. 2010). Our lack of similar
results could be due to the fact that 40.8% of their respondents reported being a target of sexual
harassment or unwanted sexual attention. We did not ask if our participants had experienced

sexual harassment in the past and only supplied hypothetical situations. Further findings from
Malik, N., Malik, S., Qureshi, and Atta (2104) also contradict our findings through their
regression analysis indicated sexual harassment is a strong predictor of low job satisfaction
among nurses (Malik, N., Malik, S., Qureshi, & Atta, 2104). In this study as well, the
participants reported actual instances of experiencing unwanted sexual attention, contrary to our
study only asking about hypothetical situations.
RQ4. Does the amount of employment time in a specific workplace influence perception of
sexual harassment?
The simple linear regression calculated to determine if the amount of employment time in
a specific workplace influenced the perception of sexual harassment concluded the influence was
not significant. While findings from Baker, Terpstra, and Cutler agreed with our results of lack
of sex differences, their results further stated organizational background influenced perception
(Baker, Terpstra, & Cutler, 1990). This contradicts with our findings that were deemed to be not
significant. Our lack of similarity in results could be due our sample size being significantly
smaller. In addition, their survey targeted specific work industries while ours was presented to
our social media followers so there were no limitations to the professional career path of our
respondents.
Limitations and Future Research
Since all of the research questions ended with non-significant results, there were many
limitations. One major limitation was the ratio of males to females who participated in the
survey. We had 93 females and 29 males. This made the results skewed in favor to females.
Another limitation included the age range that participated. We had a range from 19 years old to
69 years old. This could have caused a lack of consistency in results.

An additional constraint is the fact that some of the participants completed our survey in
exchange for our participation in their survey. This means some of these participants did not
necessarily have an interest in this subject and/or study and participated to simply receive
participation in exchange.
Furthermore, to be sensitive to the topic at hand, we did not ask participants if he or she
had been a previous target of sexual harassment. This could have been an influencer in the way
her or she answered the survey. We would recommend conducting a new study where all of the
participants were previous targets of either sexual harassment or unwanted sexual attention to get
more accurate results in perception of sexual harassment.
In addition, job industry was not asked in our survey. An individual’s job industry alone
could have been an influencer in workplace satisfaction and perception of sexual harassment.
Future examinations would need to ask job industry to examine the gender allocation a particular
area of work. Those surrounded by more of the opposite sex in the workplace could be further
prone to reporting perceived sexual harassment.
In regards to future examinations of this topic as a whole, researches will need to allow
the opportunity to receive a more even number of female and male participants. This will allow
the research to not be as skewed as it was in this particular study. Limiting the age ranges that
can participate could be another way to ensure more consistent results. Another item to ensure
for future research is utilize more platforms to spread awareness of the survey. This will allow
more participants to complete the survey but also allow more specific demographics instead of
putting it out on social media for anyone to participate.

References
Baker, D. D., Terpstra, D. E., & Cutler, B. D. (1990). Perceptions of sexual harassment:
A re-examination of gender differences. Journal of Psychology, 124, 409-416. doi:
10.1080/00223980.1990.10543236
Booth‐Butterfield, M. (1989). Perception of harassing communication as a function of locus of
control, work force participation, and gender. Communication Quarterly, 37, 262-275.
doi:10.1080/01463378909385549
Castellow, W. A., Wuensch, K. L., Moore, C. H. (1990). Effects of physical attractiveness of the
plaintiff and defendant in sexual harassment judgments. Journal of Social Behavior
and Personality, 5, 547-562. doi:none
Dougherty, D. S. (1999). Dialogue through standpoint: Understanding women’s and men’s
standpoints of sexual harassment. Management Communication Quarterly, 12, 436-
468. doi:10.1177/0893318999123003
Ekore, J. O. (2012). Gender differences in perception of sexual harassment among university
students. Gender and Behavior, 10, 4358-4367, doi: none
Hendrix, W. H., Rueb, J. D., & Steel, R. P. (1998). Sexual harassment and gender differences.
Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 13, 235-252. doi: none
Keyton, J., & Rhodes, S. (2009). Organizational sexual harassment: Translating research into
application. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 27, 158-173.
doi: 10.1080/00909889909365532
Larocca, M. A., & Kromrey, J. D. (2006). The perception of sexual harassment in higher
education: Impact of gender and attractiveness. Sex Roles, 40, 921-940. doi:
10.1023/A:1018829222894

Macdonald, S. & MacIntryre, P. (1997). The generic job satisfaction scale: Scale development
and its correlates. Employee Assistance Quarterly, 13, 1-16. doi: none
Madison, J. & Minichiello, V. (2001). Sexual harassment in healthcare: Classification of
harassers and rationalization of sex-based harassment behavior. Journal of Nursing
Administration, 31, 534-543. doi: none
Malik, N. I., Malik, S., Qureshi, N., & Atta, M. (2014). Sexual harassment as predictor of low
self-esteem and job satisfaction among in-training nurses. FWU Journal of Social
Sciences, 8, 107-116. doi: none
McCroskey, J. C., & McCain, T. A. (1974). The measurement of interpersonal attraction. Speech
Monographs, 41, 261-266. doi: none
Nielsen, M. B., Bjørkelo, B., Notelaers, G., & Einarsen, S. (2010). Sexual harassment:
Prevalence, outcomes, and gender differences assessed by three different estimation
methods. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 19, 252-274.
doi:10.1080/10926771003705056
Popovich, P. M., Licata, B. J., Nokovich, D., Martelli, T., & Zoloty, S. (1986). Assessing the
incidence and perceptions of sexual harassment behaviors among American
undergraduates. Journal of Psychology, 120, p. 387. doi: none
Popovich, P. M., Gehlauf, D. N., Jolton, J. A., Everton, W. J., Godinho, R. M., Mastrangelo, P.
M., & Somers, J. M. (1996). Physical attractiveness and sexual harassment: Does
every picture tell a story or every story draw a picture? Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 26, 520-542. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb02729.x

Rotundo, M., Nguyen, D., & Sackett, P. R. (2001). A meta-analytic review of gender differences
in perceptions of sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 914-922. doi:
10.1037//0021-9010.86.5.914
Seiter, J. S., & Dunn, D. (2000). Beauty and believability in sexual harassment cases: Does
physical attractiveness affect perceptions of veracity and the likelihood of being
harassed? Communication Research Reports, 17, 203-209.
doi:10.1080/08824090009388766
Settles, I. H., Harrell, Z., Buchanan, N. T., Yap, S. (2011). Frightened or bothered: Two types of
sexual harassment appraisals. Social Psychology and Personality Science, 2, 600-608.
doi:10.1177/1948550611402520
Valente, S. & Bullough, V. (2004). Sexual harassment of nurses in the workplace. Journal of
Nursing Care Quality, 19, 234-241. doi: none
Wuensch, K. L., & Moore, C. H. (2004) Effects of physical attractiveness on evaluations of a
male employee’s allegation of sexual harassment by his female employer. The Journal
of Social Psychology, 144, 207-217. doi:10.3200/SOCP.144.2.207-217
Wylie, M. (2016, September 7). Gretchen Carlson: Dissecting her groundbreaking settlement.
Charlotte Business Journal. Retrieved from
http://www.bizjournals.com/charlotte/bizwomen/news/latest-news/2016/09/gretchen-
carlson-dissecting-her-groundbreaking.html

Physical attractiveness and perceptions of sexual harassment

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (15)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Physical attractiveness and perceptions of sexual harassment

Similar to Physical attractiveness and perceptions of sexual harassment (20)

More from Patricia Hill

More from Patricia Hill (6)

Physical attractiveness and perceptions of sexual harassment