Advertisement

National Prevalence of Sexual Violence by a Workplace-Related Perpetrator

Published:December 10, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2019.09.011

      Introduction

      Workplace sexual violence is not a new phenomenon but has received increased attention recently with the re-emergence of the #metoo movement. Gaps exist in the understanding of the prevalence of this problem in the U.S., its perpetrators, and its impacts.

      Methods

      Using 2010–2012 data from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (22,590 women and 18,584 men), this study examined the prevalence of several types of sexual violence by a workplace-related perpetrator (authority figure or nonauthority figure) and numerous impacts of the violence, including psychological impacts, safety concerns, and missing days of work or school. Data were analyzed in 2018.

      Results

      In the U.S., 5.6% of women (almost 7 million) and 2.5% of men (nearly 3 million) reported some type of sexual violence by a workplace-related perpetrator. Almost 4% of women (3.9%) reported sexual violence by nonauthority figures and 2.1% reported authority figures; 2.0% of men reported sexual violence by nonauthority figures, and 0.6% reported authority figures. For women, the most commonly reported sexual violence type was unwanted sexual contact (3.5% of women); for men, it was noncontact unwanted sexual experiences (1.3% of men). An estimated 1 million women (0.8%) have been raped by a workplace-related perpetrator. For women and men, fear was the most commonly reported impact of workplace-related sexual violence.

      Conclusions

      These findings suggest that workplace prevention efforts that do not address different components of workplace harassment may not be adequate to address all forms of sexual violence occurring across the U.S. in the workplace context.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      REFERENCES

        • Puente M
        • Kelly C
        How common is sexual misconduct in Hollywood?.
        USA Today, Published February 20, 2018
        • Times LA
        • Editorial Board
        Sexual misconduct goes far beyond Harvey Weinstein and Hollywood. How do we make it go away for good?.
        Los Angeles Times, Published October 26, 2017
        • Garcia SE
        The women who created #metoo long before hashtags.
        The New York Times, Published October 20, 2017
      1. Bloomgarden K. How sexual harassment in Hollywood sparked a workplace revolution. World Economic Forum.www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/01/how-sexual-harassment-in-hollywood-sparked-a-workplace-revolution/. Published January 16, 2018. Accessed 30 April 2018.

        • O'Neil A
        • Sojo V
        • Fileborn B
        • Scovelle AJ
        • Milner A
        The #MeToo movement: an opportunity in public health?.
        Lancet. 2018; 391: 2587-2589
        • MacKinnon CA
        Sexual Harassment of Working Women: A Case of Sex Discrimination.
        Yale University Press, New Haven, CT1979
        • Basile KC
        • Smith SG
        • Breiding MJ
        • Black MC
        • Mahendra RR
        Sexual Violence Surveillance: Uniform Definitions and Recommended Data Elements, Version 2.0.
        National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GAPublished 2014
        • Chan DKS
        • Chow SY
        • Lam CB
        • Cheung SF
        Examining the job-related, psychological, and physical outcomes of workplace sexual harassment: a meta-analytic review.
        Psychol Women Q. 2008; 32: 362-376
        • McDonald P
        Workplace sexual harassment 30 years on: a review of the literature.
        Int J Manag Rev. 2012; 14: 1-17
        • Willness CR
        • Steel P
        • Lee K
        A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment.
        Pers Psychol. 2007; 60: 127-162
        • Rauscher KJ
        Workplace violence against adolescent workers in the US.
        Am J Ind Med. 2008; 51: 539-544
      2. Stop Street Harassment. The Facts behind the #metoo Movement: A National Study on Sexual Harassment and Assault.www.stopstreetharassment.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Full-Report-2018-National-Study-on-Sexual-Harassment-and-Assault.pdf. Published 2018. Accessed March 1, 2018.

      3. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Sexual harassment. www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sexual_harassment.cfm. Accessed September 30, 2019.

      4. Guidelines on discrimination because of sex. Fed Regist. 1980;45:74676–74677. Codified at 29 CFR §1604.11.

        • Fineran S
        Adolescents at work: gender issues and sexual harassment.
        Violence Against Women. 2002; 8: 953-967
        • Smith CR
        • Gillespie GL
        • Beery TA
        Adolescent workers’ experiences of and training for workplace violence.
        Workplace Health Saf. 2015; 63: 297-307
        • Quick JC
        • McFadyen MA
        Sexual harassment: have we made any progress?.
        J Occup Health Psychol. 2017; 22: 286-298
      5. Society for Human Resource Management. Harassment-free workplace series: the executive view.www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-and-forecasting/research-and-surveys/Pages/Workplace-Sexual-Harassment.aspx. Updated October 4, 2018. Accessed October 4, 2018.

      6. U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Charges alleging sex-based harassment (charges filed with EEOC) FY 2010-FY 2018. www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/statistics/enforcement/sexual_harassment_new.cfm. Published 2018. Accessed April 30, 2018.

        • Barling J
        • Rogers AG
        • Kelloway EK
        Behind closed doors: in-home workers’ experience of sexual harassment and workplace violence.
        J Occup Health Psychol. 2001; 6: 255-269
        • Charlesworth S
        A snapshot of sex discrimination in employment: disputes and understandings.
        in: Charlesworth S Douglas K Fastenau M Cartwright S Women and Work 2005: Current RMIT University Research. RMIT Publishing, Melbourne, Australia2006: 81-98
        • Fitzgerald LF
        • Drasgow F
        • Magley VJ
        Sexual harassment in the armed forces: a test of an integrated model.
        Mil Psychol. 1999; 11: 329-343
      7. Hayes P. Taking it seriously: contemporary experiences of sexual harassment in the workplace.www.academia.edu/5332640/Taking_It_Seriously_Contemporary_Experiences_of_Sexual_Harassment_in_the_Workplace_WASH_Working_Against_Sexual_Harassment. Published 2004. Accessed February 27, 2018.

        • Lengnick-Hall ML
        Sexual harassment research: a methodological critique.
        Pers Psychol. 1995; 48: 841-864
        • Tziner A
        • Birati A
        Assessing employee turnover costs: a revised approach.
        Hum Resour Manag Rev. 1996; 6: 113-122
        • Hershcovis MS
        • Barling J.
        Comparing victim attributions and outcomes for workplace aggression and sexual harassment.
        J Appl Psychol. 2010; 95: 874-888
        • Sojo VE
        • Wood RE
        • Genat AE
        Harmful workplace experiences and women's occupational well-being: a meta-analysis.
        Psychol Women Q. 2016; 40: 10-40
        • McLaughlin H
        • Uggen C
        • Blackstone A
        Sexual harassment, workplace authority, and the paradox of power.
        Am Sociol Rev. 2012; 77: 625-647
        • Settles IH
        • Buchanan NT
        • Yap SCY
        • Harrell ZAT
        Sex differences in outcomes and harasser characteristics associated with frightening sexual harassment appraisals.
        J Occup Health Psychol. 2014; 19: 133-142
      8. U.S. Merit: Systems Protection Board. Sexual Harassment in the Federal Workplace: Trends, Progress, Continuing Challenges.www.mspb.gov/MSPBSEARCH/viewdocs.aspx?docnumber=253661&version=253948&application=ACROBAT. Published 1995. Accessed February 27, 2018.

      9. American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR). Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys. 7th ed. https://wapor.org/wp-content/uploads/StandardDefinitions2011.pdf. Published 2011. Accessed August 21, 2018.

        • Smith SG
        • Chen J
        • Basile KC
        • et al.
        The national intimate partner and sexual violence survey (NISVS): 2010–2012 state report.
        National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GAPublished 2017
        • Chamberlain LJ
        • Crowley M
        • Tope D
        • Hodson R
        Sexual harassment in organizational context.
        Work Occup. 2008; 35: 262-295
        • Basile KC
        • DeGue S
        • Jones K
        • et al.
        STOP SV: a Technical Package to Prevent Sexual Violence.
        National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA2016
        • Gruber JE
        The impact of male work environments and organizational policies on women's experiences of sexual harassment.
        Gend Soc. 1998; 12: 301-320
        • Proctor BD
        • Semega JL
        • Kollar MA
        Income and Poverty in the United States: 2015 (Report Number P60-256).
        U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DCPublished 2016
        • Frye J
        Not just the rich and famous: the pervasiveness of sexual harassment across industries affects all workers.
        Center for American Progress, Published 2017
      10. Hart Research Associates. Key findings from a survey of women fast food workers. https://hartresearch.com/fast-food-worker-harassment-survey-findings. Published 2016. Accessed April 30, 2018.

        • Coker AL
        • Fisher BS
        • Bush HM
        • et al.
        Evaluation of the Green Dot bystander intervention to reduce interpersonal violence among college students across three campuses.
        Violence Against Women. 2015; 21: 1507-1527
        • Holland KJ
        • Rabelo VC
        • Gustafson AM
        • Seabrook RC
        • Cortina LM
        Sexual harassment against men: examining the roles of feminist activism, sexuality, and organizational context.
        Psychol Men Masc. 2016; 17: 17-29
        • Cortina LM
        Assessing sexual harassment among Latinas: development of an instrument.
        Cult Divers Ethn Minor Psychol. 2001; 7: 164-181