Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Reasonable Woman Standard: A Meta-Analytic Review of Gender Differences in Perceptions of Sexual Harassment

The Reasonable Woman Standard: A Meta-Analytic Review of Gender Differences in Perceptions of... Courts and legislatures have begun to develop the “reasonable woman standard” (RWS) as a criterion for deciding sexual harassment trials. This standard rests on assumptions of a “wide divergence” between the perceptions of men and women when viewing social-sexual behavior that may be considered harassing. Narrative reviews of the literature on such perceptions have suggested that these assumptions are only minimally supported. To test these assumptions quantitatively, a meta-analytic review was conducted that assessed the size, stability, and moderators of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. The effect of the actor's status relative to the target also was evaluated meta-analytically, as one alternative to the importance of gender effects. Results supported the claims of narrative reviews for a relatively small gender effect, and draw attention to the status effect. In discussing legal implications of the present findings, earlier claims are echoed suggesting caution in establishing the reasonable woman standard, and one alternative to the RWS, the “reasonable victim standard,” is discussed. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Law and Human Behavior Springer Journals

The Reasonable Woman Standard: A Meta-Analytic Review of Gender Differences in Perceptions of Sexual Harassment

Blumenthal, Jeremy
Law and Human Behavior , Volume 22 (1) – Sep 30, 2004
Download PDF
25 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/the-reasonable-woman-standard-a-meta-analytic-review-of-gender-GYqbcKrAEH

References (96)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 by American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association
Subject
Psychology; Law and Psychology; Criminology and Criminal Justice, general; Personality and Social Psychology; Community and Environmental Psychology
ISSN
0147-7307
eISSN
1573-661X
DOI
10.1023/A:1025724721559
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Courts and legislatures have begun to develop the “reasonable woman standard” (RWS) as a criterion for deciding sexual harassment trials. This standard rests on assumptions of a “wide divergence” between the perceptions of men and women when viewing social-sexual behavior that may be considered harassing. Narrative reviews of the literature on such perceptions have suggested that these assumptions are only minimally supported. To test these assumptions quantitatively, a meta-analytic review was conducted that assessed the size, stability, and moderators of gender differences in perceptions of sexual harassment. The effect of the actor's status relative to the target also was evaluated meta-analytically, as one alternative to the importance of gender effects. Results supported the claims of narrative reviews for a relatively small gender effect, and draw attention to the status effect. In discussing legal implications of the present findings, earlier claims are echoed suggesting caution in establishing the reasonable woman standard, and one alternative to the RWS, the “reasonable victim standard,” is discussed.

Journal

Law and Human Behavior – Springer Journals

Published: Sep 30, 2004

There are no references for this article.