Influences on Juror's Perceptions of Sexual Harassment
Participants role-played jurors evaluating the facts of a potential sexual harassment incident, including information on victim and perpetrator intoxication levels. They first made an individual determination of sexual harassment, followed by a group determination. Generally, sober perpetrators were more likely to be perceived as guilty of sexual harassment than either intoxicated perpetrators or when no information on perpetrator intoxication was available. However, victim intoxication interacted with gender to impact decisions of sexual harassment. Men were less likely than women to find the perpetrator guilty when the victim was sober. Women were less likely than men to find the perpetrator guilty when the victim was intoxicated. These data suggest that women provided more support for the "Just World Hypothesis" then did men. Women tended to blame the perpetrator when the victim was sober, but not when the victim was intoxicated. When there was no information about either the victim's or the perpetrator's intoxication status women were more likely than men to perceive sexual harassment. Information regarding intoxication level appeared to interfere with juror perceptions and their confidence in decisions of sexual harassment. When participants were placed in a group setting, they were more likely to change their decision from a finding of sexual harassment to one of no sexual harassment.
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations