1 / 35

Richard J. Harris, Ph.D. University of Texas, San Antonio

Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI). Important Issues Related to Measuring Reports about Sexual Harassment and Assault: The SHSA Module. Richard J. Harris, Ph.D. University of Texas, San Antonio. Note:.

enrico
Download Presentation

Richard J. Harris, Ph.D. University of Texas, San Antonio

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) Important Issues Related to Measuring Reports about Sexual Harassment and Assault: The SHSA Module Richard J. Harris, Ph.D. University of Texas, San Antonio

  2. Note: My name is on this presentation. However, all of the work accomplished at DEOMI last summer resulted from equal collaboration with my research colleague and spouse: Dr. Juanita M. Firestone.

  3. This research continues a focus on creating conceptual distinctions among sexual harassment, sexist behaviors and sexual assault. • new data • refined measurement

  4. DEOCS Retrieved July 14, 2011 from: http://www.deocs.net/DocDownloads/DEOCS_Description.pdf 1. What is a DEOCS? The Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS) is a confidential, command-requested organization development survey focusing on issues of equal opportunity and organizational effectiveness. 2. Who administers the DEOCS? The DEOCS program is managed and administered by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI).

  5. DEOCS (Continued) 3. What does the DEOCS Survey look like? The core survey contains 63 items, but military personnel will need to complete only 56 items. Approximately half the items address EO/EEO issues, the remainder address organizational and demographic areas. In all, the DEOCS measures 14 climate factors: eight EO/EEO and six OE factors. These are all measured on a five-point scale. A sample of the survey is available for download from this site. Commanders can also elect to add up to ten (10) locally developed questions (LDQs)… Retrieved July 14, 2011 from: http://www.deocs.net/DocDownloads/DEOCS_Description.pdf

  6. Special “SHSA” module • DEOCS participants during March 17 – 25, 2011, were invited to volunteer to take the supplemental module. • Promise of anonymity reenforced • Promise of no report back to the Unit Commander • First issue: the questions --

  7. General Organizational ContextResponses: Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided, Disagree, Strongly Disagree(Questions in Blue Font are conceptually Reverse Ordered) 1 Members of my work group feel free to report sexual harassment without fear of reprisal. 2 Members of my work group feel free to report sexual assault without fear of reprisal. 3 Complaints about sexual harassment would be taken seriously, no matter who makes them. 4 People would likely get away with committing sexual harassment if it was reported. 5 People would likely get away with committing sexual assault if it was reported. 6 Policies forbidding sexual harassment are well publicized. 7 Complaint procedures related to sexual harassment are well publicized. 8 Reports of sexual harassment are taken seriously. 9 Sexual assault reporting procedures are well publicized. 10 Sexist jokes are frequently heard. 11 Reports of sexual assault are taken seriously. 12 Some people here make sexually suggestive remarks about other people. 13 My supervisor helps everyone in my workgroup feel included. 14 I trust my supervisor to deal fairly with issues of equal treatment in the workplace. 15 All personnel are kept well informed about issues and decisions that affect them.

  8. Sexist and Harassment ExperiencesResponses: Yes, No 16 In the last 12 months, someone here has treated me as an inferior because of my sex. 17 In the last 12 months, someone here has made offensive sexist remarks to me. 18 In the last 12 months, someone here has put me down or was condescending to me because of my sex. 19 In the last 12 months, someone here has made unwelcome attempts to draw me into a discussion of sexual matters. 20 In the last 12 months, someone here has made offensive remarks about my appearance, body, or sexual activities. 21 In the last 12 months, someone here has made unwanted attempts to establish a romantic sexual relationship with me, despite my efforts to discourage it. 22 In the last 12 months, someone here has made gestures or used body language of a sexual nature that embarrassed or offended me. 23 In the last 12 months, someone here has continued to ask me for dates, drinks, dinner, etc., even though I said “no.” 24 In the last 12 months, someone here has touched me in a way that made me feel uncomfortable. 25 In the last 12 months, someone here has made me feel like I was being bribed with a reward to engage in sexual behavior. 26 In the last 12 months, someone here made me feel threatened with some sort of retaliation for not being sexually cooperative. 27 In the last 12 months, someone here has treated me badly for refusing to have sex. 28 In the last 12 months, someone here has implied faster promotions or better treatment if I were sexually cooperative.

  9. Second Issue: The Respondents Who “Volunteers” To Answer SHSA Questions? • Initially, we had no clear basis for answering the question. • But, we had access to a data set that we created in 2009 based on DEOCS respondents from October to December of 2008. • Much larger. (Potentially more “representative?”) • Different time of year. (Relevant?) • Earlier time period. (Might things have changed?)

  10. Differences by Sex of Respondent Reports of Personal Experiences of Sexual Harassment in the Last 12 Months

  11. A few key observations: • Volunteers not highly selected from those reporting sexual harassment experiences in the last 12 months. • But, slightly fewer females than expected. • Higher representation from the Army than expected. • Slightly fewer officers. • Fewer African Americans than expected, especially given the high proportion from the Army. • Things to worry about (later): • Can we safely generalize to a larger population from this sample? • Might weighting to reflect a known demographic profile help? • Did the volunteers provide valid and reliable responses to the core DEOCS questions?

  12. First check: the measures look (almost surprisingly) good.

  13. A few more key observations: • All of the reliability coefficients for all of the scales have high values. • Most of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the volunteers are actually a bit higher than those from the 2008 respondents. (None are lower.) • However, mean scores from the volunteers are mostly a bit lower. The three with the greatest difference: • Organizational Commitment (4.83% lower) • Work Group Effectiveness (3.56% lower) • Job Satisfaction (3.0% lower) • Are the differences due to: • Random variation? • The distributional characteristics of the sample? • Evidence of real change?

  14. After a few weeks – Obtained the data for the “Non-Volunteers” from the same time period. • This opens up some new and valuable analysis possibilities. • Can compare profiles. • Most importantly, can use both sets of respondents to establish indicators of “Unit Climate.”

  15. Differences between volunteers and non-volunteers less prominent than when compared to the 2008 respondents. Army still overrepresented, but not by as much. Other “statistically significant” differences (due to large samples), but small in magnitude. Both volunteers and non-volunteers may be a bit “unusual” demographically. This must be kept in mind when generalizing and, when possible, results should be compared to other samples.

  16. Other Potential Concerns Do all respondents take these surveys seriously? Socially Desirable Responses -- the answers respondent thinks significant others want to hear. Response Set – give exactly the same response code to all items in a set of questions.

  17. Regardless of all of the sample and measurement quality concerns …!! Let’s look at how the questions fit together. Factor Analysis (Principle Components Analysis or PCA) can be a useful tool for identifying sets of variables that “cluster” together as indicators of larger concepts (factors). Tried several variations – all with the same basic outcomes.

  18. The three clear factors emerging from questions 1 to 15 (general context of work group and supervisors) are tentatively labeled:  1.     Policy Clarity/Freedom to Report Issues2.     Sexist Behavior/Get Away With Harassment3.     Supervisor Clarity/Communication But factor 2 seems to mix conceptually distinct issues – sexism, sexual behavior and belief people could get away with SHSA behaviors.

  19. Excluding questionable response pattern cases alters the results.

  20. Two factors that emerge from questions 16 to 28 (experiences in last 12 months) are tentatively labeled: 1.     Individualistic Harassment (e.g., touch, bribe, threaten)2.     Broader Sexist Behavior (e.g., sexist treatment, offensive remarks about women in general and appearance in particular) similar to what we have called Environmental in previous work, but blended here with harassment and sexist (but not harassment) behaviors loading on the same factor.

  21. Identical Patterns. But, seem to mix sexist and potentially harassing behaviors.

  22. Distinct patterns for men and women.

  23. A Model for Predicting Attempted or Actual Sexual Assault

  24. Environmental (Crude, Unwanted Sexual Communication and Behavior) Harassment Sexist Behavior Attempted or Actual Sexual Assault Individual (Coercive, Physical) Harassment Figure 1: Explanatory Model to Predict Attempted and/or Actual Sexual Assault

  25. (2004 WGRR data, Reservists) Males Females Source of graph: Firestone and Harris, Armed Forces and Society, 2009.

  26. (2006 WGRA data, Active Duty) Source of graph: DEOMI presentation, Summer 2009

  27. Powerful Evidence • Even given the sampling and measurement quality concerns in the DEOCS data: • When there are no reports of sexist behavior, there is very little individual level sexual harassment. • Conversely, when sexist behavior is reported large percentages also report individual level sexual harassment. • But … this focuses on individual reports about their own experiences.

  28. Unique Possibility: Non-Volunteer reports about the “Unit Climate” as a basis for predicting experiences of the Volunteers. There are 184 units with 10 or more Volunteers and 10 or more Non-Volunteers. R = 0.34 57 Units at Zero SH, 127 with some

  29. Conclusions • Our new analyses support past research indicating that environmental context influences the probability of individual harassment (and assault) experiences. • The first analyses we completed with 1988 DoD data established the strong relationship between environmental and individualized harassment. This has been replicated in 1995, 2002 and 2006 with the DMDC random samples, and now in 2011 with the DEOCS. • Attempting to remedy the problem of harassment by focusing on changing individual behaviors will fail. • It seems very clear that altering the “Unit Climates” in which sexism still may be unofficially condoned and institutionally supported is the key to reducing individualized sexual harassment and assault.

  30. Thank you very much for your attention. Any questions?

More Related