Premium
The Empirical Basis for the Reasonable Woman Standard
Author(s) -
Gutek Barbara A.,
O'Connor Maureen
Publication year - 1995
Publication title -
journal of social issues
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.618
H-Index - 122
eISSN - 1540-4560
pISSN - 0022-4537
DOI - 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1995.tb01314.x
Subject(s) - harassment , plaintiff , ninth , perspective (graphical) , psychology , variety (cybernetics) , social psychology , double standard , empirical research , law , political science , computer science , statistics , mathematics , physics , artificial intelligence , acoustics
In Ellison v. Brady, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals said that the perspective of a reasonable woman, rather than just a reasonable person, should be used in deciding whether or not the plaintiff has experienced sexual harassment. One of the assumptions underlying the Ellison opinion, traceable to findings from research, is that men and women perceive and define sexual harassment differently. In this article, we review the research to see if the conclusion is warranted. In general, the finding that women define sexual harassment more broadly and inclusively than men is reliable, but the difference is small, often smaller than intrasex differences, and is affected by a variety of factors, including characteristics of the study itself. After reviewing the evidence, we evaluate the use of a reasonable woman standard, concluding that this standard is not helpful.