An Exploration of Cultural Differences in Perceptions of and Responses to Sexual Harassment - Dissertation Example

? The current research aims to explore the impact of cultural factors on perceptions and response to incidences of sexual harassment on students of high school in title one school. Sexual harassment has been frequently reported and investigated in working places and academic institutions for higher studies and professional courses. The high incidence of sexual harassment in high schools as reported by recent surveys has been a surprising revelation. The juvenile minds are incompletely developed to identify and deal with such problems. Identification and awareness development is determined by the individual’s perceptions of the situation which in turn are determined by their cultural driven values and socioeconomic status. In the current research participants from grades 7 through 11 were studied using a phenomenological approach to understand their perception and response to sexual harassment and correlate this with their cultural background. Interview and observation were used as tools for data collection. An Exploration of Cultural Differences in Perceptions of and Responses to Sexual Harassment in a Title One High School Introduction Sexual harassment (SH) is a gender based phenomenon of extreme concern affecting the present and future life of many young students of either sex throughout the world (Rahimi & Liston, 2011). In U.S. SH in middle and high school has been of common occurrence with almost half (48%) of students confirming to have experienced some form of sexual harassment in a 2011 survey, with approximately 87% admitting that it has an adverse impact on them. This comes as surprise since SH in schools has been infrequently reported (Hill & Kearl, 2011). Sexual harassment, a term originally coined with reference to workplace behavior has also come to include incidences in school. In school it refers to sexual conduct that negatively affects students’ academic interests. SH in school is defined as ‘unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature, which can include unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal, non-verbal, or physical conduct of sexual nature’ (Hill & Kearl, 2011). Thus SH includes verbal, physical as well as harassment through electronic means; each of which is highly common with verbal being most frequent. Girls are more frequently a target compared to boys (56% against 40%), with their experiences being more physical and intrusive compared to that of boys (Hand & Sanchez, 2001). Most harassers belong to peer with lesser number of incidences involving school staff (Eckes, 2006). In 1980, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recognized two forms of actionable SH; the quid pro quo harassment and the hostile environment harassment. The former refers to threat or assurance of consequences due to forbidding or offering of sexual favors. These favors may be demanded explicitly or implicitly and must involve substantial consequences. On the other hand hostile environment type of sexual environment refers to the work or school environment becoming totally offensive or difficult as a consequence of sexual overtures, conduct or physical gestures. In either case the environment is uncomfortable and unsuitable for pursue individual goals (Zimbroff, 2007). Legal provisions dealing with SH in schools are provided by the Title IX, the Education Amendments, passed by the Congress in 1972. The act states that ‘no person in Unites States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving financial assistance (p1681)’. The law also addresses peer-on-peer sexual harassment and considers it as a discrimination occurring in school premises and during school hours thus rendering it as a suitable cause of action against school authorities (DeSouza & Solberg, 2003). There have been several controversies and confusions with respect to legal definitions of perceptions of hostility and psychological harm that renders a SH case as actionable or simply unpleasant. In an attempt to reconcile these issues, The Supreme Court in 1986, defined two preconditions for hostile environment. One that a reasonable person in plaintiff’s position must find the environment hostile, and two; there must be at least some evidence of psychological harm to substantiate that the environment was hostile and abusive (Zimbroff, 2007). The perceptions and reactions of individual to specific situations are subjective and dependent on several factors such as individuals’ prior experiences, socioeconomic state, prejudices, cultural beliefs, and physical factors. Girls in high school have been reported to be more frequent targets of SH compared to those in middle school, however the adverse impact of these incidences on high school girls has been reported to be lower than that in middle school probably due to better coping and support systems. Several other factors such as race, culture, sexual orientation, disabilities etc have been found to affect response to and impact of SH on girls (Gruber & Fineran, 2007). The concept of SH becomes even more complex in multicultural environment since perceptions of an individual in general are highly influenced by his values that in turn are determined by his cultural beliefs (Zimbroff, 2007). Students in Title one schools belong to low income families that have been shown to more at risk of social abuse. Their financial concerns, prior experiences and lack of parental support alter their perception and reactions to incidences of SH (Briggs & Hawkins, 1996). Problem Statement In the light of the above discussion the following issues emerge: 1. Sexual harassment in high school is much prevalent and a cause of significant concern. 2. Title IX provides legal provisions that help victims of SH in academic institutions. 3. Title IX recognition of actionable SH is subjective. 4. According to Title IX, SH is dependent on individuals’ perception of hostile environment along with evidence of psychological harm. 5. Perception of SH is dependent on individual personal, socioeconomic and cultural factors. Considering the aforementioned points, it is of utmost significance to investigate the impact of cultural differences on the perception of and reaction to incidences of SH. Thus the present research aims to explore Cultural Differences in Perceptions of and Responses to Sexual Harassment in a Title one High School. Research Questions In order to achieve the aim of the study, a qualitative investigation would be followed to pursue the following objectives: 1. A review of available literature exploring the cross cultural differences in the perception and response to SH. 2. Study of demographic characteristics of selected title one school students 3. Frequency of exposure to incidences of SH both as victim and as perpetrator 4. Perception of SH 5. Reaction to incidences of SH 6. Correlation of cultural and economic background of the participants with their perception and reaction to incidences of sexual harassment Literature Review Available literature though few, provides concrete evidences for cross cultural differences in attitudes towards incidences of SH (Sigal et al., 2005). It must however be pointed out that rare studies have explored the impact of cross cultural factors on perceptions of SH among high school students. One of the rare studies conducted recently by Attar-Schwartz (2009), explored the correlation between students’ reports of SH and peer victimization, and their cultural background along with other student characteristics as well as school factors. A nationally representative sample population of 16,604 students of grades 7 through 11, from 327 schools of Israel participated in the study. The study provided questionnaires to the participants that were to be filled in the class itself and utilized Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) to investigate the correlation. The study found that 25.6% of students have been exposed to at least one incidence of SH during the month preceding the survey. A larger proportion of the students that were the victims belong to either of the groups: Israeli-Arab students, students with less educated parents, students from larger schools and classrooms etc. Gender patterns were found to vary for the Israeli-Arab and Jewish schools and for schools with varying percentage of students from families of low socioeconomic status. The study though not conclusive was successful in stressing the need of exploring cultural and socioeconomic factors along with gender and family issues in context to perceptions and reactions to incidences of SH. Rucker and Gendrin (2008) compared the cultural differences in the perception of Asian and American college students. The hypothesis tested in the study claimed that American students report sexually harassing conversations more often than their Asian counterparts. The study involved 164 American and 152 Asian participants (total number 316), with an average age of 23.26, from a midwestern university. The measures included conversational appropriateness scale and conversational effectiveness scale, both comprising of 10 items that were ranked on a 5-point Likert-type scale by the participants. Multiple regression analysis and individual t-test were done to test the hypothesis. The results favored the hypothesis that American students more often report conversational inappropriateness in context to SH. Both groups were found to be equally intolerant of SH and this can be accounted for equal level of awareness of SH in both cultures and though the subject is taboo in Asian cultures, those exposed to U.S. culture receive sufficient information to be able to identify it. The study involved participants from U.S. and therefore exposed and influenced to multicultural environments. The participants were as much influenced by U.S. culture as by their family cultures. This accounts for the mixed results. Kennedy and Gorzalka (2002), in a study exploring cultural differences with respect to SH among Asian and non Asian women reported that Asians men as well as women perceived sex conservatively. According to them it was natural for a man to make sexual advances towards women they found attractive. Thus neither the men nor the women were offended by a conduct that in non-Asian populations was considered as harassment. Traditional upbringing of women in Asian cultures made them more tolerant of physical and emotional stress making them more tolerant of SH outside. Moreover, sex being a taboo in these cultures, often incidences of SH would remain unreported (Lee, 2001). In contrast legal provision in U.S. empowers women in academic institutions to remain aware of and report similar incidences (Rucker and Gendrin 2008). Studies have also been designed to explore the perceptions regarding SH of different ethnic groups in a country (Li & Lee-Wong, 2005). Students and staff members of Chinese, Malay, Indian and Caucasian origin from four Singaporean universities rated verbal and non-verbal cues. The cues were rated as SH more frequently by Malay and Chinese participants compared to the remaining two. Their observations led the researchers to conclude that perception of SH was determined by distortion of these cues by either the victim or the harasser and by disruption of communication. Both of these factors are dependent on culture and social values. Thus, culture is a critical determinant of the perception and response to SH. An exhaustive study conducted by Sigal and associates in 2005 aimed to investigate the cross-cultural differences in attitude towards incidences of SH across nine countries with diverse political, geographic and cultural attributes. The countries included were Unites States, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, Ecuador, Taiwan, Turkey, Philippines and Pakistan with number of participants 78, 35, 41, 136, 57, 87, 185, 63 & 67 respectively. All participants were university students. The countries on the basis of their cultural background were grouped into individualist or those based on greater emphasis on individual compared to group welfare; and collectivist or those which place greater emphasis on group needs than individual rights and accomplishments. The authors tested the hypothesis that the perception of SH in individualistic countries would be more negative compared to that in collectivist countries. Further the authors also hypothesized that in individualistic countries more blame for the SH would be placed on perpetrator rather than the victim. An academic scenario describing an incidence of complaint of SH by a female college student brought against a college professor was presented to the participants, with the scenario suitably modified in accordance with culture of the country being studied. No major changes were required in any of the countries except Pakistan. The measurements were done for two criteria; guilt and penalty. Guilt attribution and the level of guilt were assigned on a 7-point Likert-type scale, with lower numbers indicating greater perception of SH. If considered guilty by the participants, they were further asked to assign a suitable punishment. Responsibility of the victim and perpetrators also were measured on a 7-point Likert-type scale with higher number indicating greater responsibility. Finally participants were asked to fill a 10-item attitude scale, the Tolerance for SH Inventory (TSHI) (Sigal et al., 2005). As hypothesized by the authors, the participants from individualistic countries considered the professor as guilty more frequently than those from collectivist countries with the former attributing more responsibility to the perpetrator. TSHI scores were also more negative for participants from individualistic countries. These results are indicative of the fact that the individualistic societies are more concerned with individual rights and therefore individuals belonging to these cultures are more critical in their perception and response to incidences of SH. Collectivist societies on the other hand are more concerned with maintenance of harmony in the society, and therefore tend to overlook individual rights and well being (Sigal et al., 2005). The second hypothesis with respect to punishment was proved to be wrong with participants from collectivist countries assigning more severe penalty compared to individualists to the harasser. Further the choice of penalty type among the collectivist too was highly varied and influenced by their cultural background. Interpreting the varied results is a complex task. For e.g. in Germany with an individualistic culture, great emphasis is placed on personal independence. At prima facie this may lead to the indication that sever penalty would be assigned to the guilty however, sense of personal boundaries prevents the participants from Germany to be judgmental. Further respect for individual achievements of the professor may have led the participants to be less harsh in meting punishment to him (Sigal et al., 2005). The study was exhaustive in involving participants as well as researchers from different countries however the participants were not randomly selected and hence cannot be considered truly representative. Further variations in age of participants was unaccounted for which may have contributed to different perceptions to incidences of SH. Methodology Quantitative and Qualitative Methods Quantitative and qualitative methods are two complimentary approaches that provide the researcher two legitimate tools for exploring an idea. While the former helps in development of in depth understanding of the perceptions and opinions of the participants, the latter enables the testing of hypothesis through an empirical and statistical approach. The tools for former include case studies, ethnography and observational studies such as interviews etc (Newman & Benz, 1998). In the current research a phenomenological approach was used since it was important o understand the participants’ experiences and their perception of the situation in order to be able to gather data regarding their perceptions and opinions. Sample The sample population for the study was derived randomly from diverse low income Title one schools across U.S. The participants belonged to grades 7 through 11. The participants were purposively selected to present diverse opinions on the basis of their first hand experiences in order to ensure phenomenological approach to the problem. Data Collection The approach of the study was phenomenological and hence the data collection tools comprised for interviews, observations and documentation. Interview method involves contact method during which a series of research related questions are presented to the participants. A good and unbiased researcher is able to gather genuine data from both verbal and non-verbal responses of the respondents. Unlike a questionnaire, it also has the added advantage of being a two way communication between the interviewer and the respondents (Cohen et al., 2007). Ethics Bells’ checklist was used as a basic framework for ethical considerations. Permissions for the research were obtained through proper official channels. Informed consent was obtained by each of the participants with assurance of confidentially and anonymity. In this regard information sheet guidance for Institutional Review Boards (IRB) was followed. Credibility Validity and reliability are the two essential prerequisites for credibility and efficiency of quantitative research method, while for qualitative research methods credibility and transferability are the major criteria (Trochim, 2008). Validity is defined as the attribute of a data collection tool that enables it to specifically and exclusively measure the quantity it is designed for (De Vaus, 2002). External validity is the ability of study design to enable the results to be generalized to the overall population or situation that the sample represents. Internal validity on the other hand refers to the ability of study design to eliminate the confounding variables within the study itself. Reliability refers to the extent to which a test procedure is capable of reproducing results given the same set of conditions (Bell, 2005). Since phenomenological research is based on participants’ descriptions and explores their opinions and perceptions, the conclusions derived from the study should represent their perspective. This aspect of research is measured by the criteria of credibility. Transferability is the ability of the readers of the research to transfer, apply and compare the conclusions of the study to other situations, samples or environment. This is more important in context to phenomenological studies, since readers are able to identify with the respondents or the situations studied (Trochim, 2008). REFERENCES 1. Attar-Schwartz, S. (2009). Peer sexual harassment victimization at school: the roles of student characteristics, cultural affiliation, and school factors. Am J Orthopsychiatry , 407-20. 2. Bell, J. (2005). Doing your research project: A guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science (4th ed.). Maidenhead, England: : Open University Press. 3. Briggs, F., & Hawkins, R. M. (1996). Low Socio-Economic Status Children are Disadvantaged in the Provision of School-Based Child Protection Programmes. Br J Soc Work , 667-78. 4. Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K., & Morrison, K. R. (2007). Research methods in education. NY: Routledge. 5. De Vaus, D. (2005). Surveys in social research. NSW: Routledge. 6. DeSouza, E. R. (2003). Incidence and dimensions of sexual harassment across culture. In M. A. Paludi, & C. A. Paludi, Academic and workplace sexual harassment (pp. 3-30). CT, USA: Praeger. 7. Eckes, S. (2006). Reducing peer sexual harassment in schools. Education digest , 36-40. 8. Gruber, J. E., & Fineran, S. (2007). The Impact of Bullying and Sexual Harassment on Middle and High School Girls. Violence against women , 627-43. 9. Hand, J. Z., & Sanchez, L. (2000). Badgering or bantering: gender differences in experience of and reactions to sexual harassment among U.S. high school students. Gender and society , 718-46. 10. Hill, C., & Kearl, H. (2011). Crossing the line: sexual harassment at school. Washington D. C.: AAUW. 11. Kennedy, M. A., & Gorzalka, B. (2002). Asian and non-Asian attitudes towards rape, sexual harassment, and sexuality. Sex roles , 227-38. 12. Lee, J. H. (2001). Women workers under the double burden of unstable environment and gender discrimination. Working women , 25-38. 13. Li, S., & Lee-Wong, S. M. (2005). A study on Singaporeans' perceptions of sexual harassment from a cross-cultural perspective. J. Applied Soc. Psychol. , 701-2. 14. Newman, I., & Benz, C. R. (1998). Qualitative and quantitative research methodology. USA: Southern Illinois University. 15. Rahimi, R., & Liston, D. (2011). Race, class, and emerging sexuality: teacher perceptions and sexual harassment in schools. Gender and education , 23 (7). 16. Rucker, M. L., & Gendrin, D. M. (2008). Revisting sexual harassment: are there cultural differences between the Asian and American college students. Human Communication , 423-36. 17. Sigal, J., Gibbs, M. S., Goodrich, C., Rashid, T., Anjum, A., Hsu, D., et al. (2005). Cross-cultural reactions to academic sexual harassment: effects of individualist vs. collectivist culture and gender of particpants. Sex roles , 201-15. 18. Trochim, W. M. (2008). Qualitative Validity. Retrieved December 2011, from Research methods knowledge base: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qualval.php 19. Zimbroff, J. (2007). Cultural differences in perceptions of and responses to sexual differences. Duke journal of gender law and policy , 1311-41. Read More

 

Read More