Prod #:

Psychology of Men & Masculinity Copyright 2002 by the Educational Publishing Foundation
2002, Vol. 3, No. 2, 119–126 1524-9220/02/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//1524-9220.3.2.119

Psychological Predictors of Sexual Harassment:

Authoritarianism, Hostile Sexism, and Rape Myths
Joseph J. Begany and Michael A. Milburn
University of Massachusetts at Boston

Sexual harassment has been found to be common in the workplace. Forty-two percent to 88% of
working women report having been sexually harassed. Recent research on sexual harassment has
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

taken a cognitive approach, arguing that male sexual harassment of women results from 2 types
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

of sexism in combination with stereotypes: hostile sexism and benevolent sexism. This study
considers a model that a deeper personality characteristic, authoritarianism, contributes to the
likelihood of sexual harassment, in combination with variables identified as influencing sexual
aggression. Results consistent with a model of emotional displacement indicated that authoritari-
anism predicts men’s self-reported likelihood of engaging in sexual harassment, mediated by
belief in rape myths and S. Fiske and P. Glick’s (1995) Hostile Sexism. Benevolent sexism did
not predict the likelihood of sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment has been found to be common
in the workplace, with between 42% and 88% of
working women reporting having been sexually ha-
rassed (Ragins & Scandura, 1996). Recent social psy-
chological research on sexual harassment (Fiske &
Glick, 1995; Glick & Fiske, 1996) has taken a cog-
nitive approach, arguing that male sexual harassment
of women results from two types of sexism in com-
bination with stereotypes: hostile sexism and benevo-
lent sexism. The research reported here considers a
model that a deeper personality characteristic, au-
thoritarianism, contributes to the likelihood of sexual
harassment, in combination with variables identified
as influencing sexual aggression.
Authoritarianism and Sexual Aggression
Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, and Sanford
(1950) argued that what they called the authoritarian
personality develops as a result of harsh, punitive
child rearing and the consequential displacement of
negative emotions into the public realm. Using a psy-
choanalytic model of emotional displacement, the au-
thors argued that negative emotions such as anger
and hatred that a child experiences toward his or her
parents as a result of harsh punishment are displaced
onto those from whom little or no threat of retribution
exists. Authoritarian aggression and ethnocentrism
Correspondence concerning this article should be ad-
dressed to Joseph J. Begany or Michael A. Milburn,
Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts,
100 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, Massachusetts 02125.
E-mail: theobeg@prodigy.net
119
were both major components of authoritarianism
(Adorno et al., 1950). They regarded the subordina-
tion of women to be an example of ethnocentrism
directed at minorities (Adorno et al., 1950, p. 107),
and they observed that individuals high in authori-
tarianism “exhibit signs of underlying resentful dis-
respect for women generally” (p. 866). Sexual ha-
rassment can be seen as an act of sexual aggression
toward women1 that may be subsumed under the
larger category of authoritarian aggression.
Currently, the most widely used measure of au-
thoritarianism is the Right-Wing Authoritarianism
(RWA) Scale developed by Altemeyer (1981). Indi-
viduals high in authoritarianism often show rigid ad-
herence to cultural traditions and traditional gender
roles, and they may exhibit hypermasculinity (Alte-
meyer, 1988). Altemeyer (1988, p. 184) argued that
fear of a dangerous world, self-righteousness, and
vindictive envy all play a role in explaining authori-
tarian aggression; all these elements could play a role
in sexual harassment.
Although authoritarianism has not as yet been
shown to be a predictor of male perpetration of sex-
ual harassment, it has been found to be predictive of
both physically and sexually aggressive behaviors.
Research has demonstrated that authoritarianism is a
predictor of battering (Ou, 1996) and sexually ag-
gressive behavior (Petty & Dawson, 1989; Walker,
Rowe, & Quinsey, 1993). We hypothesized, there-
fore, that a high level of self-reported authoritarian-
ism would be predictive of the likelihood of sexual
1
Children and men also experience sexual harassment,
but these issues are beyond the scope of this study.
 120 BEGANY AND MILBURN
harassment. It was hypothesized, in addition, that this
relationship would be mediated by acceptance of rape
myths and by attitudes of hostile and benevolent
sexism.
The conceptualization of a continuum of sexual
aggression inclusive of sexual harassment may be
defined by non-physically violent sexual aggression
(verbal sexual harassment) at one end of the con-
tinuum and extreme sexual violence (rape) at the
other end. If we consider non-physically violent sex-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
ual harassment as behavior that falls on one end
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
of the continuum of sexual aggression, it is then rea-
sonable to look to the sexual aggression literature
to begin to understand some of the underlying per-
sonality characteristics that may motivate sexual ha-
rassment perpetration by men. This literature, which
has examined both behavioral and psychological pre-
dictors of male sexual aggression, is relevant as a
point at which to begin to consider behavioral and
psychological predictors of perpetration of sexual
harassment.
Sexual aggression researchers have identified a
number of personality and behavioral characteristics
that are predictive of sexually aggressive behavior in
men. Koss and Dinero (1988) found that rape myths,
hostility toward women, acceptance of interpersonal
violence as a viable relationship tool, conservative
attitudes and beliefs about sex, the belief that sexual
relationships are basically exploitative, and negative
values related to masculinity predicted sexual aggres-
sion. Petty and Dawson (1989) found that the psy-
chological characteristics most highly correlated with
self-reported sexual aggression were high impulsiv-
ity, a high degree of dominance (the desire to control
one’s environment), aggression (the acceptance of
interpersonal violence as a relationship tool), and a
great desire for social recognition (desire to gain so-
cial acceptance from male peers through sexually ag-
gressive behavior toward women).
The hypothesized relationship between authoritari-
anism and sexual harassment may be mediated by the
psychological variables that have been identified in
the sexual aggression literature as well as in the so-
cial psychological literature on sexual harassment. In
the research presented here, we evaluate a series of
potential mediators, including support for rape
myths, hostile sexism, and benevolent sexism.
Social Psychological Research
Social psychologists have recently become inter-
ested in explaining male sexual harassment behavior.
Fiske and Glick (1995) argued that there are two
“core” types of harassment, benevolent (character-
ized by a genuine desire for lasting heterosexual in-
timacy) and hostile (primarily expressing a desire for
male dominance). These researchers suggest that dif-
ferences in these factors, paternalism, gender differ-
entiation, and heterosexuality distinguish between
the two core types of harassment.
Hostile motives for harassment are characterized
by a belief in male superiority, viewing women as
inferior and thus promoting competition, and a desire
to dominate women sexually. Benevolent motives for
harassment include protectiveness (although this im-
plies women are “weak”), favorable attitudes toward
women in traditional roles of mother and homemaker
(although this views women as disempowered ser-
vants of men), and a desire for intimacy. Glick and
Fiske (1996) noted that measures of hostile sexism
and benevolent sexism are correlated with one an-
other and that although there are differences, both of
these sets of attitudes serve to justify men’s power.
Glick and Fiske (1996) discussed the sources of
hostile and benevolent sexism, placing them in the
context of biological and social conditions that are
common to human experience. In contrast to this
perspective, the current study specifies personality
influences on sexist beliefs, specifically an individu-
al’s level of authoritarianism. Our model suggests
that hostile and benevolent sexism should be medi-
ating variables between authoritarianism and sexual
harassment.
Various components of hostile and benevolent sex-
ism (e.g., need to dominate sexually, belief in male
superiority) are highly similar to factors that re-
searchers have identified as predictors of sexual ag-
gression. Thus, including hostile and benevolent sex-
ism as potential mediators between authoritarianism
and sexual harassment, along with an individual’s
support for rape myths, integrates the literatures on
sexual harassment, sexual aggression, and authori-
tarianism. In this study we investigated the extent to
which a series of psychological characteristics iden-
tified in the sexual harassment and sexual aggression
literatures mediate the relationship between authori-
tarianism and the likelihood of sexual harassment.
We hypothesized (a) that authoritarianism would pre-
dict the likelihood of engaging in sexual harassment
and (b) that this relationship would be mediated by
support for rape myths and by attitudes of hostile
sexism and benevolent sexism toward women.
Method
Participants
The participants of this study were 104 men drawn
from the student population at the University of Mas-
 AUTHORITARIANISM AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT
sachusetts at Boston. Participants ranged in age from
18 to 74 years and represented a broad range of de-
mographic characteristics, including ethnic diversity.
The sample was reflective of the diverse nature of the
student population. The average age was 28.1 years,
with 29% of the sample being over 30 and 19% being
over 40.
Of the total sample, men self-identifying as Cau-
casian represented 51.9%, Latino Americans repre-
sented 7.7%, Asian Americans represented 6.7%, re-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
cent immigrants from Europe represented 6.7%, and
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
African Americans represented 3.8%. One partici-
pant was of Native American descent.
The participants were administered a survey con-
taining self-report instruments that are frequently
used by researchers to study issues such as authori-
tarianism, characteristics of perpetrators of physical
and sexual violence against women and children, sex-
ist attitudes toward women, and the likelihood of
sexual harassment perpetration.
Measures
Sexual harassment. Sexual harassment was op-
erationalized using the Likelihood to Sexually Harass
(LSH) Scale (Pryor, Giedd, & Williams, 1995). The
LSH Scale measures an individual’s likelihood of
sexual harassment using responses to 10 scenarios.
The convergent validity of the LSH Scale has been
established with respect to three domains: scales re-
lated to sexual violence, scales related to gender
roles, and scales related to sexual behavior. It has
been significantly correlated with Burt’s (1980) Ad-
versarial Sexual Beliefs Scale (r ⳱ .39) and Rape
Myth Acceptance Scale (r ⳱ .33; n ⳱ 117). The
LSH Scale is answered on a 7-point Likert scale.
Cronbach’s alpha for the LSH Scale in the present
study was .91.
Following is a sample scenario:
Imagine that you are a college professor. You are 38
years old. You teach in a very large university and you
are a full professor with tenure. You are renowned in
your field (abnormal psychology) and have numerous
offers for other jobs. One day following the return of
an examination to a class, a female student stops in
your office. She tells you that her score is one point
away from an “A” and asks you if she can do some
extra credit project to raise her score. She tells you that
she may not have a sufficient grade to get into graduate
school without the “A.” Several other students have
asked to do extra credit assignments, and you have
declined to let them. This particular woman is abso-
lutely gorgeous. She sits in the front row of the class
every day and always wears short skirts. You find her
121
extremely sexy. How likely are you to do the following
things in this situation [each question answered on a
scale from 1 ⳱ not at all likely to 7 ⳱ very likely]?
A. Would you offer her a project for extra credit
(e.g., write a paper)?
B. Assuming that you are very secure in your job
and the university has always tolerated professors who
make passes at students, would you offer the student a
chance to earn extra credit in return for sexual favors?
C. Given the same situation as above, would you
ask her to join you for dinner to discuss the possible
extra credit assignments?
Authoritarianism. The RWA Scale was devel-
oped by Robert Altemeyer (1981) as an instrument to
study authoritarianism or the authoritarian personal-
ity. It is a standard, widely used measure of authori-
tarianism and is considered to be reliable and valid,
except if used with specific ethnic groups such as
Black South Africans (Edwards & Leger, 1995). The
RWA Scale is a 30-item test with each question an-
swered on a 7-point Likert scale that ranged from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s
alpha for the RWA Scale was .90 in the present
study. Sample items include “Obedience and respect
for authority are the most important virtues children
should learn,” “The real key to the ‘good life’ are
obedience, discipline, and sticking to the straight and
narrow,” and “One reason we have so many trouble-
makers in our society nowadays is that parents and
other authorities have forgotten that good old-
fashioned physical punishment is still one of the best
ways to make people behave properly.”
Acceptance of rape myths. Ten scenarios were
presented, the general form is as follows: a man who
holds a position of power, which is very secure and
he is not subject to the scrutiny of his peers (i.e., a
college professor, or employer). He is asked by a
woman, who occupies a position of lesser power (i.e.,
college student, or employee) to consider making a
decision in her favor (i.e., change a course grade or
give a promotion). The respondent, who is instructed
to respond as if he was the man in the powerful
position, is given three response choices. The first
choice indicates that he will make his decision ethi-
cally, based on fairness. The second choice indicates
that he offers to make the favorable decision only in
exchange for sexual favors. The third choice indi-
cates that the man in power offers to have dinner with
the woman so they can discuss the situation further.
The respondent responds to the scenarios on a 1-7
Likert scale, the pole of which are defined by not at
all likely, to very likely. The total score is additive
across the 10 scenarios.
Sexism. The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI;
Fiske & Glick, 1995) was used to measure hostile
 122 BEGANY AND MILBURN
sexism and benevolent sexism. The overall ASI
scores measure ambivalent attitudes toward women.
The 11-item Hostile Sexism subscale of the ASI mea-
sures hostile attitudes toward women, and the 11-
item Benevolent Sexism subscale measures subjec-
tively positive attitudes toward women that are sexist
in nature. Sample Hostile Sexism items include
“Women exaggerate the problems they have at
work,” “Women are too easily offended,” and “Most
women fail to appreciate fully all that men do for
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
them.” Sample Benevolent Sexism items include
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
“Many women have a quality of purity that few men
possess,” “Every man ought to have a woman whom
he adores,” and “A good woman should be set on a
pedestal by her man.”
The convergent validity, discriminant validity, and
predictive validity of the ASI have been established
from the data of studies that used the ASI. The sub-
scales of the ASI were shown to be highly reliable,
with alpha levels of .89 for the Hostile Sexism sub-
scale and .81 for the Benevolent Sexism subscale
(Glick & Fiske, 1997). The ASI is scored on a 7-point
Likert scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly
disagree. The 7-point Likert scale was adapted for
this study from the 5-point Likert scale used in pre-
vious studies by Fiske and Glick (1995) and Glick
and Fiske (1996). This adaptation served to maintain
the consistency of the use of a 7-point Likert scale
across measures within this study. Cronbach’s alpha
for the Hostile Sexism scale was .90 and for the
Benevolent Sexism scale was .60 for this study. The
low Cronbach’s alpha for the Benevolent Sexism
subscale is inconsistent with findings from past stud-
ies, where the alpha level was found to be higher for
this particular subscale.
Social desirability response bias. The 33-item
Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Crowne
& Marlowe, 1960) was used to assess the effects of
social desirability on the participants’ responses, in
order to provide a way to statistically control for such
bias. The participants provided answers to items on a
7-point Likert scale. Sample items include “I never
make a long trip without checking the safety of my
car,” “No matter whom I’m talking to, I’m always a
good listener,” and “I’m always willing to admit it
when I made a mistake.” This test controls for both
self-deception and impression management (Paulus,
1986).
Socioeconomic status (SES). As a measure of
participants’ socioeconomic background, the occupa-
tion of the participant and the occupation of the
participant’s primary caregiver were both scored on
a 6-point scale. The scale hierarchically presented
the level of education needed to engage in a particu-
lar occupation. Zero indicated unemployment,
1 indicated unskilled labor (construction laborer),
2 indicated skilled labor (tradesman), 3 indicated
clerical work (paraprofessional), 4 indicated techni-
cal work (computer technician), and 5 indicated pro-
fessional occupations (physician or attorney). Yearly
income was indicated according to the report of the
participants.
Procedure
The university sample was recruited through the
posting of signs and the presence of a distribution
table where a researcher distributed the question-
naires, making sure to emphasize that the survey was
completely anonymous. Male students who agreed to
participate in the study did so by signing a consent
form. They were then given a questionnaire that they
completed at their leisure, taking about 35 min. Upon
returning the completed questionnaire, participants
were paid $5 for their time and effort. Anonymity
was ensured with several procedures. No identifying
information was asked on the questionnaire, and par-
ticipants returned their questionnaire to a box filled
with other questionnaires.
Results
Table 1 presents the mean scores of participants on
all of the measures used in this study. A 7-point
Likert scale was used on all measures, with a mini-
mum score of 1 and a maximum score of 7. Scores on
the LSH Scale ranged from 1.40 to 5.40, with a mean
score of 3.06, indicating a moderate likelihood of
sexual harassment across participants in the study.
Correlations
Table 2 presents the bivariate correlations of the
variables of interest on which the study was based.
The correlation matrix revealed that although the
variables of interest were all significantly intercorre-
lated, they were not highly multicollinear. This sug-
gests that the instruments used in an effort to identify
psychological predictors of the likelihood of sexual
harassment were measuring psychological character-
istics that are discrete from one another and predic-
tive of the likelihood of sexual harassment.
Authoritarianism was significantly correlated with
hostile sexism (r ⳱ .44, p < .001), benevolent sexism
(r ⳱ .46, p < .001), and support for rape myths
(r ⳱ .43, p < .001), consistent with our predicted
model of authoritarianism as a range of hostile beliefs
about women. For our hypothesized predictors of
 AUTHORITARIANISM AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT 123

Table 1
Descriptive Statistics for Measures Used
Variable M SD
Authoritarianism (RWA Scale) 3.33 0.983
LSH Scale 3.06 0.971
Support for rape myths 2.51 1.20
Hostile sexism 3.83 1.19
Benevolent sexism 4.10 1.05
Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale 0.48 0.19
Occupation 2.40 1.41
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Occupation of primary caregiver 3.92 1.18

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Income 13,980 17,292

Note. Scores for all measures other than income could range from 1 to 7. RWA ⳱ Right
Wing Authoritarianism; LSH ⳱ Likelihood of Sexual Harassment.

sexual harassment, the LSH Scale was significantly
correlated with support for rape myths (r ⳱ .37,
p < .001) and hostile sexism (r ⳱ .43, p < .001)
and approached significance with benevolent sexism
(r ⳱ .17, p ⳱ .079) and authoritarianism (r ⳱ .18,
p ⳱ .072).
Statistical Model
The extent to which the support for rape myths,
hostile sexism, and benevolent sexism mediated the
relationship between authoritarianism and the likeli-
hood of sexual harassment was tested using the
Baron and Kenny (1986) model. For mediation to be
demonstrated, authoritarianism (RWA) must first
predict sexual harassment (LSH). RWA must then
predict the proposed mediating variable. Finally, for
perfect mediation, the authoritarianism to sexual ha-
rassment relationship must become nonsignificant
while the mediator is significant when both RWA
and the mediating variable are included together as
predictors of sexual harassment.
Occupation of the participant and yearly income
and occupation of the participant’s primary caregiver
were entered into each of the three regression equa-
tions as control variables to control for socioeco-
nomic status. The Marlowe–Crowne Social Desir-
ability Scale was also included in the regression
equation to control for the effect of any demand
of social desirability on the participants’ responses.
The series of three multiple regression equations re-
vealed full support for the mediating role of support
for rape myths and hostile sexism between authori-
tarianism and sexual harassment. Benevolent sexism
did not meet the Baron and Kenny (1986) criteria for
mediation.
An initial multiple regression model using the
Baron and Kenny (1986) test of mediation estab-
lished the relationship between authoritarianism and
sexual harassment. When we controlled for occupa-
tion, occupation of caregiver, yearly income, and the
Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale, authori-
tarianism (RWA) predicted sexual harassment (LSH;
␤ ⳱ .28, p ⳱ .014); overall model, F(5, 79) ⳱ 2.56,
p ⳱ .033; adjusted R2 ⳱ .09. Subsequent analyses
tested the extent to which other variables mediate the
relationship between authoritarianism and the likeli-
hood of sexual harassment.

Table 2
Correlations Between Measures Used
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1. Authoritarianism (RWA Scale) — .18 .43*** .44*** .46*** .27** .03 −.08 −.03
2. LSH Scale — .37*** .43*** .17† −.14 −.19† .03 −.21*
3. Rape myths — .53*** .19† .19† −.11 .09 −.13
4. Hostile sexism — .32*** .13 −.01 .05 −.01
5. Benevolent sexism — .13 −.07 −.09 .09
6. Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Scale — .20* .13 .14
7. Occupation — .17† .47***
8. Caregiver occupation — .06
9. Income —
Note. RWA ⳱ Right Wing Authoritarianism, LSH ⳱ Likelihood of Sexual Harassment.
†
p < .10 (marginally significant). *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p <.001.
 124 BEGANY AND MILBURN

Support for Rape Myths Benevolent Sexism

Multiple regression (Table 3) tested whether sup-
port for rape myths mediated the relationship be-
tween authoritarianism and sexual harassment. In
Model 1a, after we controlled for SES and social
desirability, authoritarianism (RWA) significantly
predicted support for rape myths (␤ ⳱ .57, p < .001).
The results of Model 1b in Table 3 indicated the
mediational relationship of support for rape myths
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
The results presented in Model 3a (Table 3) indi-
cate that authoritarianism, after we controlled for
SES and social desirability, significantly predicted
benevolent sexism (␤ ⳱ .49, p < .001). The results of
Model 3b, however, indicated that benevolent sexism
did not meet the criteria for mediation. After we con-
trolled for SES and social desirability, benevolent
sexism did not significantly predict the likelihood of

between authoritarianism and the likelihood of sexual

sexual harassment (␤ ⳱ .04, ns), and authoritarian-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

harassment even after controlling for SES and social

desirability. Support for rape myths significantly pre-
dicted the likelihood of sexual harassment (␤ ⳱ .27,
p ⳱ .038), whereas authoritarianism no longer pre-
dicted sexual harassment (␤ ⳱ .12, ns).
Hostile Sexism
Models 2a and 2b (Table 3) tested the extent to
which hostile sexism mediates between authoritari-
anism and sexual harassment. Model 2a indicated
that authoritarianism (RWA) significantly predicted
hostile sexism (␤ ⳱ .55, p < .001).
The results of Model 2b (Table 3) supported the
mediational relationship of hostile sexism between
authoritarianism and the likelihood of sexual harass-
ment, even after we controlled for SES and social
desirability. Hostile sexism significantly predicted
the likelihood of sexual harassment (␤ ⳱ .37, p ⳱
.003), whereas authoritarianism no longer predicted
sexual harassment (␤ ⳱ .07, ns).
ism still significantly predicted sexual harassment (␤
⳱ .26, p < .046).
Combined Analysis
A multiple regression analysis was conducted to
assess the simultaneous effects of the three mediating
variables, support for rape myths, hostile sexism, and
benevolent sexism. These results are presented in
Table 4. After we controlled for yearly income and
individuals’ social desirability responses, hostile sex-
ism was the only significant variable, although the
effect of support for rape myths on an individual’s
likelihood of sexual harassment approached signifi-
cance. Given the high correlation between these two
variables (r ⳱ .53, p < .001), they jointly explain a
large amount of variance in the sexual harassment
variable. Benevolent sexism was not a significant
predictor of sexual harassment.

Table 3
Tests of Mediation Using the Baron and Kenny (1986) Method
Variable ␤ t p F(5, 79) p Adjusted R2 df

Rape myths mediating RWA and LSH

Regression 1: RWA → rape myths .57 6.14 <.001 9.73 <.001 .34 5
Regression 2 6
RWA → rape myths .12 0.92 ns
Rape myths → LSH .27 2.11 .038 2.98 .011 .12

Hostile sexism mediating RWA and LSH

Regression 1: RWA → hostile sexism .55 5.60 <.001 7.01 <.001 .26 5
Regression 2 6
RWA → hostile sexism .07 0.60 ns
Hostile sexism → LSH .37 3.10 .003 3.98 .002 .18

Benevolent sexism mediating RWA and LSH

Regression 1: RWA → Benevolent sexism .49 4.84 <.001 5.34 <.001 .21 5
Regression 2 6
RWA → benevolent sexism .26 2.03 .046 2.14 .058 .08
Benevolent sexism → LSH .04 0.36 ns
Note. RWA ⳱ Right Wing Authoritarianism; LSH ⳱ Likelihood of Sexual Harassment; ns ⳱ not significant.
 AUTHORITARIANISM AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Table 4
Combined Model Predicting Sexual
Harassment Likelihood
Variable ␤ t(7) p
Support for rape myths .17 1.50 .148
Hostile sexism .31 2.69 .009
Benevolent sexism .04 0.46 ns
Marlowe–Crowne Social
Desirability Scale −.24 −2.54 .013
Income −.15 −1.59 .116
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Note. F(5, 86) ⳱ 6.15, p < .001; adjusted R2 ⳱ .22.
Discussion
Our first hypothesis was that higher levels of au-
thoritarianism would predict a greater likelihood of
sexual harassment. Our second hypothesis was that
authoritarianism would indirectly affect the likeli-
hood of sexual harassment through particular psycho-
logical characteristics that include support for rape
myths and attitudes of hostile and benevolent sexism.
Our first hypothesis was supported; authoritarian-
ism significantly predicted the likelihood of sexual
harassment. This finding is consistent with the theo-
retical conceptualization of the authoritarian person-
ality (Adorno et al., 1950; Altemeyer, 1981, 1988). Ac-
cording to a model of affect displacement (Adorno et
al., 1950; Lasswell, 1930/1960; Milburn, Conrad, Sala,
& Carberry, 1995), the negative emotions (e.g., anger,
terror, shame) that result from punitive childhood ex-
periences are displaced onto objects in the environment
that may be perceived as threatening or as less power-
ful. These can include members of ethnic minority
groups, children, and women, and these objects can
then serve as targets for authoritarian aggression.
Our second hypothesis was supported in part. We
hypothesized that several variables (support for rape
myths, hostile sexism, and benevolent sexism) would
mediate the relationship between authoritarianism
and sexual harassment. An individual’s endorsement
of support for rape myths mediated the relationship
between authoritarianism and the likelihood of sexual
harassment. Koss and Dinero (1988) found that pre-
dictors of sexual aggression in men are parallel to the
predictors found in this study for the likelihood of
sexual harassment. Our results support the argument
that sexual harassment as non-physically violent sex-
ual aggression is a part of the same continuum as
physically violent sexual aggression. Our findings are
also consistent with the argument of Glick and Fiske
(1997), who contended that many men have historically
cast women in the two stereotyped and contradictory
roles of Madonna and Whore, with the secret desire to
be raped as a component of the whore stereotype.
125
We found that Glick and Fiske’s (1997) proposed
hostile sexism measure also mediated the relationship
between authoritarianism and likelihood of sexual
harassment. Our findings, however, did not support
benevolent sexism as a mediator in the relationship
between authoritarianism and the likelihood of sexual
harassment.
The scenarios used in the LSH Scale describe acts
of sexual harassment that are not physically violent in
nature. They represent coercive behaviors, the goals
of which may be characterized as efforts by men in
secure positions of authority toward either sexual in-
timacy or close physical proximity in either a work
setting or an intimate social context (e.g., a dinner
engagement). The LSH Scale does not directly mea-
sure overtly hostile or physically aggressive acts of
sexual harassment. Hostile sexism was, nevertheless,
highly correlated with the likelihood of sexual ha-
rassment and also mediated the relationship between
authoritarianism and the likelihood of sexual harass-
ment. Our results support the contribution of hostile
sexism to the likelihood of sexual harassment.
The absence of support for the benevolent sexism
subtype of ambivalent sexism may be a result of the
limited scope of the LSH Scale with respect to the
types of sexual harassment that it measures. This
scale does not measure behaviors that seem to have
impulsivity as a key component (e.g., uninvited
touching of a woman in a crowded public place such
as a bar, yelling sexually explicit comments at a
woman on the street). It also does not measure what
Fiske and Glick (1995) referred to as sexual harass-
ment motivated by benevolent sexism (e.g., referring
to a woman who fits the Madonna stereotype as
“honey” or paternalistically wrapping an arm around
the shoulder of a subordinate female employee).
The LSH Scale is a self-report measure of the like-
lihood that the respondent would, given certain situ-
ations, perpetrate acts of sexual harassment and the
circumstances under which it may have occurred.
The LSH Scale does not measure past perpetration or
perpetration in situations common to the life of the
particular participant responding to the survey. Fu-
ture research might include instruments that measure
past sexual harassment and the situations in which
sexual harassment was perpetrated.
Although some could argue that using students as
research participants in this study may limit the gen-
eralizability of the results, two past studies indicate
that the student population of the University of Mas-
sachusetts at Boston closely resembles a community
sample of participants. Jussim, Milburn, and Nelson
(1991) and Milburn and Conrad (1996) administered
the same survey instruments to both a University of
 126 BEGANY AND MILBURN
Massachusetts at Boston sample of students and a
community sample of participants. In both studies,
they obtained parallel results in the student and com-
munity samples, indicating that the University of
Massachusetts at Boston population is quite similar
to that of the surrounding community.
We used the Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability
Scale to control for participants’ need for social ap-
proval, which might have limited their endorsement
of non-socially desirable behaviors (i.e., sexual ha-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
rassment). Anonymity of the participants’ responses
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
also should have limited the effects of social desir-
ability bias on responses.
Historically, authoritarianism has served as a pow-
erful predictor of many different variables, such as
racial prejudice and antigay attitudes, as well as cog-
nitive rigidity (Milburn, 1991). In the research pre-
sented here, we have demonstrated that authoritari-
anism also predicts the likelihood that a man will
report a greater likelihood of engaging in sexual ha-
rassment. Further, our results support a complex me-
diational model, that authoritarianism appears to re-
sult in higher support for rape myths and hostile
sexism beliefs, and these factors in turn predicted a
higher likelihood of sexual harassment. These results
suggest that sexual harassment has fairly deep psy-
chological roots and is thus unlikely to be eliminated
with simple informational, behaviorally focused pro-
grams. Further research should explore and replicate
this mediational model.
References
Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. L., &
Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality.
New York: Norton.
Altemeyer, R. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Win-
nipeg, Ontario, Canada: University of Manitoba Press.
Altemeyer, R. (1988). Enemies of freedom: Understanding
right-wing authoritarianism. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–
mediator variable distinction in social psychological re-
search: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical consider-
ations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51,
1173–1182.
Burt, M. (1980). Cultural myths and support for rape. Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 217–230.
Crowne, D., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social
desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of
Consulting Psychology, 4, 349–354.
Edwards, D., & Leger, P. (1995). Psychometric properties
of the right-wing authoritarianism scale in Black and
White South African students. International Journal of
Psychology, 30, 47–68.
Fiske, S., & Glick, P. (1995). Ambivalence and stereotypes
cause sexual harassment: A theory with implications for
organizational change. Journal of Social Issues, 51, 97–115.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. (1996). The ambivalent sexism in-
ventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. (1997). Hostile and benevolent sex-
ism: Measuring ambivalent sexist attitudes toward
women. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 119–135.
Jussim, L., Milburn, M. A., & Nelson, W. (1991). Emotional
openness: Sex-role stereotypes and self-perceptions. Repre-
sentative Research in Social Psychology, 19, 3–20.
Koss, M., & Dinero, T. E. (1988). Predictors of sexual ag-
gression among a national sample of male college stu-
dents. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 528,
133–147.
Lasswell, H. D. (1960). Psychopathology and politics. New
York: Viking Press. (Original work published 1930).
Milburn, M. (1991). Persuasion & politics: The social psy-
chology of public opinion. California: Brooks/Cole.
Milburn, M., & Conrad, S. (1996). The politics of denial.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Milburn, M., Conrad, S., Sala, F., & Carberry, S. (1995).
Childhood punishment, denial, and political attitudes. Po-
litical Psychology, 16, 447–478.
Milburn, M., & Ezzati, A. (1998, July). Childhood punish-
ment, anger and authoritarianism. Paper presented at the
International Society of Political Psychology conference,
Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Ou, T. Y. (1996). Are abusive men different? And can we
predict their behavior? Unpublished honors thesis, De-
partment of Psychology, Harvard–Radcliffe College,
Cambridge, MA.
Paulus, D. L. (1986). Self-deception and impression man-
agement in test responses. In A. Angleitner & J. S. Wig-
gins (Eds.), Personality assessment via questionnaires:
Current issues in theory and measurement. New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Petty, G. M., & Dawson, B. (1989). Sexual aggression in
normal men: Incidence, beliefs, and personality character-
istics. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 355–362.
Pryor, J. B., Giedd, J. L., & Williams, K. B. (1995). A social
psychological model for predicting sexual harassment.
Journal of Social Issues, 51, 69–84.
Ragins, B. R., & Scandura, T. A. (1996). Antecedents of
work-related correlates of reported sexual harassment:
An empirical investigation of competing hypotheses. Sex
Roles, 32, 429–455.
Walker, W. D., Rowe, R. C., & Quinsey, V. L. (1993). Au-
thoritarianism and sexual harassment. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology, 65, 1036–1045.
Zurbriggen, E. L. (1998, July). Social motives, authoritari-
anism and cognitive power/sex associations: Predictors
of aggressive sexual behavior. Paper presented at the 21st
Annual Scientific Meeting of the International Society for
Political Psychology, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Received December 7, 2000
Revision received November 28, 2001
Accepted December 27, 2001 䡲