2003 IMTA Proceedings - International Military Testing Association

208
THE 2002 WORKPLACE AND GENDER RELATIONS SURVEY
Anita R. Lancaster, Rachel N. Lipari, Lee M. Howell, and Regan M. Klein
Defense Manpower Data Center
1600 Wilson Blvd., Suite 400
Arlington, VA 22209-2953
liparirn@osd.pentagon.mil
Introduction
This paper provides results for sections of the Status of Armed Forces: Workplace and
Gender Relations Survey (2002 WGR). The United States Department of Defense (DoD) has
conducted three sexual harassment surveys of active-duty members in the Army, Navy, Marine
Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard – in 1988, 1995, and 2002. The surveys not only document
the extent to which Service members report experiencing unwanted, uninvited sexual attention,
they also provide information on the details surrounding those events (e.g., where they occur),
and Service members’ perceptions of the effectiveness of sexual harassment policies, training,
and programs.
This paper examines the circumstances in which unprofessional, gender-related behaviors
occur as reported in the 2002 survey. 4 Service members who experienced at least one
unprofessional, gender-related behavior were asked to consider the “one situation” occurring in
the year prior to taking the survey that had the greatest effect on them. Members then reported
on the circumstances surrounding that experience. Specifics related to the situation provided
answers to questions such as: (1) What was the unprofessional, gender-related experience, (2)
Who were the offenders, (3) Where did the experience occur, (4) How often did the situation
occur, (5) How long did the situation last, (6) Was the situation reported, and if so, to whom, and
(7) Were there any repercussions as a result of reporting the incident?
This paper will analyze gender differences in the circumstances surrounding the one
situation, reporting behaviors, and problems at work resulting from unprofessional, genderrelated
behavior. In addition, this paper will include an analysis of paygrade by gender
differences. Members in the W1-W5 paygrade are not presented or analyzed in this paper
because estimates would be unstable due to low cell size. Only differences for statistically
significant numbers are presented in this paper.
Survey Methodology
The population of interest for the survey consisted of all active-duty members of the
Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard, below the rank of admiral or general,
with at least 6 months of active duty service. The sampling frame included Service members
who were on active-duty in May 2001, with eligibility conditional on their also being on active
duty in September 2001 and December 2001.
The sample consisted of 60,415 Service members. A total of 19,960 eligible members
returned usable surveys yielding an adjusted weighted response rate of 36%. Data were
collected by mail and Web between December 26, 2001 and April 23, 2002. Data were weighted
to reflect the active duty population as of December 2001. The nonresponse-adjusted weights
were raked to force estimates to known population totals of the midpoint of data collection.
45 th 4
Comparisons are made to the 1995 survey but not to the 1988 survey as it was substantially different.
Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association
Pensacola, Florida, 3-6 November 2003