2003 IMTA Proceedings - International Military Testing Association

Far less is known about the consequences of cognitive or behavioral avoidance. These
less direct behaviors are far more common than confrontation or reporting, the two most often
recommended behaviors in response to harassment. It is not unreasonable to consider whether
common behaviors, such as ignoring the UGRB, can also trigger a retaliatory response.
Organizational Power
Findings concerning the status of the reporter or target and retaliation are mixed. Two
studies, one with military personnel, the other with federal employees, showed no direct
relationship between the reporter's status within the organization and retaliation (Bergman et
al., 2002; Near & Miceli, 1986). However, a study of federal court employees demonstrated
that victims with lower occupational status were more likely to receive both personal and workrelated
retaliation than higher status victims; when a lower status victim reported, confronted,
or sought social support regarding a higher status harasser, the victim experienced more
retaliation of both types (Cortina & Magley, in press). Holding power within the organization,
as measured by support by management and immediate supervisor, has been consistently
associated with receiving less retaliation in the whistle-blowing literature (Miceli, Rehg, Near,
& Ryan, 1999; Near & Miceli, 1986). Thus it seems important to consider the relationship of
organizational power or status to retaliation.
OUTCOMES OF RETALIATION
Work-Related Outcomes
Given that harassment is associated with negative outcomes to the individual it is likely
that retaliation will also be negatively related to an individual's work attitudes, performance,
and commitment to the organization. In a study of civilian women involved in a class action
lawsuit against a private sector firm, outcomes associated with retaliation (after controlling for
the harassment and effects due to reporting) included decreased satisfaction with coworkers and
supervisors and increased work withdrawal (Fitzgerald et al., in preparation). For public sector
employees, as retaliation increased so did the targets' job dissatisfaction, job stress, and
organizational withdrawal (Cortina & Magley, in press). In a study of federal employees
retaliation resulted in increased involuntary exit from the organization including forced transfer
or leaving (Near & Miceli, 1986). For male and female military personnel, those who
experienced more retaliation generally had poorer work outcomes (Magley & Cortina, 2002),
and for those who reported harassment, retaliation was associated with lower procedural
satisfaction with reporting (Bergman et al., 2002).
Well-Being
In a study of civilian women involved in a class action lawsuit against a large private
firm, outcomes associated with retaliation included decreased health satisfaction and increased
psychological distress (Fitzgerald et al., in preparation). For public sector employees, as
retaliation increased the targets' psychological and physical health decreased (Cortina &
Magley, in press) and military personnel who experienced more retaliation demonstrated
generally poorer psychological and health-related outcomes (Magley & Cortina, 2002).
223
45 th Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association
Pensacola, Florida, 3-6 November 2003