2003 IMTA Proceedings - International Military Testing Association

Finally individuals were identified as having experienced Sexual Coercion if they
endorsed one of four response items including behaviors wherein the harasser bribed, threatened
or in some way coerced the target into participating in sexual activities or treated them badly for
not participating. These response options include “made you feel like you were being bribed with
some sort of reward or special treatment to engage in sexual behavior”, “made you feel
threatened with some sort of retaliation for not being sexually cooperative”, “treated you badly
for refusing to have sex”, and “implied faster promotions or better treatment if you were sexually
cooperative”.
Reasons for Not Reporting. Survey participants were asked to indicate whether or not any
of the 19 items listed in this checklist matched their reasons for not reporting those behavior(s)
indicative of sexual harassment they had experienced as a part of the One Situation with the
Greatest Effect.
Reporting Status. Research participants were separated into one of three groups:
Complete Reporters (those individuals who reported all of the harassment that had occurred as
part of the One Situation With the Greatest Effect), Non-Reporters (those individuals who did
not report any of the harassing behaviors indicated in the One Situation With the Greatest
Effect), and Partial Reporters (those individuals who reported only some of the behaviors that
had occurred as part of the One Situation With the Greatest Effect). Non-Reporters were
identified through the use a 5-item dichotomous (yes or no) reporting checklist which asked
participants to specify whether or not they had reported the unwanted sexual talk and/or
behaviors they had indicated had occurred on the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire as applied
specifically to the one situation (incident(s) of sexual harassment) which had the greatest effect
on the participant. Respondents who did not endorse reporting the One Situation with the
Greatest Effect to any of the five listed individuals/groups were placed in the Non-Reporters
group.
Participants were placed into the Complete Reporters group based on their response to
both the reporting checklist used to identify Non-Reporters and an additional survey item
relevant to the comprehensiveness of the participant’s formal or informal report. Respondents
were asked to indicate (yes or no) on the reporting checklist whether they had reported the
incident of sexual harassment which had the greatest effect on them to their immediate
supervisor, someone else in their chain-of-command (including their commanding officer),
Supervisor(s) of the person(s) who did it, Special military office responsible for handling these
kinds of complaints (for example, Military Equal Opportunity of Civil Rights Office), or Other
installation/Service/DoD person or office with responsibility for follow-up.
Participants who endorsed reporting the situation to any of the above individuals/groups
and indicated that they had reported all of the behaviors that had occurred as part of the One
Situation with the Greatest Effect were designated as Complete Reporters. Participants who
endorsed reporting the situation to any of the individuals/groups listed in the reporting checklist
but indicated that they had not reported all of the behaviors that had occurred as part of the One
Situation with the Greatest Effect were designated as Partial Reporters.
Supervisor Harassment. Bergman et al (2002) suggest that a harasser’s status in an
organization may influence a target’s willingness to report sexual harassment. Therefore
perpetrators were categorized on the basis of their power within the military context.
Respondents who endorsed one of five items indicating that a supervisor or someone else of a
241
45 th Annual Conference of the International Military Testing Association
Pensacola, Florida, 3-6 November 2003