The DOI matches its Crossref record; 108 of the 108 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sexual Harassment, Workplace Authority, and the Paradox of Power
Open accessAbstract
Power is at the core of feminist theories of sexual harassment, although it has rarely been measured directly in terms of workplace authority. Popular characterizations portray male supervisors harassing female subordinates, but power-threat theories suggest that women in authority may be more frequent targets. This article analyzes longitudinal survey data and qualitative interviews from the Youth Development Study to test this idea and to delineate why and how supervisory authority, gender nonconformity, and workplace sex ratios affect harassment. Relative to nonsupervisors, female supervisors are more likely to report harassing behaviors and to define their experiences as sexual harassment. Sexual harassment can serve as an equalizer against women in power, motivated more by control and domination than by sexual desire. Interviews point to social isolation as a mechanism linking harassment to gender nonconformity and women’s authority, particularly in male-dominated work settings.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color
Crenshaw, K. (1991) · Stanford Law Review · doi:10.2307/1229039 · Cited by 32,792
WEST, C., & ZIMMERMAN, D. H. (1987) · Gender & Society · doi:10.1177/0891243287001002002 · Cited by 8,954
HIERARCHIES, JOBS, BODIES: A Theory of Gendered Organizations
ACKER, J. (1990) · Gender & Society · doi:10.1177/089124390004002002 · Cited by 7,374
(1941) · Research in International Economics by Federal Agencies · doi:10.7312/schw92626-009 · Cited by 4,682
Gender and Power: Society, the Person, and Sexual Politics.
Stacey, J., & Connell, R. W. (1988) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2073932 · Cited by 4,210
Survival analysis using sas®: a practical guide
Allison, P. D. (1995) · International Linear Collider · Cited by 3,567
(1987) · Cited by 3,394
Getting a Job: Is There a Motherhood Penalty?
Correll, S. J., Benard, S., & Paik, I. (2007) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/511799 · Cited by 2,525
The Wage Penalty for Motherhood
Budig, M. J., & England, P. (2001) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/000312240106600203 · Cited by 2,279
Patriarchal Terrorism and Common Couple Violence: Two Forms of Violence against Women
Johnson, M. P. (1995) · Journal of Marriage and the Family · doi:10.2307/353683 · Cited by 2,217
Cited by
Scaling Up: Representing Gender Diversity in Survey Research
Magliozzi, D., Saperstein, A., & Westbrook, L. (2016) · Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World · doi:10.1177/2378023116664352 · Cited by 146
Credible Threat: Attacks Against Women Online and the Future of Democracy
Sobieraj, S. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190089283.001.0001 · Cited by 100
Claesson, A. (2023) · Digital Journalism · doi:10.1080/21670811.2022.2110509 · Cited by 29
Bernacchio, C., & Foss, N. (2024) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4736313 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- McLaughlin, H., Uggen, C., & Blackstone, A.
- Venue
- American Sociological Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-07-02
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 625-647
- ISSN
- 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-8271
- OpenAlex
- W2131349202
- Cited by
- 538
- References
- 108
- FWCI
- 52.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sexual Harassment, Workplace Authority, and the Paradox of Power. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0003122412451728
- The paper
- McLaughlin, H., Uggen, C., & Blackstone, A. (2012). Sexual Harassment, Workplace Authority, and the Paradox of Power. American Sociological Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122412451728
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.