CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 14Sexual Assault and Victimization StudiesWorkplace Violence and BullyingGender Diversity and Inequality

The purpose of whisper networks: a new lens for studying informal communication channels in organizations

Open access
Johnson, Carrie Ann·2023·Frontiers in Communication
DOI 10.3389/fcomm.2023.1089335
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Introduction: This paper explores whisper networks, which are informal communication networks women use to share information about sexual harassment and sexual harassers in the workplace. Women use whisper networks to share information about people known for sexual harassment or assault. This study offers an innovative approach to studying the nuances and dynamics of sexual harassment and communication in the workplace by focusing on women's experiences in whisper networks. Methods: To examine these back-channels, I conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with participants who participated in whisper networks in their organizations. Using grounded theory, I established three emergent theories about the purposes whisper networks serve in organizations. Results: Whisper networks (1) serve as protection in organizational cultures of harassment and (2) help women make sense of their harassment experience through sensemaking. Whisper networks also serve the purpose of (3) identifying harassers because harassers are not readily apparent when entering a new work situation. Discussion: These findings establish a baseline of theories to explain whisper networks' purposes and offer theoretical and practical implications for future research on sexual harassment, whisper networks, and informal communication networks.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fcomm.2023.1089335

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This resulted in expansive and deeply connected networks of trans contributors where they could help reduce scrutiny of their gender identities, support one another, and recommend inclusive projects.

    “This resulted in what our participants described as expansive and deeply connected networks of trans contributors where they could help reduce scrutiny of their gender identities, support one another, and recommend inclusive projects, akin to whisper networks for women [51].”

    From Paradoxes of Openness: Trans Experiences in Open Source Software (2024) · cites this paper as [51]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Alvinius, A., and Holmberg, A. (2019). Silence-breaking butterfly effect: Resistance towards the military within #MeToo. Gender Work Organ. 26, 1255-1270. doi: 10.1111/gwao.12349 · DOI
  2. Bergman, M. E., Langhout, R. D., Palmieri, P. A., Cortina, L. M., and Fitzgerald, L. F. (2002). The (Un)reasonableness of reporting: antecedents and consequences of reporting sexual harassment. J. Appl. Psychol. 87, 230-242. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.230 · DOI
  3. Bowes-Sperry, L., and O'Leary-Kelly, A. M. (2005). To act or not to act: the dilemma faced by sexual harassment observers. Acad. Manag. Rev. 30, 288-306. doi: 10.5465/amr.2005.16387886 · DOI
  4. Breger, M. L., Holman, M. J., and Guerrero, M. D. (2019). Re-norming sport for inclusivity: how the sport community has the potential to change a toxic culture of harassment and abuse. J. Clin. Sport Psychol. 13, 274-289. doi: 10.1123/ jcsp.2019-0004 · DOI
  5. Brickell, C. (2006). The sociological construction of gender and sexuality. Sociol. Rev. 54, 87-113. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.2006.00603.x · DOI
  6. Browne, K. (2005). Snowball sampling: Using social networks to research non-heterosexual women. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 8, 47-60. doi: 10.1080/1364557032000081663 · DOI
  7. Cermele, J. (2010). Telling our stories: the importance of women's narratives of resistance. Viol. Against Women 16, 1162-1172. doi: 10.1177/1077801210382873 · DOI
  8. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. London; Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  9. Charmaz, K., Thornburg, R., and Keane, E. (2018). "Evolving grounded theory and social justice inquiry, " in The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 5th Edn, eds K. D. Norman, and Y. S. Lincoln (Los Angeles, CA; London; New Delhi; Singapore;
  10. Clair, R. P. (1999). standing still in an ancient field: a contemporary look at the organizational communication discipline. Manag. Comm. Q. 13, 283-293. doi: 10.1177/0893318999132005 · DOI
  11. Clair, R. P., Brown, N. E., Dougherty, D. S., Delemeester, H. K., Geist- Martin, P., Gorden, W. I., et al. (2019). #MeToo, sexual harassment: an article, a forum, and a dream for the future. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 47, 111-129. doi: 10.1080/00909882.2019.1567142 · DOI
  12. Cortina, L. M., and Berdahl, J. L. (2008). "Sexual harassment in organizations: a decade of research, " in The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Behavior: Volume I -Micro Approaches (London: SAGE Publications Ltd.), 469-497.
  13. Cortina, L. M., and Magley, V. J. (2003). Raising voice, risking retaliation: events following interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 8, 247-265. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.8.4.247 · DOI
  14. Deetz, S. (2000). Putting the community into organizational science: exploring the construction of knowledge claims. Org. Sci. 11, 732-738. doi: 10.1287/orsc.11.6.732.12536 · DOI
  15. Dougherty, D. S. (1999). Dialogue through standpoint: understanding women's and men's standpoints of sexual harassment. Manag. Commun. Q. 12, 436-468. doi: 10.1177/0893318999123003 · DOI
  16. Dougherty, D. S. (2001). Sexual harassement as [dys]functional process: a feminist standpoint analysis. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 29, 372-402. doi: 10.1080/00909880128116 · DOI
  17. Dougherty, D. S. (2009). "Sexual harassment as destructive organizational process, " in Destructive Organizational Communication: Processes, Consequences, and Constructive Ways of Organizing, eds P. Lutgen-Sandvik, and B. D. Sypher (New York, NY: Routledge), 203-226.
  18. Dougherty, D. S., and Smythe, M. J. (2004). Sensemaking, organizational culture, and sexual harassment. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 32, 293-317. doi: 10.1080/00909880420002 75998 · DOI
  19. Ford, J. L., Ivancic, S., and Scarduzio, J. (2021). Silence, voice, and resilience: an examination of workplace sexual harassment. Commun. Stud. 72, 513-530. doi: 10.1080/10510974.2021.1953092 · DOI
  20. Gilligan, C. (1982). In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  21. Hazleton, V., and Kennan, W. (2000). Social Capital: Reconceptualizing the Bottom Line. Corp. Commun. Int. J. 5, 81-87. doi: 10.1108/13563280010372513 Frontiers in Communication frontiersin.org · DOI
  22. Hershcovis, M. S., Vranjes, I., Berdahl, J. L., and Cortina, L. M. (2021). See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil: theorizing network silence around sexual harassment. J. Appl. Psychol. 106, 1834-1847. doi: 10.1037/apl0000861 · DOI
  23. Hertzog, J. L., Wright, D., and Beat, D. (2008). There's a policy for that: a comparison of the organizational culture of workplaces reporting incidents of sexual harassment. Behav. Soc. Iss. 17, 169-181. doi: 10.5210/bsi.v17i2.2175 · DOI
  24. Hlavka, H. R. (2014). Normalizing sexual violence: young women account for harassment and abuse. Gender Soc. 28, 337-358. doi: 10.1177/0891243214526468 · DOI
  25. Keyton, J., Clair, R., Compton, C. A., Dougherty, D. S., Berthoud, D. F., Manning, J., et al. (2018). Addressing sexual harassment in a sexually charged national culture: a journal of applied communication research forum. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 46, 665-683. doi: 10.1080/00909882.2018.1546472 · DOI
  26. Krackhardt, D., and Kilduff, M. (1990). Friendship patterns and culture: the control of organizational diversity. Am. Anthropol. 92, 142-154. doi: 10.1525/aa.1990.92.1.02a00100 Langer, G., and Langer, G. (2017). Unwanted Sexual Advances Not Just a Hollywood, Weinstein Story, Poll Finds. News. ABC News. Available online at: https://abcnews.go. com/Politics/unwanted-sexual-advances-hollywood-weinstein-story-poll/story?id= 50521721 (accessed October 17, 2017). · DOI
  27. Lutgen-Sandvik, P. (2006). Take this job and . . . : quitting and other forms of resistance to workplace bullying. Commun. Monogr. 73, 406-433. doi: 10.1080/03637750601024156 · DOI
  28. McDonald, P., Charlesworth, S., and Cerise, S. (2011). Below the 'Tip of the Iceberg': extra-legal responses to workplace sexual harassment. Womens Stud. Int. Forum 34, 278-289. doi: 10.1016/j.wsif.2011.03.002 · DOI
  29. O'Leary-Kelly, A. M., Bowes-Sperry, L., Bates, C. A., and Lean, E. R. (2009). Sexual harassment at work: a decade (plus) of progress. J. Manage. 35, 503-536. doi: 10.1177/0149206308330555 · DOI
  30. O'Leary-Kelly, A. M., Tiedt, P., and Bowes-Sperry, L. (2004). Answering accountability questions in sexual harassment: insights regarding harassers, targets, and observers. Hum. Resour. Manag. Rev. 14, 85-106. doi: 10.1016/j.hrmr. 2004.02.005 · DOI
  31. Robillard, A. (2021). From isolated stories to a collective: speaking out about misogyny in english departments. J. Coalit. Femin. Schol. Hist. Rhet. Comp. 23. Saldaña, J. (2021). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. 4th Edn. London; Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publishing Ltd.
  32. Scarduzio, J. A., Sheff, S. E., and Smith, M. (2018). Coping and sexual harassment: how victims cope across multiple settings. Arch. Sex. Behav. 47, 327-340. doi: 10.1007/s10508-017-1065-7 · DOI
  33. Shupe, E. I. (2020). Beneath the surface of the sexual harassment label: a mixed methods study of young working women. Sex Roles 83, 179-92. doi: 10.1007/s11199-019-01106-z · DOI
  34. Tracy, S. J. (2013). Qualitative Research Methods: Collecting Evidence, Crafting Analysis, Communicating Impact. Wiley-Blackwell.
  35. Tye-Williams, S., and Krone, K. J. (2017). Identifying and re-imagining the paradox of workplace bullying advice. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 45, 218-235. doi: 10.1080/00909882.2017.1288291 · DOI
  36. Walsh, L., Rivers, N. A., Rice, J., Gries, L. E., Bay, J. L., Rickert, T., et al. (2017). Forum: bruno latour on rhetoric. Rhetor. Soc. Q. 47, 403-462. doi: 10.1080/02773945.2017.1369822 · DOI
  37. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Sage Publications.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Johnson, C. A.
Affiliations
Iowa State University (US)
Corresponding author
Johnson, Carrie Ann
ORCID
Johnson, Carrie Ann
Venue
Frontiers in Communication
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2023-05-19
Volume
8
ISSN
2297-900X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fcomm.2023.1089335
OpenAlex
W4377139947
Cited by
14
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1
FWCI
4.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Communication (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Iowa State University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Workplace Violence and Bullying
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Diversity and Inequality
Keywords
sexual harassment, workplace harassment, informal communication networks, women in organizations, sensemaking, organizational culture, backchannels

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