Sexual Harassment Proclivity Index (SHPI) is a 16-item measure of the likelihood of men engaging in sexual harassment behavior. A scenario is set in which the respondent is the manager of a large company who has recently hired an "outgoing and friendly" female employee. The items cover two subscales: intrusive harassment and quid pro quo harassment.
Geographies Tested: United States of America
Populations Included: Male
Age Range: Adults
Suppose that during the first few weeks Donna worked for you, you invited her out todinner several times. She turned you down each time. This was really disappointing toyou because you think Donna is very pretty and you would like to get to know her better.Listed below are various strategies that men have said they might use in this situation. If you were in this situation, how likely would you be to use each of the strategies listed?
Intrusive Harassment
1. Try to convince Donna that she would enjoy having dinner with you.
2. Ask Donna if she is romantically involved with anyone.
3. Tell Donna you would like to get to know her on a personal level.
4. Make subtle passes at Donna until she changes her mind about dating you.
5. Let Donna know nonverbally how attractive she is.
6. Comment on what a good figure Donna has.
7. Ask Donna if dating her boss would bother her.
8. Comment on how pretty Donna is.
9. Ask Donna about her past romantic relationships.
Quid Pro Quo Harassment
10. Give Donna difficult, boring assignments until she agrees to have dinner with you.
11. Offer Donna a raise or promotion if she will start seeing you socially.
12. Tell Donna that all your other female assistants have dated you.
13. Tell Donna you will fire her if she doesn't start seeing you socially.
14. Give Donna a raise, hoping she will change her mind about dating you.
15. Let Donna go and hire someone else who is equally qualified for the job.
16. Remind Donna that you can help her advance in the company.
Response Options:
5-point Likert scale
Highly unlikely to use - 1
Highly likely to use - 5
The mean of each subscale is computed.
Bingham, S. G., & Burleson, B. R. (1996). The development of a sexual harassment proclivity scale: Construct validation and relationship to communication competence. Communication Quarterly, 44(3), 308-325. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379609370020
Psychometric Score
Ease of Use Score
Qualitative Research
Existing Literature/Theoretical Framework
Field Expert Input
Cognitive Interviews / Pilot Testing
Internal
Test-retest
Interrater
Content
Face
Criterion (gold-standard)
Construct
Readability
Scoring Clarity
Length
to get the latest updates on new measures and guidance for survey researchers