Sexual harassment jury instructions\u27 effects on jury decisions

This study compares the effect of reasonable standards on the jury\u27s verdict in a sexual harassment lawsuit. One hundred and fifty seven participants (82 males, 74 females and 1 unidentified), ages ranging from 16 to 90, (M= 22.74) were randomly divided into juries (7 reasonable woman, 8 reasonable person, and 9 reasonable worker). Participants were given a written sexual harassment case, judge\u27s instructions, and a survey to complete before and after the group had reached a unanimous verdict. It was hypothesized that participants who applied the reasonable woman standard would be more likely to take the complainant\u27s perspective. This hypothesis was found to be supported by a significant difference between worker and woman juries\u27 use of the terms of hostile work environment. There were significant interactions between those who did and did not experience sexual harassment in the workplace and their judgments of both, hostile work environment and severity