Workplace harassment: A test of definitional criteria derived from an analysis of research definitions and Canadian social definitions

Public awareness of the occurrence and effects of workplace harassment continues to grow. However, despite increasing awareness, ambiguity remains about how harassment is defined and, consequently, how to determine whether a questionable situation should be judged as harassment. For this research we reviewed definitions of workplace harassment and identified four elements that were frequently included as criteria for making judgments of whether harassment had occurred (i.e., repetition, intent, perceived intent, consequences). In two separate studies, fictional scenarios were used to evaluate the extent to which participants' judgments about harassment were affected by the presence or absence of the four elements. Ratings of the scenarios provided by student participants (study one; N = 160) and a convenience sample of community participants (study two; N = 292) with varying levels of work experience and diverse professional backgrounds were analysed. According to our results the four elements significantly influenced participants' judgments of harassment. The intent of the harasser had the strongest and most consistent effect on harassment judgements and whether the behaviour was repeated had the weakest and least consistent effect. In addition to the unique effects of the individual elements, significant interactions between the elements emerged and suggest that harassment judgements depend on the interplay of a variety of factors. Though the results of these studies add to the growing body of research that focuses on defining workplace harassment, they also highlight the need for additional research in the area.