Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

>On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Risker wrote:... In many settings, including healthcare, higher education, and certain industries, ALL staff are provided with anti-harassment training; it's often treated as an extension of basic health and safety training, and is frequently

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

On 5/5/2016 2:56 PM, danc...@frontiernet.net wrote: Anecdotally, some people actually have the idea that sexual harassment is something that is only legally actionable when men do it to women (which further adds heteronormativity as an implicit bias). Yet as of 2013 17.6% of the

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

ually causes what Edelman describes as, "a backlash in males". Marie Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 11:13:58 -0400 From: risker...@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment R

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

e sent all our staff on a course" - but the course actually causes what Edelman describes as, "a backlash in males". Marie Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 11:13:58 -0400 From: risker...@gmail.com To: gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

Responding to WSC: In many settings, including healthcare, higher education, and certain industries, ALL staff are provided with anti-harassment training; it's often treated as an extension of basic health and safety training, and is frequently mandatory. It has nothing to do with the gender

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

Ach, I didn't realize they were citing research from 15 years ago. Also it is more about the type of in-person situations that Berkeley and other campuses have found themselves in the courts over recently, and not the type of online harassment that WP needs to solve (not to minimize the

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

On 05/04/2016 09:24 AM, Neotarf wrote: > although you would think the Gruniad would not report on something > that was obviously flawed. It's hard to know Gruniad's intention, given the research articles are also relatively old (not just published or forthcoming): 1. Bingham & Scherer (2001) 2.

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

It goes without saying that a meaningful study should have a random selection process, although it happens all the time that researchers can't always get ideal populations so they study the populations they have. Unfortunately the study is behind a paywall, so you can't see how it was designed,

Re: [Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

Significantly less likely than men who don't attend such training.. So does that mean the targeting is correct and the people sent on such training are disproportionately those who most need it? If you want a test of how effective that training is you could try an AB test. Study a

[Gendergap] Study: men who receive harassment training “significantly less likely” to recognize harassment

"A study in the Journal of Applied Behavioral Science found men who participated in a university staff sexual harassment programme were “significantly less likely” to see coercive behaviour as sexual harassment."