Does Verbal Street Harassment Signal Perpetrator Dominance to Male and Female Observers?

Abstract

It is difficult to explain why verbal street harassment, where typically a male harasser yells sexually harassing statements at a female victim, has survived as a behaviour. We propose that verbal street harassment may signal a harasser’s dominance and aimed to test this in our registered report. Participants (N = 443) read one of two vignettes describing either a street harassment incident (in which a male perpetrator harasses a female victim) or a street incident without harassment. Participants were asked to evaluate whether the male target possessed a range of traits (including dominance) and to evaluate any harm the female target suffered from the incident. Results suggested that the male target who verbally harassed a female victim on the street was perceived by participants as more dominant and as having a darker personality than a male target who did not engage in street harassment. Participants also perceived the female target as more harmed when she was harassed. However, results did not support the predicted interaction of participant sex and incident type on participants’ perceptions of the male and female targets. These results suggest that verbal street harassment may signal a harasser’s dominance which may be why the behaviour has been maintained. To establish whether verbal street meets the conditions to be classed as a costly signal, these findings should be replicated and extended. Understanding why street harassment persists as a behaviour is critical to designing effective intervention to prevent street harassment and protect harassment victims.