Welcome, everybody. My name is Steve V Weg, and I'm the Associate Director of the Center for Translating Research into Practice. It's my pleasure to welcome you to our event today. And where we're going to host doctor Peggy Stockdale as part of our monthly conversation series featuring our translational scholars and Campus. So a couple of quick announcements to get you up to speed. As we have a Zoom meeting today, we do want to remind everybody about Zoom etiquette. So be sure to please keep your microphones mute to help keep background noise to a minimum until we might have a chance to call on you to speak in particular. We're inviting you to type your questions into the chat box, and we will have time for conversation and discussion, but please go ahead and share any of your ideas while doctor Stockdale is presenting her initial thoughts for us to think about. If you're having to leave early or you have others that maybe want to hear this conversation, we are, in fact, recording this, so you'll have a chance to view this later. And at the end, you'll get a request to do a quick post evaluation because we love to hear your thoughts about this monthly series as we begin to share some of the exciting work going on here on campus. To get to know more information about the center. The center for translating research into practice is the brain child of doctor Sandra Petronio, who's a communications professor, and a former chancellor Emeritus Charles R Bans. And they thought that I UPI was a hotbed of faculty, staff, and community and student partners that are generating and using knowledge to solve complex problems in our community. So if you want to learn more about that. We invite you to subscribe to our monthly newsletter, check out our YouTube channel, where we're hosting these videos. And if you're so interested by attending today's session, you'll have a chance to earn continuing education units, so watch for more information about that coming out. You can also follow us on our Social media outlets, so you can follow us on Twitter or to our Facebook page or any number of places. But so please take note of these opportunities and keep track of us. We're very excited to have featured scholars. If you go to our website and look them up, you can find out more about their research, and if you're interested in learning more about their particular publications, you can scroll down and you'll find their scholar works. Scholar works is an opportunity IUPUI has for providing free and public access to a lot of the works that our scholars are doing. And this way, you can be in the know about what's happening and learn more about the work that they're doing. We do want to let you know that next month is another event, another conversation series, and we're so excited to have doctor William Blumkris to speak. It'll be on April 23, and he's going to be talking to us about water policy. As we've gotten lots of rain over these last days, water might be on our minds, but he's going to challenge us to think about even if we have a lot of water, why we need to be thinking about water? But today, we are very fortunate to have with us, doctor Peggy Stockdale, who is on faculty here, who's been here for a while, thinking about the idea of sexual harassment. And if you read her notes in the website on our webpage where we have a chance to interview her and get to know her better. She's been thinking about this for a really long time, I think. This is just like part of her DNA. But we're really happy to have her here today to help us think about this issue and to talk about harassment and things that we should be considering. So let's welcome our guest speaker today, doctor Peggy Stockdale. Thank you for joining us. Thank you for that nice introduction. I just want a quick assessment to see that you're seeing a full screen of a slide and not my speaker notes. Does that sound right? That is correct. So you are honor. Okay. Thank you. Again, it was a real honor to be asked to be part of this monthly series and talk about the work that we've been doing in our lab, and work that I've been part of, as you said, part of my DNA, I've been interested in gender issues in the workplace throughout my career. My initial aim when I was a graduate student. A Industrial Organizational Psychology was to be a scholar of women's issues in the workplace. And it just so happened that when I started my career at a different university Southern Illinois University, the Supreme Court hearings to confirm Clarence Thomas as a justice of the Supreme Court was taking place. And for those of you who have been around for a while, you may remember these televised hearings where Anita Hill who had been worked with Clarence Thomas in a couple different federal agencies, had brought to the attention of the Senate Justice Committee concerns that she had about his kind of salacious behavior towards her and others that worked with her in these agencies. These hearings were publicized and really shook the nation waking us up to the issue of sexual harassment. It was happened to be at a time when I was, as I said, first starting my career, hoping to become a scholar and an expert on gender issues in the workplace. And I thought, I have my topic. This is what I'm going to be studying and working on for my career. I thought I would have it figured out in maybe a couple of studies, and by the time I got promoted to associate professor, the issue would be solved. But I was naive. And in fact, as we know, with the M two movement has also brought awareness again to this problem. That's really been around for as long as women have been in the workplace, but it's been in our conscious awareness since the late 1970s. So my career has focused on research on sexual harassment for over 30 years now. I've looked at how people perceive and label their experiences as sexual harassment or perceive the harassment experience of others. I've studied men's experiences of sexual harassment to try to develop a broader theory of harassment. I've studied how targets of harassment cope with their experiences and the kinds of consequences that they experience, such as post traumatic stress disorder and re victimization experiences. Recently, I've been interested in the role of I've actually always been interested in the role of power on sexual harassment, but recently, I've been trying to really nail down how does power operate to incentivize or to mobilize people to sexually harass. With the hope that this work will lead to effective interventions that can be developed to help at least put some kind of control over this problem. My translational work has been involved with developing policies and examining procedural issues in organizations to address sexual harassment claims, and I've worked in many different contexts on the issues of organizational climate and leadership that I think is also part of the solution. So in my talk today, I'm going to provide a brief overview of the problem of sexual harassment, and then I'll delve into questions of why people engage in sexual harassment, focusing specifically on the role of power. I'll describe some recent research that we've been doing in my lab on power. Then finally, I'll discuss some translational implications of this research. I want to give a special call out to these two individuals, my collaborators, and my students that are in our graduate programs at the Department of Psychology. Twin Den is a doctoral student in our applied social and organizational psychology program, and I will be talking about a project that she did for her master's thesis under my direction. And Laura Laurel Mikawski, is a master's student in our industrial organizational psychology program, and I'll be talking about her master's thesis as well. And if you could send some positive vibes toward Laurel's way, she's actually defending her thesis in about an hour and a half. So so we wish her very well in that defense. So a little bit about sex harassment. I'll probably go back and forth between saying sexual harassment and sex harassment. They're used interchangeably. The sex harassment is behavior that derogate, demeans, or humiliates an individual based on that person's sex or gender. It may involve acts or comments or materials that derogate that individual in sex based ways, such as sexually objectifying and subordinating women or denigrating men to police expressions of masculinity, for example. There are three forms that we talk about in the psychological definition of sexual harassment. The first is gender harassment. This is the range of these sexist comments and behavior that can be targeted towards a class of people generally like all women or to specific subsets of people. I have this graphic of an iceberg here on the screen to show that the gender harassment is by far the most prevalent form of sex based harassment. It's really what's under the water in that iceberg metaphor. What we tend to think about when we think about sexual harassment is unwanted sexual attention, which is exactly that, unwelcome verbal or physical sexual advances, which can include assault as well as a gestures and looks and repeated requests for dates and things of that nature. And then sexual coercion, which is where employment or educational outcomes are conditioned on sexual activity. The M two movement, for example, made this form of harassment, as well as unwanted sexual attention quite salient. But that really is the tip of the iceberg compared to where gender harassment is. But it's going to be the focus of the research that I'll be talking about today. In terms of prevalence, there have been many different studies in different kinds of organizations. I'm just going to highlight a couple here. One are studies of the US military where these are large scale studies and have been conducted periodically over the last couple of decades. The most recent epis or survey finds in a 12 month period that almost 50% of women will experience some form of gender harassment, about a quarter, some form of unwanted sexual attention, and a little under 10% experiencing sexual coercion. The rates are lower for men, but they certainly are not trivial. We also know from this research that men tend to be harassers of both women and men and that sexual harassing behaviors are not isolated events. They occur in a pattern. Here's another estimate of harassment that was conducted at Penn State University, a system not unlike our own, which has several satellite campuses as well as a main campus, a medical school, and so forth. This study of women, found that The rates of harassment, especially gender harassment increase pretty sadly across different stages of student appointments. So Undergraduates about 30% up to med students who are experiencing 50%, 50% of female med students experiencing gender harassment. We know that harassment is most prevalent in environments where they are male dominated and have male leaders when the organizational climate tolerates sexual harassment, which means that perpetrators are not held accountable or victims are blamed or not taken seriously. They happen here in the university setting when there are hierarchical and dependent relationships between faculty and their trainees. Also, it tends to be more prevalent in islating environments like labs, field sites, hospitals, where the faculty and the trainees spend considerable time together. Outcomes of sexual harassment to the victim or what we call the target include both job related or academic related outcomes, such as job dissatisfaction, dissatisfaction with supervisors and co workers, or with the work itself. This then leads to organizational withdrawal, which can mean physical withdrawal, such as leaving a program of study, changing majors, or quitting a job. It can also affect that person's productivity and their job performance, which certainly makes it a concern to organizations. Health and well being. Outcomes include the panopoly of physical ailments, PTSD, depression, anxiety, sleep disturbances, and other stress related reactions. But it's not just the target who experiences negative consequences to sexual harassment. Harassment has effects on organizations. In environments where harassment is prevalent, organizational productivity is decreased. And it also can affect the psychological consequences of other people within the organization that are hearing about or observing others being sexually harassed. In fact, there's some research to show that the bystanders, the people who are observing harassment have worse psychological outcomes than the actual targets do, kind of thinking like waiting for the other shoe to drop. When will they be next? We know that the cost of turnover is particularly expensive for organizations, and of course, there are litigation costs which can run into multiple millions of dollars. So my question in my recent research has been on why people harass, and I've looked specifically at the effects of power. Power has been part of the conversation of sex harassment since we've been looking at this issue for over 40 years now. We think of patriarchical structures, men's control over women's economic roles and so forth. But my interest has been on more proximal influences. I want to know how does power motivate harassing actions in the moment. I was intrigued originally by this concept called the metamorphic effects of power. The idea of power corrupting. When people feel powerful, they have an exalted view of themselves, and they see others as less important and deserving of less attention. This theory of metamorphic effect of power has been updated in a more recent theoretical framework called the power approach theory. In this theory, power activates what we call the behavioral activation system. The behavioral activation system is a complex of cognitive behavioral and emotional systems that motivate uninhibited, self relevant, goal seeking behaviors and thoughts. People who feel powerful, feel disinhibited. They engage in higher risk taking behaviors. They overestimate how much they think they regard themselves, and they underrestimate others emotional states. They think of others as being instrumental. People who are primed to think of power make more automatic associations between power and sex. Therefore, when we think of sex harassment, it's not about misguided amorous intentions, but rather using sex to enhance one's feelings of power and using power to gain sexual access to others. In other words, feeling powerful makes one feel free to act with impunity, which can lead to sex harassment. Translating that into our research model, we have been trying to understand how a feeling of power increases feelings of sexy and powerful feelings and whether that leads to sexual harassment. I want to go through my research method or my research essay, so to speak, because this is going to be consistent through all the studies that I'll be talking about with some variation. So psychologists use a concept called priming to make people feel a certain way in a moment. This can be done sublimally. It can be done in interpersonal interaction or many different methods. What we did was create a scenario where we ask our research participants, which are adults living in the US, to imagine themselves being the person in this scenario, to imagine themselves in this situation. Our scenario to prime this sense of self focused power, talks about waking up in the morning, feeling really great, pumping some iron and going to work at work, they pitch a winning proposal to top management, which will get them promoted. Later on in the day, they are completing performance evaluations, and they examine a poor performing subordinate and decide, got to go. They fire that subordinate. And then later in the day, they have a beer some co workers after work. That prime is compared to a control prime, where it's the same basic day, but none of these power elements are in the scenario. After they read one or the other scenario, then they fill out a survey, and we ask them to rate their feelings, how they feel right now after reading the scenario, and imagining themselves having a day like was described in the scenario. And in particular, we're interested in their sexy, powerful, attractive, strong, desirable, competitive. These sexy, powerful feelings. After that, they complete one of two different self report measures of their likelihood to engage in sex harassment. We use two different versions to have a replication of our research. In one version, they completed a scale that's been around for a long time. It's called the likelihood to sexually harassed scale. And in this scale, there are a number of vignettes. Again, kind of putting that person in a situation like imagine yourself being in this situation. And in the likelihood of sexually harass sale, there's an opportunity for that person to engage in that quid pro quo or sexual coercion form of sexual harassment. They go through a series of scenarios and rate the likelihood that they would engage in harassing behavior in each scenario. The second one is a newer instrument called the workplace crush scenario. And as it sounds, it sets up a situation where you imagine having a crush on an employee, and that, that crush object, is not returning your affections. And so the questionnaire asks the likelihood that you would engage in unwanted sexual attention toward that person. And again, we add up the items and come up with an overall scale that measures their intention to sexually harass. Doing this research in our lab, we we found that when people were primed to feel this self focused power, it did increase their ratings on those feelings of sexiness and powerfulness, as we expected. And we found that those feelings then positively increased scores on sexual coercion and unwanted sexual tension, either of those two scales I just talked about. This was a significant, what we call an indirect effect. The self focus power increases sexy powerful feelings, and then sexy powerful feelings increased the likelihood that they would engage in sexual harassment. These are our parameters for those who want to see the numbers. But then we said, well, not all power is bad. With great power comes great responsibility. The responsibility motive has been demonstrated in social psychological research on power motives for several decades. It's been the foundation for most religious figures and conceptualizations of what we call great man theories of leadership. We wondered if we prime participants to feel powerful in a responsibility focused way, whether it would maybe decrease the inclination to sexually harass or at least temper that impulse. In the same study, we had a third prime where we prime a portion of our participants to feel powerful in this responsibility focused way. Again, using that scenario approach. Here in this scenario, you wake up feeling great, you walk your dog, make a vet appointment. Then at work, you pitch a winning proposal to top management, but it's focused now on promoting the team as opposed to promoting yourself. Later in the day, when you're completing your performance reviews, you decide to mentor that poor performing subordinate. Then last after work, you have some ice tea, not alcohol with your friends. Again, they're going to complete measures of their feelings, and in this case, we're interested in their feelings of what we call communal feelings or connectiveness feelings. How caring do they feel after reading this scenario, how connected to others, altruistic, responsibility for others, et cetera. These items combined together to form a scale that we call communal feelings. Then they complete one of those two vignettes or measures of the proclivity to engage in sexual harassment. With this study, we found that responsibility focused power Prime compared to the other conditions, increased feel those communal feelings as we anticipated. But to our surprise, communal feelings had a positive impact. In other words, it increased the likelihood of engaging in sexual harassment on both of our measures. We expected to either have a zero correlation or possibly a negative correlation, but in fact, it was positive. The effect was significant, again, indirect effect, and these are our parameters for those interested in the numbers. So why do good people sexually harass? We thought about that and it didn't take us long to think about all of the people who have been called out with credible claims of sexual harassment in the M two movement and certainly before. That are well liked people, for example, Neil Degras Tyson, an astrophysicist and host of the PBS show Cosmos, Charlie Rose, PBS interviewer, and anchor of CBS this morning, Tom Brokaw, MBS reporter and anchor. Then this other person is Justin Forsyth, who is CEO of a foundation called Save Children or Save the Children. He's also been Deputy Director of UNSF. Well, we can also think of examples of harassment by clergy, by teachers, and probably even some of our friends and colleagues. So why do these folks engage in harassment? We we're interested in this concept of moral licensing as a possible explanatory mechanism. Moral licensing occurs is a thinking of yourself as having permission to indulge in transgressive behaviors after you have established positive credentials. It's like a psychological balancing act. The idea that past good deeds can liberate people to engage in behaviors that are mal, unethical, or otherwise problematic. A analogy that I use is driving through McDonald's and ordering a diet coke, and then thinking, I can have a big MAC with that. The diet coke licenses you to have the Big MAC. Other researchers found that, for example, voting for a Black presidential candidate moly license some people to discriminate against Black job candidates. A recent study found that engaging in community volunteer behavior increased subtle acts of incivility in the workplace. Our question was, do we morally license ourselves to sexually harass when we believe we have used our power responsibly. This was the focus of Twin Dens master's thesis. Twin primed her research participants in the same way we showed in the previous study to feel this responsibility focused power, comparing that to the control condition. They then also completed these measures of communal feelings, and then a second scale that measures moral licensing. An example of an item on the scale is I earned credit for performing good behaviors, or my previous good deeds, earn me credits as a moral person, and so forth. Then they complete the workplace crush scenario. We just used that one this time. And what she found was as she replicated the effect that responsibility focus power increases communal feelings, and those communal feelings, in turn, increased scores on that moral licensing scale. Responsibility focus power also had a direct effect on the moral licensing. Then the higher the score on moral licensing, the higher the score on indicating that you would engage in sexual harassment with that workplace crush scenario. This effect, again, was indirectly of an indirect effect, this is called serial mediation, and those were her parameters. T hus Twins thesis found support for the theory that people who envision embodying responsibility, focus power morally license themselves to engage in sexual harassment. The next question then was, do we morally license other people to sexually harass? This was the focus of Laurel Michalski thesis. This is examining whether when we observe or hear about a person who has been accused of sexual harassment, if they have had a prior record of being a good person, they've been a responsibility focus leader, do we let them off the hook? In Laurel's research, she had them read a scenario about a manager named Troy, and Troy is described in one of three ways. So participants read one of these three versions. In the first scenario, Troy embodies this responsibility focus power. He has received an award at work for being an excellent leader and for being a wonderful mentor and an ally for women in the workplace. In the cell focus condition, Troy is described as somebody who is very likely to promote himself, and he's the guy who pitches the proposal that aims at getting himself a promotion and fires the struggling employee. In the control condition, Troy is kind of an average Joe, and he earns a bonus for receiving a firm wide goal, but so does everybody else in the firm. After reading one of those three scenarios, they complete a similar measure that Twin used in her thesis that measures moral licensing. But this one turns the focus on Troy, and we ask, Does Troy earn credit for performing good behaviors? Does Troy's previous good deeds earn him credits as a moral person? After they've completed that scale, they're presented with a new scenario. In this scenario, This describes an incident or accusation of sexual harassment against Troy by a woman named Alicia. This is actually a scenario that's based on actual case, and we've used this in prior research. So if you read this and I'm not going to go through it, but it's pretty bad. Troy is inappropriately touching Alicia. He tries to get her talk about He wants to talk to her about his sex life, explains how he fantasizes about her, and so on and so forth. After they read that scenario, they're asked to make judgments of the scenario and of Troy and also of Alicia. So they rate the severity of this event. They rate the degree to which they think Troy is guilty. They also rate whether they think Alicia is making a false accusation against Troy. And then finally, they select a punishment that they think Troy should receive, and they can select a range of punishments from do nothing, no action up to firing him. What she found was that indeed, when Troy was described as responsibility focused leader, he is getting higher scores on that moral licensing scale than the control or the version of Troy described as a self focus or egocentric power holder. So we find this effect on moral licensing. The effect on severity was not quite as clear, both the responsibility version and the self focus version, the scenario is described as serious compared to the control. But for guilt ratings, the self focus version of Troy is rated as more guilty than the responsibility version of Troy. And then for false accusations, we find that when they were lower than the guilt ratings, but still we find that responsibility focused Troy, people pointed their finger a little bit more towards Alicia, suggesting that she was making a false accusation, more so in those other conditions. So with the research model, that responsibility focused power did increase moral licensing as we just showed, and the moral licensing was positively related to those false accusation beliefs. And those are the parameters there. Then finally, in terms of the punishments that they selected for Troy. Most people said, Yeah, we got to fire this guy, but much more likely they were picked out this particular punishment when Troy embodied that self focus power than when he embodied the responsibility focus power. And then down on these less severe actions, we find that people were more likely to pick the less severe action for the responsibility focus Troy than the self focused or the control version. Laurel's thesis has demonstrated evidence that we morally license other people to sexually harass when we see them embodying this good form of power. To summarize this body of research, we find that both self centered and responsibility focus power increase sexual harassment proclivities, that people embodying responsibility focus power morally license themselves to sexually harass, and that observers morally license those responsibility focus power holders to sexually harass. So what do we do with this? Can we fix it? This is the focus of our next phase of our research. I'm presenting some preliminary ideas about where we're taking our research. Although moral licensing effects are robust, they can be disrupted. The way we disrupt moral licensing is by emphasizing the hypocrisy of the behavior, heightening the perceptions of the wrongness of the action, especially when the transgressive behavior directly contradicts the moral behavior that they had previously established. We know that increasing empathy and perspective taking can remind powerful people of their duty to take care of others. Then accountability, which is that conscious public awareness of what you're doing. Think of accountability like writing down all of the calories that you've consumed in a day to help you stay on a diet. It serves as a conscious reminder of what our duties are to protect others or ourself from harm, and it can stop us from engaging in harmful acts toward others. We have a proposal to develop what I'm calling accountability based empathy training or ABET training. In this training, participants would view what we call an empathy video. The empathy video, which we hope to get funding to develop will be a interview with a real victim, one or two real victims of sexual harassment, talking about what she experienced and how it affected her. After watching the empathy video, then the trainees will go through accountability exercises. They will list the feelings and consequences that this person experiences to increase their empathy. They will read about ethical business principles and write an essay on why sex harassment is counter to those business ethics. Then finally, they will describe your accountability in this situation. ABT training is designed to be a module that will fit into pre existing sex harassment training programs. I can be done online, or it can be done live. So we are seeking funding to develop this training program to create those videos and the exercises, to pilot test the training, and then to implement it. I'm very fortunate already to have partners here on campus on our IUPUI campus as well as the system more broadly, the Office of Equal Employment, the Office for Women, the graduate Office, and the Office of Institutional Equity, who are all working with me on this project, and I want to thank them for their support. I want to give a shout out to the WOW lab, the women and work lab. This is a photo taken before the pandemic of some current and former members of the WOW lab, and citations if anyone's interested in learning more about this work, and now I'll open up for questions. Thank you. Wow, thank you, doctor Stockdale. That was a lot of information for us to digest. And we would love to entertain some of your questions or comments. And while you're thinking about that, if you'd want to identify yourself in some way, we did have somebody pose a question for you in the chat from Amy Kimball Hill, who asked if there was any suggestion that privilege or perceptions of a new powerful identity sector or intersection played a role in the propensity to harass. So Mick, could you clarify the question? We'd have to ask Anne to do that if Ann is available because I'm just reading what was here. Yeah. So the way I'm interpreting that question is do people who have intersexual identities feel powerful? And if so, does that increase their propensity to has? I think it's a really interesting question. And actually, we didn't look at this idea of whether that was a new identity, but we have examined whether this effect is limited to what we might think of as the typical harasser, men, white men in particular. We found that the same effects occurred for women. Women who were perceiving themselves as being powerful, either in the responsibility focused way or the self focused way, engage in those same thought patterns and indicate a likelihood of sexually harass. And we did because of a quirk in some of the data that we collected originally, we had a fairly large sample of LGBTQ people who completed our survey as we looked specifically at them and we did a follow up study with them and found that they too, when they are empowered, in this way, will actually engage in the same kinds of processes culminating in a stating an intention to sexually harass. Did it look like doctor Andel was raising a hand to say something or are you just waving? Did you have a question or comment? You want to unmute and let us know. I actually don't think I did raise my hand, but this is a great tank you. Thank you so much. Okay. So I'm observing that, you've got a proposal out to do some training, which sounds like, Oh my gosh, that would be an appropriate thing to do and a nice way to try to impact this. But what other things are you guys thinking about about ways to address this issue? And do we think training would be effective in addressing the issue as well. Well, I can tell you that training is important, but it's not the only thing. You have to have you have to have a strong policy and it has to be backed up with procedures that are effective in investigating and making reasonable determinations and applying the appropriate punishment regardless of the level of the power of the initiator. And that's been part of the problem throughout history of this is that we're easy to fire a low level employee, but so, someone who is higher up in the organization. But you also have to have an environment where harassment just is not tolerated. That is the tone from the top. The top leadership really has to set that tone, and enforce it, role model it, and intervene when necessary. Yeah. And there's a comment in the chat that says a lot of times harassment happens in the presence of people where the observers may laugh at the victim's discomfort, making the victim really doubt their own feelings? Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So another comment says, it seems from your answer so far that this is a very robust effect. Does it seem likely that the empowerment scenario affects impulse control generally? Or might it also encourage people to take other risks with either positive or negative implications. Yes. Thank you, doctor Gabbert, for that astute comment. Yeah. The power approach theory is very broad, it applies to many different behaviors, some of which are quite positive things. P who feel powerful get things done because they don't feel that sense of inhibition. And if their goal is a pro social goal to do good, then they're likely to carry out good behavior and so forth. But that's where that moral licensing effect sort of kind of trips that up a little bit. Yeah. And did you see there was a question, a comment that the university has implemented some sexual harassment training. And do you know if has that been a set? So in Mitchell, who is the director of the Office of Equal Opportunity here on campus, and it's through her office that faculty and staff are directed to the training that we receive, and then the students, especially graduate students who are serving as TAs will go through a similar training that goes from the graduate office. I think it's part of the Office of Institutional Equity in Bloomington that oversees that training. And has indicated that they just have not had the resources to evaluate their training. There is literature on sexual harassment training effectiveness, and we know that training does increase knowledge It tends to increase awareness. We haven't seen much on changing behavior, unfortunately, that's what I'm hoping our training program will do. It needs to be effective training, though. I need to people have to feel that it's authentic and that that it's relevant to them. So I'm hoping that our training, especially with those empathy and videos will create a sense of engagement with the material. And my colleague, Iva Pietre, I don't know if for some of you who saw her work highlighted in yesterday's symposium on the picture of scientist video, talked about the importance of that kind of film and videos that create a sense of real interest in the subject matter that motivate people to change. In honoring this next question, I want to share with you. I also want to comment. Several folks have noted that the interpreters are part of this series, and we have some student interpreters that are learning and practicing their craft, so it's very enjoyable to watch them and to have this opportunity to practice that skill. Which leads to this other question then about what do you think about the role of culture and stereotypes and how does that maybe apply? The particular question says, What do you do when leadership tells you that certain cultural backgrounds, that males don't like taking orders from women or that sort of thing. How does that impact this your research? Well, certainly early on in my career when I was doing sort of university wide surveys on experiences of sex harassment. I got a little bit of hate mail in doing that research particularly from people from cultures that where there was a hierarchical relationship, a strong hierarchical relationship between men and women's roles, and kind of sort of set me back. I was like, I didn't expect to encounter that. I didn't really have a strong answer to that now. I think that these issues have to be studied within cultural contexts and find solutions that are consistent with cultural values. So instead of maybe turning a what we might call a high power dominance culture or a high masculinity culture from one that derogates women to perhaps one that cares for women, one that makes sure that women are protected without a sexist overtone to that. When you mentioned hate mail and there's another question in here about social media. Well, about social media. And we've been talking about sexual harassment. But do you think these feelings of power might also lead to threatening behavior in social media out? Yeah. Like Docing. Yeah and harassment. Yeah. We're seeing a real uptick in that. The problem with that is it's anonymity. And that's created. I mean, we see this not just with harassment, but just the Vitroligy of conversation that goes on in the social media space because of this sense of lack of connection to the people that we're engaging with in anonymity. Just as a kind of a side story, yesterday, my sister sent me a letter that an attorney had written on behalf of her 17-year-old daughter who works as a waitress in a restaurant and she's 17, and she and another young female waitress, were working Monday night, and there were a couple of men sitting at the bar, giving them harassing taunts, looking at them inappropriately, just making them feel very uncomfortable. My niece turns to the man and said, Hey, I'm under age, you're not getting anywhere here. He the customer asked to speak to her manager, the manager comes out and he actually apologizes to the customers and gives them a gift certificate. And when they leave, he tells my niece and the other waitress that he doesn't want to get bad comments online from these customers. So he was placating them and not protecting his employees because of the fear that he was going to get a negative anonymous review on whatever. Yell open table and so forth. So I thought, Wow, that's another way that we are allowing harassment to continue. That online customer reviews are putting the fear into management that, the manager was wrong, but certainly supported by that online anonymous feature that we see now in restaurants and other entertainment venues. I can't help but think what the message was to those 17 year olds, too. Oh, my goodness. Yeah. Well, my niece is pretty strong. You know, she got a lawyer right right away. Yes. But that everybody has that privilege to be able to have those resources. Yeah. Well, somebody's making a comment that in your scenario, if fits your model, like, if someone pays for food, then then, you know, that's Right. That gives them the ability. There's been some there's coming out with interesting research on tipping that when restaurants that, of course, almost all restaurants especially the United States allow tipping, but it does, increase the likelihood that wait staff will be sexually harassed. Yeah. Well, there's a question too about always the question of, do you think there's enough resources to address this issue particularly on our campus e then? And this might be an opportunity to promote, like, Oh, my gosh, we do cob do that ABET training, right? That would be helpful, wouldn't it? So if we also have some great initiatives going on, for example, Project Epic, which is the NSF advance grant that I've been working with Kathy Johnson as the PI, and we're really focusing on department cultures and not just on harassment, but empowering department leaders to create environments that are welcoming and invitational to women and set the tone that harassment is not tolerated. That's one step. It's a multi pronged issue. There's not a single solution to it, but we always need to have more resources. And I think there are lots more questions. As I see a couple of more questions that are coming up, there's lots more opportunity for additional research to dig down deeper into this issue. But I'm also aware of our time. And we want to thank doctor Stockdale for sharing this amazing research and this information and to help us to see how this applies very directly to what we are doing and what we can do here on our campus, but also in our community. And we want to be mindful of Zoom etiquette and end our meeting officially a little bit before the next hour, particularly since it's during lunchtime, and we know that people need to take a break here in there. So join me in thanking doctor Stockdale for doing this. I know that she'll be happy to stay here for just a few more minutes. If people want to stay on and ask another question or continue the conversation just a few more minutes. We'll do that. But as an official end, I do want to also remind you that, again, go visit the trip website. It's trippy dot edU. You can see lots more information about the amazing translational research here on our campus. And we invite you to join us again next month as we have another conversation. We'll be talking with doctor Bloomquist about water management, water resources. So thank you again, doctor Stockdale, and have a great day to everybody else. And as I said, we'll just hang out if there's anybody that really wants to continue a conversation, ask another question. Doctor Stockdale said she's stayed for just another few minutes. Thank you. Yes, we'll do. I think great, great research and presentation. I'm sorry, I missed the very beginning because of connection issues. So I'm wondering, is this research inclusive of gender harassment, even if that's sexual harassment? Good question. So we have been focusing on the one of sexual attention and the sexual coercion. Primarily because we have measures of that the ability to measure it. So One thing that we're working on in our lab is a measure of gender harassment, where we get a self report of people's willingness to engage in gender harassment. And once we get that scale validated, we plan to use it in the same paradigm to see if it also has similar effects. Excellent. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for asking. I see doctor Bans has joined us, the director of our Center hello. Great to see you. Thank you. Thank you so much. This was a terrific presentation. I'm so glad to see the length that you've worked on this and tried to tease out the different dimensions. Obviously, in my last life, I worried a good deal about this. And I guess, one of the questions I still have is I watch events recently is how leaders can try and strengthen and mitigate the kinds of things you're saying because it's a very tricky set of motivations and the links and those models are not super complex, but trying to think, how do you message in a way that says, Look, just because you buy food, it doesn't get you off. You don't have that you're not empowered to do that. This is a really challenging thing. It's not going to get solved with a single message. It's going to need some sophisticated training. Yeah. Thank you, doctor Banz, especially for setting up this center. I think it's a terrific idea, and I really appreciate the work you're doing to highlight the work of translational scholars, and what a great opportunity to turn the pandemic into an opportunity to hear about more research. So thank you for that. And yeah, like I said, tone from the top is important as well as the role modeling and quick action, appropriate action and consistent action. So we don't treat high value, so to speak, well paid or maybe that star researcher differently than we would the janitor. And so that's hard to do, you know, because it's tough to you have a strong policy or a strong consequence to people who are instrumental to the success of the organization. But the problem is that they will also be the undoing of the organization if that behavior is allowed to continue. So consistent, strong, vocal, be out in front, all the things that you did when you were Chancellor that I see Chancellor Paid doing, Kathy Johnson doing are the kinds of leadership that we need to continue to strengthen and encourage. Thank you. Thank you. It's amazingly complicated this week is on my mind because of the president of Oregon State just having stepping down over the way he didn't handle the LSU, which involved athletics, and he now publicly has been saying the board basically took away his authority over athletics, which violates the NCA rules, which you know, I mean, it's tied up. And so I think trying to have leaders consistently, but also we're going to have to work all the way through it because boards are known some places to be metal. So how's that? That's the nicest I can be about it. But I want to thank you. I want to give credit to Steve and Nuri for the spotlights because they have cooked this up, and frankly, as you said, we wouldn't have done this in person every month. We don't have the staff and resources to do it, but on Zoom, this has been perfect. And please. I looked down by the way at one point, and there were 93 pchase. And just made me smile because this is the way we get this information out, and your work is a perfect illustration of it. And Sandra's concept for the center from the beginning of the time we were here was to try and celebrate this work, and you give us that chance to do it. So thank you and thank Steve and Ni both. And Kathy Dean Grove being on right now has been a voice on this campus for these issues. All the time. Thank you. Ti's been a great partner. Great. Thank you. Well, I see that we've had several people hang on until the bitter end, and we want to thank you for doing that. And I'm sure that doctor Stockdale would be happy to entertain additional questions and conversations beyond this hour, right? If you have until 130 whereby Laura Mit Kalowski defends her master's thesis. Well, I mean, I mean, outside of this call. You would love to have more conversation about collaborating, about finding resources, any ways that we could continue this work. So as soon as you say, Hey, let's collaborate and do some work, get some money, people they're leaving in droves. But this is the part of the spirit of our campus where we can do that sort of work and find partnerships. So I hope that you do, in fact, hear from some of your colleagues after today, and that we can help promote this work even further. It's been fantastic. I want to thank you again. I do want to have for those that are just left, and for our video audience, just remind you that we thank you for attending today, and we hope that you'll come join us next month as we have doctor Bloom Quiz talk about water control. So thank you so much, doctor Stockdale, and thank you all for attending. Have a great day.