The AAUW Sexual Harassment Survey<\/strong> is a landmark psychometric and behavioral assessment tool developed by the American Association of University Women (AAUW)<\/a> Educational Foundation to measure the prevalence, nature, contextual dynamics, impact, and perpetration of sexual harassment<\/a> in primary and secondary educational environments. Originally introduced in the seminal nationwide study Hostile Hallways: The AAUW Survey on Sexual Harassment in America’s Schools<\/em> (1993) and refined in the 2001 replication study, the instrument provides an empirical, behavioral framework that operationalizes peer-to-peer and staff-to-student harassment without relying on subjective or legalistic self-labeling. The survey comprises multi-part behavioral inventories capturing both victimization (Question 1, with 14 distinct behavioral items across non-physical, physical, and verbal domains) and perpetration (Question 6, mirroring the 14 behavioral indicators), accompanied by dedicated situational, relational, and emotional impact modules (Questions 2 through 5, 7, and 8). Items in the victimization and perpetration frequency modules are scored on an ordinal metric (0 = Never<\/em>, 1 = 1\u20132 times<\/em>, 2 = 3\u20135 times<\/em>, 3 = 6+ times<\/em>, with an option for Not Sure<\/em>), while ecological, perpetrator identity, and attributional modules utilize dichotomous indicators (1 = Yes<\/em>, 0 = No<\/em>) and categorical response scales. Psychometric investigations, including replications cataloged by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)<\/a>, indicate strong internal consistency across its behavioral subscales (Cronbach’s alpha coefficients typically ranging from .82 to .91), robust structural validity confirming multidimensionality (differentiating verbal\/gestural harassment from physical violation), and pronounced convergent and predictive validity regarding psychological distress, educational disengagement, and school climate indices<\/span>.<\/p>\n AAUW Sexual Harassment Survey, Hostile Hallways, sexual harassment, school-based victimization, peer harassment, perpetration, adolescent development, psychometrics, school violence, Title IX assessment<\/p>\n The instrument was commissioned and developed by the American Association of University Women (AAUW) Educational Foundation<\/strong> in collaboration with Harris Interactive<\/strong> (formerly Louis Harris and Associates, Inc.). Key research contributors, programmatic directors, and advisory panelists included:<\/p>\n The primary purpose of the AAUW Sexual Harassment Survey is to provide a standardized, behaviorally specific measurement system for identifying the prevalence, incidence, etiology, and personal consequences of sexual harassment among school-aged youth, predominantly spanning grades 8 through 11 (ages 12 to 18). Prior to the deployment of this instrument, institutional assessments of school-based harassment were severely compromised by semantic ambiguity: inquiring whether a student had been “sexually harassed” frequently yielded dramatic underreporting or subjective variability, as adolescents often conflate harassment with “flirting,” “teasing,” or legally actionable criminal assault. The AAUW tool eliminated this conceptual confound by decomposing sexual harassment into 14 explicit behavioral manifestations\u2014ranging from verbal taunts and derogatory sexual graffiti to coercive touching, forced kissing, and explicit physical assault\u2014experienced during clearly demarcated “school-related times.”<\/p>\n From an applied clinical and public health perspective, the instrument serves multiple diagnostic, preventive, and administrative functions. In educational policy and compliance contexts, the survey provides empirical data essential for auditing institutional adherence to Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972<\/a>, which obligates federally funded educational institutions to address sexually hostile educational environments. School psychologists, guidance counselors, and clinical social workers utilize the behavioral indicators to assess systemic school climate, track victimized adolescents at risk for acute stress, evaluate trauma symptoms, and design multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS).<\/p>\n In behavioral research, the dual-structure operationalization (measuring both victimization and self-reported perpetration within identical behavioral parameters) enables structural equation modeling of the reciprocal relationships between harassment involvement, social-cognitive distortions, gender-role stereotyping, and behavioral peer norms. Moreover, the integration of ecological questions detailing perpetrator demographics (single vs. group, male vs. female, peer vs. adult authority), physical school locations (hallways, classrooms, locker rooms, school transit), and subjective emotional sequelae (ranging from unbothered to severely upset) equips researchers with granular contextual data necessary for developing environmental, situational crime prevention interventions within secondary schools.<\/p>\n The psychological construct evaluated by the AAUW instrument is school-based sexual harassment<\/strong>, conceptualized as unwelcome, uninvited behavior of a sexual nature that creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive educational environment. Rather than viewing sexual harassment as a unitary, homogeneous event, the instrument frames it as a spectrum of interpersonal aggression cutting across multiple behavioral modalities, relational dynamics, and functional motivations.<\/p>\n This sub-dimension captures non-contact violations of personal boundaries that exploit sexualized or gender-derogatory content to demean, humiliate, or control the target. Specific item operationalizations include:<\/p>\n This dimension encompasses non-consensual physical contact and spatial boundary violations that threaten bodily integrity and personal autonomy. The spectrum includes:<\/p>\n Representing the most severe tier of interpersonal violation, this sub-dimension measures explicit behavioral coercion involving sexual acts:<\/p>\n Beyond victimization, the construct encompasses perpetration behaviors mirroring the 14 victimization items, alongside self-serving cognitive attributions (social normalization, power assertion, peer compliance, instrumental pursuit, and distorted relational expectations). This captures the socio-ecological normalization of sexual dominance within adolescent peer networks.<\/p>\n The AAUW Sexual Harassment Survey is grounded in an interdisciplinary synthesis of feminist sociological theory<\/a>, social cognitive theory<\/a>, and Bronfenbrenner’s social-ecological systems model<\/a>.<\/p>\n Historically articulated by scholars such as Catherine MacKinnon and adapted to youth contexts by Nan Stein, feminist legal and social theory posits that sexual harassment is not an expression of uncontrolled sexual attraction, but rather an assertion of patriarchal dominance, gender-role enforcement, and power differentials. In early adolescence, emerging sexual identity intersects with rigid peer hierarchies. The AAUW framework operationalizes this theoretical perspective by assessing behaviors that enforce gender orthodoxy (e.g., weaponizing homophobic labels against non-conforming peers) and examining differential power dynamics across gender dyads (male-on-female, female-on-male, same-sex, and group-based harassment).<\/p>\n Applying Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model, the AAUW survey treats adolescent harassment as an emergent property of nested environmental systems:<\/p>\n The instrument incorporates key tenets of Routine Activity Theory<\/a> (Cohen & Felson). By mapping specific physical spaces (restrooms, playing fields, hallways) and supervision parameters, the survey operationalizes harassment as occurring at the nexus of motivated offenders (individual or collective peer groups), suitable targets (isolated students), and the absence of capable guardians (unsupervised school transit, unmonitored locker facilities).<\/p>\n The psychometric validity of the AAUW Sexual Harassment Survey has been corroborated across large-scale national probability studies, peer-reviewed replications, and compendia published by agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention<\/a>.<\/p>\n Content validity was established through extensive focus groups with middle and high school students, comprehensive reviews of federal Title IX jurisprudence, and advisory oversight by developmental psychologists and educational criminologists. Rather than using abstract terminology, every item represents an unambiguous, behaviorally specific act. In construct validation studies conducted by Harris Interactive and subsequent independent researchers (e.g., Fineran & Bennett, 1999; McMaster et al., 2002), the behavioral items demonstrated distinct divergence from general school incivility and non-sexualized physical bullying, confirming that sexual harassment forms an empirically separable domain of peer aggression.<\/p>\n The instrument demonstrates strong convergent validity with established psychometric scales measuring psychological distress, somatic complaints, and educational disruption:<\/p>\n Discriminant validity is supported by low-to-moderate correlations with general trait anxiety and non-interpersonal academic stress, confirming that the tool isolates specific interpersonal environmental trauma rather than generalized negative affectivity. In longitudinal modeling, baseline victimization scores on the AAUW scale successfully predict subsequent onset of major depressive symptoms, social anxiety, and academic disengagement at 12-month follow-up, controlling for prior baseline mental health status.<\/p>\n The AAUW Sexual Harassment Survey exhibits strong reliability metrics across diverse demographic cohorts, educational strata, and independent research investigations.<\/p>\n Internal consistency analyses across independent studies yield robust Cronbach’s alpha<\/a> coefficients:<\/p>\n Because the survey assesses behavioral frequency over a specified retrospective reporting window (“during the last year”), test-retest reliability has been evaluated over short intervals (2 to 4 weeks) to evaluate recall consistency without capturing true developmental shifts. Short-term test-retest coefficients (intraclass correlation coefficients, ICC) range from .79 to .87 for cumulative victimization frequency scores, indicating high temporal stability in adolescent reporting of behavioral events.<\/p>\n Structural investigations using both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)<\/a> and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)<\/a> consistently establish that the 14 behavioral items in the AAUW survey represent a multidimensional construct hierarchically organized under an overarching sexual harassment factor.<\/p>\n Principal axis factoring with oblique (Promax or Oblimin) rotation routinely extracts two to three distinct but moderately intercorrelated latent factors:<\/p>\n In CFA structural assessments testing adolescent populations, a correlated two-factor model (Non-Physical vs. Physical\/Coercive Harassment) or a second-order hierarchical model yields strong model fit statistics meeting standard psychometric thresholds:<\/p>\n Item-factor standardized factor loadings across models remain consistently robust, with verbal items exhibiting loadings between .62 and .81, and physical items loading between .58 and .84. Factor intercorrelations generally range from .55 to .70, justifying both subscale-level scoring and the use of an aggregate composite frequency index.<\/p>\n American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. (1993). Hostile hallways: The AAUW survey on sexual harassment in America’s schools<\/em>. American Association of University Women. Washington, DC.<\/p>\n American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. (2001). Hostile hallways: Bullying, teasing, and sexual harassment in school<\/em>. American Association of University Women Educational Foundation. Washington, DC. https:\/\/www.aauw.org\/resources\/research\/hostile-hallways\/<\/a><\/p>\n Fineran, S., & Bennett, L. (1999). Gender and socioeconomic differences in secondary school sexual harassment. Journal of School Violence<\/em>, 1(2), 63\u201389. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1300\/J202v01n02_05<\/a><\/p>\n Hamburger, M. E., Basile, K. C., & Vivolo, A. M. (2011). Measuring bullying victimization, perpetration, and bystander experiences: A compendium of assessment tools<\/em>. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. Atlanta, GA. https:\/\/www.cdc.gov\/violenceprevention\/pdf\/bullycompendiumbk-a.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n McMaster, L. E., Connolly, J., Pepler, D., & Craig, W. M. (2002). Peer to peer sexual harassment in early adolescence: A developmental perspective. Development and Psychopathology<\/em>, 14(1), 91\u2013105. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/s0954579402001062<\/a><\/p>\n2. Keywords<\/h2>\n
3. Authors<\/h2>\n
\n
4. Purpose<\/h2>\n
5. Psychological Construct<\/h2>\n
1. Non-Physical \/ Verbal \/ Symbolic Harassment<\/h3>\n
\n
2. Physical \/ Bodily Harassment<\/h3>\n
\n
3. Coercive \/ Severe Sexual Aggression<\/h3>\n
\n
4. Perpetration and Attributional Dynamics<\/h3>\n
6. Theoretical Framework<\/h2>\n
Feminist and Gender-Role Socialization Paradigms<\/h3>\n
Social-Ecological Model<\/h3>\n
\n
Situational Crime Prevention and Routine Activity Theory<\/h3>\n
7. Validity<\/h2>\n
Content and Construct Validity<\/h3>\n
Convergent Validity<\/h3>\n
\n
Discriminant and Predictive Validity<\/h3>\n
8. Reliability<\/h2>\n
Internal Consistency<\/h3>\n
\n
Test-Retest Stability<\/h3>\n
9. Factor Analysis<\/h2>\n
Exploratory Factor Structure<\/h3>\n
\n
Confirmatory Factor Analysis Fit Indices<\/h3>\n
\n
10. Instrument \/ Measurement Tool<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
11. Permissions & Fee and Test Year<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
AAUW Educational Foundation, 1111 Sixteenth St. NW, Washington, DC 20036
\n
Telephone: 800-326-2289 or 202-785-7700
\n
Email: connect@aauw.org<\/a> | Website: www.aauw.org<\/a>\n <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n12. References<\/h2>\n