The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report presents a comprehensive review of the research, experiences, and effects of sexual harassment on women and their careers in science, engineering, and medicine.

In addition to evidence-based findings, the report provides recommendations for how organizations can prevent and address sexual harassment in academic settings, specifically in science, engineering, and medicine.

“Academia is no Hollywood, but it is also infected by a hidden epidemic of sexual misconduct,” a female senior professor of philosophy wrote in The Times Higher Education for a survey done in November 2017.

Earlier the same year, an ad hoc committee under the oversight of the National Academies Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine announced a study of the impacts of sexual harassment in academia.

The National Academies study will examine the extent to which women in the scientific, technical, and medical workforce are victimized by sexual harassment in academic settings, the extent to which sexual harassment in academia impacts recruitment, retention, and advancement of women, and the practices that have been the most successful in preventing and addressing sexual harassment.

To advance this conversation, the Committee on the Impacts of Sexual Harassment in Academia held a one-day workshop in Irvine, CA, on June 20, 2017.

The summer before, the Committee on Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine held a scoping workshop in Irvine to address sexual harassment in science, engineering, and medical workplaces.

The committee heard from Gilda Barabino, Dean of Engineering at the City College of New York. She spoke on race and gender in sexual harassment and stressed the point—made by many speakers throughout the workshop—that while cases of grievous sexual assault may garner the greatest public and media attention, subtle forms of sexual harassment that take the form of gender harassment, sexism, and microaggression are more common and likely contribute to the under-representation of women, and minority women in particular, in many fields.

Kathryn Clancy, associate professor in the Department of Anthropology at the University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign, currently in the process of publishing a study on sexual harassment in astronomy, spoke to the importance of interrogating power in addressing sexual harassment and how the intersection of race and gender in sexual harassment acts to drive minority women out of scientific, engineering, and medical fields at a disproportionate rate compared to white women.

Clancy’s data on sexual harassment at scientific field sites showed that female trainees were most likely to be harassed and that this harassment was most likely to come from a supervisor or mentor. She challenged federal science agencies to terminate funding to perpetrators of sexual harassment.

The committee also heard from Telle Whitney, who retired from the role of president and CEO of the Anita Borg Institute for Women and Technology at the end of 2017, after 15 years of service.

Whitney shared the findings of the “Elephant in the Valley Survey” that surveyed 200 people in the tech industry and found that 60 percent had experienced sexual harassment, only 10 percent had reported the harassment to human resources, and 39 percent did not report out of fear that it would negatively impact their careers.

Of those that did report, 29 percent signed a non-disparagement agreement. Whitney also spoke to the ways that different types of businesses (venture capital, start-ups, large established companies, etc.) may differ in terms of workplace culture and the maturity of company policies and procedures intended to prevent and respond to sexual harassment.

Whitney mentioned that tech start-ups that tend to have few, mostly male employees often lag behind large established companies in sexual harassment policies and procedures, such as required sexual harassment training.

Whitney also spoke to the value of women’s conferences, such as the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing Conference, as safe places where women can come together and provide candid feedback on their negative workplace experiences and share concerns related to sexual harassment, such as a lack of trust for human resources, fear of retaliation, lack of transparency, and conference cultures that are actively hostile toward women.

The committee heard from Anita Levy as well, a senior program officer at the American Association of University Professors, and Yesenia Gallegos, Partner, Fox Rothschild LLP.

Gallegos remarked that employers struggle with fundamental confusion over what constitutes sexual harassment and often put strict policies into place out of fear of lawsuits.

She also raised the point that cultural factors can play a role in different perceptions of which behaviors constitute sexual harassment and that employers must develop responsible policies to prevent real or perceived retaliation since “plaintiffs win cases over retaliation.” Gallegos clarified that in California, any company with over 50 employees must provide mandatory sexual harassment training.

Speaking as a representative of the federal government’s office that is responsible for the enforcement of Title IX, Laura Faer, currently statewide Education Rights Director for Public Counsel Law Center, concluded with guidelines for schools for effectively upholding Title IX.

Lilia Cortina , professor of psychology and women’s studies at University of Michigan, presented data on the high prevalence of sexual harassment in male-dominated environments, including the military.

Cortina drew parallels between aspects of the military environment and aspects of the environment in some fields within science, engineering, and medicine, such as the male-dominated nature of many of these fields; the power relationships that exist in hierarchical workplaces, and the isolated and remote working environments that some scientists, engineers, and medical professionals must work in to conduct their research and practice.

Cortina also showed data that demonstrated that gender harassment, rather than sexual coercion or unwanted sexual attention, is the most common form of harassment experienced by victims. Moreover, Cortina’s data showed that “gender harassment has at least as great—if not greater—impact on professional and personal health compared to unwanted sexual attention and sexual coercion.”

Vicki Magley, professor of psychology at University of Connecticut, raised the topic of civility and respect training as a possible precursor to sexual harassment training (though she was clear to point out that civility and respect training should not be conducted in such a way that it minimizes the significance of sexual harassment as an issue unto itself within the workplace).

Magley spoke to the growing evidence on the importance of cynicism among sexual harassment training participants as a barrier to training effectiveness.

Finally, Magley raised the point, made by other speakers as well, that efforts to address sexual harassment must take context into account as sexual harassment occurs within units in an institution and any effective intervention must consider the culture and climate of these units and the role of the unit leadership in promoting a climate that is intolerant of sexual harassment.