United States General Accounting Office

GAO Report to Congressional Requesters

March 1995 DOD SERVICE

ACADEMIES

Update on Extent of

Sexual Harassment

GAO/NSIAD-95-58

GAO United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

National Security and

International Affairs Division

B-259415 

March 31, 1995

The Honorable Strom Thurmond

Chairman

The Honorable Sam Nunn

Ranking Minority Member

Committee on Armed Services

United States Senate

The Honorable Dan Coats

Chairman

The Honorable Robert C. Byrd

Ranking Minority Member

Subcommittee on Personnel

Committee on Armed Services

United States Senate

The Honorable John Glenn

United States Senate

On January 31, 1994, we issued a report on sexual harassment at the three

Department of Defense (DOD) service academies as part of a series of

reports originally requested by Senator Nunn and Senator Glenn.1

 As

requested, we updated that previous work, and this report compares the

results of our 1990-91 survey with the extent to which sexual harassment

was reported to have occurred at the academies in the 1993-94 academic

year, the forms it took, and the views of academy men and women on the

consequences of reporting it.

Previous Findings We previously reported that between half and three-quarters of academy

women experienced at least one form of sexual harassment on a recurring

basis during academic year 1990-91,2

 whereas the vast majority of men

indicated never having experienced sexual harassment at the academy.

Our surveys inquired about 10 forms of harassment that were derived from

previous surveys conducted among federal workers by the Merit Systems

1

DOD Service Academies: More Actions Needed to Eliminate Sexual Harassment (GAO/NSIAD-94-6,

Jan. 31, 1994).

2

We asked respondents to indicate how often they experienced each of 10 forms of harassment. The

response categories were “Never,” “One or two times a year,” “A couple of times a semester,” “A

couple of times a month,” “A couple of times a week,” and “Daily or almost daily.” For presentation

purposes, we have combined the last three categories into one covering “A couple of times a month or

more often,” which we see as representing a recurring exposure.

Page 1 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
B-259415 

Protection Board in 1980 and 1987 and a 1988 survey of active duty

military personnel conducted by the Defense Manpower Data Center. We

tailored the items somewhat to the academy environments. The 10 forms

of sexual harassment included: derogatory comments, jokes, or

nicknames; comments that standards have been lowered for women;

comments that women do not belong at the academy; offensive posters,

signs, or graffiti; mocking gestures, whistles, or catcalls; derogatory letters

or messages; exclusion from social activities or informal gatherings; target

of unwanted horseplay or hijinks; unwanted pressure for dates by a more

senior student; and unwanted sexual advances.

The most common forms of harassment academy women reported

experiencing were gender-related verbal comments or visual displays, as

opposed to sexual advances. While students perceived that reported

incidents would be thoroughly investigated and offenders appropriately

disciplined, they also perceived that those reporting sexual harassment

would encounter significant negative consequences. These negative

consequences played a role in the tendency for most sexual harassment

not to be officially reported.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines and

subsequent court decisions have delineated two types of sexual

harassment in work environments: (1) quid pro quo harassment and

(2) hostile environment harassment. Quid pro quo harassment involves the

exchange of employment benefits by a supervisor or employer for sexual

favors from a subordinate employee. Hostile environment harassment

consists of conduct, such as verbal or physical abuse, that creates an

intimidating or offensive working environment.3

Results in Brief Similar to our previous findings, the majority of academy women reported

experiencing at least one form of sexual harassment on a recurring basis

in academic year 1993-94, while the highest percentage of men indicating

exposure to some form of recurring sexual harassment was about

11 percent. The proportion of women at the Naval and Air Force

academies who reportedly experienced some form of sexual harassment a

couple of times a month or more often represented a statistically

significant increase from the 1990-91 levels. Again, the most common

forms of sexual harassment were verbal comments and visual displays.

The comparison of the 1990-91 and 1994 results appears in appendix I.

3

For the most recent holding on what constitutes a hostile environment, see Harris v. Forklift Systems

114 S.Ct. 367 (1993).

Page 2 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
B-259415 

In our 1994 followup survey, we added a question on sexual harassment

tailored after the wording of the DOD definition of sexual harassment

issued in 1988. This was suggested at the Senate Armed Services

Committee’s hearing4

 on our January 1994 report. This new question

focused on the incidence of more overt, physical forms of sexual

harassment in addition to verbal forms. Responses to this new question

indicated that between 36 percent and 42 percent of the women at each

academy have been subjected at least once or twice over the year to

(1) physical, gender-related behavior that interfered with their

performance or created a hostile environment or (2) unwelcome,

deliberate physical contact of a sexual nature. Also, from 11 percent to

22 percent of the academy women reported encountering sexual advances

that were tied to some aspect of their academy careers. Responses to the

questions added to the 1994 survey are shown in appendix II.

Academy men tended to perceive an improvement in the atmosphere for

reporting sexual harassment, with significant declines in the percentages

seeing negative consequences as likely to accrue to those who report

sexual harassment. The responses of academy women, however, showed

no such change in perceived consequences.

Scope and

Methodology

We administered questionnaires at each of the three academies to

randomly drawn samples of cadets and midshipmen in May 1994. We

statistically compared the resulting data with corresponding responses

from questionnaires administered to comparably drawn samples of

academy students in the 1990-91 academic year. The maximum sampling

errors at the 95-percent confidence level are about 5 percent for male

students and about 10 percent for female students at each academy for

each survey year. Where a difference is cited as significant, it means that

there is a 5-percent chance or less that a difference as large as the one

observed between our samples could have occurred when there was zero

difference between the population figures. A detailed discussion of our

survey methodology, including specific sampling errors for various data

splits, appears in appendix III. Some of the differences may appear to be

relatively large and yet are not cited as statistically significant. The reason

for this is that those differences fall well within the error confidence

interval for a zero difference. For example, if 45 percent of the women

responded in a given way in 1991 and 30 percent responded that same way

in 1994 we cannot definitively say that the two numbers are different.

4

DOD Service Academies: Further Efforts Needed to Eradicate Sexual Harassment

(GAO/T-NSIAD-94-111, Feb. 3, 1994).

Page 3 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
B-259415 

Since the margin of error for each of the cited percentages is plus or minus

about 10 percentage points, the 45-percent figure could actually be as low

as 35 percent, while the 30-percent figure could actually be as high as

40 percent.

We performed our review at the Military Academy at West Point, New

York; the the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland; and the Air Force

Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado. We performed our review from

May 1994 to January 1995 in accordance with generally accepted

government auditing standards.

The service academies and DOD reviewed a draft of this report. Their

informal comments have been incorporated where appropriate.

Unless you publicly announce its contents earlier, we plan no further

distribution of this report until 1 day after its issue date. At that time, we

will send copies to the Secretaries of Defense, the Air Force, the Army,

and the Navy; the superintendents of the three service academies; and

interested congressional committees. We will also make copies available

to other interested parties on request.

If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, I can be

reached on (202) 512-5140. Major contributors to this report were

William E. Beusse, Rudolpho G. Payan, and Robin Brooks.

Mark E. Gebicke

Director, Military Operations

 and Capabilities Issues

Page 4 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Page 5 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Contents

Letter 1

Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at

the Service

Academies During the

1993-94 Academic

Year

8

Overall Extent of Sexual Harassment 8

Examples of the Kinds of Sexual Harassment Academy Women

Reported Encountering

11

Men Perceived Improvement in the Atmosphere for Reporting

Sexual Harassment

12

Women See No Improvement in the Atmosphere for Reporting

Sexual Harassment

17

Many Women Continue to Indicate Fear of Reprisal for Reporting

Sexual Harassment

21

Appendix II 

DOD Definition of

Sexual Harassment

24

Repeated, Unwelcome Verbal Comments Related to Gender 25

Verbal Conduct That Interfered With Performance or Created an

Intimidating, Hostile, or Offensive Environment

26

Physical Conduct That Interfered With Performance or Created

an Intimidating, Hostile, or Offensive Environment

27

Unwelcome, Deliberate Physical Contact of a Sexual Nature 28

Sexual Advances Being Implicitly or Explicitly Tied to Some

Aspect of Their Academy Careers

29

Appendix III 

Description of

Questionnaire

Methodology

31

Questionnaire Development 31

Sampling Methodology and Administration of the Surveys 31

Questionnaire Response Rates and Weighing of Data 32

Processing Completed Questionnaires 32

Sampling Error 32

Other Potential Sources of Error 34

Table Table II.1: Sampling Errors for Various Academy Subgroups 33

Figures Figure I.1: Extent of Recurring Sexual Harassment Reportedly

Experienced by Academy Women, Academic Years 1990-91 and

1993-94

8

Figure I.2: Percentage of Military Academy Women Indicating

They Experienced Recurring Sexual Harassment in Academic

Years 1990-91 and 1993-94

9

Page 6 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Contents

Figure I.3: Percentage of Naval Academy Women Indicating They

Experienced Recurring Sexual Harassment in Academic Years

1990-91 and 1993-94

10

Figure I.4: Percentage of Air Force Academy Women Indicating

They Experienced Recurring Sexual Harassment in Academic

Years 1990-91 and 1993-94

11

Figure I.5: Male Student Perceptions of Positive Consequences of

reporting Sexual Harassment

13

Figure I.6: Male Student Perceptions of Negative Consequences

of Reporting Sexual Harassment

16

Figure I.7: Female Student Perceptions of Positive Consequences

of Reporting Sexual Harassment

18

Figure I.8: Female Student Perceptions of Negative

Consequences of Reporting Sexual Harassment

20

Figure I.9: Views of Academy Women Regarding Fear of Reprisal

for Reporting Sexual Harassment, Academic Years 1990-91 and

1993-94

22

Figure II.1: Reported Frequency That Academy Women

Experienced Repeated, Unwelcome Verbal Comments Related to

Their Gender

25

Figure II.2: Reported Frequency That Academy Women

Experienced Gender-Related Verbal Conduct That Interfered

With Their Performance or Created an Intimidating, Hostile, or

Offensive Environment

26

Figure II.3: Reported Frequency That Academy Women

Experienced Gender-Related Physical Conduct That Interfered

With Their Performance or Created an Intimidating, Hostile, or

Offensive Environment

28

Figure II.4: Reported Frequency That Academy Women

Experienced Unwelcome, Deliberate Physical Contact of a

Sexual Nature

29

Figure II.5: Reported Frequency That Academy Women

Experienced Explicit or Implicit Indications That Some Aspect of

Their Academy Careers Would Be Affected by Their Acceptance

or Rejection of Sexual Advances

30

Abbreviations

DOD Department of Defense

Page 7 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Overall Extent of

Sexual Harassment

The percentage of female academy students indicating they had

experienced at least 1 of the 10 forms of sexual harassment on a recurring

basis was 80 percent at the Military Academy, 70 percent at the Naval

Academy, and 78 percent at the Air Force Academy (fig. I.1). The

percentages for the Naval and Air Force academies were significantly

higher than when we surveyed students in 1990-91.

Figure I.1: Extent of Recurring Sexual

Harassment Reportedly Experienced

by Academy Women, Academic Years

1990-91 and 1993-94

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Military

Academy

Naval 

Academy a

Air Force

Academy a

76

80

50

70

59

78

1990-91 academic year

1993-94 academic year

aStatistically significant difference.

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

No more than about 11 percent of the men at any of the academies

indicated that they had experienced any form of sexual harassment on a

recurring basis, and the average percentage of men citing recurring levels

of sexual harassment across all 10 categories was 3 percent to 4 percent.

Military Academy Women While the percentages of women reporting recurring exposure to sexual

harassment at the Military Academy appeared lower in 1994 for 7 of the 10

Page 8 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

forms, none of the differences was statistically significant. As in 1990-91,

the most common forms of sexual harassment were verbal or visual (such

as posters and graffiti) (fig. I.2).

Figure I.2: Percentage of Military

Academy Women Indicating They

Experienced Recurring Sexual

Harassment in Academic Years

1990-91 and 1993-94

Percent reporting exposure to harassment at least a couple of times a month

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Derogatory

comments,

nicknames, jokes

Comments that standards have been lowered

Comments that women don’t belong

Offensive posters, signs, graffiti, T-shirts, or pictures

Mocking gestures,

whistles, catcalls, etc.

Derogatory letters or messages

Exclusion from

social activities, informal gatherings

Target of unwanted

horseplay or hijinks

Unwanted pressure

for dates by a more senior student

Unwanted sexual advances

Form of sexual harassment

63

59

64 63

45

30

49

41

51

35

12 10

18

13 16 19

4 6

14 15

Academic year 1990-91

Academic year 1993-94

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Naval Academy Women While the percentages of women reporting recurring exposure to sexual

harassment at the Naval Academy appeared higher in a majority of areas,

the only statistically significant change was the increased percentage of

women reporting derogatory comments, nicknames, and jokes, etc. As was

the case in 1990-91, the primary forms of sexual harassment were verbal

and visual (fig. I.3).

Page 9 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Figure I.3: Percentage of Naval

Academy Women Indicating They

Experienced Recurring Sexual

Harassment in Academic Years

1990-91 and 1993-94

Percent reporting exposure to harassment at least a couple of times a month

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Derogatory

comments,

nicknames, jokes a

Comments that standards have been lowered

Comments that women don’t belong

Offensive posters, signs, graffiti, T-shirts, or pictures

Mocking gestures,

whistles, catcalls, etc.

Derogatory letters or messages

Exclusion from

social activities, informal gatherings

Target of unwanted

horseplay or hijinks

Unwanted pressure

for dates by a more senior student

Unwanted sexual advances

Form of sexual harassment

28

49

33

43

19 19

26 29

15

29

4

10 10 10

6 5 4

13

4

15

Academic year 1990-91

Academic year 1993-94

aStatistically significant difference.

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Air Force Academy Women While the percentages of women reporting recurring exposure to sexual

harassment at the Air Force Academy appeared higher in a majority of

areas, none of the differences was statistically significant. As in 1990-91,

the most common forms of sexual harassment were verbal or visual 

(fig. I.4).

Page 10 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Figure I.4: Percentage of Air Force

Academy Women Indicating They

Experienced Recurring Sexual

Harassment in Academic Years

1990-91 and 1993-94

Percent reporting exposure to harassment at least a couple of times a month

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Derogatory

comments,

nicknames, jokes

Comments that standards have been lowered

Comments that women don’t belong

Offensive posters, signs, graffiti, T-shirts, or pictures

Mocking gestures,

whistles, catcalls, etc.

Derogatory letters or messages

Exclusion from

social activities, informal gatherings

Target of unwanted

horseplay or hijinks

Unwanted pressure

for dates by a more senior student

Unwanted sexual advances

Form of sexual harassment

40

54

38

49

22

15

21

37

17

26

5 6 6

12 13 13

4 4 5

11

Academic year 1990-91

Academic year 1993-94

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Examples of the Kinds

of Sexual Harassment

Academy Women

Reported

Encountering

Write-in comments indicate some of the kinds of sexual harassment

reported to have occurred at the academies over the 1993-94 academic

year.

“I was assaulted and I am very displeased with the actions taken. The guy is still here and I

wish people would do something even if it is just my word against his.” (USAFA cadet)

“People must wake up and realize there are many problems here. I hope I can help it

change.” (USAFA cadet)

“Guys in my company specifically tell me girls shouldn’t be in the military. On our class

boards are our class pictures and all the females have pinholes through our picture or were

Page 11 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

‘X’ed out. I can’t express an opinion without being interrupted or I may just be scoffed at

whatever was said.” (USNA midshipman)

“I’ve been called so many names that sometimes it doesn’t even register that they are

inappropriate. The lack of respect that the men have here for women is appalling and

challenging their actions only ostracizes women from the unit.” (USNA midshipman)

“I feel sexually harassed daily and feel I have nowhere to go and no one to tell. I get poor

military grades from officers and cadets due to my gender. It makes me sick what I have to

go through every day and I think about quitting all the time.” (USMA cadet)

“For instance, a professor’s comment that ‘guys should find themselves a girlfriend so that

they have someone to cook, clean and wash clothes’ or to another male cadet that he likes

running in the fast group because ‘there are no women there’ would never be complained

about because it would not change anything.” (USMA cadet)

Men Perceived

Improvement in the

Atmosphere for

Reporting Sexual

Harassment

Male students had a general tendency to perceive improvement in the

atmosphere for reporting sexual harassment at the academies. Figure I.5

shows the perceptions of men regarding the likelihood of positive

consequences resulting from reporting sexual harassment. At the Military

Academy, there were statistically significant increases in the percentages

of men indicating that reported incidents would be thoroughly investigated

and that a victim who reported sexual harassment would be supported by

classmates and companymates. There was also an increase among Air

Force Academy men in the perceived likelihood that a victim would be

supported by squadronmates. However, the percentages of Naval Academy

men who perceived that a victim would be supported by classmates and

companymates both declined significantly.

Page 12 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Figure I.5: Male Student Perceptions of Positive Consequences of Reporting Sexual Harassment

Percent indicating a consequence was likely or extremely likely

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

MA a NA AFA MA NA AFA MA a NA a AFA MA a NA a,b AFA a

67

74 73 76

63 61

72

77 76 76

68 67

36

50

46

38

48 49

30

49

38 38 36

46

Incident would be thoroughly

investigated

Offender would be

appropriately disciplined

Victim would be supported by

classmates

Victim would be supported by

company/squadronmates

Academic year 1990-91

Academic year 1993-94

Legend

NA = Naval Academy

MA = Military Academy

AFA = Air Force Academy

aStatistically significant difference.

bWhile the percentage perceiving that a sexual harassment victim would be supported by

companymates remained the same, there was a statistically significant shift of responses from the

“not sure” category to the two “unlikely” categories.

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

The responses of men, particularly at the Military and Air Force

academies, tended to show decreases in the percentage who saw negative

consequences as a likely outcome of reporting sexual harassment (fig. I.6).

Among men at the Military and Air Force academies, there were significant

declines in the percentages who indicated that a victim who reported

sexual harassment would be viewed as a crybaby, be shunned by others,

Page 13 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

be viewed less favorably by either the student or officer chains of

command, or receive lower military grades or additional duties. At the

Military Academy, there was also a decrease in the percentages who

perceived that nothing would be done or that harassment incidents would

be swept under the rug. Among men at the Naval Academy, there was a

decrease in the percentages who thought that a victim who reported

sexual harassment would receive lower military grades or that nothing

would be done, but an increase in the perceived likelihood that a

complaining victim would receive additional duties. Men at all three

academies showed an increase in the percentage who thought it was likely

that a sexual harassment victim would be transferred to another company

or squadron.

Page 14 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Page 15 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Figure I.6: Male Student Perceptions of Negative Consequences of Reporting Sexual Harassment

Percent indicating a consequence was likely or extremely likely

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

MA a NA AFA a MA a NA AFA a MA a NA AFA a MA a NA AFA a MA a NA a AFA a

83

48

63

59

73

47

63

36

47

53 54

43

51

20

27

31

48

21

25

12 12 15

32

13

34

13

24

19

37

16

Victim would be viewed

as a crybaby

Victim would be

shunned by others

Victim would be viewed

less favorably by

student chain

Victim would be viewed

less favorably by officer

chain

Victim would receive

lower military grades

Page 16 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Percent indicating a consequence was likely or extremely likely

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

MA a NA AFA a MA a NA a AFA MA a NA AFA MA NA a AFA MA a NA a AFA a

36

13

17 16

31

14 15

10

17

11

19

15 16

9 8 11

18

14

10

5 4

8 8

3

19

29

9

30

14

21

Victim would be

subjected to more of

the same

Nothing would be done Incident would be

swept under the rug

Victim would receive

additional duties

Victim would be

transferred to another

company/squadron

Academic year 1990-91

Academic year 1993-94

aStatistically significant difference.

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Women See No

Improvement in the

Atmosphere for

Reporting Sexual

Harassment

The responses of women students at the three academies generally

showed no statistically significant changes in the perceived likelihood of

positive consequences accruing from reporting sexual harassment 

(fig. I.7). The actual percentages perceiving positive consequences

appeared generally lower, although the only statistically significant decline

occurred in the case of Air Force Academy women’s perception of the

likelihood that offenders would be appropriately disciplined, which went

from 68 percent in 1991 to 44 percent in 1994.

Page 17 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Figure I.7: Female Student Perceptions of Positive Consequences of Reporting Sexual Harassment

Percent indicating a consequence was likely or extremely likely

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

MA NA AFA MA NA AFA a MA NA AFA MA NA AFA

68

46

64

48

55

48

71

51

59

45

68

44

33

26

31

40

44

32 34

28 27

33

27 25

Incident would be thoroughly

investigated

Offender would be

appropriately disciplined

Victim would be supported by

classmates

Victim would be supported by

company/squadronmates

Academic year 1990-91

Academic year 1993-94

aStatistically significant difference.

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

In general, among women at the three academies, there were no

significant changes in the percentage who saw negative consequences as

likely to accrue to those who reported sexual harassment (fig. I.8). The

one exception was an increase in the percentage of women at the Naval

Academy who thought that a complaining victim would be transferred to

another company.

Page 18 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Page 19 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Figure I.8: Female Student Perceptions of Negative Consequences of Reporting Sexual Harassment

Percent indicating a consequence was likely or extremely likely

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

MA NA AFA MA NA AFA MA NA AFA MA NA AFA MA NA AFA

88

82

76

83 85

75

64

70

59

69

61

73

61

51 49

53

57

48

26

38

23

32

36

32 32 29

39

34

39 38

Victim would be viewed

as a crybaby

Victim would be

shunned by others

Victim would be viewed

less favorably by

student chain

Victim would be viewed

less favorably by officer

chain

Victim would receive

lower military grades

Page 20 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Percent indicating a consequence was likely or extremely likely

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

MA NA AFA MA NA AFA MA NA AFA MA NA AFA MA NA a AFA

44

30

40

31

50

38

23

33 31 34 31

41

30 29

22

34

28

40

12 11

5 6

10

4

35 36

15

34

18

27

Victim would be

subjected to more of

the same

Nothing would be done Incident would be

swept under the rug

Victim would receive

additional duties

Victim would be

transferred to another

company/squadron

Academic year 1990-91

Academic year 1993-94

aStatistically significant difference.

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Many Women

Continue to Indicate

Fear of Reprisal for

Reporting Sexual

Harassment

The percentage of women who indicated that they would hesitate to report

an incident of sexual harassment for fear of reprisal was 60 percent at the

Military Academy, 41 percent at the Naval Academy, and 40 percent at the

Air Force Academy. These figures indicate no significant change from 1991

(fig. I.9).

Page 21 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

Figure I.9: Views of Academy Women

Regarding Fear of Reprisal for

Reporting Sexual Harassment,

Academic Years 1990-91 and 1993-94

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1990-91 1993-94 1990-91 1993-94 1990-91 1993-94

Military

Academy

Naval Academy Air Force

Academy

Would not hesitate to report

Undecided

Would hesitate to report for fear of reprisal

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Given that there has been no apparent change in the perceptions of

women regarding the negative consequences of reporting harassment, it is

likely that sexual harassment will continue to be underreported. Narrative

comments also seem to support this conclusion:

“I feel reporting sexual harassment is a 2-edged sword. Some of it is crying wolf and

relatively innocent people get slammed for things that aren’t sexual harassment, it just so

happens that the 2 people involved are of the opposite sex. But the Academy is so afraid of

appearances that the male gets slammed hard. I think everyone would have a much better

attitude towards reporting it and eliminating harassment if they knew it would be

investigated fairly and punished or exonerated accordingly. As it is now, if someone cries

sexual harassment the male is always punished.” (USMA cadet)

“I think that sexual harassment problems arise from the fact that male cadets are too

immature to realize how rude, vulgar, offensive and mean they can be. However, women

Page 22 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix I 

Sexual Harassment at the Service

Academies During the 1993-94 Academic

Year

(especially cadets) have become accustomed to this ‘harassment’ (as some would call it),

so we don’t see a need to report it. No matter what anyone complains about, the verbal

harassment won’t go away because you can’t change 17-23 year old guys into polite

gentlemen. The only harassment that I would ever report would be sexual assault

(physical). I think this is pretty much an accurate description of the feelings of many

female cadets.” (USMA cadet)

“I know there have been cases of sexual harassment by both cadets and officers directed

toward cadets of the opposite sex. . . . and the reasons I was told by these individuals as to

why they failed to report it were (1) fear of putting themselves in a position of being

unaccepted by peers and officers or (2) they decided to tell themselves it was really not

that big of a deal. Also, I think sexual harassment is accepted because little is done to let

people know what sexual harassment actually encompasses.” (USMA cadet)

“The negative perception that many cadets have regarding turning in gender-related

violations is that many times a trivial matter that could and should have been handled on a

1 vs. 1 basis has been blown out of proportion with disproportionate consequences.”

(USAFA cadet)

“As a general rule, any sort of harassment based on race or gender will go unreported at

USNA. ‘On the strength of one link in the cable dependeth the might of the chain. . . .’ is

drilled into our heads plebe summer. . . The general consensus, unfortunately, is that

someone who would report such an offense is the ‘weak link’, or a ‘bilge’ [informant].

Nobody wants to be a ‘bilge’.” (USNA midshipman)

“A ‘p’ [professor] is proven to have made a sexist comment in class, but only gets a slap on

the wrist - has to read 2 books to get ‘sensitized.’ These are personal experiences, not made

up. But they went unpunished and I got bad grades. Do something, because I got shunned

and ridiculed when I did.” (USMA cadet)

Page 23 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix II 

DOD Definition of Sexual Harassment

In our 1994 followup survey, we added a question on sexual harassment

tailored after the wording of the DOD definition of sexual harassment. That

definition was issued on July 20, 1988, in a memorandum from the

Secretary of Defense directing the services to incorporate the definition of

sexual harassment into their regulations. The DOD definition states:

“Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that involves unwelcome sexual

advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal and physical conduct of a sexual

nature when:

(1) submission to or rejection of such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term

or condition of a person’s job, pay, or career, or

(2) submission to or rejection of such conduct by a person is used as a basis for career

employment decisions affecting that person, or

(3) such conduct interferes with an individual’s performance or creates an intimidating,

hostile, or offensive environment.

Any person in a supervisory or command position who uses or condones implicit or

explicit sexual behavior to control, influence, or affect the career, pay, or job of a military

member or civilian employee is engaging in sexual harassment. Similarly, any military

member or civilian employee who makes deliberate or repeated unwelcome verbal

comments, gestures, or physical contact of a sexual nature is also engaging in sexual

harassment.”

Figure II.1 addresses the reported frequency of exposure to “repeated,

unwelcome verbal comments” related to gender cited in the last sentence

of the definition. Figure II.2 presents responses regarding verbal conduct,

and figure II.3 presents responses regarding physical conduct that

“interferes with an individual’s performance or creates an intimidating,

hostile, or offensive environment,” as cited in section (3) of the definition.

Figure II.4 addresses the reported frequency of “physical contact of a

sexual nature” cited in the last sentence of the definition. Figure II.5

addresses responses concerning exposure to explicit or implicit

indications that some aspect of the respondent’s academy career would be

affected by submission to or rejection of unwelcome sexual advances, as

cited in sections (1) and (2) of the definition.

Page 24 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix II 

DOD Definition of Sexual Harassment

Repeated, Unwelcome

Verbal Comments

Related to Gender

Between 60 percent and 71 percent of the women reported at least some

exposure to repeated, unwelcome verbal comments related to their

gender, with from 21 percent to 36 percent citing a frequency of a couple

of times a month or more (fig. II.1).

Figure II.1: Reported Frequency That

Academy Women Experienced

Repeated, Unwelcome Verbal

Comments Related to Their Gender

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Military Academy

Naval Academy

Air Force Academy

Never happened

Happened a couple of times a semester or less

Happened a couple of times a month or more

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Page 25 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix II 

DOD Definition of Sexual Harassment

Verbal Conduct That

Interfered With

Performance or

Created an

Intimidating, Hostile,

or Offensive

Environment

Between 62 percent and 72 percent of the women reported at least some

exposure to verbal conduct, related to their gender, that interfered with

their performance or created an intimidating, hostile, or offensive

environment, with from 17 percent to 28 percent citing a recurring level

(fig. II.2).

Figure II.2: Reported Frequency That

Academy Women Experienced

Gender-Related Verbal Conduct That

Interfered With Their Performance or

Created an Intimidating, Hostile, or

Offensive Environment

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Military Academy

Naval Academy

Air Force Academy

Never happened

Happened a couple of times a semester or less

Happened a couple of times a month or more

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Page 26 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix II 

DOD Definition of Sexual Harassment

The two questions concerning verbal comments and conduct (figs. II.1 and

II.2) show basically similar patterns and percentages, indicating that

negative gender-related comments appear to rise to the level of

harassment in the minds of most academy women. However, there were a

number of write-in comments that indicated that not all such comments

were considered harassment:

“The jokes made to me are the good humor of friends. I have not witnessed or heard of any

deliberate name-calling or derogatory statements made to people on sporadic or a

continuous basis. People would not stand for it. What goes on mainly goes on between

friends and it is a fun nature on both sides.” (USMA cadet)

“When I say I hear gender based comments all the time, that doesn’t mean I am necessarily

offended by them or that they are meant maliciously. Most of the guys here are very good

about it, and there are few who actually feel that way.” (USAFA cadet)

“Some derogatory comments are meant in playful terms but stem from college immaturity.”

(USAFA cadet)

“My friends and I tease each other all the time with no offense given or taken.”

(USNA midshipman)

“I think there is a BIG difference between an intentional insult and a joking one, and mids

[midshipmen], on the whole, understand the difference. For this reasons I answered never

to Question 19 [the question that asked about whether respondents had experienced any of

10 forms of harassment].” (USNA midshipman)

Physical Conduct

That Interfered With

Performance or

Created an

Intimidating, Hostile,

or Offensive

Environment

The percentage of women who reported being exposed at least one or two

times a year to physical, gender-related conduct that interfered with their

performance or created an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment

ranged from 39 percent to 42 percent, with 2 percent to 13 percent

indicating recurring exposure (fig. II.3).

Page 27 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix II 

DOD Definition of Sexual Harassment

Figure II.3: Reported Frequency That

Academy Women Experienced

Gender-Related Physical Conduct That

Interfered With Their Performance or

Created an Intimidating, Hostile, or

Offensive Environment

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Military Academy

Naval Academy

Air Force Academy

Never happened

Happened a couple of times a semester or less

Happened a couple of times a month or more

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Unwelcome,

Deliberate Physical

Contact of a Sexual

Nature

As shown in figure II.4, the percentage of women at each academy who

reported being exposed at least one or two times a year to “unwelcome,

deliberate physical contact of a sexual nature (e.g., groping, patting,

fondling, kissing, hugging, etc.)” ranged from 36 percent to 42 percent,

with 2 percent to 6 percent indicating that it happened a couple of times a

month or more often.

Page 28 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix II 

DOD Definition of Sexual Harassment

Figure II.4: Reported Frequency That

Academy Women Experienced

Unwelcome, Deliberate Physical

Contact of a Sexual Nature (e.g.,

groping, patting, fondling, kissing,

hugging, etc.)

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Military Academy

Naval Academy

Air Force Academy

Never happened

Happened a couple of times a semester or less

Happened a couple of times a month or more

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Sexual Advances

Being Implicitly or

Explicitly Tied to

Some Aspect of Their

Academy Careers

Figure II.5 shows the responses of academy women regarding what is

generally referred to as “quid pro quo” sexual harassment. We asked

respondents whether, during the 1993-94 academic year, they had

experienced any explicit or implicit indications that some aspect of their

academy careers (e.g., grades, performance ratings, disciplinary actions,

duty assignments, etc.) would be affected by their acceptance or rejection

of sexual advances. While the overwhelming majority of women at each

academy (79 percent to 89 percent) reported that they had not

encountered this form of sexual harassment, from 11 percent to 22 percent

indicated that it had happened to them at least once during the year, with

Page 29 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix II 

DOD Definition of Sexual Harassment

1 percent to 4 percent citing a frequency of at least a couple of times a

month.

Figure II.5: Reported Frequency That

Academy Women Experienced Explicit

or Implicit Indications That Some

Aspect of Their Academy Careers

Would Be Affected by Their

Acceptance or Rejection of Sexual

Advances

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Military Academy

Naval Academy

Air Force Academy

Never happened

Happened a couple of times a semester or less

Happened a couple of times a month or more

Source: Responses to GAO questionnaires.

Page 30 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix III 

Description of Questionnaire Methodology

The purpose of this appendix is to set forth our questionnaire development

process, our sampling approach, the response rates, the weighing of the

data, the processing of completed questionnaires, the sampling error, and

other methodological issues.

Questionnaire

Development

We originally developed an omnibus questionnaire in 1990-91 to address

the full scope of the broader review.1

 The 1994 version of the

questionnaire was shortened by omitting most of the items that did not

pertain to the honor and conduct systems or the issue of sexual

harassment. The wording of items repeated in the 1994 survey was

identical to their wording in the 1990-91 version. In addition, the 1994

survey included a new question tailored after the wording of the DOD

definition of sexual harassment (see app. II).

Sampling

Methodology and

Administration of the

Surveys

To ensure that an adequate number of women would be included, we used

a stratified random sample design, which allowed us to oversample

women. We used the last digit of the social security number to randomly

select respondents from each strata.2

 We selected one final digit for all

cadets and midshipmen and an additional final digit for women.

The 1994 questionnaires were administered at all three academies in May

1994. The original administration of the academy student questionnaires

occurred in December 1990 at the Naval Academy and in March 1991 at

the Military and Air Force academies.

The questionnaires were mass-administered to the academy students.

Those selected for the sample were notified through academy channels to

report to rooms designated for the questionnaire administration. The

questionnaires were administered by our staff during what would

otherwise be free time for the respondents. Respondents were assured of

anonymity. There was a make-up session for Air Force Academy cadets

and Naval Academy midshipmen who had scheduling conflicts. Our survey

administration time at the Military Academy conflicted with a scheduled

academic placement exam for a portion of the Class of 1995. To ensure

that this would not have an impact on the representativeness of our

1

A more detailed description of the questionnaire development process and the 1990-91 survey

administration can be found in DOD Service Academies: More Actions Needed to Eliminate Sexual

Harassment (GAO/NSIAD-94-6, Jan. 31, 1994).

2

The last four digits of social security numbers are essentially a random field based on the order in

which individual social security offices process the applications they receive. Selecting one final digit

could be expected to yield a sample of about 10 percent.

Page 31 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix III 

Description of Questionnaire Methodology

sample, those cadets scheduled for the placement exam were subtracted

from the population before the random sample selection was made.

Questionnaire

Response Rates and

Weighing of Data

Completed questionnaires were received from 430 Military Academy

cadets (a response rate of about 92 percent), 470 Naval Academy

midshipmen (a response rate of about 90 percent), and 428 Air Force

Academy cadets (a response rate of about 77 percent).

Since we oversampled the women, we needed to apply weights to the

responses to allow them to represent the total academy population. Raw

weights were computed by dividing the number of subgroup responses

into the subgroup population. However, applying raw weights would

artificially increase the number of cases and inflate tests of statistical

significance. To avoid such inflation, we used the raw weights to compute

constrained weights, which when applied to the data make the number of

weighted cases equal to the number of unweighted cases.3

 Weights applied

in this manner yield data that represent the total population without

distorting significance tests.

Processing Completed

Questionnaires

We reviewed and edited each returned questionnaire. Responses were

double-keyed, creating two files for each completed questionnaire. The

two files were then compared for consistency, and corrections were made

as necessary. We checked the overall accuracy of the keyed data by

verifying every 10th record back to the responses in the completed

questionnaire. None of the three sets of questionnaires reached an error

level of 1 percent.

Sampling Error Since we surveyed samples of cadets and midshipmen rather than the

entire populations, the results we obtained were subject to some degree of

uncertainty, or sampling error. Sampling errors represent the expected

difference between our sample results and the results we would have

obtained had we surveyed the entire populations. Sampling errors are

smallest when the percentage split responding to a particular question is

highly skewed, such as 5 percent responding “yes” and 95 percent

responding “no” and greatest when there is about a 50-50 percentage split

in responses.

3

SPSS-X User’s Guide, 3rd edition, Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc., 1988.

Page 32 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix III 

Description of Questionnaire Methodology

Based on our response rates, we estimate that our results can be

generalized to the cadet and midshipman populations at the 95-percent

confidence level, with a maximum sampling error of plus or minus

4.6 percent at the Military Academy, 4.4 percent at the Naval Academy, and

4.6 percent at the Air Force Academy.

The sampling errors for various subgroups for which data are cited in this

report appear in table II.1. The decimal figures in the table are the

sampling errors that correspond to various percentages of respondents

selecting a particular response alternative. For example, if we state that

15 percent of Military Academy cadets responded in a given way, the table

shows a sampling error of 3.3 percent corresponding to “all cadets” and a

15-percent to 85-percent response split. This means that we can be

95-percent confident that the percentage of cadets responding that way in

the population would be within 15 percent plus or minus 3.3 percent, or

between 11.7 percent and 18.3 percent.

Table II.1: Sampling Errors for Various Academy Subgroups

Percentage split in responses

Subgroup Population Sample

05%

95%

10%

90%

15%

85%

20%

80%

25%

75%

30%

70%

35%

65%

40%

60%

45%

55%

50%

50%

Military Academy

All cadets 3,638 430 2.4 3.0 3.3 3.7 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.6

Males 3,232 341 2.8 3.5 4.0 4.2 4.5 4.7 4.9 5.1 5.1 5.2

Females 406 79 6.6 7.9 8.8 9.5 9.9 10.2 10.2 10.4 10.6 10.6

Naval Academy

All midshipmen 4,049 470 2.3 2.9 3.2 3.5 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.3 4.3 4.4

Males 3,564 382 2.6 3.3 3.8 3.9 4.2 4.5 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.9

Females 485 88 6.4 7.5 8.3 9.0 9.4 9.7 9.6 9.9 10.0 10.1

Air Force Academy

All cadets 4,012 428 2.5 3.1 3.3 3.7 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.6

Males 3,495 338 2.8 3.5 4.1 4.2 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.2

Females 517 90 6.3 7.4 8.3 8.9 9.3 9.6 9.6 9.8 10.0 10.0

Page 33 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Appendix III 

Description of Questionnaire Methodology

Other Potential

Sources of Error

In order to encourage candid responses, our methodology for

administering the 1994 surveys, as well as the 1990-91 surveys, did not

permit us to identify those students who failed to attend the group

administration sessions. As a result, we are unable to evaluate how, if at

all, the percentages cited in this report might change if these

nonrespondents had provided responses. In some cases, respondents

failed to answer some of the questions they were asked to respond to. The

nonresponse rates for each of the questions in our surveys ranged from

0.2 percent to 1.4 percent.

A variety of factors also temper our ability to make clear comparisons

about the respondents from the 1990-91 period and the 1994 period. Our

percentages represent the results for two different, but partially

overlapping, cohorts of students. Members of the class of 1994 at each

academy, although not necessarily the same students, participated in both

surveys. The data cited, therefore, may mask individual changes in

perceptions and reported experiences.

(703090) Page 34 GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a

single address are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 6015

Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (301) 258-4097 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Mail

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100
GAO/NSIAD-95-58 DOD Service Academies