{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017857142857142856, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0021008403361344537, 'mean_word_length': 5.4391891891891895, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Factors Affecting Credibility in a Simulated Sexual Harassment Hearing

Two hundred forty male and female undergraduates participated in two studies investigating judgments in a simulated sexual harassment hearing. A transcript presented a female student's allegations of sexual harassment against a male professor. The first experiment varied the status of the accused professor (national prominence vs. moderate status) and his style of defense (aggressive vs. nonaggressive). The second study varied the emotionality of both the victim and the accused and the time between the occurrence and the reporting of the alleged harassment incident (1 month vs. 6 months). Findings included negative effects on the student's credibility ratings when the professor attacked aggressively and more severe punishment of the defendant when the victim was emotional. It was concluded that process variables may be important in the perception of sexual harassment.