Sexual Harassment and Discrimination Experiences of Academic Medical Faculty.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jagsi R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5526590 | biostudies-literature | 2016 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Sexual Harassment and Discrimination Experiences of Academic Medical Faculty.
Jagsi Reshma R Griffith Kent A KA Jones Rochelle R Perumalswami Chithra R CR Ubel Peter P Stewart Abigail A
JAMA 20160501 19
Similar Datasets
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Gender-based discrimination and sexual harassment of female physicians are well documented. The #MeToo movement has brought renewed attention to these problems. This study examined academic emergency physicians' experiences with workplace gender discrimination and sexual harassment. METHODS:We conducted a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of emergency medicine (EM) faculty across six programs. Survey items included the following: the Overt Gender Discrimination at Work (OGDW) Scale; the frequency and source of experienced and observed discrimination; and whether subjects had encountered unwanted sexual behaviors by a work superior or colleague in their careers. For the latter question, we asked subjects to characterize the behaviors and whether those experiences had a negative effect on their self-confidence and career advancement. We made group comparisons using t-tests or chi-square analyses, and evaluated relationships between gender and physicians' experiences using correlation analyses. RESULTS:A total of 141 out of 352 (40.1%) subjects completed at least a portion of the survey. Women reported higher mean OGDW scores than men (15.4 vs 10.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6-6.8). Female faculty were also more likely to report having experienced gender-based discriminatory treatment than male faculty (62.7% vs 12.5%; 95% CI, 35.1%-65.4%), although male and female faculty were equally likely to report having observed gender-based discriminatory treatment of another physician (64.7% vs 56.3%; 95% CI, 8.6%-25.5%). The three most frequent sources of experienced or observed gender-based discriminatory treatment were patients, consulting or admitting physicians, and nursing staff. The majority of women reported having encountered unwanted sexual behaviors in their careers, with a significantly greater proportion of women reporting them compared to men (52.9% vs 26.2%, 95% CI, 9.9%-43.4%). The majority of unwanted behaviors were sexist remarks and sexual advances. Of those respondents who encountered these unwanted behaviors, 22.9% and 12.5% reported at least somewhat negative effects on their self-confidence and career advancement. CONCLUSION:Female EM faculty perceived more gender-based discrimination in their workplaces than their male counterparts. The majority of female and approximately a quarter of male EM faculty encountered unwanted sexual behaviors in their careers.
| S-EPMC7081862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionDespite the increasing diversity of individuals entering medicine, physicians from racial and sexual minority groups continue to experience bias and discrimination in the workplace. The objective of this study was to determine the current experiences and perceptions of discrimination on the basis of race and sexual orientation among academic emergency medicine (EM) faculty.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey of a convenience sample of EM faculty across six programs. Survey items included the Overt Gender Discrimination at Work (OGDW) Scale adapted for race and sexual orientation, and the frequency and source of experienced and observed discrimination. Group comparisons were made using t-tests or chi-square analyses, and relationships between race or sexual orientation, and we evaluated physicians' experiences using correlation analyses.ResultsA total of 141 out of 352 (40.1%) subjects completed at least a portion of the survey. Non-White physicians reported higher mean racial OGDW scores than their White counterparts (13.4 vs 8.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) for difference, -7.7 - -2.9). Non-White EM faculty were also more likely to report having experienced discriminatory treatment based on race than were White EM faculty (48.0% vs 12.6%; CI for difference, 16.6% - 54.2%), although both groups were equally likely to report having observed race-based discrimination of another physician. EM faculty who identified as sexual minorities reported higher mean sexual minority OGDW scores than their heterosexual counterparts (11.1 vs 7.1; 95% CI for difference, -7.3 - -0.6). There were no significant differences between sexual minority and heterosexual faculty in their reports of experiencing or observing discrimination based on sexual orientation.ConclusionEM faculty from racial and sexual minority groups perceived more discrimination based on race or sexual orientation in their workplace than their majority counterparts. EM faculty regardless of race or sexual orientation were similar in their observations of discriminatory treatment of another physician based on race or sexual orientation.
| S-EPMC7514380 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGender discrimination (GD) and sexual harassment (SH) occur at all academic institutions worldwide. Medical students report high prevalence of GD and SH, which may negatively affect their education and health. There are indications that policies and reforms on reducing GD/SH are insufficient. Swedish medical students' experiences of GD/SH are monitored by course-evaluations and bi-annual student union evaluations; however, the response rate is usually low. The aim of this study was to compare the exposure to and context of self-reported GD/SH over an 11-year period amongst medical students at a Swedish university.MethodsIn 2002, a questionnaire (n = 622) was mailed to medical students' home addresses. It was repeated in 2013 and then distributed during mandatory lectures (n = 856). The questions used a behavioristic approach and asked about specific GH/SH experiences. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. The changes in prevalence over time were calculated by sampling weights in order to obtain comparable estimates, representative of both cohorts.ResultsThe response frequency was 55% (62% women) in 2002 and 81% (59% women) in 2013. The prevalence of GD tended to decrease for male and clinical students in comparison to female and pre-clinical peers. However, the prevalence of SH increased for female compared to male students. The ratio of SH for female pre-clinical students doubled in many instances; most often, the mistreatment occurred in the clinic. Medical doctors were indicated as perpetrators up to five times more often by all students in 2013.ConclusionOur results show a disproportional change in exposure to GD/SH between female and male medical students, resulting in a widening of the gender gap regarding prevalence of GD and SH between 2002 and 2013. In particular, personal experiences of SH increased for both sexes. It is proof that institutional efforts to fight mistreatment might be ineffective.
| S-EPMC7731624 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10751587 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Academic contrapower harassment (ACPH) occurs when someone with seemingly less power in an educational setting (e.g., a student) harasses someone more powerful (e.g., a professor). A representative sample of 289 professors from U.S. institutions of higher education described their worst incident with ACPH. Open-ended responses were coded using a keyword text analysis. Compared to the experiences of men faculty, women faculty reported that students were more likely to challenge their authority, argue or refuse to follow course policies, and exhibit disrespectful or disruptive behaviors. Although sexual harassment was uncommon, men faculty were more likely than women faculty to recount such incidents. Women faculty reported significantly more negative outcomes as a result of ACPH (e.g., anxiety, stress-related illness, difficulty concentrating, wanting to quit) than men faculty, and negative outcomes were most likely to result from ACPH involving intimidation, threats, or bullying from students. Implications for the prevention and reporting of ACPH are discussed.
| S-EPMC5322483 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the prevalence of sexual harassment and perceptions of gender disparities affecting the careers of physicians in gynecologic oncology.MethodsWe conducted a survey of US physician members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology. Participants were queried about demographics, sexual harassment experiences during training/practice, and perceptions of gender disparities in compensation and career advancement. Responses were categorized as "never" versus "ever" and compared using Fisher's exact test.ResultsThe survey was sent to 1566 members-405 (255 females, 147 males, 3 other) responded (response rate 26%). Sixty-four percent reported having experienced sexual harassment during training/practice. Sexual harassment was experienced by 71% of females and 51% of males. Of these respondents, only 14.5% reported it. Reasons for not reporting included: "incident did not seem important enough" (40%); "did not think anything would be done about it" (37%); and "fear of reprisal" (34%). Female respondents were more likely to report gender affected their career advancement (34% vs. 10%; p ≤ .001) and compensation (64% vs. 19%; p ≤ .001); males were more likely to report no gender income disparity (91% vs. 57%; p ≤ .001).ConclusionsSexual harassment during training/practice appears common among male and female gynecologic oncologists. Although most are aware of how to report an incident, few do so, mostly for fear of reprisal or concern nothing will be done. Despite practicing in a field defined by caring for women, female physicians more often perceive gender influences their compensation and career advancement. Awareness of these issues can lead to their elimination from our specialty.
| S-EPMC7584749 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective This study assesses a new departmental role-a professionalism mentor-who receives sexual harassment reporting, liaisons with campus resources, and organizes educational sessions. Study Design Multicenter randomized controlled survey study. Methods Academic ophthalmology departments in the United States were randomized to a professionalism mentor group ( n = 9) and a control group ( n = 7). Among both pre- and postsurveys, 605 faculty and trainee responses were received and 546 were complete. The intervention group was assigned a professionalism mentor with educational session for a 6- to 10-month period. Sexual harassment and reporting rate change over time were compared between the two groups. Results Among 546 anonymous responses, 16% experienced workplace sexual harassment during the prior 10 months. Location in the South or Midwest was a risk factor ( p < 0.001). Victims were mostly women (76%), including residents/fellows (46%) and academic attendings (49%); perpetrators included patients (35%) and academic attendings (35%). Departments with and without a professionalism mentor had stable harassment from pre- to postsurvey ( p = 0.95 comparing change). The professionalism mentor group had an increase in reporting to an authority from pre- to postsurvey (7-23%), whereas the control group had a decrease (27-12%; p = 0.07 comparing change). Most faculty and trainees in the interventional arm of this study recommended instituting a professionalism mentor with educational session (66% presurvey and 68% postsurvey), compared with educational session alone (25% presurvey and 23% postsurvey), or neither (9% presurvey and 9% postsurvey). Residency program directors in the professionalism mentor group even more strongly supported instituting both a professionalism mentor and educational program (100% presurvey and 100% postsurvey) as opposed to educational program alone (0% presurvey and 0% postsurvey) or neither (0% presurvey and 0% postsurvey). Conclusion This study identified a high sexual harassment rate in academic ophthalmology departments over a brief period. The presence of a professionalism mentor was viewed favorably and may lead to increased reporting.
| S-EPMC9928060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Little is known about the climate of the scientific fieldwork setting as it relates to gendered experiences, sexual harassment, and sexual assault. We conducted an internet-based survey of field scientists (N = 666) to characterize these experiences. Codes of conduct and sexual harassment policies were not regularly encountered by respondents, while harassment and assault were commonly experienced by respondents during trainee career stages. Women trainees were the primary targets; their perpetrators were predominantly senior to them professionally within the research team. Male trainees were more often targeted by their peers at the research site. Few respondents were aware of mechanisms to report incidents; most who did report were unsatisfied with the outcome. These findings suggest that policies emphasizing safety, inclusivity, and collegiality have the potential to improve field experiences of a diversity of researchers, especially during early career stages. These include better awareness of mechanisms for direct and oblique reporting of harassment and assault and, the implementation of productive response mechanisms when such behaviors are reported. Principal investigators are particularly well positioned to influence workplace culture at their field sites.
| S-EPMC4100871 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDespite explicit policies and reporting mechanisms in academia designed to prevent harassment and ensure respectful environments, sexual harassment persists. We report on a national survey of Canadian medical students' experiences of sexual harassment perpetrated by faculty, patients and peers, their responses to harassment, and their suggestions for improving the learning environment.MethodsWith ethics approval from all 17 Canadian universities with medical schools, an invitation to participate in an anonymous, electronic survey was included in three Canadian Federation of Medical Students' newsletters (2016). Narrative information about sexual harassment during medical training, perpetrators, ways of coping, sources of support, formal and informal reporting/discussion, and suggestions for change was sought. Three authors then conducted a qualitative analysis and identified emergent themes.FindingsWhen asked to estimate the number of occurrences of SH experienced during medical school, 188 students reported 807 incidents perpetrated by peers, patients, and, to a lesser extent, faculty. Perpetrators were almost always men and 98% of victims were women. What emerged was a picture of social, educational, and individual conditions under which sexual harassment becomes normalised by faculty, peers and victims. Students often tried to ignore harassment despite finding it confusing, upsetting, and embarrassing. They offered strategies for schools to raise awareness, support students, and prevent or mitigate harms going forward.InterpretationSexual harassment is a part of the Canadian medical education environment where most who reported harassment are subject to the dual vulnerabilities of being learners and women. Although survey respondents recognised the systemic nature of the problem, as individuals they often described shame and self-blame when victimised, came up with solutions that implied they were the problem, and often reported thinking silence was less risky than confrontation or official reporting. Many participants believed in the transformative power of education - of themselves and faculty - as a means of improving the medical environment whilst we await social change.
| S-EPMC6537541 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPatients are the most common source of gender-based harassment of resident physicians, yet residents receive little training on how to handle it. Few resources exist for residents wishing to address patient-initiated verbal sexual harassment themselves.MethodsWe developed, taught, and evaluated a 50-minute workshop to prepare residents and faculty to respond to patient-initiated verbal sexual harassment toward themselves and others. The workshop used an interactive lecture and role-play scenarios to teach a tool kit of communication strategies for responding to harassment. Participants completed retrospective pre-post surveys on their ability to meet the learning objectives and their preparedness to respond.ResultsNinety-one participants (57 trainees, 34 faculty) completed surveys at one of five workshop sessions across multiple departments. Before the workshop, two-thirds (67%) had experienced patient-initiated sexual harassment, and only 28 out of 59 (48%) had ever addressed it. Seventy-five percent of participants had never received training on responding to patient-initiated sexual harassment. After the workshop, participants reported significant improvement in their preparedness to recognize and respond to all forms of patient-initiated verbal sexual harassment (p < .01), with the greatest improvements noted in responding to mild forms of verbal sexual harassment, such as comments on appearance or attractiveness or inappropriate jokes (p < .01).DiscussionThis workshop fills a void by preparing residents and faculty to respond to verbal sexual harassment from patients that is not directly observed. Role-play and rehearsal of an individualized response script significantly improved participants' preparedness to respond to harassment toward themselves and others.
| S-EPMC7880260 | biostudies-literature