ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026
The Master's Tools-Anti-Bullying and Harassment Policy in Higher Education Institutions.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The persistently high prevalence of gender-based violence and harassment (GBVH) in higher education institutions is a well established phenomenon, as is the inadequacy of institutional responses and the silencing of those who aim or attempt to report it. Drawing on Ahmed's concept of 'non-performativity', 'institutional speech acts that do not bring into effect what they name', this paper argues that the non-performativity of anti-bullying and harassment policy is an exercise of power, consistent with Agócs concept of institutionalised resistance. Reporting misconduct is intentionally transformational, but seen as a threat to powerful organisational actors, who exercise institutional power to enact procedures in such a way that victim-survivors are unvoiced and tricked into 'reluctant acquiescence' with adverse consequences on their personal and occupational health. We employ documentary analysis to critique policies and procedures for GBVH in Irish universities, and specifically how institutional power is exercised through policy documents. The analysis is based on ten pseudonymised universities, rendering a sample size of 23 documents, pertaining to GBVH for staff. We find that the tone and language employed in policies, and the way in which the informal and formal approaches in anti-bullying and harassment policies frame the problem, serve the interests of the institution. Confidentiality clauses, the framing of the problem as an individualistic, incident-based problem, to be resolved case-by-case, and quasi-legal processes facilitate non-performativity, preserving institutional power and the status quo. From a public health perspective such inertia undermines efforts to prevent harm and promote workplace wellbeing. Meaningful reform will require that HEIs employ alternative tools capable of unsettling these entrenched institutional arrangements and to adopt alternative, proactive tools that prioritise accountability, transparency, prevention and health gain. We suggest new tools in the form of victim-centred, trauma-informed, remediation- and restorative-based approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.