Christopher T. Begeny

Gynecological violence (GV) is a public health issue with serious consequences for the sexual and reproductive health of women and other individuals assigned female at birth. Social and behavioral science research has focused on how individuals at different axes of oppression (e.g., gender and indigeneity or socioeconomic status) experience GV. However, substantial gaps exist in the understanding of the role of interlocked systems of oppression (sexism, colonialism, and classism) in GV, and the extent to which women's privilege and oppression at different intersectional positions are associated with GV. Using secondary data from the Chilean National Survey on Health, Sexuality and Gender ( N = 20,392), we explored the differential experiences of GV (including psychological, sexual, and physical) on women at the intersections of indigeneity and poverty. Results showed that these multiple systems of oppression are intertwined, and that privileged positions (high access to healthcare) protect women from GV only when combined with another privileged position (White/mestiza). As interest in this area continues to expand, our findings offer valuable insights that stress the need for an intersectional descriptive analysis to: (a) explore how GV is reinforced by sexism, and racism, and classism; and (b) inform intersectionally specific interventions to eradicate GV.

Introduction: Sexual misconduct in surgery is recognised as widespread, yet individuals within the same departments report markedly different perceptions of prevalence. Quantitative data show gender differences in experiences, but reasons for this remain unclear. This study explored perceptions of sexual misconduct in the UK surgical workplace and developed a heuristic framework. Methods: Qualitative analysis was undertaken of free-text responses from 742 participants in a 2022 nationwide UK survey. Respondents included students, trainees and consultants. Inductive, reflexive thematic analysis within a constructionist paradigm was conducted, with iterative coding by two researchers and team discussions to refine themes and develop an explanatory framework. Results: Accounts diverged. Some participants described respectful workplaces with little misconduct, while others reported pervasive harassment, assault and inaction. Using an X-ray metaphor, the “Lateral View X-ray” theory was developed to explain this. The “AP View” reflects unawareness or minimisation, sustained by limited exposure, normalisation as banter, defensiveness, and seniority-related distancing. The “Lateral View” reflects heightened awareness from personal or witnessed experiences, hypervigilance, frustration at inaction, and informal warning networks. Male victims described additional barriers to recognition and disclosure. Drawing on standpoint and epistemic injustice theory, this work demonstrates how social position, power and language shape whether misconduct is recognised or obscured. Conclusion: The Lateral View X-ray theory explains how sexual misconduct can be simultaneously pervasive and invisible within surgery. Awareness depends on vantage point, where those least exposed perceive little problem, whereas those affected perceive structural harm. Embedding this framework in surgical education may widen perspective, improve responses and support cultural change.

The impostor phenomenon refers to an experience whereby individuals believe that others overestimate their abilities, prompting fears of being exposed as impostors. Research has predominantly conceptualized impostorism as a trait-based phenomenon and focused on examining individual-level predictors. This offers a limited understanding of how organizational contexts fuel impostorism. To address this gap, we examine the role of organizations’ work climates in eliciting employees’ impostorism. Across six studies, using experimental, single- and multi-waved survey methods ( N = 1,288) we demonstrate that when an organization’s work climate emphasizes competition, employees’ impostorism increases. We further show that this effect is partly explained by employees’ tendency to compare themselves to higher-performing colleagues in such competitive work climates. These findings have important implications for how we conceptualize and understand the impostor phenomenon—suggesting it is a feature not just of particular individuals, but of particular work climates.

Dear Editor

Background: This observational study, paired with National Health Service (NHS) workforce population data, examined gender differences in surgical workforce members’ experiences with sexual misconduct (sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape) among colleagues in the past 5 years, and their views of the adequacy of accountable organizations in dealing with this issue. Methods: This was a survey of UK surgical workforce members, recruited via surgical organizations. Results: Some 1704 individuals participated, with 1434 (51.5 per cent women) eligible for primary unweighted analyses. Weighted analyses, grounded in NHS England surgical workforce population data, used 756 NHS England participants. Weighted and unweighted analyses showed that, compared with men, women were significantly more likely to report witnessing, and be a target of, sexual misconduct. Among women, 63.3 per cent reported being the target of sexual harassment versus 23.7 per cent of men (89.5 per cent witnessing versus 81.0 per cent of men). Additionally, 29.9 per cent of women had been sexually assaulted versus 6.9 per cent of men (35.9 per cent witnessing versus 17.1 per cent of men), with 10.9 per cent of women experiencing forced physical contact for career opportunities (a form of sexual assault) versus 0.7 per cent of men. Being raped by a colleague was reported by 0.8 per cent of women versus 0.1 per cent of men (1.9 per cent witnessing versus 0.6 per cent of men). Evaluations of organizations’ adequacy in handling sexual misconduct were significantly lower among women than men, ranging from a low of 15.1 per cent for the General Medical Council to a high of 31.1 per cent for the Royal Colleges (men’s evaluations: 48.6 and 60.2 per cent respectively). Conclusion: Sexual misconduct in the past 5 years has been experienced widely, with women affected disproportionately. Accountable organizations are not regarded as dealing adequately with this issue.

Higher Education (HE) is seen as a tool to create job opportunities and enhance individuals’ quality of life. Research demonstrates that students’ expectations of career success in HE are an important predictor of their motivation and academic attainment. However, there is a lack of clarity about how career success is defined and whether individuals perceive that their experiences (e.g., gender) may be associated with these definitions. In online written interviews with 36 university students in the United Kingdom, we examine how students define career success and how they perceive their identity (gender, socioeconomic status) experiences underpinning these definitions. We analysed three main definitional themes: (a) career success as personal development, (b) career success as individual mobility, and (c) lack of clarity about what career success is. Findings suggest that gender and socioeconomic experiences had an important role in students’ understanding of career success, especially for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Indeed, in the intersection of gender and socioeconomic status, inequalities persist: female students anticipated difficulties in terms of work-life balance and gender stereotypes that constrained their career success definitions. Moreover, family experiences were important to understand students’ definitions of career success, particularly for disadvantaged socioeconomic groups. The current research sheds light on an important paradox in HE organisations: while students tend to define career success in relatively individualistic ways, such as individual mobility, financial success, or personal development, it was clear that their social identities (e.g., gender, socioeconomic status) and related experiences played an important role in creating definitions of career success. This further implies that when universities encourage a perception of career success as individual mobility, for example, having better job opportunities, or by espousing the belief that higher education and/or professional sectors are truly meritocratic–this will not always align with, and may create tension for, students from disadvantaged groups.

Sense of belonging is a fundamental human motivation and, in higher education settings, has been associated with students’ motivation and academic outcomes. However, less is known about the nuances of how students define belonging within a university context, and how their gendered and socio-economic identity-based experiences inform these definitions. Using a qualitative approach, we interviewed 36 UK university students to better understand (1) students’ definitions of belonging to university, and (2) how these conceptualizations are shaped by their experiences in terms of their gender, their socioeconomic status, and the intersection of these two identities. Interviews showed that students defined belonging in terms of social belonging. These definitions were shaped by their (a) cultural capital about university, (b) socioeconomic or gender identity experiences and (c) perceived similarity with other students. Indeed, despite the fact that students’ definitions of belonging were associated with how they have experienced belonging to university, identity-based experiences were mostly mentioned when they perceived they did not belong, which was framed as a “sense of anti-belonging”. Otherwise, students defined belonging as (a) being authentic, considering—for example—gender identity-based experiences of acceptance in university, or (b) sharing similar experiences with others, considering the importance of perceiving similarity with other students to feel they belong and, in some cases, being necessary to learn about university culture to perceive similarity with others. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed in terms of how belonging conceptualisations are bound up in identity and context, opening questions about the consequences of inclusion and diversity policies in higher education.

Although stressors are common in group life, people cope better when group authorities treat them with care/concern. However, it remains unclear whether such treatment affects individuals’ physiological stress. In this experiment, individuals engaged in an interview known to increase cortisol (stress biomarker). Surrounding the interview, an ingroup supervisor treated them with standard professionalism (politeness [control]), explicit care/concern (high-quality treatment), or disregard (poor-quality treatment). While those in the control condition experienced a spike in cortisol, individuals in the high-quality treatment condition did not experience this physiological stress (cortisol). Those given poor-quality treatment also did not exhibit stress, suggesting the explicit disregard for them may have undermined the interview’s legitimacy, thereby removing social evaluative threat. Paralleling past research, self-reported stress did not reflect individuals’ physiological stress (cortisol). Overall, results suggest that to alleviate group members’ physiological stress, supervisors need to be more than polite and professional–also demonstrating care/concern for them as individuals.