ReviewFrontiers in psychology2019
Better Together: A Model for Women and LGBTQ Equality in the Workplace.
Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Negative Work Behavior: Toward an Integrated Definition.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Pooled it
- Latent Class Analysis of Victimization Patterns and Associated Protective Factors among LGBTQ Youth.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Aspects of Gender and Sexuality in Relation to Experiences of Subjection to Sexual Harassment among Adolescents in General Population.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Increasing Engagement in Kitten Fostering Programs: Lessons Learned From High Kitten Intake Zip Codes in Los Angeles County.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- "I Don't Even Want to Come Out": the Suppressed Voices of Our Future and Opening the Lid on Sexual and Gender Minority Youth Workplace Discrimination in Europe: a Qualitative Study.Sexuality research & social policy : journal of NSRC : SR & SP · 2022Article
- "I Come Out Because I Love You": Positive Coming Out Experiences Among Latter-day Saint Sexual and Gender Minorities.Review of religious research · 2022Article
- Association of Workplace Bullying and Workplace Vulnerability in the Psychological Distress of Chilean Workers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Much has been achieved in terms of human rights for women and people of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, and queer (LGBTQ) community. However, human resources management (HRM) initiatives for gender equality in the workplace focus almost exclusively on white, heterosexual, cisgender women, leaving the problems of other gender, and social minorities out of the analysis. This article develops an integrative model of gender equality in the workplace for HRM academics and practitioners. First, it analyzes relevant antecedents and consequences of gender-based discrimination and harassment (GBDH) in the workplace. Second, it incorporates the feminist, queer, and intersectional perspectives in the analysis. Third, it integrates literature findings about women and the LGBTQ at work, making the case for an inclusive HRM. The authors underscore the importance of industry-university collaboration and offer a starters' toolkit that includes suggestions for diagnosis, intervention, and applied research on GBDH. Finally, avenues for future research are identified to explore gendered practices that hinder the career development of women and the LGBTQ in the workplace.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.