ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
Who posted #MeToo, why, and what happened: A mixed methods examination.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Process of Online Disclosures of Interpersonal Victimization: A Systematic Review.Trauma, violence & abuse · 2024Pooled it
- Self-concealment predicts use of secrecy and attitude toward secrecy, not subjective ability to keep secrets.Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Cross-sectional examination of correlates of sexual victimization disclosure via #MeToo.European journal of psychotraumatology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The #MeToo social media campaign raised awareness about sexual harassment. The purpose of the current study was to address three unexplored research questions. First, what factors influenced whether a person posted #MeToo? Second, how did posting (or not) influence participants' wellbeing? Finally, what motivated participants' posting (or not) #MeToo? Method: This mixed-methods study explores how #MeToo was experienced by full-time employees ( Results: Quantitative results indicated that sexual harassment history was the most powerful predictor of #MeToo posting, while power and interpersonal contact also contributed. Qualitative analyses ( Conclusion: This study contributes to the literature on sexual harassment disclosure by focusing on informal means of disclosure and drawing on comparisons to formal reporting and implications for workplaces. Online sexual harassment disclosure, in many ways, reflects the impediments to formal reporting procedures. Given the increased use of social media for purposes of disclosure, these findings suggests that organizations should recognize the legitimacy of sexual harassment reports made online and consider the possible failings of their formal reporting systems as reasons for online disclosure.
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.