ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Invisible conflicts: the impact of covert academic bullying among "Double First-Class" young medical teachers on academic output-a qualitative study.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
Background: China's "Double First-Class" initiative has significantly reshaped higher education resources. While medical disciplines benefit from concentrated funding and platforms, they also face heightened competition and pressure. This study investigates the manifestations and mechanisms of covert academic bullying in these universities and its full-chain impact on young medical teachers' academic output. Methods: Using phenomenological and social constructivist approaches, 21 teachers from 12 universities were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling for semi-structured interviews. Data were transcribed, anonymized, and thematically analyzed with NVivo, yielding six core themes. Results: Covert academic bullying follows an "entry restriction-process constraint-endpoint undermining" chain, involving information withholding, institutional marginalization, resource deprivation, heavy workload, unfair authorship, and reputation manipulation. Gender and career stage intersections intensify disadvantages, while core teams' monopolization of resources restricts peripheral teachers' opportunities in collaboration, project access, and platform utilization. Conclusion: The phenomenon is persistent and linked to centralized management and relationship-based culture. Recommended interventions include improving information transparency, ensuring review fairness, securing independent budgets and priority resources, and protecting authorship and reputation, supported by cross-institutional cooperation and online platforms to sustain research productivity and career resilience.
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.