Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Case Series
Editorial
Original Article
View Point
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Case Report
Case Series
Editorial
Original Article
View Point
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Original Article
ARTICLE IN PRESS
doi:
10.25259/BJPSY_3_2025

A Cross-Sectional Study to Determine the Prevalence of Workplace Gender Discrimination and Sexual Harassment Faced by Female Trainee Doctors

Department of Psychiatry, ICARE Institute of Medical Sciences and Research and Dr Bidhan Chandra Roy Hospital, Haldia, West Bengal, India
Author image

*Corresponding author: Chayan Kanti Manna, Department of Psychiatry, ICARE Institute of Medical Sciences and Research and Dr Bidhan Chandra Roy Hospital, Haldia, West Bengal, India. chayankm06@gmail.com

Licence
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

How to cite this article: Jain R, Manna CK. A Cross-Sectional Study to Determine the Prevalence of Workplace Gender Discrimination and Sexual Harassment Faced by Female Trainee Doctors. Bengal J Psychiatry. doi: 10.25259/BJPSY_3_2025

Abstract

Introduction

This study investigates the prevalence and nature of workplace gender discrimination and sexual harassment among female professionals in India, with a focus on healthcare and academic institutions.

Objectives

The primary outcome measure was the prevalence and nature of workplace sexual harassment experienced by female medical trainee. Additional outcome measures included the perceived reason for harassment, reason for not raising complaints and other related issues.

Material and Methods

A hospital-based cross-sectional study which employed an anonymous, voluntary-response online survey to explore experiences of sexual harassment of female trainee doctors.

Results

Using an online questionnaire, 100 participants shared their experiences, revealing high rates of gender-based discrimination (75%) and sexual harassment (52.5%). Among the various forms of harassment reported, verbal assault was the most common (71%), followed by uncomfortable stares (68%), and physical harassment (18.8%), including touching and groping. Faculty members were identified as the primary perpetrators (69%), highlighting the impact of power dynamics on harassment incidences. Additionally, participants perceived that regressive ideas about women (75%) and abuse of authoritative power (62%) were major contributing factors to these behaviors. The study reveals significant barriers to reporting harassment, with only 9.1% of participants lodging complaints due to fears of higher authority and workplace visibility. This aligns with broader South Asian research indicating that sociocultural and workplace hierarchies often deter victims from speaking out. The findings underscore the detrimental effects of ongoing harassment, with 71.9% of participants experiencing continuous harassment, which can lead to mental health challenges such as anxiety and burnout, adversely impacting productivity and job satisfaction.

Conclusion

This study highlights the urgent need for policy reforms in Indian workplaces, particularly in healthcare and academia, to establish zero-tolerance harassment policies, enforce anti-harassment frameworks, and empower victims to report incidents safely. Addressing these issues could foster a safer, more inclusive work environment, supporting both professional growth and mental well-being.

Keywords

Female safety
Gender discrimination
Work place harassment

INTRODUCTION

Workplace sexual harassment remains a critical issue across various professional fields, and the medical sector is no exception. Female doctors, despite their significant contributions and expertise in healthcare, often face unique challenges in their professional environments. Sexual harassment in this field can undermine their well-being, hinder career advancement, and disrupt the overall work environment.1

The healthcare industry is traditionally seen as a bastion of professionalism and respect, yet female doctors frequently encounter inappropriate behaviors and discriminatory practices. These can range from subtle forms of harassment, such as demeaning comments or unwanted advances, to more overt actions that create hostile work environments. Such behaviors not only impact the individual victims but can also affect patient care and the efficacy of healthcare teams.2

Workplace harassment has been a well-known yet unresolved issue in many countries around the world for decades, but in developing countries like India, the situation is much more serious than it appears. From social taboos and other prohibitions, women’s fights on how to report this, often, in many cases, end up in mental health danger. The research is very limited, and this problem is yet to be solved. Not only in the field of medical but also in other fields, gender discrimination, and verbal or physical abuse are alarming issues. Through our research, we aim to assess the current realities and unequivocally assert that gender discrimination persists as a systemic problem, highlighting the substantial work still required to achieve genuine equality. Addressing workplace sexual harassment in the medical profession is crucial not only for ensuring the safety and dignity of female doctors but also for promoting a healthier, more equitable work culture. Understanding the scope, impact, and necessary interventions for sexual harassment in this field is essential for fostering an environment where all professionals can thrive free from discrimination and abuse.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

  • Study Design: a hospital-based cross-sectional study

  • Study Population: female doctors working in different medical college settings in West Bengal, specifically interns and postgraduate trainees.

  • Inclusion criteria: it required participants to be currently affiliated with the hospital as medical trainees.

  • Exclusion criteria: non-female medical trainees and those not actively working in the hospitals.

  • Sampling methods: This study employed an anonymous, voluntary-response online survey to explore experiences of sexual harassment among female doctors in government and private medical colleges. The survey was disseminated through social media groups frequented by female doctors, allowing participants to self-select without disclosing identifying details, including institutional affiliation—ensuring confidentiality for both respondents and researchers. As the survey relied on convenience sampling via digital platforms, the sample may reflect self-selection bias, with respondents potentially overrepresenting those with strong opinions or personal experiences.

  • Survey content: anonymous, self-administered, structured questionnaire consisting of closed-ended questions with both single and multiple-choice responses. The questionnaire was adapted from the Sexual Harassment Inventory3 and reviewed by psychiatrists for cultural relevance.3 Domains included verbal/physical harassment (yes/no), perpetrator profiles (multiple-choice), and reporting barriers (Likert scale).

  • Administration: Online via Google form.

  • Sample size: A sample of 100 was estimated to detect a 50% harassment prevalence (p = 0.05, 95% CI) based on prior studies.4 Feasibility was constrained by institutional approvals and response rates.

  • Ethics approval: Ethical permission was taken from the Institute Review Board of ICARE Institute of Medical Sciences and Research and Dr Bidhan Chandra Roy Hospital, Haldia, before conducting the study. Informed consent for participation in the study was taken before starting the questionnaire attached with the Google Form. However, the study protocol is not registered anywhere.

  • Data collection: Survey links were emailed to 200 eligible trainees via institutional rosters over 8 weeks, with two reminders. Consent was obtained digitally via a Google Form disclaimer, and internet protocol address (IP) anonymity ensured confidentiality. CHERRIES checklist guidelines were followed [Appendix].

Appendix

AppendixChecklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES).

RESULTS

In this study, 100 participants responded to the online Google form questionnaire. Of 100 respondents, 60% were clinical PG trainees (Year 1: 30%, Year 2: 40%, Year 3: 30%), and 40% were interns. Age distribution: 24–30 years (mean = 26.5 ± 2.1). Marital status: 65% unmarried, 35% married [Table 1]. Among the 100 participants, 75% of them faced gender discrimination in the workplace, and 52.5% faced any type of sexual harassment. 71% of them faced verbal assault, such as sexual jokes, comments on body parts/private parts, and untoward discussion about sexual activities. Sexual assault, like kissing, touching, rubbing, and groping, was faced by 18.8%, and uncomfortable stare was noticed by 68%; however, none of the participants told they were raped [Figure 1]. There was overlapping in the nature of the sexual assault, and most of the participants answered multiple options. Based on participants’ responses, faculty was involved the majority of the time (69%), followed by patients/patient parties (51.7%), seniors (41.4%), batchmates (34.5%), and hospital staff (27.6%) [Figure 2]. Among the harassed participants, 42.3% of them have been facing it for more than 1 year, followed by 26.9% of them facing it for around 6–12 months, 23.1% of them for less than 6 months, and 7.7% of them for less than 1 month. The frequency of harassment was continuous for 71.9%, whereas 21.9% said it was occasional. The perceived reason for harassment was regressive ideas about women (75%), closely followed by authoritative power (62%), threatened by skill set (18.8%), and thinking the female more/less efficient than others (12.5%) [Figure 3]. Many of the participants chose to give multiple answers for the perceived reasons. Only 9.1% lodged a complaint against the offender, but no steps were taken in the majority of cases. 60% did not lodge any complaint due to fear of higher authority, followed by 56% who didn’t lodge any complaints out of fear of being highlighted in the workplace. Fear of being subject to further harassment (46.7%), no appropriate steps were taken in the past (40%), and did not feel the need to complain (13.3%) were some other reasons mentioned by the participants [Figure 4].

Table 1: Sociodemographic characteristics (N = 100).
Age distribution 24–30 years (mean = 26.5 ± 2.1)
Marital status Unmarried (65%)
Married (35%)
Trainee PG Year 1: 18%
PG Year 2: 24%
PG Year 3: 18%
Interns: 40%

PG: Post graduate.

What kind of sexual harassment have you faced? (n = 100, multiple options considered).
Figure 1:
What kind of sexual harassment have you faced? (n = 100, multiple options considered).
By whom was the sexual assault done? (n = 100, multiple options considered).
Figure 2:
By whom was the sexual assault done? (n = 100, multiple options considered).
Perceived reason for harassment? (n = 100, multiple options considered).
Figure 3:
Perceived reason for harassment? (n = 100, multiple options considered).
Why no complaint was lodged? (n= 100, multiple options considered).
Figure 4:
Why no complaint was lodged? (n= 100, multiple options considered).

DISCUSSION

The results reveal that workplace gender discrimination and harassment are prevalent, with 75% of participants facing gender-based discrimination and over half experiencing sexual harassment. Studies have shown that gender discrimination and harassment in professional settings, particularly in South Asia, are prevalent yet often underreported due to sociocultural factors and workplace hierarchies that favor male dominance. Studies from India, such as those by Mishra and Sharma (2022), indicate similar patterns where cultural norms and workplace structures discourage women from reporting harassment due to fear of repercussions and lack of support systems.5

In alignment with research globally, the study reveals that the most common forms of harassment experienced were verbal assaults, including sexual jokes and comments on appearance. This is consistent with findings from a cross-cultural study by Thapalia et al.,6 where non-physical harassment, such as inappropriate jokes or comments, was among the most reported types of harassment across various workplaces globally.6 Additionally, 18.8% reported physical assaults like touching or groping, which suggests a significant need for preventive measures and better reporting mechanisms in Indian workplaces, particularly in healthcare and academic institutions where close interactions are common.4

The study’s finding that faculty members were the primary perpetrators (69%) highlights the role of power dynamics in harassment cases. This aligns with the theory of “power harassment,” which is well-documented in both Indian and international literature.3,7 The authority that faculty hold over students creates an environment where boundaries can be easily crossed, often leaving victims feeling helpless to report incidents.

The participant’s perception that regressive ideas about women (75%) and authoritative power (62.5%) were the primary reasons behind harassment echoes findings from global studies that underscore the role of entrenched patriarchy and gender stereotypes.8 Studies on workplace harassment from the United States and Europe also support the view that authoritarian attitudes and rigid gender norms fuel discriminatory behaviors.9

The low reporting rate (9.1%) among participants highlights a concerning trend, which is supported by other studies on workplace harassment in South Asia. Fear of retaliation, lack of confidence in the response from higher authorities, and fear of being further targeted were significant reasons for non-reporting. Similar barriers to reporting harassment were observed in studies conducted by Banerjee et al.,10 who found that fear of retribution and career-related repercussions deter women from lodging complaints in the Indian corporate sector.10 Globally, research points to comparable fears, with studies from countries like Korea and Japan indicating that fear of career damage is a significant deterrent to reporting harassment.3,11

The continuous nature of harassment reported by 71.9% of participants has profound implications on mental health, productivity, and overall job satisfaction. Research by Galanis et al.12 has highlighted how long-term exposure to workplace harassment correlates strongly with increased risks of anxiety, depression, and burnout.12 Specifically, in healthcare and academia, unaddressed harassment creates a hostile work environment that impairs learning, performance, and professional development.13

The lack of institutional support, evidenced by the high percentage of participants who did not report harassment due to fear of authority, indicates a pressing need for policy reforms. Studies in Indian contexts suggest that implementing clear anti-harassment policies, providing education about reporting mechanisms, and creating third-party oversight committees could foster safer work environments.14 Internationally, organizations with zero-tolerance policies towards harassment and regular training programs have shown better outcomes in reducing harassment and encouraging reporting.15

Limitations

The small sample size limits the ability to generalize the results to larger populations or different cultural or organizational contexts. The study relies on self-reported data, which is subject to recall bias, especially for events that may have occurred over a year ago. Longitudinal data could have provided more insight into the progression, persistence, or potential escalation of harassment and discrimination in the workplace. The study does not account for how factors such as age, marital status, socioeconomic background, or ethnicity may intersect with gender to influence experiences of discrimination and harassment. Acknowledging these limitations could provide a balanced view of the study’s findings and set the stage for future research on this important topic.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study align with broader research on workplace harassment and the intersection of gender, power, and institutional culture. The results emphasize the need for Indian institutions to adopt robust anti-harassment frameworks, cultural sensitivity training, and mechanisms to empower victims to report incidents without fear of retaliation.

Ethical approval

The research/study approved by the Institutional Review Board at ICARE Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, number IIMSAR-Haldia/IEC/October 24/91, dated 5th October 2024.

Declaration of patient consent

The authors certify that they have obtained all appropriate patient consent.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for manuscript preparation

The authors confirm that there was no use of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technology for assisting in the writing or editing of the manuscript and no images were manipulated using AI.

Supplementary Available on

https://doi.org/10.25259/BJPSY_3_2025

REFERENCES

  1. , . Getting to Zero Sexual Harassment in the Workplace. Am J Crit Care. 2021;30:250-2.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , , , . Sexual Harassment of Female Providers by Patients: A Qualitative Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2020;35:2963-8.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , . Reliability and Validity of the Workplace Harassment Questionnaire for Korean Finance and Service Workers. Ann Occup Environ Med. 2016;28:1-8.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , . An Overview of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace in India: An Analytical Study. Int J Innov Res Sci Eng Technol. 2017;6:14361-9.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , . Understanding Workplace Bullying: A Conceptual Review. Int J Manag Pract. 2022;15:346-63.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , . Understanding, Experience and Response to Sexual Harassment Among the Female Students: A Mixed Method Study. J Nepal Health Res Counc. 2020;17:424-30.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. , , . Sexual Harassment at the Workplace Act: Providing Redress or Maintaining Status Quo?. Soc Change. 2021;51:246-57.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. , . Are Traditional, Negative Gender Attitudes Associated with Violent Attitudes Toward Women? Insights From a New, Culturally Adapted Measure in India. Sex Roles. 2020;83:143-62.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. , , , , , . Measuring Exposure to Bullying and Harassment in Health Professional Students in a Clinical Workplace Environment: Evaluating the Psychometric Properties of the Clinical Workplace Learning NAQ-R Scale. Med Teach. 2020;42:813-21.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. , . Gender Differences in Perception of Workplace Sexual Harassment Among Future Professionals. Ind Psych J. 2011;20:21-4.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
  11. . Workplace Sexual Harassment in Japan: A Review of Combating Measures Taken. Asian Survey. 2007;47:811-27.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. , , , . Association between Workplace Bullying, Job Stress, and Professional Quality of Life in Nurses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Healthcare (Basel). 2024;12:623.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
  13. , , , . Sexual Harassment in the Work Place: Lessons from a Web-Based Survey. Indian J Med Ethics. 2005;2:47-50.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. , , , . Gender-Based Discrimination and Sexual Harassment Among Academic Internal Medicine Hospitalists. J Hosp Med. 2021;16:84-9.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. , , . Prevention Strategies for Sexual Harassment in Academic Medicine: A Qualitative Study. J Interpers Violence. 2022;37:NP2490-515.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central] [Google Scholar]
Show Sections