CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 86Sexual Assault and Victimization StudiesGender, Sexuality, and EducationWorkplace Violence and Bullying

The Bureaucratization, Commodification, and Privatization of Sexual Harassment through Institutional Discourse: A Study of the Big Ten Universities

Clair, Robin P.·1993·Management Communication Quarterly
DOI 10.1177/0893318993007002001
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The present study extends research of sexual harassment by examining the communicative techniques that are employed in institutional discourse. Sexual harassment is viewed as a discursive practice that can be enacted, tolerated, perpetuated, or rectified through communication. Past studies have examined how the victims of sexual harassment “frame” these events that in turn affect power relations. The current study addresses how universities frame their managerial discourse regarding sexual harassment, which often perpetuates the bureaucratization, commodification, and privatization of sexual harassment. Specifically, a post-structuralist critique and deconstruction of the policies and brochures developed by the Big Ten universities are undertaken to reveal oppressive and/or emancipatory forms of discourse. Three specific forms are addressed. They are taken-for-granted discourse, strategic ambiguity, and exclusionary discourse. A discussion follows that suggests that these forms of discourse contribute to the commodification, bureaucratization, and privatization of sexual harassment in an ironic way.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0893318993007002001

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous research has utilized the Big Ten sample to study campus recreation, ethnicity diversity, sexual harassment, and transgender policy in HEIs.

    “Previous research has also utilized this sample to study campus recreation [47], ethnicity diversity [48], sexual harassment [49], and transgender policy [50] in HEIs.”

    From AI Governance in Higher Education: Case Studies of Guidance at Big Ten Universities (2024) · cites this paper as [49]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Clair, R. P.
Affiliations
Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
Corresponding author
Clair, Robin P.
Venue
Management Communication Quarterly
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1993-11
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
123-157
ISSN
  • 0893-3189 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-6798
DOI
10.1177/0893318993007002001
OpenAlex
W2071891316
Cited by
86
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Management Communication Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Sexuality, and Education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Workplace Violence and Bullying
Keywords
sexual harassment, institutional discourse, bureaucratization, commodification, privatization, management discourse, strategic ambiguity, exclusionary discourse, deconstruction, power relations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review