Olivia Smith’s scientific contributions

Theories have been used to explain gender-based violence (GBV) in U.S. universities (e.g. Gervais, DiLillo and McChargue, 2014; Tewksbury and Mustaine's, 2001) but they have limited utility in UK universities, as the history, composition, geography, and culture of UK universities differs (Phipps and Smith, 2012; Stenning et al., 2012). Due to these differences, a theoretical framework relevant to UK universities is needed that can guide studies and contextualise findings. As a starting point, this working paper adapted Hagemann-White et al.’s (2010) framework, which was developed for the European Union (EU). To date, this framework is the most researched, demonstrated and wholistic model for the EU. The framework used an ecological model to identify and categorise factors facilitating and scaffolding GBV, including policies, sanctions, redress and implementation of laws, to provide nation states with a framework to guide developing and implementing policies that would more effectively prevent and combat GBV. This working paper aimed to tailor Hagemann-White et al.’s model to UK universities, using a more sophisticated understanding of intersectional (dis)advantage (such as ethnicity, gender, sexuality, disability, class, age), men and masculinities, peer-group support for violence, environmental time-space and power relations, and legal duties in prevention and response.

There is an international body of evidence indicating that universities are significant sites for GBV (DeGue, 2014). Understanding the prevalence, characteristics, and impacts of GBV among university students and staff is essential for universities to effectively prevent and combat it. In the UK, a limited number of studies have started to address this gap (e.g. NUS, 2011) but they have not been been reviewed and synthesised to create an overall picture of what is known and not known about GBV. The overarching aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review of research on GBV among UK university students and staff to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the current state of knowledge and emerging findings, as well as to make recommendations for future research. Studies were identified through: 1) systematic searches of International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), PsychInfo, EmBase and ISI Web of Knowledge and 2) contact with university networks and stakeholders. A total of 1,328 studies were identified. After screening, 15 studies were included in the review. None of the studies reviewed looked at GBV among staff. The focus of studies was student victimisation experiences of sexual violence (13 of 15 studies) and domestic abuse (3 of 15 studies). Findings suggest sexual harassment appears to be the most prevalent among university students followed by sexual assault and domestic abuse. Most studies (11 of 14) collected biographical information needed to understand how the intersections of gender with other social positions influenced victimisation, with findings suggesting there is a higher prevalence among marginalised groups. There was a lack of consistency in how sexual violence and domestic abuse were measured, which contributed to large variations in prevalence. Implications for findings and recommendations for future research on GBV among university staff and students are provided.