Typology
Legend: WB (Workplace bullying); USA (United States of America); WI (workplace incivility), LV (lateral violence); ASSIA (Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts); BSP (Business Source Premier); CINAHL (Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature); Embase (Excerpta Medica database); JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute); MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online); IBSS (International Bibliography of the Social Sciences); Q1 (Question 1—What are the prevalence in workplace bullying in nursing studies?) Q2 (Question 2—What are the antecedents for workplace bullying in nursing?); Q3 (Question 3—What are the consequences of workplace bullying in nursing?).
Quality appraisal of included systematic reviews.
S/N | Article | Quality of Study Using ROBIS Tool | Strengths | Limitations | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | O | ||||
1. | Hutchinson & Jackson (2013) [ ] Mixed-methods systematic review | |||||||
2. | Spector et al. (2014) [ ] Quantitative review | |||||||
3. | Trépanier et al. (2016) [ ] Systematic review with narrative synthesis | = 12), which were insufficient to justify the model development. | ||||||
4. | Houck & Colbert (2017) [ ] Integrative review | = 11). | ||||||
5. | Pfeifer & Vessey (2017) [ ] Integrative review | |||||||
6. | Bambi et al. (2018) [ ] Narrative review | |||||||
7. | Hartin et al. (2018) [ ] Integrative review | |||||||
8. | Crawford et al. (2019) [ ] Integrative review | within the article, but there might be a potential risk of bias on lack of clarity over data collection and quality appraisal process. | ||||||
9. | Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ] Integrative review | = 16). | ||||||
10. | Lever et al. (2019) [ ] Systematic review (quantitative studies) | |||||||
11. | Johnson & Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] Systematic review (involving qualitative synthesis | = 14). | ||||||
12. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] Scoping review |
Seven reviews addressed the prevalence of workplace bullying within the nursing and healthcare literature ( Table 3 ). Two reviews conducted a pooled estimation of workplace bullying prevalence and reported a mean prevalence of 26.3 and 66.9% among nurses [ 8 , 18 ]. Spector et al. seemed to be the most comprehensive review between these two reviews, having conducted a quantitative review of 136 healthcare studies on the global nursing violence literature to examine the extent (prevalence), sources, and subtypes of bullying and violence across countries and prevalence. They reported workplace bullying prevalence ranges from 57.6% in hospital settings to 67.7% in psychiatric settings. The mean percentage of perceived bullying also varied across different geographical regions: Middle East (86.5%), Anglo (39.5%), Asia (29.8%), and Europe (8.8%). The highest rate of non-physical violence from peers and colleagues occurred among nurses working in Asia (50.2%), followed by the Middle East (44.9%), Anglo countries (US, Canada, UK, and Australia) (37.4%), and Europe (27.6%). Asian, Anglo, and Middle Eastern nurses suffered similar rates of physical violence at 7.3, 6.6, and 6.0%, respectively. Similarly, a more recent quantitative systematic review involving 45 studies reported a lower percentage of workplace bullying among nurses. They have classified workplace bullying in general terms, demonstrating that the trend in workplace prevalence among nurses has remained vastly varied across different regions [ 8 ].
Summary table of prevalence rate for workplace bullying among nurses.
No. | Evidence/Reference | Prevalence Rate |
---|---|---|
1. | Spector et al. (2014) [ ] | Prevalence rate: 25–66.9%. Specific: Physical violence (36.4%), non-physical (66.9%), bullying and others (39.7%), sexual harassment (25%), injured (32.7%). |
2. | Houck and Colbert (2017) [ ] | Prevalence of bullying among nurses was observed to be between 26% and 77%. |
3. | Bambi et al. (2018) [ ] | % of bullying prevalence: 2.4 to 81%. % of workplace incivility: 67.5 to 90.4%. % of lateral violence (peer violence): 1 to 87.4%. |
4 | Hartin et al. (2018) [ ] | 61% of respondents in Australia reported workplace bullying events within the last 12 months. |
5. | Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ] | Prevalence ranged widely from 0.3 to 73.1% (variations attributed to the workplace context and instrument measuring workplace bullying events [e.g., daily basis, over the past 1 month, or over the past 12 months]). Studies measuring workplace bullying within past 6–12 months reported a more consistent prevalence ranging from 25.6 to 73.1%. |
6. | Lever et al. (2019) [ ] | Bullying prevalence ranged from 3.9 to 86.5%, with a pooled mean estimate of 26.3%. The pooled mean prevalence of bullying by region: Asia (47.1%), Australia (36.1%), Europe (18.4%), and North America (24.5%). |
7. | Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] | % of bullying prevalence in emergency department setting: 60%. % of bullying prevalence in Operating Room setting: 59% witnessed workplace bullying events, but only 6% self-reported such events in the USA. |
There were vast differences in workplace bullying prevalence across all seven reviews, with one review reporting the greatest prevalence range from 1 to 90.4% [ 8 ]. Other reviews also reported a similar prevalence range [ 8 , 22 ]. The vast discrepancies in the reported bullying rates across different nursing studies might suggest regional and country differences in the workplace bullying incidence rates and sources of violence, making it difficult for researchers to grasp its extent and impact. One possible explanation for such discrepancies could be that some countries or cultures may trivialize or pay little attention to the problem, leading to under-reporting issues (Spector et al., 2014). Another reason could be the different ways bullying is defined and measured, inconsistent research methods, and an absence of longitudinal studies [ 24 ]. The current lack of local data on the extent of the phenomenon could impede nursing leaders from developing and implementing tailored interventions to address these issues in their specific settings.
Workplace bullying seems more prevalent in hospitals’ high-stress work environments, such as emergency departments, operating theaters, intensive care units, and surgical and psychiatric settings [ 20 , 22 , 23 ]. However, this trend might not be generalizable across different countries, as Bambi et al. highlighted obstetrics wards as the most affected units in public hospitals in Cape Town, South Africa. Additionally, it appears that nurses in Asian and Middle Eastern countries have a higher prevalence of workplace bullying, and physical and non-physical violence than their counterparts from other regions [ 8 , 18 ].
Five reviews identified five antecedents for workplace bullying within the nursing and healthcare literature ( Table 4 ). Among the five reviews, the most comprehensive was Karatuna et al.’s scoping review, which included 166 studies on workplace bullying among nurses. The review was also the most recent, with included studies published between 2001 and 2019. Hence, we used their review to guide the categorization of antecedents into five main types: demographics, personality, organizational culture, work characteristics, and leadership. These five antecedents can also be grouped under two main layers of antecedents—individual-level or organizational-level [ 21 ].
Summary table of antecedents for workplace bullying.
No. | Types of Antecedents | Subtypes | Association | Evidence |
---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Demographics (Individual-level) | Age | Negatively associated with workplace bullying. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] Crawford et al. (2019) [ ] |
Length of experience/service | Negatively associated with workplace bullying. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] | ||
Gender | No association. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] | ||
Marital status | No association. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] | ||
Education level | No association. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] | ||
Minority race or ethnicity | Association reported in Anglo, Southern Asia. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] | ||
Disability | Association reported in Anglo. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] | ||
Having children | Association reported in Latin America and Eastern Europe. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] | ||
2. | Personality (Individual-level) | Locus of control/assertiveness | Lower locus of control (assertiveness) is negatively associated with workplace bullying. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] |
Psychological capital | Less psychological capital is negatively associated with workplace bullying. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] | ||
Vulnerable traits or personality/poor compliance to social norms | Negatively associated with workplace bullying. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] | ||
3. | Organizational culture (Organizational-level) | Organizational culture promotes staff empowerment, distributive justice, and zero tolerance for bullying/Magnet organizational culture | Perceived healthy work environment is negatively associated with workplace bullying. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] Pfeifer and Vessey (2017) [ ] |
Quality of interpersonal relationships | Association varies according to regions. Vertical bullying was most prevalent in higher power distance cultures, whereas horizontal bullying was either more or equally prevalent in lower power distance cultures. | Crawford et al. (2019) [ ] Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ] | ||
4. | Work characteristics (Organizational-level) | Work overload | Higher workload is positively associated with workplace bullying. | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] Trépanier et al. (2016) [ ] |
Staff shortages | More severe staff shortages are positively associated with workplace bullying. | Trépanier et al. (2016) [ ] | ||
Stressful working conditions | High-stress work environment is positively associated with workplace bullying. | Trépanier et al. (2016) [ ] | ||
5. | Leadership and hierarchy (Organizational-level) | Leadership styles | Autocratic, unsupportive, and disengaged leadership tends to perpetuate high-power distance clusters and increased bullying behaviors. | Trépanier et al. (2016) [ ] Crawford et al. (2019) [ ] Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ] Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ] |
Individual antecedents include demographics and personality traits of individuals who contributed to the occurrence of workplace bullying. The results showed some similarities in the demographical antecedents of bullying across clusters that differ in their cultural practices. In terms of demographics, they found that most studies reported no associations between gender, education level, marital status, and workplace bullying. Conversely, age and length of experience/service were found to be negatively associated with workplace bullying. Other demographical antecedents were found to vary across different geographical clusters and subject to the different socio-cultural and politico-economic influences. For example, nurses considered “vulnerable” to workplace bullying in Anglo countries belong to a certain race, ethnicity, or disability, while those in Latin America and Eastern Europe have children. For personality characteristics, nurses with less locus of control, psychological capital, or poor compliance to social norms were associated with a greater risk of workplace bullying than others [ 16 ].
Organizational-level antecedents included leadership, work characteristics, and organizational culture. For example, an organizational culture that is performance-oriented is more likely to tolerate workplace bullying, while cultures that emphasize people-orientation tolerate such behaviors if the group views the victim as inconsistent with social norms or misaligned with the organizational structure and hierarchy [ 16 ]. These findings highlighted group inclusivity within the organization, which is highly dependent and varies according to the larger socio-cultural context.
As for work characteristics, Karatuna et al. (2020) reported that negative work environments and characteristics include work overload, staffing shortages, and stressful working conditions. These variables were found to be reported across all clusters. Trépanier et al. [ 4 ] conducted a systematic literature review specifically examining work-related antecedents of workplace bullying in nursing and retrieved 12 relevant studies. They reported similar results to Karatuna et al. based on their four categories of work-related antecedents: (1) job characteristics, (2) quality of interpersonal relationships, (3) leadership styles, and (4) organizational culture. They found that nurses’ better job characteristics, higher quality of interpersonal working relationships, people-centric leadership styles, and positive organizational culture (promoting staff empowerment, distributive justice, and zero tolerance for bullying) were associated with less workplace bullying. Pfeifer and Vessey [ 19 ] conducted an integrative review focusing on examining bullying issues among nurses in Magnet ® organizations, which are designated hospitals that meet the quality benchmark for providing quality of care and nursing excellence. They found 11 articles (eight quantitative and three qualitative studies). Their review demonstrated emerging evidence on how a positive work environment could contribute to reduced reports of verbal abuse, incivilities, and hostile encounters from colleagues. Despite the positive and significant findings, Pfeifer and Vessey cautioned that workplace bullying can still affect nurses in the Magnet ® environment and highlighted the complex interplay of individual and organizational factors in influencing the occurrences of workplace bullying [ 19 ].
Leadership and hierarchy seem to mediate in organizational culture and work characteristics. For example, Karatuna et al. reported that autocratic, unsupportive, and disengaged leadership perpetuates high-power distance clusters and increased bullying behaviors [ 16 ]. On the other hand, Trépanier et al. [ 4 ] found three studies examining how authentic (positive) leadership significantly reduced workplace bullying and burnout reports. All four reviews stated positive leadership mediated the workplace environmental factors by promoting a climate of trust, positive collegial relationships, and mitigating stressful work environments and workplace bullying events [ 4 , 16 , 21 , 22 ].
The workplace culture and pervasive nature of bullying have a significant negative impact on nurses, organizations, and patient outcomes. Nine reviews reported the consequences of workplace bullying among nurses [ 3 , 8 , 14 , 16 , 17 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]. The summary review generated five types of consequences: psychosocial well-being, physical well-being, work performance, organizational impact, and patient outcomes ( Table 5 ).
Summary table of consequences of workplace bullying.
No. | Types of Consequences | Subtypes | Evidence |
---|---|---|---|
1. | Psychosocial well-being | Psychological stress | Hartin et al. (2018) [ ]; Bambi et al. (2018) [ ]; Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ]; Crawford et al. (2019) [ ]; Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] |
Depression | Hartin et al. (2018) [ ]; Bambi et al. (2018) [ ]; Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ] | ||
Burnout | Hartin et al. (2018) [ ]; Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ] | ||
Professional confidence | Hartin et al. (2018) [ ] | ||
Sense of self-worth | Hartin et al. (2018) [ ] | ||
Work motivation | Hartin et al. (2018) [ ]; Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] | ||
2. | Physical well-being | Sleep-related issues | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ]; Lever et al. (2019) [ ] |
Headaches | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ]; Lever et al. (2019) [ ] | ||
Gastrointestinal problems, and to a lesser extent, | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ]; Lever et al. (2019) [ ] | ||
Back and joint pain | Lever et al. (2019) [ ] | ||
Cardiac-related symptoms, tachycardia, or blood pressure changes | Karatuna et al. (2020) [ ]; Lever et al. (2019) [ ] | ||
Sick leave/absenteeism | Bambi et al. (2018) [ ]; Lever et al. (2019) [ ]; Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ]; Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] | ||
3. | Work performance | Avoidance behavior, delay in effective communication, or impaired peer relations | Hutchinson and Jackson (2013) [ ]; Houck and Colbert (2017) [ ]; Crawford et al. (2019) [ ]; Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] |
Poor concentration at work, preventing them from delivering safe and effective nursing care | Hutchinson and Jackson (2013) [ ]; Houck and Colbert (2017) [ ]; Bambi et al. (2018) [ ]; Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ]; Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] | ||
Fail to raise safety concerns and seek assistance/delayed care | Hutchinson and Jackson (2013) [ ]; Houck and Colbert (2017) [ ]; Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ] | ||
Become hostile and perpetrators of similar bullying behaviors | Hutchinson and Jackson (2013) [ ] | ||
4. | Organizational impact | Job dissatisfaction | Hartin et al. (2018) [ ]; Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ]; Crawford et al. (2019) [ ]; Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] |
Increased intention to quit | Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] | ||
Increased staff turnover/attrition rate | Bambi et al. (2018) [ ]; Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ]; Hawkins et al. (2019) [ ] | ||
Higher organizational costs due to recruitment and retention difficulties | Johnson and Benham-Hutchins (2020) [ ] | ||
5. | Patient outcomes | Patient falls | Houck and Colbert (2017) [ ] |
Errors in treatments or medications | Houck and Colbert (2017) [ ] | ||
Adverse event or patient mortality | Houck and Colbert (2017) [ ] | ||
Patient satisfaction or patient complaints | Houck and Colbert (2017) [ ] Hutchinson and Jackson (2013) [ ] |
From the literature, workplace bullying affects nurses’ psychosocial well-being. Hartin et al. [ 25 ] conducted an integrative review of 23 Australian nursing studies. They reported that nurses who experienced workplace bullying faced greater risks of poor psychosocial outcomes such as psychological distress, depression, and burnout. It also undermines the nurses’ professional confidence and decreases their self-worth, motivation, and work ethic. In another systematic review, Johnson and Benham-Hutchins [ 23 ] reported similar psychosocial consequences of bullying, including increased stress, somatic symptoms, frustration, absenteeism, and lack of concentration. These findings were retrieved from 14 relevant nursing studies conducted in multiple healthcare settings, suggesting the significance of the issues in nursing. Of the nursing population, Hawkins et al. [ 22 ] suggested that workplace bullying might affect new graduate nurses, particularly as this group mainly holds subordinate positions and experiences much uncertainty during their adaption to the workplace. They conducted an integrative review of studies that examined this phenomenon among new graduate nurses and found 16 studies from Canada, the US, Australia, Korea, Singapore, and Ireland. They reported similar consequences on the new nurses, specifically, job satisfaction, burnout, intention to leave, and turnover.
Based on two reviews, workplace bullying is also reported to affect nurses’ physical well-being. The review by Johnson and Benham-Hutchins [ 23 ] found one study that surveyed 248 nurses in the Midwest US using an electronic questionnaire and found that work-related bullying showed a highly significant positive relationship with psychological/behavioral responses. However, they did not specify the types of physical outcomes being affected. In another review, Karatuna et al. [ 16 ] reported headache, tachycardia, fatigue, sleep disorders, and pseudo-neurological and gastrointestinal complaints as common physiological health outcomes of workplace bullying in their review of 166 studies in different countries. Lever et al. conducted a systematic review specifically looking at the health consequences in the healthcare workplace [ 8 ]. They retrieved 45 studies published between 2005 and 2017, with 40 studies examining mental health outcomes and 15 on physical health. They reported that nurses who encountered workplace bullying face a greater risk of developing sleep-related issues, headaches, gastrointestinal problems, and to a lesser extent, back and joint pain and blood pressure changes. As a result, these staff are more likely to report sick leave than those not affected by workplace bullying [ 8 ].
The review outlines two types of organizational-related consequences from the review. The first is about the nurses’ work performance. Workplace bullying reduces nursing performance by affecting nurses’ state of mind and impairs their ability to seek help at work, engage in effective and timely communication, and make clinical judgments. As a result, nurses cannot deliver patient care in a safe and effective manner. Hutchinson and Jackson [ 17 ] conducted a mixed-methods systematic review to determine how workplace bullying can affect patient care. They found 30 appropriate studies and conducted a content analysis to generate four themes: (1) physician–nurse relations and patient care, (2) nurse–nurse bullying, intimidation, and patient care, (3) reduced nurse performance related to exposure to hostile clinician behaviors, and (4) nurses and physicians directly implicating patients. The first two themes highlighted that physicians and nursing colleagues were the two main sources of bullying behaviors. In comparison, the last two themes revealed how bullying behaviors reduce nurses’ work performance. They reported that nurses affected by workplace bullying were reported to (1) avoid or delay effective communication, (2) experience poor concentration at work, preventing them from delivering safe and effective nursing care, (3) fail to raise safety concerns and seek assistance, and (4) become hostile and perpetrators of similar bullying behaviors.
The second organizational-related consequence is the organizational impact. Hartin et al. reported that workplace bullying decreases nurses’ job satisfaction and productivity, such as increased absenteeism and committing errors during work [ 25 ]. Johnson and Benham-Hutchins [ 23 ] reported that workplace bullying created a negative and hostile work environment, where teamwork and communication are being impeded. Both reviews reported that this indirectly leads to decreased job satisfaction, increased intention to quit, and staff turnover/attrition rate, leading to a higher organizational cost due to recruitment and retention difficulties. Crawford et al. analyzed 21 studies involving nursing students, new graduates, and experienced and academic faculty [ 21 ]. They reported that new graduate nurses face a higher risk of workplace bullying and difficulty coping with their new role. This situation is especially significant if the workplace environment is perceived as hostile, toxic, and unforgiving. If not managed properly, these events could negatively impact new nurses’ transition experiences and result in impaired peer relations and even higher staff attrition.
In terms of patient outcomes, workplace bullying indirectly influences patient outcomes by negatively affecting nurses’ work performance. Houck and Colbert conducted an integrative review to examine the association between workplace bullying and patient safety outcomes [ 3 ]. They retrieved 11 studies conducted between 1995 and March 2016 in Anglo countries (US, Canada, UK, and Australia). They reported seven patient safety consequences of workplace bullying: (1) patient falls, (2) errors in treatments or medications, (3) patient satisfaction or patient complaints, (4) adverse event or patient mortality, (5) altered thinking or concentration, (6) silence or inhibited communication, and (7) delayed care. Among these themes, the first four were reported as patient-related consequences of workplace bullying. The last three revolved around the negative impact on nursing performance related to patient safety. These findings concur with the review by Hutchinson and Jackson [ 17 ] about patient-related consequences. They also reported similar outcomes such as medication errors, surgical errors, and failure to report clinical issues of concern resulting in adverse events. Additionally, Hutchinson and Jackson highlighted how open displays of workplace bullying could erode patients’ confidence in nurses’ capability and instances of how bullied nurses may, in turn, display hostile behaviors or non-emphatic care, resulting in poor patient satisfaction [ 23 ].
Workplace bullying is a complex and dynamic social phenomenon that generates various definitions and concepts, making it hard to unify or standardize. Instead, our summary review compared nursing and non-healthcare literature to provide an overview of the various concepts and terms about workplace bullying, as shown in Table 6 [ 2 , 4 , 22 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 ].
Summary of concepts, terms, measurement tools, and theories for workplace bullying in nursing and non-healthcare literature.
Concepts/Terms | Examples |
---|---|
Sources | Management, leaders, peers, non-nursing colleagues, patients, and family members |
Direction | Horizontal, lateral, and vertical |
Manifestations | Incivility, disruptive behaviors, threats, mistreatment, hostility, bullying, abuse, aggression, violence, mobbing, sexual harassment |
Forms | Covert behaviors (e.g., sabotage, withholding support) and overt forms (verbal and physical) |
Measurement instruments | |
Theories |
* more commonly used in nursing literature.
The prevalence rate of workplace bullying varies widely. Nevertheless, there is empirical evidence to show the widespread prevalence of workplace bullying in nursing across different countries and healthcare contexts when the data is considered collectively from the included systematic reviews. The review by Lever et al. [ 8 ] showed that the pooled workplace bullying prevalence among nurses is estimated at 26.3%, which was similar to the pooled prevalence rate of 22% as reported by a Korean-language systematic review that examined 23 nursing studies [ 32 ]. However, it was higher than the prevalence rate of 11 to 18%, as reported by a non-nursing systematic review and meta-analysis that extracted 86 studies from various industry fields [ 5 ]. The higher-than-average prevalence rate observed in the healthcare sector could be attributed to several factors, including the highly stressful environment faced by healthcare professionals around the world, availability of reporting systems, and greater staff willingness to recognize and report workplace bullying events [ 8 , 18 ].
A remarkable proportion of nurses in hospital settings have experienced workplace violence, with bullying being the most common. The international variation in workplace bullying prevalence could be due to differences in sample size, type of measurement used, organizational/service setting, and reporting culture [ 2 , 8 , 18 ]. We attributed the extreme prevalence rate, either too high or too low, to the following reasons: (1) poorly defined or inconsistent terms; (2) different measurement tools used to measure workplace bullying events; (3) under-reporting due to a lack of reporting system or fear of repercussions; (4) over-sensitive reporting. Therefore, researchers need to consider the study designs, socio-cultural, and organizational contexts when interpreting the prevalence rates. Additionally, it is good for researchers to consider measuring other indirect measures of workplace bullying, such as job satisfaction, intention to leave, etc.
Workplace bullying can stem from various triggering factors (antecedents) and develop through multiple sources. We identified at least five main types of antecedents. These five can be grouped under two main levels: individual and organizational antecedents ( Table 3 ). Although Johnson (2011) and Samnani and Singh (2012) have suggested the role of societal-level antecedents, such as the societal culture of individualism versus collectivism [ 29 , 33 ], we concurred with the findings by Karatuna et al. that both individual and organizational antecedents exert an overlapping but greater immediate effect on workplace bullying than societal cultures or norms [ 16 ]. This proposition can also be explained by two dominant workplace bullying doctrines: the work environment hypothesis and the individual-dispositions hypothesis [ 31 ]. It is important to note that these antecedents were not mutually exclusive, but reflect the dynamic and mutual interactions between situational and individual factors within the workplace [ 31 ]. The findings from this summary review were also consistent with other rigorous reviews in other fields [ 2 , 16 , 30 , 34 ].
This summary review also shows that workplace bullying has many detrimental consequences, not only in terms of the health and well-being of nurses, but also patient safety. For example, Lever et al. reported 45 studies highlighting the mental and physical problems that have afflicted nurses who encountered workplace bullying [ 8 ]. These issues could lead to more staff taking sick leave and providing less-than-effective care at work. In addition, Hutchinson and Jackson found 30 studies demonstrating how workplace bullying reduces nurses’ work performance and productivity and prevents effective teamwork and communication [ 17 ]. This inevitably creates a negative and hostile work environment, leading to organizational consequences, such as reduced job satisfaction, increased intention to quit, and staff turnover/attrition rate, which inevitably leads to higher organizational costs due to recruitment and retention difficulties [ 14 , 23 ].
This is the first summary review to synthesize an extensive body of systematic reviews about workplace bullying to the best of our knowledge. We conducted a comprehensive search strategy and critical appraisal of the published reviews under the Cochrane Overview of Reviews method. Ultimately, we generated a conceptual framework to help clinicians and researchers understand the extent of research underlying this topic ( Figure 2 ). However, this review is not without its limitations. First, we excluded several reviews that did not focus primarily on nurses, were published outside the last ten years, did not specify any systematic review methodology, or were published in non-English language [ 1 , 35 , 36 , 37 ]. We acknowledge that this could potentially result in the omission of several systematic reviews and their findings. Second, as we only included peer-reviewed journal publications, there is a possibility of publication bias, with studies reporting only positive results more likely to be published. These positive effects may be compounded in our included reviews [ 12 ]. Finally, we did not conduct a re-analysis of possible meta-analysis within the included reviews due to heterogeneity in measurement outcomes and study designs. This aspect may have limited the extent to which we could draw convincing conclusions about the review findings and any associations of variables within the conceptual framework.
Conceptual Framework for Workplace Bullying among Nurses.
Bullying is a social phenomenon that has been extensively studied within nursing and non-nursing literature. This review found that current studies over-utilized cross-sectional survey designs and generated varied and conflicting results in the literature, making it difficult to determine whether the key correlates of bullying are predictors, consequences, or both. For example, there were times when the occurrence of bullying caused a poor work environment or times when it became vice versa [ 4 , 16 ]. Based on the review, the associations between bullying and correlates are likely characterized by reciprocal relationships. This finding aligns with bullying as a dynamic social phenomenon [ 2 ]. Therefore, there is a need for more advanced study designs where one can also identify and determine directionality between variables based on individual contexts.
Next, there is a need to design robust and effective interventions to address workplace bullying. Although this summary review did not extract systematic reviews focusing on workplace bullying interventions, we observed only a few reviews that addressed this issue. Additionally, these reviews only retrieved a few studies that reported bullying intervention’s effectiveness, highlighting a lack of studies in this area [ 38 , 39 ]. To achieve this, clinicians could consider using advanced and sound methodological designs and a well-developed theoretical framework [ 2 ]. Experimental research designs or survey studies following the same individuals over several time points (e.g., diary studies or longitudinal studies with multiple measurement points) are also needed to provide better indications of causality and intervention effectiveness [ 38 , 39 ].
This summary review evaluated the prevalence, antecedents, and consequences of workplace bullying among nurses based on an extensive body of systematic reviews published between 2013 and 2021. Workplace bullying was reported to affect at least one-quarter of the nursing population, higher than in other professions. The huge variation in prevalence rates from 1 to 90% reported across different reviews could be attributed to socio-cultural differences, workplace differences, heterogeneity in study designs, and operationalization of terms and measurement tools. The review findings on the antecedents and consequences demonstrated the complex and overlapping dynamics in the relationships among different variables for workplace bullying. We synthesized the findings from the included reviews and proposed an integrative model to explain this phenomenon and serve as the basis for future research.
This research received no external funding.
Conceptualization: H.S.G. and S.H.; methodology: H.Z.; formal analysis: H.S.G. and H.Z.; writing—original draft preparation: S.H.; writing—review and editing: H.S.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Conflicts of interest.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Abstract. Bullying is a severe problem that is experienced, especially in schools. Children belong to the same social group, but some feel powerful than others and therefore take advantage of them ...
Bullying involves repeated hurtful actions between peers where an imbalance of power exists [].Arseneault et al. [] conducted a review of the mental health consequences of bullying for children and adolescents and found that bullying is associated with severe symptoms of mental health problems, including self-harm and suicidality.Bullying was shown to have detrimental effects that persist into ...
Bullying in childhood is a global public health problem that impacts on child, adolescent and adult health. Bullying exists in its traditional, sexual and cyber forms, all of which impact on the physical, mental and social health of victims, bullies and bully-victims. Children perceived as 'different' in any way are at greater risk of ...
1.1. Bullying Victimisation, Cognitive-Motivational Factors, and Academic Achievement. The expectancy-value theory [32,33] and the achievement goal theory [34,35] propose that individuals are more likely to engage in a particular task when such a task has some value to them and when they believe they are likely to do well.From this perspective, cognitive-motivational factors such as academic ...
Abstract. During the school years, bullying is one of the most common expressions of violence in the peer context. Research on bullying started more than forty years ago, when the phenomenon was defined as 'aggressive, intentional acts carried out by a group or an individual repeatedly and over time against a victim who cannot easily defend him- or herself'.
The main findings of our review are that bullying programs were effective in reducing bullying perpetration outcomes by roughly 18-19% and bullying victimization by roughly 15-16%. ... Our searches of the literature produced approximately 19,877 reports that were screened for eligibility. ... " Canadian research network has had on ...
Introduction. Research on bullying victimization in schools has developed into a robust body of literature since the early 1970s. Formally defined by Olweus (Citation 1994), "a student is being bullied or victimized when he or she is exposed, repeatedly and over time, to negative actions on the part of one or more other students and where a power imbalance exists" (p. 1173).
Drawing on recent research literature, the following sections illustrate and discuss some common aspects of bullying. First, the distinction between offline and online bullying is explored. ... "A Systematic Review of Bullying Definitions: How Definition and Format Affect Study Outcome." Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research 11
Abstract Objective: Bullying threatens the mental and educational well-being of students. Although anti-bullying policies are prevalent, little is known about their effectiveness. This systematic review evaluates the methodological characteristics and summarizes substantive findings of studies examining the effectiveness of school bullying policies. Method: Searches of 11 bibliographic ...
Schools*. Social Skills*. This paper presents a systematic literature review addressing rigorously planned and assessed interventions intended to reduce school bullying. The search for papers was performed in four databases (Lilacs, Psycinfo, Scielo and Web of Science) and guided by the question: What are the interventions u ….
First, the findings might be an underestimate of the literature on ACEs and bullying. The review coverage years were 1999-2019. This systematic review is part of a larger search that extracted data from 140 articles and took several years to complete. ... D. L. (2012). A review of research on bullying and peer victimization in school: An ...
School bullying is a critical problem of global concern and potentially leads to serious health consequences for students. Research indicates that bullying is a significant risk factor for adolescent mental and physical health in the short and long term (Wang and Chen, 2024). The prevalence of bullying among students in schools has increased ...
The purpose of this literature review is to examine the research base of interventions focused on reducing bullying, aggressive, or inappropriate behavior in recess settings through behavioral-based interventions. This review extends the literature by synthesizing findings from experimental, quasi-experimental, and single-case research on the characteristics and components of effective ...
WASHINGTON — A special issue of American Psychologist ® provides a comprehensive review of over 40 years of research on bullying among school age youth, documenting the current understanding of the complexity of the issue and suggesting directions for future research. "The lore of bullies has long permeated literature and popular culture. Yet bullying as a distinct form of interpersonal ...
This article provides an introductory overview of findings from the past 40 years of research on bullying among school-aged children and youth. ... physical, and health effects and affects a victim's academic performance. Keywords: Bullying, literature review, school, Malaysia Article History: Received on 4/1/2021; Revised on 1/1/2021; Accepted ...
Methods: A systematic review of available literature was completed following PRISMA guidelines using the search themes "cyberbullying" and "adolescent or children"; the time frame was from January 1st, 2015 to December 31st, 2019. Eight academic databases pertaining to public health, and communication and psychology were consulted ...
"A Review of Research on Bullying and Peer Victimization in School: An Ecological System Analysis," Aggression and violent behavior (17:4), pp. 311-322. Humphrey, N., and Symes, W. 2010.
Study 1 consists of a systematic review of the literature published between 2011 and 2021. Multiple sources were used to identify potentially eligible studies using keywords in varying combinations and the PRISMA guidelines were followed. ... Further, bullying research continues to neglect to define and investigate covert types of bullying ...
This article tracks the history, research, and literature of upwards bullying in the workplace, where employees use calculated tactics against the directors, managers, supervisors, and leaders to whom the subordinates are accountable. While there is a huge body of literature on all aspects of workplace bullying, finding relevant publications on ...
A key facet of addressing bullying and harassment at the school level is combatting harassment that occurs due to facets of a student's identity: race, religion, sex, gender, sexuality, size, ability and national origin. Every student should feel welcome at school, regardless of how they look, identify, or worship.
Literature Review of School Bullying 7 Ross (2002, p. 107) also states in her research that "15% to 20% of all students will experience some form of bullying during their school years and between 10% and 20% of children are bullied often enough for them to consider it a serious problem". Harris & Hathorn (2006, p.
A literature review is a critical component of academic research, serving as the foundation upon which new knowledge is built. It's more than just a summary of existing research; it's a systematic and critical analysis of relevant literature that identifies key themes, gaps, and controversies in a specific field. Conducting a literature review can be a daunting task, especially for those ...
Definition and epidemiology. Bullying is the systematic abuse of power and is defined as aggressive behaviour or intentional harm-doing by peers that is carried out repeatedly and involves an imbalance of power, either actual or perceived, between the victim and the bully. 1 Bullying can take the form of direct bullying, which includes physical and verbal acts of aggression such as hitting ...
Literature review analytics (LRA) on sustainable cold-chain for perishable food products: research trends and future directions This study focuses on the topics in sustainable freight transportation for perishable food products, and finds the recent research themes, and future research directions by reviewing sustainable logistics for ...
This study provides a comprehensive review of machine learning (ML) applications in the fields of business and finance. First, it introduces the most commonly used ML techniques and explores their diverse applications in marketing, stock analysis, demand forecasting, and energy marketing. In particular, this review critically analyzes over 100 articles and reveals a strong inclination toward ...
Conclusions. Anti-bullying policies might be effective at reducing bullying if their content is based on evidence and sound theory and if they are implemented with a high level of fidelity. More research is needed to improve on limitations among extant studies. Keywords: school, bullying, policy, law, effectiveness.
Background and objectives: As one of the most popular beverages in the world, coffee has long been known to affect bowel functions such as motility, secretion, and absorption. Recent evidence obtained in human and animal studies suggests that coffee has modulating impacts on gut microbiota. We aim to present an overview of the specific effects of coffee on gut microbiota composition, diversity ...
A comprehensive literature search was conducted between April 2021 and December 2021 to search for relevant systematic reviews using the following key search terms and related text words: 'workplace bullying,' 'nurs*,' and 'review.' The search for literature was limited to those published within the past ten years, as this paper ...