Instruments and Taxonomy of Workplace Bullying in Health Care Organizations

This study was aimed to evaluate the methodological issues and comprehensiveness of workplace bullying instruments and to suggest a taxonomy of psychological abuse.MethodsNineteen instruments applied in health care organizations and 469 questionnaire items mainly regarding psychological abuse were c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Asian nursing research 2017, 11(4), , pp.237-245
Main Authors: Park, Eun-Jun, Lee, Mikyoung, Park, Myungsook
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Behavior
Bullying
Clinical outcomes
Content analysis
Emotional abuse
Manipulation
Nurses
Professional relationships
Quantitative psychology
Social conflict
Taxonomy
Violence
간호학
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study was aimed to evaluate the methodological issues and comprehensiveness of workplace bullying instruments and to suggest a taxonomy of psychological abuse.MethodsNineteen instruments applied in health care organizations and 469 questionnaire items mainly regarding psychological abuse were collected through a literature review. Three researchers classified the questionnaire items according to a “taxonomy of psychological abuse in the workplace.”ResultsMany instruments of workplace bullying were developed in the 2000s using a reflective measurement model, but their psychometric property was not sufficient and the measurement model is questioned. Based on the questionnaire items, the “taxonomy of psychological abuse in the workplace” was modified by adding two new subcategories (unachievable work and unfair treatment) and clarifying some operational definitions. According to the modified taxonomy of 11 (sub)categories, the reviewed instruments assessed 6.5 (sub)categories on average. No instrument measured all (sub)categories. Category 4.2 (disrespect, humiliation, and rejection of the person) was measured in all instruments, followed by Categories 5 (professional discredit and denigration) and 1.2 (social isolation) behaviors.ConclusionThe current instruments are not comprehensive enough. It is suggested that the modified taxonomy is verified and guide more reliable and inclusive instruments in the future. Furthermore, a formative measurement model, which defines a bullying as an inventory of different types of behaviors, should be used.
ISSN:1976-1317
2093-7482
DOI:10.1016/j.anr.2017.10.001