Work harassment in the UK and US nursing context

This paper examines one type of negative work behaviour, work harassment, using two theoretical frameworks: Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Similarity-Attraction (SA). SET explains work harassment as a product of poor management practices, whereas using SA theory explains it as a result of the grow...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of management & organization 2022-03, Vol.28 (2), p.348-362
Main Authors: Farr-Wharton, Ben, Brunetto, Yvonne, Xerri, Mathew, Shriberg, Art, Newman, Stefanie, Dienger, Joy
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accountability
Behavior
Bullying
Government employees
Local government
Nurses
Nursing care
Professionals
Social exchange theory
Structural equation modeling
Supervisors
Workloads
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!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-df44a3bb8354a26be035972dad2671bc10572951547fedec01e0338fce2f84753
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-df44a3bb8354a26be035972dad2671bc10572951547fedec01e0338fce2f84753
container_end_page 362
container_issue 2
container_start_page 348
container_title Journal of management & organization
container_volume 28
creator Farr-Wharton, Ben
Brunetto, Yvonne
Xerri, Mathew
Shriberg, Art
Newman, Stefanie
Dienger, Joy
description This paper examines one type of negative work behaviour, work harassment, using two theoretical frameworks: Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Similarity-Attraction (SA). SET explains work harassment as a product of poor management practices, whereas using SA theory explains it as a result of the growing normalisation of high workloads. The study undertakes latent mean and path model comparison analysis using structural equation modelling of data from 189 nurses in the UK and 401 nurses in the USA. The findings indicate a good model fit showing a significant path from Leader Member Exchange (LMX) to work harassment, wellbeing and subsequent turnover intentions, with LMX fully mediating the path from LMX to wellbeing for UK nurses, but only partially mediating the same path for nurses in the USA. The findings suggest SET provides a better explanation for work harassment for UK nurses, whereas SA theory better explains the US nurse experience.
doi_str_mv 10.1017/jmo.2019.16
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2664723015</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_jmo_2019_16</cupid><sourcerecordid>2664723015</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-df44a3bb8354a26be035972dad2671bc10572951547fedec01e0338fce2f84753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpt0E9LwzAYBvAgCs7pyS8Q8CitefO3PcrQKQ48aPEY0ibdWm06kw7029u6gRdP73v48TzwIHQJJAUC6qbt-pQSyFOQR2gGGcsTJqg6_v1ZwqSip-gsxpYQSZWkM0Te-vCONyaYGDvnB9x4PGwcLp6w8RYXL9jvQmz8Gle9H9zXcI5OavMR3cXhzlFxf_e6eEhWz8vHxe0qqZhQQ2Jrzg0ry4wJbqgsHWEiV9QaS6WCsgIiFM0FCK5qZ11FYBQsqytH64wrweboap-7Df3nzsVBt_0u-LFSUym5oozApK73qgp9jMHVehuazoRvDURPk-hxEj1NokGOOjlo05WhsWv3F_qf_wHhgWD7</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2664723015</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Work harassment in the UK and US nursing context</title><source>Business Source Ultimate</source><source>Cambridge Journals Online</source><source>ABI/INFORM Global</source><creator>Farr-Wharton, Ben ; Brunetto, Yvonne ; Xerri, Mathew ; Shriberg, Art ; Newman, Stefanie ; Dienger, Joy</creator><creatorcontrib>Farr-Wharton, Ben ; Brunetto, Yvonne ; Xerri, Mathew ; Shriberg, Art ; Newman, Stefanie ; Dienger, Joy</creatorcontrib><description>This paper examines one type of negative work behaviour, work harassment, using two theoretical frameworks: Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Similarity-Attraction (SA). SET explains work harassment as a product of poor management practices, whereas using SA theory explains it as a result of the growing normalisation of high workloads. The study undertakes latent mean and path model comparison analysis using structural equation modelling of data from 189 nurses in the UK and 401 nurses in the USA. The findings indicate a good model fit showing a significant path from Leader Member Exchange (LMX) to work harassment, wellbeing and subsequent turnover intentions, with LMX fully mediating the path from LMX to wellbeing for UK nurses, but only partially mediating the same path for nurses in the USA. The findings suggest SET provides a better explanation for work harassment for UK nurses, whereas SA theory better explains the US nurse experience.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1833-3672</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1839-3527</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/jmo.2019.16</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Accountability ; Behavior ; Bullying ; Government employees ; Local government ; Nurses ; Nursing care ; Professionals ; Social exchange theory ; Structural equation modeling ; Supervisors ; Workloads</subject><ispartof>Journal of management &amp; organization, 2022-03, Vol.28 (2), p.348-362</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-df44a3bb8354a26be035972dad2671bc10572951547fedec01e0338fce2f84753</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-df44a3bb8354a26be035972dad2671bc10572951547fedec01e0338fce2f84753</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7219-0817</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2664723015/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2664723015?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,11688,27924,27925,36060,44363,72960,74895</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Farr-Wharton, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunetto, Yvonne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xerri, Mathew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shriberg, Art</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newman, Stefanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dienger, Joy</creatorcontrib><title>Work harassment in the UK and US nursing context</title><title>Journal of management &amp; organization</title><addtitle>Journal of Management &amp; Organization</addtitle><description>This paper examines one type of negative work behaviour, work harassment, using two theoretical frameworks: Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Similarity-Attraction (SA). SET explains work harassment as a product of poor management practices, whereas using SA theory explains it as a result of the growing normalisation of high workloads. The study undertakes latent mean and path model comparison analysis using structural equation modelling of data from 189 nurses in the UK and 401 nurses in the USA. The findings indicate a good model fit showing a significant path from Leader Member Exchange (LMX) to work harassment, wellbeing and subsequent turnover intentions, with LMX fully mediating the path from LMX to wellbeing for UK nurses, but only partially mediating the same path for nurses in the USA. The findings suggest SET provides a better explanation for work harassment for UK nurses, whereas SA theory better explains the US nurse experience.</description><subject>Accountability</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Bullying</subject><subject>Government employees</subject><subject>Local government</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>Nursing care</subject><subject>Professionals</subject><subject>Social exchange theory</subject><subject>Structural equation modeling</subject><subject>Supervisors</subject><subject>Workloads</subject><issn>1833-3672</issn><issn>1839-3527</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><recordid>eNpt0E9LwzAYBvAgCs7pyS8Q8CitefO3PcrQKQ48aPEY0ibdWm06kw7029u6gRdP73v48TzwIHQJJAUC6qbt-pQSyFOQR2gGGcsTJqg6_v1ZwqSip-gsxpYQSZWkM0Te-vCONyaYGDvnB9x4PGwcLp6w8RYXL9jvQmz8Gle9H9zXcI5OavMR3cXhzlFxf_e6eEhWz8vHxe0qqZhQQ2Jrzg0ry4wJbqgsHWEiV9QaS6WCsgIiFM0FCK5qZ11FYBQsqytH64wrweboap-7Df3nzsVBt_0u-LFSUym5oozApK73qgp9jMHVehuazoRvDURPk-hxEj1NokGOOjlo05WhsWv3F_qf_wHhgWD7</recordid><startdate>20220301</startdate><enddate>20220301</enddate><creator>Farr-Wharton, Ben</creator><creator>Brunetto, Yvonne</creator><creator>Xerri, Mathew</creator><creator>Shriberg, Art</creator><creator>Newman, Stefanie</creator><creator>Dienger, Joy</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><general>Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management (ANZAM)</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AYAGU</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7219-0817</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220301</creationdate><title>Work harassment in the UK and US nursing context</title><author>Farr-Wharton, Ben ; Brunetto, Yvonne ; Xerri, Mathew ; Shriberg, Art ; Newman, Stefanie ; Dienger, Joy</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-df44a3bb8354a26be035972dad2671bc10572951547fedec01e0338fce2f84753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Accountability</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Bullying</topic><topic>Government employees</topic><topic>Local government</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>Nursing care</topic><topic>Professionals</topic><topic>Social exchange theory</topic><topic>Structural equation modeling</topic><topic>Supervisors</topic><topic>Workloads</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Farr-Wharton, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brunetto, Yvonne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xerri, Mathew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shriberg, Art</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newman, Stefanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dienger, Joy</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Complete</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Australia &amp; New Zealand Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology Journals</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of management &amp; organization</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Farr-Wharton, Ben</au><au>Brunetto, Yvonne</au><au>Xerri, Mathew</au><au>Shriberg, Art</au><au>Newman, Stefanie</au><au>Dienger, Joy</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Work harassment in the UK and US nursing context</atitle><jtitle>Journal of management &amp; organization</jtitle><addtitle>Journal of Management &amp; Organization</addtitle><date>2022-03-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>348</spage><epage>362</epage><pages>348-362</pages><issn>1833-3672</issn><eissn>1839-3527</eissn><abstract>This paper examines one type of negative work behaviour, work harassment, using two theoretical frameworks: Social Exchange Theory (SET) and Similarity-Attraction (SA). SET explains work harassment as a product of poor management practices, whereas using SA theory explains it as a result of the growing normalisation of high workloads. The study undertakes latent mean and path model comparison analysis using structural equation modelling of data from 189 nurses in the UK and 401 nurses in the USA. The findings indicate a good model fit showing a significant path from Leader Member Exchange (LMX) to work harassment, wellbeing and subsequent turnover intentions, with LMX fully mediating the path from LMX to wellbeing for UK nurses, but only partially mediating the same path for nurses in the USA. The findings suggest SET provides a better explanation for work harassment for UK nurses, whereas SA theory better explains the US nurse experience.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/jmo.2019.16</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7219-0817</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1833-3672
ispartof Journal of management & organization, 2022-03, Vol.28 (2), p.348-362
issn 1833-3672
1839-3527
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2664723015
source Business Source Ultimate; Cambridge Journals Online; ABI/INFORM Global
subjects Accountability
Behavior
Bullying
Government employees
Local government
Nurses
Nursing care
Professionals
Social exchange theory
Structural equation modeling
Supervisors
Workloads
title Work harassment in the UK and US nursing context
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T01%3A18%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Work%20harassment%20in%20the%20UK%20and%20US%20nursing%20context&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20management%20&%20organization&rft.au=Farr-Wharton,%20Ben&rft.date=2022-03-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=348&rft.epage=362&rft.pages=348-362&rft.issn=1833-3672&rft.eissn=1839-3527&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/jmo.2019.16&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2664723015%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c357t-df44a3bb8354a26be035972dad2671bc10572951547fedec01e0338fce2f84753%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2664723015&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_jmo_2019_16&rfr_iscdi=true