Workplace bullying in a group context: are victim reports of working conditions representative for others at the workplace?

ABSTRACT

Previous research on psychosocial working conditions as risk factors of workplace bullying builds on the underlying assumption that targets’ subjective reports of their psychosocial working conditions are shared by their non-bullied colleagues. This study investigates differences in perceptions of such conditions by comparing the ratings from targets of bullying, witnesses, and non-witnesses in groups with at least one target, and groups free from bullying. We also examine if known work-related risk factors predict a group level estimate of bullying with the targets excluded from the analyses. Data included 2215 employees in 195 work groups from Sweden. Targets of bullying perceived the psychosocial working conditions more negatively compared to non-exposed colleagues. In addition, non-exposed in work groups with at least one target reported their working conditions more negatively than those working in groups free from bullying. Associations between examined working conditions and group levels of bullying were significant even when the targets were excluded from the analyses, albeit less strong. The results show that working conditions are risk factors of bullying, but also indicate that previous studies may have overestimated the associations. Future research should consider differences in perceptions of targets and non-targets when investigating work-related risk factors of bullying.

KEYWORDS:

• Work environment hypothesis
• bullying behaviours
• bystanders
• group level

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working life and Welfare under Grant number 2019-01232. We have no potential conflict of interest to report. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The project was approved by the Regional Ethical Review Board at Linköping University. Protocol number: 2014/282-31.