Good grief: Victimized employees don't get a break

March 8, 2019

Science Daily/University of Central Florida

As if being picked on wasn't bad enough, victims of workplace mistreatment may also be seen as bullies themselves, even if they've never engaged in such behavior. Adding insult to injury, victims may even be seen by supervisors as worse employees, despite exemplary performance. Bullies, on the other hand, may be given a pass if they are liked by their supervisor.

Adding insult to injury, victims may even be seen by supervisors as worse employees, despite exemplary performance. Bullies, on the other hand, may be given a pass if they are liked by their supervisor.

A study about this bias toward victim blaming was recently published in the Journal of Applied Psychology. The peer-reviewed article was co-authored by Shannon Taylor, an associate professor of management in the University of Central Florida's College of Business.

"The results are eye-opening," Taylor says. "I think they are useful because, given all of these accounts in the media of bad behavior happening, people are often left wondering how can we blame victims, and why do we let these perpetrators off the hook, why do they go unpunished?"

Taylor attributes the flawed decision making to cognitive biases, such as the halo effect, in which positive attributes mask negative traits, or the horns effect, in which one negative attribute casts a person in a completely negative light.

He recommends that supervisors receive bias training.

"The first step is really awareness of these biases," Taylor says. "We hope this study will at least bring awareness to people's potential for bias."

The researchers performed their work over the course of four studies. The first two studies showed through surveys of employees and supervisors that supervisors tend to view victims of bullying as being bullies themselves.

Studies three and four were experiments where participants evaluated employees based on descriptions of their work performance, as well as how they treated others and how they were treated.

They found that even when evaluators were clearly informed that a victim did not mistreat others, victims were still seen as bullies. In the fourth study, they found that not only are victims seen as bullies despite evidence to the contrary, but also that they receive lower job performance evaluations as a result of being victimized.

The researchers found support in all four studies that bullies were less likely to be seen as deviant when their supervisor considered them to be good performers.

"What I think is really interesting about this is, when you hear stories of high-profile people engaging in bad behavior at work, a lot of these people have gone unpunished for long periods of time," Taylor says. "And we have examples of victims of this bad behavior being called out and attacked on social media and by the media. Our studies show this is actually pretty common. We're all susceptible to these biases."

An example -- the victim blaming that occurred during Christine Blasey Ford's testimony during and after Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court confirmation hearing, Taylor says.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/03/190308154831.htm

Bullying bosses negatively impact employee performance and behavior

March 7, 2019

Science Daily/Portland State University

Employees bullied by their bosses are more likely to report unfairness and work stress, and consequently become less committed to their jobs or even retaliate, according to a new study.

The findings, published recently in the Journal of Management, highlight the consequences of abusive supervision, which is becoming increasingly common in workplaces, said Liu-Qin Yang, the study's co-author and an associate professor of industrial-organizational psychology in PSU's College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.

Yang and her co-authors reviewed 427 studies and quantitatively aggregated the results to better understand why and how bullying bosses can decrease "organizational citizenship behavior" -- or the voluntary extras you do that aren't part of your job responsibilities -- and increase "counterproductive work behavior." Examples of such behaviors include sabotage at work, coming into work late, taking longer-than-allowed breaks, doing tasks incorrectly or withholding effort, all of which can affect your team and coworkers.

The researchers attribute the negative work behaviors to either perceptions of injustice or work stress.

With perceptions of injustice, employees bullied by their boss see the treatment as unfair relative to the effort they've put into their jobs. In response, they're more likely to purposely withhold from the unpaid extras that help the organization, like helping coworkers with problems or attending meetings that are not mandatory. They're also more likely to engage in counterproductive work behavior such as taking longer breaks or coming in late without notice, Yang said.

Having an abusive boss can also lead to work stress, which reduces an employee's ability to control negative behaviors or contribute to the organization in a positive way.

The researchers found that fairness (or the lack thereof) accounted more for the link between abusive supervision and organizational citizenship behavior, while work stress led to more counterproductive work behavior.

"Stress is sometimes uncontrollable. You don't sleep well, so you come in late or take a longer break, lash out at your coworkers or disobey instructions," Yang said. "But justice is more rational. Something isn't fair, so you're purposely not going to help other people or when the boss asks if anyone can come in on a Saturday to work, you don't volunteer."

Yang and her co-authors recommend that organizations take measures to reduce or curb abusive supervision. Among their suggestions:

·     Launch regular training programs to help supervisors learn and adopt more effective interpersonal and management skills when interacting with their employees

·     Implement fair policies and procedures to reduce employees' perceptions of injustice in the organization

·     Ensure employees have sufficient resources to perform their job, such as by offering stress management training

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/03/190307073452.htm

Workplace bullying, violence are risk factors for type 2 diabetes

November 13, 2017

Science Daily/Diabetologia

Workplace bullying and violence may increase the risk of type 2 diabetes, for both men and women, according to new research.

Previous analyses have noted that issues, such as job insecurity and long working hours, with the consequent psychological impacts, are associated with a moderately higher risk of diabetes. It has also been shown that bullying and violence can affect personal resources, such as self-esteem and the ability to cope. In this study -- carried out by Tianwei Xu, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Denmark and her collaborators from Denmark, Sweden and Finland -- the prospective relationships between workplace bullying or violence and diabetes risk were considered.

The study population was derived from four cohort studies: the Swedish Work Environment Survey (SWES), the Swedish Longitudinal Occupational Survey of Health (SLOSH), the Finnish Public Sector Study (FPS) and the Danish Work Environment Cohort Study (DWECS). Questionnaires were used to establish exposure to workplace bullying, defined as unkind or negative behaviour from colleagues, and workplace violence, defined as having been the target of violent actions or threats of violence, in the previous 12 months (note: the Finnish study referred to current bullying and did not measure violence).

The study included people employed and aged 40 to 65 years; younger participants being excluded to minimise the possible inclusion of persons with other conditions, such as type 1 diabetes. Persons diagnosed with diabetes at baseline were also excluded. The final sample consisted of 19,280 men and 26,625 women.

Incidence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) was obtained from nationwide health registers using the unique personal identification numbers for the participants in each country. Statistical analysis included adjustment for possible confounders, such as educational level and marital status (used as an indication of social support outside work). Adjustment for alcohol consumption, mental health problems and body mass index (BMI) were also considered, although the authors note the possible causal link between workplace negative interpersonal relationships and these factors.

Nine per cent of the participants reported exposure to workplace bullying. During a mean follow up of 11.7 years, 1,223 incident cases of T2D were identified. After adjustment, being bullied at work was associated with a 46% higher risk of T2D (61% for men and 36% for women). Adjustment for alcohol consumption and mental health difficulties did not affect this association. Adjustment for BMI removed one-third of the risk increase. Some 12% of participants had experienced violence or threats of violence in the preceding 12 months. During a mean follow up of 11.4 years, 930 participants were found to have T2D. After adjusting for confounders, workplace violence was associated with a 26% higher risk of diabetes, for both men and women. Again, adjustment for alcohol consumption and mental health problems did not affect this result.

The authors note that, whilst both bullying and violence represent negative interpersonal relationships, they appear to constitute different concepts and are distinct social stressors. Bullying is psychological aggression, including behaviours such as unfair criticisms, isolation and humiliating work tasks. It is most often perpetrated by people from inside, such as colleagues. Violence, on the other hand, is more likely to involve physical acts such as pushing or kicking, or the threat of these, and is generally perpetrated by people from outside, such as clients, patients etc. Bullying and violence are distinct behaviours and consequently their induced emotions can be different.

According to the authors, "Being bullied is regarded as a severe social stressor that may activate the stress response and lead to a range of downstream biological processes that may contribute towards the risk of diabetes." They suggest that changes caused by stress hormones may be one possible causal pathway. Also, metabolic changes and obesity may be a mechanism for the increased risk, as the stress response may be linked to the endocrine regulation of appetite, and/or because workplace bullying or violence, and the resulting negative emotional experience, might induce comfort eating behaviours.

The authors say: "There is a moderate and robust association between workplace bullying, violence and the development of type 2 diabetes. As both bullying and violence or threats of violence are common in the workplace we suggest that prevention policies should be investigated as a possible means to reduce this risk."

They add: "Further study of possible causal pathways, for example weight gain, negative emotions and the psychological stress response, would help to provide an understanding of the causal mechanisms and to develop cost effective interventions."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/11/171113195027.htm