IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i21p14120-d957049.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis of Studies on Workplace Bullying among Nurses

Author

Listed:
  • Haeyoung Lee

    (College of Nursing, Chung-Ang University, Seoul 06974, Korea)

  • Young Mi Ryu

    (Department of Nursing, Baekseok University, Cheonan 31065, Korea)

  • Mi Yu

    (College of Nursing, Institute of Health Sciences, Gyeongsang National Universtiy, Jinju 52727, Korea)

  • Haejin Kim

    (Department of Nursing, Changwon National University, Changwon 51140, Korea)

  • Seieun Oh

    (College of Nursing, Dankook University, Cheonan 31116, Korea)

Abstract

This study aimed to further understand and compare the phenomenon of workplace bullying (WPB) among clinical nurses in various sociocultural contexts. The study sought to determine appropriate interventions, examining how said interventions should be delivered at individual, work-unit, and institutional levels. Qualitative meta-synthesis was chosen to achieve the study aims. Individual qualitative research findings were gathered, compared, and summarized using the thematic analysis suggested by Braun and Clark. Based on the predefined analytic points, the findings included the following themes: horizontal yet vertical violence, direct and indirect violence on victims, nurses feed on their own, accepting and condoning WPB embedded in ineffective work systems, and rippling over the entire organization. The results showed that the phenomenon of workplace bullying shares quite a few attributes across cultures in terms of the characteristics, types, perpetrators, subjects, and consequences. The findings suggest that interventions to change and improve organizational work culture must be developed and implemented.

Suggested Citation

  • Haeyoung Lee & Young Mi Ryu & Mi Yu & Haejin Kim & Seieun Oh, 2022. "A Qualitative Meta-Synthesis of Studies on Workplace Bullying among Nurses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:14120-:d:957049
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14120/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14120/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susan L. Johnson, 2019. "Workplace bullying, biased behaviours and performance review in the nursing profession: A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(9-10), pages 1528-1537, May.
    2. Heiyoung Kang & Kihye Han, 2021. "Moderating Effects of Structural Empowerment and Resilience in the Relationship between Nurses’ Workplace Bullying and Work Outcomes: A Cross-Sectional Correlational Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-12, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nicola Magnavita & Igor Meraglia, 2024. "Poor Work Ability Is Associated with Workplace Violence in Nurses: A Two-Wave Panel Data Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(9), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Ana Rita Valente Ribeiro & Ana Isabel Sani, 2024. "Bullying against Healthcare Professionals and Coping Strategies: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(4), pages 1-13, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Declan Fahie & Gerry Dunne, 2021. "Standing by or Standing Up? —How Philosophy Can (In)form Our Understanding of Bystander Behaviours in Workplace Bullying Dynamics," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-10, March.
    2. Juliet McMahon & Michelle O’Sullivan & Sarah MacCurtain & Caroline Murphy & Lorraine Ryan, 2021. "“It’s Not Us, It’s You!”: Extending Managerial Control through Coercion and Internalisation in the Context of Workplace Bullying amongst Nurses in Ireland," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:14120-:d:957049. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.