IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v19y2010i15-16p2319-2328.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A typology of bullying behaviours: the experiences of Australian nurses

Author

Listed:
  • Marie Hutchinson
  • Margaret H Vickers
  • Lesley Wilkes
  • Debra Jackson

Abstract

Aim and objective. This study sought to explore the nature of bullying in the Australian nursing workplace. Background. While there is widespread concern about the extent and consequences of bullying among nurses, to date, there have been no published reports cataloguing the types of behaviours that constitute bullying. Design. Reported here are findings from the first stage of a three‐stage sequential mixed methods study. Methods. The first, qualitative stage of this study employed in‐depth, semi structured interviews with 26 nurses who had experienced bullying from two Australian area health services. Content analysis of the verbatim interview transcripts was performed using the nvivo 7 software program. Results. The analysis identified six major categories and constituent sub‐categories. The typology of bullying behaviours reported here is one of these major categories. Conclusion. The typology of behaviours developed from the study provides detailed insights into the complexity of bullying experienced by nurses. The behaviours were labelled: personal attack, erosion of professional competence and reputation, and attack through work roles and tasks. These themes provide insight into the construct of bullying by providing a detailed catalogue of bullying behaviours that show that bullying is frequently masked in work tasks or work processes and focused on damaging the reputation and status of targets. Relevance to clinical practice. The detailed catalogue of bullying behaviours draws attention to the breadth of the bullying experience. It is anticipated the typology will be of use to nurses, managers and other professionals who are interested in responding to the problem of bullying in nursing.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie Hutchinson & Margaret H Vickers & Lesley Wilkes & Debra Jackson, 2010. "A typology of bullying behaviours: the experiences of Australian nurses," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(15‐16), pages 2319-2328, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:15-16:p:2319-2328
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03160.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03160.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03160.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mayhew, C. & Chappell, D., 2001. "Occupational Violence: Types, Reporting Patterns, and Variations Between Health Sectors," Papers 139, The University of New South Wales. Department of Industrial Relations..
    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. 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. Fereshteh Najafi & Masoud Fallahi‐Khoshknab & Fazlollah Ahmadi & Asghar Dalvandi & Mehdi Rahgozar, 2018. "Antecedents and consequences of workplace violence against nurses: A qualitative study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1-2), pages 116-128, January.

    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. Noordeen Shoqirat, 2014. "‘Let other people do it…’: the role of emergency department nurses in health promotion," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1-2), pages 232-242, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:15-16:p:2319-2328. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    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.