Search

The main aims of this two-wave prospective study were to (1) present different theoretical mechanisms for relationships between bullying and personality characteristics, (2) determine forward and reverse long-term associations between victimization from bullying and personality traits included in the five-factor model and (3) establish whether these personality traits contribute to the variance in bullying, beyond work environment factors in the form of role conflict and role ambiguity. The prospective sample comprised 3066 Norwegian employees. The time lag between the two measurement points was two years. Neuroticism significantly predicted subsequent bullying in analyses of direct associations between personality traits and victimization. When adjusting for role conflict and role ambiguity, conscientiousness emerged as the only significant predictor of later victimization from bullying. In tests of reverse associations, victimization from bullying at baseline was significantly related to agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness at follow-up. Taken together, the study findings indicate that personality traits may function as both predictors and outcomes of workplace bullying. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Within a stressor-strain framework, the aim of this study is to examine the influence of perceived laissez-faire leadership – a type of leadership characterized by the superiors' avoidance and inaction when subordinates are experiencing a situational need for leadership – on stress in the form of experiences of role ambiguity. This was tested within a prospective 3-wave research design with time lags of 2 and 3 years respectively. A combination of 2 constructive types of leadership, initiating structure and showing consideration, was included as a control. In a sample of 1771 employees drawn from the Norwegian working population, structural equation modelling supported the hypothesis that perceived laissez-faire leadership would be positively related to experiencing role ambiguity at 3 consecutive measurement points. The findings did not support a potential reciprocal relationship between the two across time. Initiation of structure and Consideration were not related to role ambiguity, providing strong evidence of the importance of laissez-faire leadership within a stressor-strain framework. Demonstrating that laissez-faire leadership is a root source of subordinate role ambiguity underlines the importance of superiors perceiving situations and circumstances where subordinates experience a need for leadership and, accordingly, approaching this need instead of avoiding it. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In line with the 'Work environment hypothesis,' role stressors have been proposed as important antecedents of bullying in the workplace. Only a few longitudinal studies on the relationship between role stressors and bullying exist, however, and earlier studies have largely been cross-sectional. The aim of the present prospective study was to determine whether role stressors at baseline predict new cases of workplace bullying at follow-up. A total of 2,835 Norwegian employees participated at both baseline and follow-up, with an interval of two years between the measurements. The study supports the hypotheses that role ambiguity and role conflict, independently, contribute to subsequent new reports of workplace bullying. However, there was a weak reverse effect: reporting being bullied at work at baseline predicted reporting increased levels of role ambiguity and role conflict at follow-up. Even though the results may indicate a circular relationship between the variables at hand, the weak reverse relationship seems to have little practical impact compared to the stronger relationship from role stressors to bullying. Hence, the results mainly support the hypotheses stating that role ambiguity and role conflict, independently, predict subsequent exposure to workplace bullying. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]