Self and peer nominations of bullying: An analysis of incident rates, individual differences, and perceptions of the working environment

Abstract

Within workplace bullying research, the use of different criteria to identify victim samples, and a tendency to rely on self-reported victimization without including reports from other stakeholders have been considered major methodological problems associated with incidence studies (Cowie, Naylor, Rivers, Smith, & Pereira, 2002; Hoel, Rayner, & Cooper, 1999; Randall, 2001). Using diverse criteria to identify victim and perpetrator samples (such as self report, peer report, and self- and peer report), this study found rates of victimization and bullying varied quite considerably. Rates for victims ranged from 3.9% to 39.6% and for perpetrators from 2.7% to 19.3%. Differences in personality and perceptions of the organizational environment were then examined between victim/bully groups and a control sample. Results indicated that all victim samples differed significantly from controls on stability. However, self- and peer-reported victims differed significantly from controls on both the poised and relaxed subscales, whereas self-reported victims only differed significantly on the relaxed subscale. Additionally, self- and peer-reported victims were the only group that significantly differed from controls in their views of the negative aspects of the work environment. The notion that victim and perpetrator samples are not homogenous groups and considerations of why this is the case are discussed.