A Prospective Study of Employee Response to Bullying in a Workplace Environment: Does Assertiveness Actually Help or Hurt?

The aim of the present two-wave prospective study was twofold: (1) to identify the role of assertiveness in exposure to workplace bullying and (2) to determine causal and reverse causal long-term associations between workplace bullying exposure, working conditions and assertiveness. In the present two-wave panel design study (N = 128), with a six-month lag, high assertiveness predicted exposure to bullying. Furthermore, in line with the work environment hypothesis, the results indicate that negative workplace conditions in the first wave led to workplace bullying exposure. The findings suggest that assertive communication may be inappropriate in the case of workplace bullying. As such, we argue that functional assertiveness could be useful.

Workplace bullying: individual hostility, poor work environment or both? Exploring competing explanatory models in a single longitudinal study.

PURPOSE: A central focus of research and literature on workplace bullying is the importance of explanatory factors such as individual dispositions (i.e., the vulnerability hypothesis) and work environment factors (i.e., the work environment hypothesis). Although several studies address the importance of the two approaches, as well as their individual and combined effects, the unique contribution of each of the competing approaches remain unexplored in a single longitudinal study. METHODS: Based on Affective Events Theory, we explore the contribution of work environment and individual hostility in the occurrence of workplace bullying over time, using two-wave survey data, collected with a 6-month time lag among 152 employees from 7 private and public workplaces. RESULTS: Results confirmed that work environment factors predicted later exposure to bullying. Exposure to workplace bullying at T1 was also related to a poor work environment at T2. Results further showed that higher exposure to workplace bullying at T1 and T2 was related to higher levels of almost all aspects of individual hostility over time. Moreover, poor working conditions especially in T1 predicted individual hostility at T2. CONCLUSION: The present study thus documents that a poor work environment fosters bullying, and when bullying exists in a workplace, this elicits interpersonal hostility. Results points to the importance of addressing, through research and practice, work environment factors as predictors of workplace bullying.

The Foot-in-the-Door Phenomenon 40 and 50 Years Later: A Direct Replication of the Original Freedman and Fraser Study in Poland and in Ukraine.

Since the original Freedman and Fraser studies were published, a great amount of research using the foot-in-the-door tactic has revealed its effectiveness. Nevertheless, the effect sizes reported in meta-analysis studies tend to be low and the effect size obtained by Freedman and Fraser in their studies has never been obtained again. We conducted a direct replication of the original foot-in-the-door experiment in two time intervals and in two countries. The results indicate a drop of compliance over time. The results reveal that, while in 2003 the foot-in-the-door strategy was effective in Ukraine and ineffective in Poland, in 2013, the effect was insignificant in both Ukraine and Poland. The results are explained by high ecological validity of the foot-in-the-door procedure.

Mindfulness and Compliance: The Way We Make Requests Influences Compliance With the Foot-in-the-Door Strategy.

The foot-in-the-door effect is considered more effective when a time lapse occurs between performing an initial, smaller request and being asked a second request. It has been hypothesized that mindfulness moderates the effectiveness of two versions of the strategy - time-delay and no-delay foot-in-the-door. The greater magnitude of time-delay foot-in-the-door is considered to be connected with increased mindfulness. The aim of this study was to verify the assumption concerning mindfulness as a state triggering time-delay foot-in-the-door. In a field experiment ( N = 249), we manipulated the time lapse and kind of reason (real, placebic, and no reason) accompanying a difficult or less difficult target request. This extended Langer et al. replication indicates that time-delay foot-in-the-door is indeed greater after mindfulness activation.