Next Article in Journal
Visions of Automation: A Comparative Discussion of Two Approaches
Next Article in Special Issue
The Dark Side of School Culture
Previous Article in Journal
Giving a Voice to Students with Disabilities to Design Library Experiences: An Ethnographic Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Incivility in Higher Education: Challenges of Inclusion for Neurodiverse Students with Traumatic Brain Injury in Ireland
Article

Acceptable Behavior or Workplace Bullying?—How Perpetrator Gender and Hierarchical Status Affect Third Parties’ Attributions and Moral Judgments of Negative Behaviors

1
Department of Business and Management, Webster Vienna Private University, 1020 Vienna, Austria
2
Department of Management and Organization, Hanken School of Economics, 00100 Helsinki, Finland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editors: Margaret Hodgins and Patricia Mannix McNamara
Received: 1 May 2021 / Revised: 26 May 2021 / Accepted: 31 May 2021 / Published: 16 June 2021
Workplace bullying consists of repeated, long-term exposure to a variety of negative behaviors. However, it remains unclear when behaviors are seen as morally acceptable vs. become bullying. Moral judgments affect whether third parties deem it necessary to intervene. In this qualitative study, we first conceptualize and then explore via 27 interviews with Austrian HR professionals and employee representatives whether twelve diverse negative behaviors elicit distinct causal attributions and moral judgments. In particular, we examine how a perpetrator’s hierarchical position and gender shape the third parties’ evaluations. A qualitative content analysis reveals the behaviors vary in their perceived acceptability and associations with workplace bullying. Ambiguous behaviors require specific cues such a perpetrator’s malicious intent to be labeled workplace bullying. Overall, third parties judge behaviors by supervisors more harshly, particularly when managerial role expectations are violated. The majority of informants reject the notion that their perceptions are affected by perpetrator gender. Still, women who engage in behaviors associated with anger or a lack of empathy are often perceived as acting with intent. The findings suggest that the violation of social role expectations amplifies the attribution of dispositional causes (e.g., malicious intent). We discuss the relevance of perpetrator intent for research and practice. View Full-Text
Keywords: workplace bullying; moral judgments; attributions of intent; perpetrator status; perpetrator gender; ethical decision making workplace bullying; moral judgments; attributions of intent; perpetrator status; perpetrator gender; ethical decision making
MDPI and ACS Style

Zedlacher, E.; Salin, D. Acceptable Behavior or Workplace Bullying?—How Perpetrator Gender and Hierarchical Status Affect Third Parties’ Attributions and Moral Judgments of Negative Behaviors. Societies 2021, 11, 62. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/soc11020062

AMA Style

Zedlacher E, Salin D. Acceptable Behavior or Workplace Bullying?—How Perpetrator Gender and Hierarchical Status Affect Third Parties’ Attributions and Moral Judgments of Negative Behaviors. Societies. 2021; 11(2):62. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/soc11020062

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zedlacher, Eva, and Denise Salin. 2021. "Acceptable Behavior or Workplace Bullying?—How Perpetrator Gender and Hierarchical Status Affect Third Parties’ Attributions and Moral Judgments of Negative Behaviors" Societies 11, no. 2: 62. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/soc11020062

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop