essay about bullying and discrimination

The Broad Impact of School Bullying, and What Must Be Done

Major interventions are required to make schools safe learning environments..

Posted May 2, 2021 | Reviewed by Hara Estroff Marano

• How to Handle Bullying
• Find a therapist to support kids or teens
• At least one in five kids is bullied, and a significant percentage are bullies. Both are negatively affected, as are bystanders.
• Bullying is an epidemic that is not showing signs of improvement.
• Evidence-based bullying prevention programs can be effective, but school adoption is inconsistent.

According to the U.S. federal government website StopBullying.gov :

There is no federal law that specifically applies to bullying . In some cases, when bullying is based on race or ethnicity , color, national origin, sex, disability, or religion, bullying overlaps with harassment and schools are legally obligated to address it.

The National Bullying Prevention Center reports data suggesting that one in five children have been bullied. There are many risk factors for being targeted, including being seen as weak, being different from peers including being LGBT or having learning differences or visible disabilities, being depressed or anxious, and having few friends. It's hard to measure how many engage in bullying, but estimates range from one in twenty, to much higher .

The American Association of University Women reports that in grades 7-12, 48 percent of students (56 percent of girls and 40 percent of boys) are sexually harassed. In college, rates of sexual harassment rise to 66 percent. Eleven percent are raped or sexually assaulted.

Silence facilitates traumatization

Only 20 percent of attacked young women report sexual assault . And 89 percent of undergraduate schools report zero sexual harassment. This means that children, adolescents, young adults and their friends are at high risk for being victimized. It means that many kids know what is happening, and don't do anything.

This may be from fear of retaliation and socialization into a trauma-permissive culture, and it may be from lack of proper education and training. Institutional betrayal , when organizations fail to uphold their promises and responsibilities, adds to the problem.

In some states such as New York, laws like “ the Dignity for All Students Act ” (DASA) apply only to public schools. Private, religious, and denominational schools are not included, leaving 20 percent of students in NYC and 10 percent throughout the state unprotected. Research shows that over the last decade, bullying in U.S. high schools has held steady around 20 percent, and 15 percent for cyberbullying.

The impact of bullying

While there is much research on how bullying affects mental health, social function, and academics, the results are scattered across dozens of papers. A recent paper in the Journal of School Violence (Halliday et al., 2021) presents a needed systematic literature review on bullying’s impact in children aged 10-18.

1. Psychological: Being a victim of bullying was associated with increased depression , anxiety , and psychosis . Victims of bullying reported more suicidal thinking and engaged in greater self-harming behaviors. They were more likely to experience social anxiety , body-image issues, and negative conduct. Simultaneous cyberbullying and conventional bullying were associated with more severe depression.

2. Social: Bullying victims reported greater problems in relationships with family, friends and in day-to-day social interactions. They reported they enjoyed time with family and friends less, felt they were being treated unfairly more easily, and liked less where they lived. Victimized children were less popular and likeable, and experienced more social rejection. They tended to be friends with other victims, potentially heightening problems while also providing social support.

3. Academic achievement: Victimized kids on average had lower grades. Over time, they did worse especially in math. They tended to be more proficient readers, perhaps as a result of turning to books for comfort in isolation (something people with a history of being bullied commonly report in therapy ).

4. School attitudes: Bullied children and adolescents were less engaged in education, had poorer attendance, felt less belonging, and felt more negatively about school.

5. What happens with age? Researchers studied adult psychiatric outcomes of bullying, looking at both victims and bullies, reported in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Psychiatry (Copeland et al., 2013). After controlling for other childhood hardships, researchers found that young adults experience increased rates of agoraphobia (fear of leaving the house), generalized anxiety, panic disorder, and increased depression risk. Men had higher suicide risk.

The impact of bullying does not stop in early adulthood. Research in the Journals of Gerontology (Hu, 2021) found that people over the age of 60 who were bullied as children had more severe depression and had lower life satisfaction.

6. Bullying and the brain: Work reported in Frontiers in Psychiatry (Muetzel et al., 2019) found that victims of bullying had thickening of the fusiform gyrus, an area of the cerebral cortex involved with facial recognition, and sensing emotions from facial expressions. 1 For those with posttraumatic stress disorder, brain changes may be extensive.

7. Bystanders are affected: Research also shows that bystanders have higher rates of anxiety and depression (Midgett et al., 2019). The problem is magnified for bystanders who are also victims. It is likely that taking appropriate action is protective.

Given that victims of bullying are at risk for posttraumatic stress disorder ( PTSD ; Idsoe et al., 2012), it’s important to understand that many of the reported psychiatric findings may be better explained by PTSD than as a handful of overlapping but separate diagnoses. Trauma often goes unrecognized.

What can be done?

The psychosocial and academic costs of unmitigated bullying are astronomical, to say nothing of the considerable economic cost. Change is needed, but resistance to change, as with racism, gender bias, and other forms of discrimination , is built into how we see things.

Legislation: There is no federal antibullying legislation, and state laws may be weak and inconsistently applied. Given that bullying rates are no longer falling, it’s important for lawmakers and advocates to seek immediate changes.

Bullying prevention: Schools can adopt antibullying programs, though they are not universally effective and sometimes may backfire. Overall, however, research in JAMA Pediatrics (Fraguas et al., 2021) shows that antibullying programs reduce bullying, improve mental health outcomes, and stay effective over time. 2

Trauma-informed education creates an environment in which all participants are aware of the impact of childhood trauma and the need for specific modifications given how trauma is common among children and how it affects development.

According to the National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN):

"The primary mission of schools is to support students in educational achievement. To reach this goal, children must feel safe, supported, and ready to learn. Children exposed to violence and trauma may not feel safe or ready to learn. Not only are individual children affected by traumatic experiences, but other students, the adults on campus, and the school community can be impacted by interacting or working with a child who has experienced trauma. Thus, as schools maintain their critical focus on education and achievement, they must also acknowledge that mental health and wellness are innately connected to students’ success in the classroom and to a thriving school environment."

Parenting makes a difference. Certain parenting styles may set kids up for emotional abuse in relationships , while others may be protective. A 2019 study reported in Frontiers in Public Health (Plexousakis et al.) found that children with anxious, overprotective mothers were more likely to be victims.

Those with cold or detached mothers were more likely to become bullies. Overprotective fathering was associated with worse PTSD symptoms, likely by getting in the way of socialization. The children of overprotective fathers were also more likely to be aggressive.

Quality parental bonding, however, appeared to help protect children from PTSD symptoms. A healthy home environment is essential both for helping victims of bullying and preventing bullying in at-risk children.

Parents who recognize the need to learn more positive approaches can help buffer again the all-too-common cycle of passing trauma from generation to generation, building resilience and nurturing secure attachment to enjoy better family experiences and equip children to thrive.

State-by-state legislation

Bullying prevention programs (the KiVA program is also notable)

Measuring Bullying Victimization, Perpetration and Bystander Experiences , Centers for Disease Control

Trauma-informed teaching

US Government Stop Bullying

1. Such differences could both result from being bullied (e.g. needing to scan faces for threat) and could also make being bullied more likely (e.g. misreading social cues leading to increased risk of being targeted).

2. Such programs focus on reducing negative messaging in order to keep stakeholders engaged, monitor and respond quickly to bullying, involve students in bullying prevention and detection in positive ways (e.g. being an “upstander” instead of a bystander), monitor more closely for bullying when the risk is higher (e.g. after anti-bullying trainings), respond fairly with the understanding that bullies often have problems of their own and need help, involved parents and teachers in anti-bullying education, and devote specific resources for anti-bullying.

Sarah Halliday, Tess Gregory, Amanda Taylor, Christianna Digenis & Deborah Turnbull (2021): The Impact of Bullying Victimization in Early Adolescence on Subsequent Psychosocial and Academic Outcomes across the Adolescent Period: A Systematic Review, Journal of School Violence, DOI: 10.1080/15388220.2021.1913598

Copeland WE, Wolke D, Angold A, Costello EJ. Adult Psychiatric Outcomes of Bullying and Being Bullied by Peers in Childhood and Adolescence. JAMA Psychiatry. 2013;70(4):419–426. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.504

Bo Hu, PhD, Is Bullying Victimization in Childhood Associated With Mental Health in Old Age, The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, Volume 76, Issue 1, January 2021, Pages 161–172, https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbz115

Muetzel RL, Mulder RH, Lamballais S, Cortes Hidalgo AP, Jansen P, Güroğlu B, Vernooiji MW, Hillegers M, White T, El Marroun H and Tiemeier H (2019) Frequent Bullying Involvement and Brain Morphology in Children. Front. Psychiatry 10:696. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00696

Midgett, A., Doumas, D.M. Witnessing Bullying at School: The Association Between Being a Bystander and Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms. School Mental Health 11, 454–463 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-019-09312-6

Idsoe, T., Dyregrov, A. & Idsoe, E.C. Bullying and PTSD Symptoms. J Abnorm Child Psychol 40, 901–911 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-012-9620-0

Fraguas D, Díaz-Caneja CM, Ayora M, Durán-Cutilla M, Abregú-Crespo R, Ezquiaga-Bravo I, Martín-Babarro J, Arango C. Assessment of School Anti-Bullying Interventions: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Pediatr. 2021 Jan 1;175(1):44-55. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.3541. PMID: 33136156; PMCID: PMC7607493.

Plexousakis SS, Kourkoutas E, Giovazolias T, Chatira K and Nikolopoulos D (2019) School Bullying and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms: The Role of Parental Bonding. Front. Public Health 7:75. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00075

Note: An ExperiMentations Blog Post ("Our Blog Post") is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice. We will not be liable for any loss or damage caused by your reliance on information obtained through Our Blog Post. Please seek the advice of professionals, as appropriate, regarding the evaluation of any specific information, opinion, advice, or other content. We are not responsible and will not be held liable for third-party comments on Our Blog Post. Any user comment on Our Blog Post that in our sole discretion restricts or inhibits any other user from using or enjoying Our Blog Post is prohibited and may be reported to Sussex Publishers/Psychology Today. Grant H. Brenner. All rights reserved.

Grant Hilary Brenner, M.D., a psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, helps adults with mood and anxiety conditions, and works on many levels to help unleash their full capacities and live and love well.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Preventing Bullying Through Science, Policy, and Practice (2016)

Chapter: 1 introduction, 1 introduction.

Bullying, long tolerated by many as a rite of passage into adulthood, is now recognized as a major and preventable public health problem, one that can have long-lasting consequences ( McDougall and Vaillancourt, 2015 ; Wolke and Lereya, 2015 ). Those consequences—for those who are bullied, for the perpetrators of bullying, and for witnesses who are present during a bullying event—include poor school performance, anxiety, depression, and future delinquent and aggressive behavior. Federal, state, and local governments have responded by adopting laws and implementing programs to prevent bullying and deal with its consequences. However, many of these responses have been undertaken with little attention to what is known about bullying and its effects. Even the definition of bullying varies among both researchers and lawmakers, though it generally includes physical and verbal behavior, behavior leading to social isolation, and behavior that uses digital communications technology (cyberbullying). This report adopts the term “bullying behavior,” which is frequently used in the research field, to cover all of these behaviors.

Bullying behavior is evident as early as preschool, although it peaks during the middle school years ( Currie et al., 2012 ; Vaillancourt et al., 2010 ). It can occur in diverse social settings, including classrooms, school gyms and cafeterias, on school buses, and online. Bullying behavior affects not only the children and youth who are bullied, who bully, and who are both bullied and bully others but also bystanders to bullying incidents. Given the myriad situations in which bullying can occur and the many people who may be involved, identifying effective prevention programs and policies is challenging, and it is unlikely that any one approach will be ap-

propriate in all situations. Commonly used bullying prevention approaches include policies regarding acceptable behavior in schools and behavioral interventions to promote positive cultural norms.

STUDY CHARGE

Recognizing that bullying behavior is a major public health problem that demands the concerted and coordinated time and attention of parents, educators and school administrators, health care providers, policy makers, families, and others concerned with the care of children, a group of federal agencies and private foundations asked the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to undertake a study of what is known and what needs to be known to further the field of preventing bullying behavior. The Committee on the Biological and Psychosocial Effects of Peer Victimization:

Lessons for Bullying Prevention was created to carry out this task under the Academies’ Board on Children, Youth, and Families and the Committee on Law and Justice. The study received financial support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the Health Resources and Services Administration, the Highmark Foundation, the National Institute of Justice, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Semi J. and Ruth W. Begun Foundation, and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. The full statement of task for the committee is presented in Box 1-1 .

Although the committee acknowledges the importance of this topic as it pertains to all children in the United States and in U.S. territories, this report focuses on the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Also, while the committee acknowledges that bullying behavior occurs in the school

environment for youth in foster care, in juvenile justice facilities, and in other residential treatment facilities, this report does not address bullying behavior in those environments because it is beyond the study charge.

CONTEXT FOR THE STUDY

This section of the report highlights relevant work in the field and, later in the chapter under “The Committee’s Approach,” presents the conceptual framework and corresponding definitions of terms that the committee has adopted.

Historical Context

Bullying behavior was first characterized in the scientific literature as part of the childhood experience more than 100 years ago in “Teasing and Bullying,” published in the Pedagogical Seminary ( Burk, 1897 ). The author described bullying behavior, attempted to delineate causes and cures for the tormenting of others, and called for additional research ( Koo, 2007 ). Nearly a century later, Dan Olweus, a Swedish research professor of psychology in Norway, conducted an intensive study on bullying ( Olweus, 1978 ). The efforts of Olweus brought awareness to the issue and motivated other professionals to conduct their own research, thereby expanding and contributing to knowledge of bullying behavior. Since Olweus’s early work, research on bullying has steadily increased (see Farrington and Ttofi, 2009 ; Hymel and Swearer, 2015 ).

Over the past few decades, venues where bullying behavior occurs have expanded with the advent of the Internet, chat rooms, instant messaging, social media, and other forms of digital electronic communication. These modes of communication have provided a new communal avenue for bullying. While the media reports linking bullying to suicide suggest a causal relationship, the available research suggests that there are often multiple factors that contribute to a youth’s suicide-related ideology and behavior. Several studies, however, have demonstrated an association between bullying involvement and suicide-related ideology and behavior (see, e.g., Holt et al., 2015 ; Kim and Leventhal, 2008 ; Sourander, 2010 ; van Geel et al., 2014 ).

In 2013, the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services requested that the Institute of Medicine 1 and the National Research Council convene an ad hoc planning committee to plan and conduct a 2-day public workshop to highlight relevant information and knowledge that could inform a multidisciplinary

___________________

1 Prior to 2015, the National Academy of Medicine was known as the Institute of Medicine.

road map on next steps for the field of bullying prevention. Content areas that were explored during the April 2014 workshop included the identification of conceptual models and interventions that have proven effective in decreasing bullying and the antecedents to bullying while increasing protective factors that mitigate the negative health impact of bullying. The discussions highlighted the need for a better understanding of the effectiveness of program interventions in realistic settings; the importance of understanding what works for whom and under what circumstances, as well as the influence of different mediators (i.e., what accounts for associations between variables) and moderators (i.e., what affects the direction or strength of associations between variables) in bullying prevention efforts; and the need for coordination among agencies to prevent and respond to bullying. The workshop summary ( Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 2014c ) informs this committee’s work.

Federal Efforts to Address Bullying and Related Topics

Currently, there is no comprehensive federal statute that explicitly prohibits bullying among children and adolescents, including cyberbullying. However, in the wake of the growing concerns surrounding the implications of bullying, several federal initiatives do address bullying among children and adolescents, and although some of them do not primarily focus on bullying, they permit some funds to be used for bullying prevention purposes.

The earliest federal initiative was in 1999, when three agencies collaborated to establish the Safe Schools/Healthy Students initiative in response to a series of deadly school shootings in the late 1990s. The program is administered by the U.S. Departments of Education, Health and Human Services, and Justice to prevent youth violence and promote the healthy development of youth. It is jointly funded by the Department of Education and by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. The program has provided grantees with both the opportunity to benefit from collaboration and the tools to sustain it through deliberate planning, more cost-effective service delivery, and a broader funding base ( Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2015 ).

The next major effort was in 2010, when the Department of Education awarded $38.8 million in grants under the Safe and Supportive Schools (S3) Program to 11 states to support statewide measurement of conditions for learning and targeted programmatic interventions to improve conditions for learning, in order to help schools improve safety and reduce substance use. The S3 Program was administered by the Safe and Supportive Schools Group, which also administered the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act State and Local Grants Program, authorized by the

1994 Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 2 It was one of several programs related to developing and maintaining safe, disciplined, and drug-free schools. In addition to the S3 grants program, the group administered a number of interagency agreements with a focus on (but not limited to) bullying, school recovery research, data collection, and drug and violence prevention activities ( U.S. Department of Education, 2015 ).

A collaborative effort among the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Education, Health and Human Services, Interior, and Justice; the Federal Trade Commission; and the White House Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders created the Federal Partners in Bullying Prevention (FPBP) Steering Committee. Led by the U.S. Department of Education, the FPBP works to coordinate policy, research, and communications on bullying topics. The FPBP Website provides extensive resources on bullying behavior, including information on what bullying is, its risk factors, its warning signs, and its effects. 3 The FPBP Steering Committee also plans to provide details on how to get help for those who have been bullied. It also was involved in creating the “Be More than a Bystander” Public Service Announcement campaign with the Ad Council to engage students in bullying prevention. To improve school climate and reduce rates of bullying nationwide, FPBP has sponsored four bullying prevention summits attended by education practitioners, policy makers, researchers, and federal officials.

In 2014, the National Institute of Justice—the scientific research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice—launched the Comprehensive School Safety Initiative with a congressional appropriation of $75 million. The funds are to be used for rigorous research to produce practical knowledge that can improve the safety of schools and students, including bullying prevention. The initiative is carried out through partnerships among researchers, educators, and other stakeholders, including law enforcement, behavioral and mental health professionals, courts, and other justice system professionals ( National Institute of Justice, 2015 ).

In 2015, the Every Student Succeeds Act was signed by President Obama, reauthorizing the 50-year-old Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which is committed to providing equal opportunities for all students. Although bullying is neither defined nor prohibited in this act, it is explicitly mentioned in regard to applicability of safe school funding, which it had not been in previous iterations of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.

The above are examples of federal initiatives aimed at promoting the

2 The Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act was included as Title IV, Part A, of the 1994 Elementary and Secondary Education Act. See http://www.ojjdp.gov/pubs/gun_violence/sect08-i.html [October 2015].

3 For details, see http://www.stopbullying.gov/ [October 2015].

healthy development of youth, improving the safety of schools and students, and reducing rates of bullying behavior. There are several other federal initiatives that address student bullying directly or allow funds to be used for bullying prevention activities.

Definitional Context

The terms “bullying,” “harassment,” and “peer victimization” have been used in the scientific literature to refer to behavior that is aggressive, is carried out repeatedly and over time, and occurs in an interpersonal relationship where a power imbalance exists ( Eisenberg and Aalsma, 2005 ). Although some of these terms have been used interchangeably in the literature, peer victimization is targeted aggressive behavior of one child against another that causes physical, emotional, social, or psychological harm. While conflict and bullying among siblings are important in their own right ( Tanrikulu and Campbell, 2015 ), this area falls outside of the scope of the committee’s charge. Sibling conflict and aggression falls under the broader concept of interpersonal aggression, which includes dating violence, sexual assault, and sibling violence, in addition to bullying as defined for this report. Olweus (1993) noted that bullying, unlike other forms of peer victimization where the children involved are equally matched, involves a power imbalance between the perpetrator and the target, where the target has difficulty defending him or herself and feels helpless against the aggressor. This power imbalance is typically considered a defining feature of bullying, which distinguishes this particular form of aggression from other forms, and is typically repeated in multiple bullying incidents involving the same individuals over time ( Olweus, 1993 ).

Bullying and violence are subcategories of aggressive behavior that overlap ( Olweus, 1996 ). There are situations in which violence is used in the context of bullying. However, not all forms of bullying (e.g., rumor spreading) involve violent behavior. The committee also acknowledges that perspective about intentions can matter and that in many situations, there may be at least two plausible perceptions involved in the bullying behavior.

A number of factors may influence one’s perception of the term “bullying” ( Smith and Monks, 2008 ). Children and adolescents’ understanding of the term “bullying” may be subject to cultural interpretations or translations of the term ( Hopkins et al., 2013 ). Studies have also shown that influences on children’s understanding of bullying include the child’s experiences as he or she matures and whether the child witnesses the bullying behavior of others ( Hellström et al., 2015 ; Monks and Smith, 2006 ; Smith and Monks, 2008 ).

In 2010, the FPBP Steering Committee convened its first summit, which brought together more than 150 nonprofit and corporate leaders,

researchers, practitioners, parents, and youths to identify challenges in bullying prevention. Discussions at the summit revealed inconsistencies in the definition of bullying behavior and the need to create a uniform definition of bullying. Subsequently, a review of the 2011 CDC publication of assessment tools used to measure bullying among youth ( Hamburger et al., 2011 ) revealed inconsistent definitions of bullying and diverse measurement strategies. Those inconsistencies and diverse measurements make it difficult to compare the prevalence of bullying across studies ( Vivolo et al., 2011 ) and complicate the task of distinguishing bullying from other types of aggression between youths. A uniform definition can support the consistent tracking of bullying behavior over time, facilitate the comparison of bullying prevalence rates and associated risk and protective factors across different data collection systems, and enable the collection of comparable information on the performance of bullying intervention and prevention programs across contexts ( Gladden et al., 2014 ). The CDC and U.S. Department of Education collaborated on the creation of the following uniform definition of bullying (quoted in Gladden et al., 2014, p. 7 ):

Bullying is any unwanted aggressive behavior(s) by another youth or group of youths who are not siblings or current dating partners that involves an observed or perceived power imbalance and is repeated multiple times or is highly likely to be repeated. Bullying may inflict harm or distress on the targeted youth including physical, psychological, social, or educational harm.

This report noted that the definition includes school-age individuals ages 5-18 and explicitly excludes sibling violence and violence that occurs in the context of a dating or intimate relationship ( Gladden et al., 2014 ). This definition also highlighted that there are direct and indirect modes of bullying, as well as different types of bullying. Direct bullying involves “aggressive behavior(s) that occur in the presence of the targeted youth”; indirect bullying includes “aggressive behavior(s) that are not directly communicated to the targeted youth” ( Gladden et al., 2014, p. 7 ). The direct forms of violence (e.g., sibling violence, teen dating violence, intimate partner violence) can include aggression that is physical, sexual, or psychological, but the context and uniquely dynamic nature of the relationship between the target and the perpetrator in which these acts occur is different from that of peer bullying. Examples of direct bullying include pushing, hitting, verbal taunting, or direct written communication. A common form of indirect bullying is spreading rumors. Four different types of bullying are commonly identified—physical, verbal, relational, and damage to property. Some observational studies have shown that the different forms of bullying that youths commonly experience may overlap ( Bradshaw et al., 2015 ;

Godleski et al., 2015 ). The four types of bullying are defined as follows ( Gladden et al., 2014 ):

• Physical bullying involves the use of physical force (e.g., shoving, hitting, spitting, pushing, and tripping).
• Verbal bullying involves oral or written communication that causes harm (e.g., taunting, name calling, offensive notes or hand gestures, verbal threats).
• Relational bullying is behavior “designed to harm the reputation and relationships of the targeted youth (e.g., social isolation, rumor spreading, posting derogatory comments or pictures online).”
• Damage to property is “theft, alteration, or damaging of the target youth’s property by the perpetrator to cause harm.”

In recent years, a new form of aggression or bullying has emerged, labeled “cyberbullying,” in which the aggression occurs through modern technological devices, specifically mobile phones or the Internet ( Slonje and Smith, 2008 ). Cyberbullying may take the form of mean or nasty messages or comments, rumor spreading through posts or creation of groups, and exclusion by groups of peers online.

While the CDC definition identifies bullying that occurs using technology as electronic bullying and views that as a context or location where bullying occurs, one of the major challenges in the field is how to conceptualize and define cyberbullying ( Tokunaga, 2010 ). The extent to which the CDC definition can be applied to cyberbullying is unclear, particularly with respect to several key concepts within the CDC definition. First, whether determination of an interaction as “wanted” or “unwanted” or whether communication was intended to be harmful can be challenging to assess in the absence of important in-person socioemotional cues (e.g., vocal tone, facial expressions). Second, assessing “repetition” is challenging in that a single harmful act on the Internet has the potential to be shared or viewed multiple times ( Sticca and Perren, 2013 ). Third, cyberbullying can involve a less powerful peer using technological tools to bully a peer who is perceived to have more power. In this manner, technology may provide the tools that create a power imbalance, in contrast to traditional bullying, which typically involves an existing power imbalance.

A study that used focus groups with college students to discuss whether the CDC definition applied to cyberbullying found that students were wary of applying the definition due to their perception that cyberbullying often involves less emphasis on aggression, intention, and repetition than other forms of bullying ( Kota et al., 2014 ). Many researchers have responded to this lack of conceptual and definitional clarity by creating their own measures to assess cyberbullying. It is noteworthy that very few of these

definitions and measures include the components of traditional bullying—i.e., repetition, power imbalance, and intent ( Berne et al., 2013 ). A more recent study argues that the term “cyberbullying” should be reserved for incidents that involve key aspects of bullying such as repetition and differential power ( Ybarra et al., 2014 ).

Although the formulation of a uniform definition of bullying appears to be a step in the right direction for the field of bullying prevention, there are some limitations of the CDC definition. For example, some researchers find the focus on school-age youth as well as the repeated nature of bullying to be rather limiting; similarly the exclusion of bullying in the context of sibling relationships or dating relationships may preclude full appreciation of the range of aggressive behaviors that may co-occur with or constitute bullying behavior. As noted above, other researchers have raised concerns about whether cyberbullying should be considered a particular form or mode under the broader heading of bullying as suggested in the CDC definition, or whether a separate defintion is needed. Furthermore, the measurement of bullying prevalence using such a definiton of bullying is rather complex and does not lend itself well to large-scale survey research. The CDC definition was intended to inform public health surveillance efforts, rather than to serve as a definition for policy. However, increased alignment between bullying definitions used by policy makers and researchers would greatly advance the field. Much of the extant research on bullying has not applied a consistent definition or one that aligns with the CDC definition. As a result of these and other challenges to the CDC definition, thus far there has been inconsistent adoption of this particular definition by researchers, practitioners, or policy makers; however, as the definition was created in 2014, less than 2 years is not a sufficient amount of time to assess whether it has been successfully adopted or will be in the future.

THE COMMITTEE’S APPROACH

This report builds on the April 2014 workshop, summarized in Building Capacity to Reduce Bullying: Workshop Summary ( Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 2014c ). The committee’s work was accomplished over an 18-month period that began in October 2014, after the workshop was held and the formal summary of it had been released. The study committee members represented expertise in communication technology, criminology, developmental and clinical psychology, education, mental health, neurobiological development, pediatrics, public health, school administration, school district policy, and state law and policy. (See Appendix E for biographical sketches of the committee members and staff.) The committee met three times in person and conducted other meetings by teleconferences and electronic communication.

Information Gathering

The committee conducted an extensive review of the literature pertaining to peer victimization and bullying. In some instances, the committee drew upon the broader literature on aggression and violence. The review began with an English-language literature search of online databases, including ERIC, Google Scholar, Lexis Law Reviews Database, Medline, PubMed, Scopus, PsycInfo, and Web of Science, and was expanded as literature and resources from other countries were identified by committee members and project staff as relevant. The committee drew upon the early childhood literature since there is substantial evidence indicating that bullying involvement happens as early as preschool (see Vlachou et al., 2011 ). The committee also drew on the literature on late adolescence and looked at related areas of research such as maltreatment for insights into this emerging field.

The committee used a variety of sources to supplement its review of the literature. The committee held two public information-gathering sessions, one with the study sponsors and the second with experts on the neurobiology of bullying; bullying as a group phenomenon and the role of bystanders; the role of media in bullying prevention; and the intersection of social science, the law, and bullying and peer victimization. See Appendix A for the agendas for these two sessions. To explore different facets of bullying and give perspectives from the field, a subgroup of the committee and study staff also conducted a site visit to a northeastern city, where they convened four stakeholder groups comprised, respectively, of local practitioners, school personnel, private foundation representatives, and young adults. The site visit provided the committee with an opportunity for place-based learning about bullying prevention programs and best practices. Each focus group was transcribed and summarized thematically in accordance with this report’s chapter considerations. Themes related to the chapters are displayed throughout the report in boxes titled “Perspectives from the Field”; these boxes reflect responses synthesized from all four focus groups. See Appendix B for the site visit’s agenda and for summaries of the focus groups.

The committee also benefited from earlier reports by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine through its Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education and the Institute of Medicine, most notably:

• Reducing Risks for Mental Disorders: Frontiers for Preventive Intervention Research ( Institute of Medicine, 1994 )
• Community Programs to Promote Youth Development ( National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2002 )
• Deadly Lessons: Understanding Lethal School Violence ( National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2003 )
• Preventing Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Disorders Among Young People: Progress and Possibilities ( National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2009 )
• The Science of Adolescent Risk-Taking: Workshop Report ( Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 2011 )
• Communications and Technology for Violence Prevention: Workshop Summary ( Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 2012 )
• Building Capacity to Reduce Bullying: Workshop Summary ( Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 2014c )
• The Evidence for Violence Prevention across the Lifespan and Around the World: Workshop Summary ( Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 2014a )
• Strategies for Scaling Effective Family-Focused Preventive Interventions to Promote Children’s Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Health: Workshop Summary ( Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 2014b )
• Investing in the Health and Well-Being of Young Adults ( Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, 2015 )

Although these past reports and workshop summaries address various forms of violence and victimization, this report is the first consensus study by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine on the state of the science on the biological and psychosocial consequences of bullying and the risk and protective factors that either increase or decrease bullying behavior and its consequences.

Terminology

Given the variable use of the terms “bullying” and “peer victimization” in both the research-based and practice-based literature, the committee chose to use the current CDC definition quoted above ( Gladden et al., 2014, p. 7 ). While the committee determined that this was the best definition to use, it acknowledges that this definition is not necessarily the most user-friendly definition for students and has the potential to cause problems for students reporting bullying. Not only does this definition provide detail on the common elements of bullying behavior but it also was developed with input from a panel of researchers and practitioners. The committee also followed the CDC in focusing primarily on individuals between the ages of 5 and 18. The committee recognizes that children’s development occurs on a continuum, and so while it relied primarily on the CDC defini-

tion, its work and this report acknowledge the importance of addressing bullying in both early childhood and emerging adulthood. For purposes of this report, the committee used the terms “early childhood” to refer to ages 1-4, “middle childhood” for ages 5 to 10, “early adolescence” for ages 11-14, “middle adolescence” for ages 15-17, and “late adolescence” for ages 18-21. This terminology and the associated age ranges are consistent with the Bright Futures and American Academy of Pediatrics definition of the stages of development. 4

A given instance of bullying behavior involves at least two unequal roles: one or more individuals who perpetrate the behavior (the perpetrator in this instance) and at least one individual who is bullied (the target in this instance). To avoid labeling and potentially further stigmatizing individuals with the terms “bully” and “victim,” which are sometimes viewed as traits of persons rather than role descriptions in a particular instance of behavior, the committee decided to use “individual who is bullied” to refer to the target of a bullying instance or pattern and “individual who bullies” to refer to the perpetrator of a bullying instance or pattern. Thus, “individual who is bullied and bullies others” can refer to one who is either perpetrating a bullying behavior or a target of bullying behavior, depending on the incident. This terminology is consistent with the approach used by the FPBP (see above). Also, bullying is a dynamic social interaction ( Espelage and Swearer, 2003 ) where individuals can play different roles in bullying interactions based on both individual and contextual factors.

The committee used “cyberbullying” to refer to bullying that takes place using technology or digital electronic means. “Digital electronic forms of contact” comprise a broad category that may include e-mail, blogs, social networking Websites, online games, chat rooms, forums, instant messaging, Skype, text messaging, and mobile phone pictures. The committee uses the term “traditional bullying” to refer to bullying behavior that is not cyberbullying (to aid in comparisons), recognizing that the term has been used at times in slightly different senses in the literature.

Where accurate reporting of study findings requires use of the above terms but with senses different from those specified here, the committee has noted the sense in which the source used the term. Similarly, accurate reporting has at times required use of terms such as “victimization” or “victim” that the committee has chosen to avoid in its own statements.

4 For details on these stages of adolescence, see https://brightfutures.aap.org/Bright%20Futures%20Documents/3-Promoting_Child_Development.pdf [October 2015].

ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT

This report is organized into seven chapters. After this introductory chapter, Chapter 2 provides a broad overview of the scope of the problem.

Chapter 3 focuses on the conceptual frameworks for the study and the developmental trajectory of the child who is bullied, the child who bullies, and the child who is bullied and also bullies. It explores processes that can explain heterogeneity in bullying outcomes by focusing on contextual processes that moderate the effect of individual characteristics on bullying behavior.

Chapter 4 discusses the cyclical nature of bullying and the consequences of bullying behavior. It summarizes what is known about the psychosocial, physical health, neurobiological, academic-performance, and population-level consequences of bullying.

Chapter 5 provides an overview of the landscape in bullying prevention programming. This chapter describes in detail the context for preventive interventions and the specific actions that various stakeholders can take to achieve a coordinated response to bullying behavior. The chapter uses the Institute of Medicine’s multi-tiered framework ( National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2009 ) to present the different levels of approaches to preventing bullying behavior.

Chapter 6 reviews what is known about federal, state, and local laws and policies and their impact on bullying.

After a critical review of the relevant research and practice-based literatures, Chapter 7 discusses the committee conclusions and recommendations and provides a path forward for bullying prevention.

The report includes a number of appendixes. Appendix A includes meeting agendas of the committee’s public information-gathering meetings. Appendix B includes the agenda and summaries of the site visit. Appendix C includes summaries of bullying prevalence data from the national surveys discussed in Chapter 2 . Appendix D provides a list of selected federal resources on bullying for parents and teachers. Appendix E provides biographical sketches of the committee members and project staff.

Berne, S., Frisén, A., Schultze-Krumbholz, A., Scheithauer, H., Naruskov, K., Luik, P., Katzer, C., Erentaite, R., and Zukauskiene, R. (2013). Cyberbullying assessment instruments: A systematic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 18 (2), 320-334.

Bradshaw, C.P., Waasdorp, T.E., and Johnson, S.L. (2015). Overlapping verbal, relational, physical, and electronic forms of bullying in adolescence: Influence of school context. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 44 (3), 494-508.

Burk, F.L. (1897). Teasing and bullying. The Pedagogical Seminary, 4 (3), 336-371.

Currie, C., Zanotti, C., Morgan, A., Currie, D., de Looze, M., Roberts, C., Samdal, O., Smith, O.R., and Barnekow, V. (2012). Social determinants of health and well-being among young people. Copenhagen, Denmark: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe.

Eisenberg, M.E., and Aalsma, M.C. (2005). Bullying and peer victimization: Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Journal of Adolescent Health, 36 (1), 88-91.

Espelage, D.L., and Swearer, S.M. (2003). Research on school bullying and victimization: What have we learned and where do we go from here? School Psychology Review, 32 (3), 365-383.

Farrington, D., and Ttofi, M. (2009). School-based programs to reduce bullying and victimization: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 5 (6).

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., and Turner, H.A. (2007). Poly-victimization: A neglected component in child victimization. Child Abuse & Neglect , 31 (1), 7-26.

Gladden, R.M., Vivolo-Kantor, A.M., Hamburger, M.E., and Lumpkin, C.D. (2014). Bullying Surveillance among Youths: Uniform Definitions for Public Health and Recommended Data Elements, Version 1.0 . Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and U.S. Department of Education.

Godleski, S.A., Kamper, K.E., Ostrov, J.M., Hart, E.J., and Blakely-McClure, S.J. (2015). Peer victimization and peer rejection during early childhood. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 44 (3), 380-392.

Hamburger, M.E., Basile, K.C., and Vivolo, A.M. (2011). Measuring Bullying Victimization, Perpetration, and Bystander Experiences: A Compendium of Assessment Tools. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

Hellström, L., Persson, L., and Hagquist, C. (2015). Understanding and defining bullying—Adolescents’ own views. Archives of Public Health, 73 (4), 1-9.

Holt, M.K., Vivolo-Kantor, A.M., Polanin, J.R., Holland, K.M., DeGue, S., Matjasko, J.L., Wolfe, M., and Reid, G. (2015). Bullying and suicidal ideation and behaviors: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics, 135 (2), e496-e509.

Hopkins, L., Taylor, L., Bowen, E., and Wood, C. (2013). A qualitative study investigating adolescents’ understanding of aggression, bullying and violence. Children and Youth Services Review, 35 (4), 685-693.

Hymel, S., and Swearer, S.M. (2015). Four decades of research on school bullying: An introduction. American Psychologist, 70 (4), 293.

Institute of Medicine. (1994). Reducing Risks for Mental Disorders: Frontiers for Preventive Intervention Research. Committee on Prevention of Mental Disorders. P.J. Mrazek and R.J. Haggerty, Editors. Division of Biobehavioral Sciences and Mental Disorders. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2011). The Science of Adolescent Risk-taking: Workshop Report . Committee on the Science of Adolescence. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2012). Communications and Technology for Violence Prevention: Workshop Summary . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2014a). The Evidence for Violence Prevention across the Lifespan and around the World: Workshop Summary . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2014b). Strategies for Scaling Effective Family-Focused Preventive Interventions to Promote Children’s Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Health: Workshop Summary . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2014c). Building Capacity to Reduce Bullying: Workshop Summary . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2015). Investing in the Health and Well-Being of Young Adults . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Kim, Y.S., and Leventhal, B. (2008). Bullying and suicide. A review. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 20 (2), 133-154.

Koo, H. (2007). A time line of the evolution of school bullying in differing social contexts. Asia Pacific Education Review, 8 (1), 107-116.

Kota, R., Schoohs, S., Benson, M., and Moreno, M.A. (2014). Characterizing cyberbullying among college students: Hacking, dirty laundry, and mocking. Societies, 4 (4), 549-560.

McDougall, P., and Vaillancourt, T. (2015). Long-term adult outcomes of peer victimization in childhood and adolescence: Pathways to adjustment and maladjustment. American Psychologist, 70 (4), 300.

Monks, C.P., and Smith, P.K. (2006). Definitions of bullying: Age differences in understanding of the term and the role of experience. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 24 (4), 801-821.

National Institute of Justice. (2015). Comprehensive School Safety Initiative. 2015. Available: http://nij.gov/topics/crime/school-crime/Pages/school-safety-initiative.aspx#about [October 2015].

National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2002). Community Programs to Promote Youth Development . Committee on Community-Level Programs for Youth. J. Eccles and J.A. Gootman, Editors. Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2003). Deadly Lessons: Understanding Lethal School Violence . Case Studies of School Violence Committee. M.H. Moore, C.V. Petrie, A.A. Barga, and B.L. McLaughlin, Editors. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council and Institute of Medicine. (2009). Preventing Mental, Emotional, and Behavioral Disorders among Young People: Progress and Possibilities. Committee on the Prevention of Mental Disorders and Substance Abuse Among Children, Youth, and Young Adults: Research Advances and Promising Interventions. M.E. O’Connell, T. Boat, and K.E. Warner, Editors. Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Olweus, D. (1978). Aggression in the Schools: Bullies and Whipping Boys. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.

Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at School. What We Know and Whal We Can Do. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Olweus, D. (1996). Bully/victim problems in school. Prospects, 26 (2), 331-359.

Slonje, R., and Smith, P.K. (2008). Cyberbullying: Another main type of bullying? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49 (2), 147-154.

Smith, P. ., and Monks, C. . (2008). Concepts of bullying: Developmental and cultural aspects. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 20 (2), 101-112.

Sourander, A. (2010). The association of suicide and bullying in childhood to young adulthood: A review of cross-sectional and longitudinal research findings. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 55 (5), 282.

Sticca, F., and Perren, S. (2013). Is cyberbullying worse than traditional bullying? Examining the differential roles of medium, publicity, and anonymity for the perceived severity of bullying. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42 (5), 739-750.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2015). Safe Schools/Healthy Students. 2015. Available: http://www.samhsa.gov/safe-schools-healthy-students/about [November 2015].

Tanrikulu, I., and Campbell, M. (2015). Correlates of traditional bullying and cyberbullying perpetration among Australian students. Children and Youth Services Review , 55 , 138-146.

Tokunaga, R.S. (2010). Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (3), 277-287.

U.S. Department of Education. (2015). Safe and Supportive Schools . Available: http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-awards-388-million-safe-and-supportive-school-grants [October 2015].

Vaillancourt, T., Trinh, V., McDougall, P., Duku, E., Cunningham, L., Cunningham, C., Hymel, S., and Short, K. (2010). Optimizing population screening of bullying in school-aged children. Journal of School Violence, 9 (3), 233-250.

van Geel, M., Vedder, P., and Tanilon, J. (2014). Relationship between peer victimization, cyberbullying, and suicide in children and adolescents: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association. Pediatrics, 168 (5), 435-442.

Vivolo, A.M., Holt, M.K., and Massetti, G.M. (2011). Individual and contextual factors for bullying and peer victimization: Implications for prevention. Journal of School Violence, 10 (2), 201-212.

Vlachou, M., Andreou, E., Botsoglou, K., and Didaskalou, E. (2011). Bully/victim problems among preschool children: A review of current research evidence. Educational Psychology Review, 23 (3), 329-358.

Wolke, D., and Lereya, S.T. (2015). Long-term effects of bullying. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 100 (9), 879-885.

Ybarra, M.L., Espelage, D.L., and Mitchell, K.J. (2014). Differentiating youth who are bullied from other victims of peer-aggression: The importance of differential power and repetition. Journal of Adolescent Health, 55 (2), 293-300.

This page intentionally left blank.

Bullying has long been tolerated as a rite of passage among children and adolescents. There is an implication that individuals who are bullied must have "asked for" this type of treatment, or deserved it. Sometimes, even the child who is bullied begins to internalize this idea. For many years, there has been a general acceptance and collective shrug when it comes to a child or adolescent with greater social capital or power pushing around a child perceived as subordinate. But bullying is not developmentally appropriate; it should not be considered a normal part of the typical social grouping that occurs throughout a child's life.

Although bullying behavior endures through generations, the milieu is changing. Historically, bulling has occurred at school, the physical setting in which most of childhood is centered and the primary source for peer group formation. In recent years, however, the physical setting is not the only place bullying is occurring. Technology allows for an entirely new type of digital electronic aggression, cyberbullying, which takes place through chat rooms, instant messaging, social media, and other forms of digital electronic communication.

Composition of peer groups, shifting demographics, changing societal norms, and modern technology are contextual factors that must be considered to understand and effectively react to bullying in the United States. Youth are embedded in multiple contexts and each of these contexts interacts with individual characteristics of youth in ways that either exacerbate or attenuate the association between these individual characteristics and bullying perpetration or victimization. Recognizing that bullying behavior is a major public health problem that demands the concerted and coordinated time and attention of parents, educators and school administrators, health care providers, policy makers, families, and others concerned with the care of children, this report evaluates the state of the science on biological and psychosocial consequences of peer victimization and the risk and protective factors that either increase or decrease peer victimization behavior and consequences.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

What you need to know about school violence and bullying

Bullying in schools deprives millions of children and young people of their fundamental right to education. A recent UNESCO report revealed that more than 30% of the world's students have been victims of bullying, with devastating consequences on academic achievement, school dropout, and physical and mental health.

The world is marking the first International Day against Violence and Bullying at School Including Cyberbullying , on 5 November. Here is what you need to know about school violence and bullying.

What is school violence?

School violence refers to all forms of violence that takes place in and around schools and is experienced by students and perpetrated by other students, teachers and other school staff. This includes bullying and cyberbullying. Bullying is one of the most pervasive forms of school violence, affecting 1 in 3 young people.

What forms may school violence take?

Based on existing international surveys that collect data on violence in schools, UNESCO recognizes the following forms of school violence:

• Physical violence, which is any form of physical aggression with intention to hurt perpetrated by peers, teachers or school staff.
• Psychological violence as verbal and emotional abuse, which includes any forms of isolating, rejecting, ignoring, insults, spreading rumors, making up lies, name-calling, ridicule, humiliation and threats, and psychological punishment.
• Sexual violence, which includes intimidation of a sexual nature, sexual harassment, unwanted touching, sexual coercion and rape, and it is perpetrated by a teacher, school staff or a schoolmate or classmate.
• Physical bullying, including hitting, kicking and the destruction of property;
• Psychological bullying, such as teasing, insulting and threatening; or relational, through the spreading of rumours and exclusion from a group; and
• Sexual bullying, such as making fun of a victim with sexual jokes, comments or gestures, which may be defined as sexual ‘harassment’ in some countries.
• Cyberbullying is a form of psychological or sexual bullying that takes place online. Examples of cyberbullying include posting or sending messages, pictures or videos, aimed at harassing, threatening or targeting another person via a variety of media and social media platforms. Cyberbullying may also include spreading rumours, posting false information, hurtful messages, embarrassing comments or photos, or excluding someone from online networks or other communications.

Who perpetrates school violence?

School violence is perpetrated by students, teachers and other school staff. However, available evidence shows that violence perpetrated by peers is the most common.

What are the main reasons why children are bullied?

All children can be bullied, yet evidence shows that children who are perceived to be “different” in any way are more at risk. Key factors include physical appearance, ethnic, linguistic or cultural background, gender, including not conforming to gender norms and stereotypes; social status and disability.

What are the consequences of school violence?

Educational consequences: Being bullied undermines the sense of belonging at school and affects continued engagement in education. Children who are frequently bullied are more likely to feel like an outsider at school, and more likely to want to leave school after finishing secondary education. Children who are bullied have lower academic achievements than those who are not frequently bullied.

Health consequences: Children’s mental health and well-being can be adversely impacted by bullying. Bullying is associated with higher rates of feeling lonely and suicidal, higher rates of smoking, alcohol and cannabis use and lower rates of self-reported life satisfaction and health. School violence can also cause physical injuries and harm.

What are the linkages between school violence and bullying, school-related gender-based violence and violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression?

School violence may be perpetrated as a result of gender norms and stereotypes and enforced by unequal power dynamics and is therefore referred to as school-related gender-based violence. It includes, in particular, a specific type of gender-based violence that is linked to the actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity or expression of victims, including homophobic and transphobic bullying. School-related gender-based violence is a significant part of school violence that requires specific efforts to address.

Does school-related gender-based violence refer to sexual violence against girls only?         

No. School-related gender-based violence refers to all forms of school violence that is based on or driven by gender norms and stereotypes, which also includes violence against and between boys.

Is school violence always gender-based?           

There are many factors that drive school violence. Gender is one of the significant drivers of violence but not all school violence is based on gender. Moreover, international surveys do not systematically collect data on the gendered nature of school violence, nor on violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity or expression. 

Based on the analysis of global data, there are no major differences in the prevalence of bullying for boys and girls. However, there are some differences between boys and girls in terms of the types of bullying they experience. Boys are much more exposed to physical bullying, and to physical violence in general, than girls. Girls are slightly more exposed to psychological bullying, particularly through cyberbullying. According to the same data, sexual bullying the same proportion of boys and girls. Data coming from different countries, however, shows that girls are increasingly exposed to sexual bullying online.

How does UNESCO help prevent and address school violence and bullying?

The best available evidence shows that responses to school violence and bullying that are effective should be comprehensive and include a combination of policies and interventions. Often this comprehensive response to school violence and bullying is referred to as a whole-school approach. Based on an extensive review of existing conceptual frameworks that describe that whole-school approach, UNESCO has identified nine key components of a response that goes beyond schools and could be better described as a whole-education system or whole-education approach.  These components are the following:

• Strong political leadership and robust legal and policy framework to address school violence and bullying;
• Training and support for teachers on school violence and bullying prevention and positive classroom management
• Curriculum, learning & teaching to promote, a caring (i.e. anti- school violence and bullying) school climate and students’ social and emotional skills
• A safe psychological and physical school and classroom environment
• Reporting mechanisms for students affected by school violence and bullying, together with support and referral services
• Involvement of all stakeholders in the school community including parents
• Student empowerment and participation
• Collaboration and partnerships between the education sector and a wide range of partners (other government sectors, NGOs, academia)
• Evidence: monitoring of school violence and bullying and evaluation of responses

More on UNESCO’s work to prevent and address school violence and bullying

Read UNESCO's publication Behind the numbers: Ending school violence and bullying

Photo: Eakachai Leesin/Shutterstock.com

More on this subject

Event International Conference of the Memory of the World Programme, incorporating the 4th Global Policy Forum 28 October 2024 - 29 October 2024

Other recent articles

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• NATURE CAREERS PODCAST
• 28 June 2023

Bullying in academia: why it happens and how to stop it

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Credit: zmeel/Getty Images

Morteza Mahmoudi and Chris Jackson talk about how to address bullying in academia.

Morteza Mahmoudi witnessed bullying behaviours during a series of lab visits following his PhD in 2009. He now studies the topic alongside his role as a nanoscience and regenerative medicine researcher at Michigan State University in East Lansing. In 2019 he co-founded the Academic Parity Movement, a non-profit which aims to end academic discrimination, violence and bullying across the sector.

In the seventh episode of this podcast series about freedom and safety in science, Mahmoudi tells Adam Levy that bullying is triggered by workplace power imbalances and is particularly prevalent in academia with its hierarchical structure, often causing targets to stay silent.

Bullying can cause a range of physical and mental health problems, he says. Perpetrators damage individuals, institutions’ reputations and wider society. He outlines steps to take if you find yourself bullied, and how academic institutions can tackle the problem.

Mahmoudi is joined by geoscientist Chris Jackson, who left academia in 2022 for a role at engineering consultancy Jacobs, based in Manchester, UK. Jackson welcomes the fact that bullying harassment and discrimination in academia is now more talked about, but says its root cause is an individual’s inability to put themselves in someone else’s position and identify with their personality and experience.

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-02172-w

Adam Levy: 00:03

Hello, I’m Adam Levy and this is Working Scientist , a Nature Careers podcast. In this episode: bullying in science.

Throughout this series we’ve looked at the threats to scientists and to science itself, threats to freedom and safety that can end careers and block avenues of research.

As we’ve discussed, many such threats come from outside of science. External factors like war, an economic situation, or political interference. But today, in our seventh episode of the series, we’re taking a look at a problem that comes from within the research world, a problem whose severity can derail lives, and yet can be found in labs the world over.

Today we’re talking about bullying and harassment in academic research.

Harassment and bullying can take many forms, and no two experiences are the same. Earlier in this series, we spoke about the impact that online harassment can have on researchers. And in that episode we spoke with Chris Jackson, a geoscientist at the engineering company Jacobs, in the UK.

Chris also shared his thoughts on why, despite evidence of widespread harassment in the sciences, there’s so little awareness of the problem.

Chris Jackson: 01:35

There seems to be this amazing bus between how common it is and the awareness of it. And I think that, in itself, explains why, that it’s so common bullying and harassment, is because I think some people are just ignorant to it.

Either they don’t know what bullying harassment means or by them not being subjected to it, they can't almost imagine it happens to other people.

And I really think, you know, whether it’s bullying, harassment, such as racial discrimination, or its anti-queer sentiments and discrimination, I think a lot of these things arise because people are unable to put themselves in somebody else’s position and identify with the axes of that other person’s personality, which might mean that discrimination is more likely to occur to them than it is to them themselves.

So I do think just that awareness, and continually talking about things, and then showing a bunch of data which kind of explain numerically what the problem is and how it affects people, it’s really, really important, because sometimes it’s just ignorance, and sometimes it’s just, you know, an unwillingness to believe that happens. But we need to keep on banging the drum about these things.

Adam Levy: 02:46

It can seem like a lot of institutions are taking more and more measures to actually fight bullying and harassment. Do you think this is actually taking place in institutions you’ve been aware of? Or is it more about paying lip service to the idea of taking action?

Chris Jackson: 03:03

I think there’s some good people trying to do some good things, is probably the first bit of my answer, I think.

The second bit of my answer is there’s some people who want to be seen to be doing the right thing and doing good things, and they want to be seen to be good.

I can honestly say 20 years into my academic career, although I’m not you know, I’ve kind of recently moved away from the centre of it, these things are being talked about more.

We are, we are talking more about bullying and harassment. You know, there are podcast series and op-eds about about the importance of this, and we’re trying to recognize the importance of good academic conduct and positive academic environments as an integral part of the academic process.

And that wasn’t happening 20 years ago. I think we have moved positively in that sense, which I think is good. Now we still need to have the tenacity and the processes and the, you know - whether they’re disciplinary or supporting victims of abuse - we need to have resources, financial and otherwise, being put into those things to make sure that we’re not just talking about these things more, we are actually seeing people having a better experience within academia or within science more generally, as a function of these things we’re trying to implement.

And that’s all that matters really. It doesn’t matter if you talk about things. All that matters is that people have a better time of it. That’s where we want to get to. How we get there is kind of secondary in a way.

Adam Levy: 04:27

Chris Jackson there. Some researchers have made it their mission to find a way to make the situation better, and to uncover why so many individuals and institutions resist the changes needed to stamp out bullying and harassment in science.

For example, nanomedicine and regenerative medicine researcher Morteza Mahmoudi, who’s at Michigan State University. Besides his official academic research, Morteza is also the co-founder and director of the Academic Parity movement.

Since 2019 the organization has aimed to provide external resources for targets of academic bullying.

We began our conversation discussing what inspired Morteza to found the movement.

Morteza Mahmoudi: 05:15

When I basically got my PhD back in 2009, I had to basically get training in different aspects of science, like in medicine.

So I started visiting different labs and get additional training. So no matter where I basically work, I always basically saw people suffering from the issues of academic bullying and harassment.

So I wrote a short piece to Nature about the issues of the reporting system in the field of academic bullying and harassment.

And it was interesting that between two weeks after publication of these pieces, the number of feedback that I’ve got was like hugely higher than all of the feedbacks that I’ve got for over 200 papers that I had in the field of nanomedicine and regenerative medicine.

So I thought with myself that, okay, our role as a scientist is to make the world a better place to live. So what is better than studying academic bullying? It seems that it’s a real problem, but yet no one talks about it. So I basically, I started studying academic bullying seriously, from that time.

Adam Levy: 06:37

Now, when we talk about bullying, and specifically academic bullying, how do we define those terms?

Morteza Mahmoudi: 06:45

In general terms academic bullying is a violation of human rights in an academic setting.

But it has a wide range of actions. It starts from, like, verbal abuse, all the way to stealing intellectual properties, or authorship credit. Advanced version, I would say, it’s a false allegation of academic misconduct in an attempt to basically remove star scientists from competition.

Adam Levy: 07:19

What are the effects on academics who are being bullied, both in terms of their careers, but also in terms of the actual wellbeing?

Morteza Mahmoudi: 07:30

It has huge effects. It starts from mental health issues in short term, like anxiety or stress.

But in long term, it can also develop serious cardiovascular issues, PTSD, and other mental and even physical health issues.

I always encourage people to also consider the fact that this is not a problem that only affect targets. It also affect like other people. For example, if a target is in like a medical setting or in healthcare, academic bullying, or other types of bullying and harassment, can increase wrong decision-making in medical procedures. So it even affects patients.

Adam Levy: 08:20

Given all these incredibly negative effects on the person on the receiving end, as well as the wider discipline, why does this kind of behaviour happen in the first place?

Morteza Mahmoudi: 08:32

So there are many reasons for that. I mean, the bullying happens actually, when we have power differences. And unfortunately, in academia, they have a unique power difference structures.

If you look at the universities, when an international student basically comes to a lab, many of the major decisions about the careers and also their residency in the lab, gets limited to one person, which is a PI.

So people at higher level of power feel less accountable about their actions and behaviours. If, like a bullying cases get kind of escalated at the lab level, and the target basically complains to department chair or other authorities at the universities, the outcomes that at least we see from scandals that comes to the news are very disappointing, and encourage basically perpetrators to do what they do. And also encourage targets to use the code of silence.

For example, in many cases of academic bullying that comes to the news, specifically like a couple of cases that basically they witnessed last year, the situation is that the perpetrator does bullying behaviour for even a couple of decades.

There were like hundreds of targets, who a portion of them complained to the university and nothing happened. Basically perpetrators got protected for a variety of reasons. For example, one reason is that their interest is intertwined with university’s interest. They bring huge amount of money and funding to the university. Universities gets overhead. So they basically sweep the case under the carpet,

It sends a clear signal to perpetrators that they are protected. They can do whatever they want to do, and another negative signals to target that it's better to use the code of silence

Adam Levy: 10:47

Given all of that. it might seem almost a bit helpless to someone who does find themselves on the receiving end of bullying. What actions can someone actually take if they are in this situation, being bullied by someone in the academic workplace, especially when that might be a superior, someone with power over them?

Morteza Mahmoudi: 11:08

So the first thing is that they should detect and identify academic bullying at the first place. The second part is to document everything. Academic bullies are clever. They barely leave trace of their actions.

So every single chance that basically a target can get to document, they need to document that. If someone is witness, they basically need to also collect their names, their ideas. The third important thing is collective actions.

So it would be great that they basically find allies and look for others that are in the, in the same situation. So this helps a lot.

The other thing is to inform themselves, or basically educate themselves, about the internal and external resources that are available to them to get help.

For example, one of the trusted resources is ombudsofficers, getting consultation from legal bodies, for example. They can consult with a lawyer about the situation.

Be aware of retaliation of any kind, which is unfortunately very common in the case of, like, academic bullying. Try to see what happened to other people at the same cases, and have Plan B in mind.

Adam Levy: 12:38

Now, how is all of this limited when there are serious risks to the career of the academic when they would speak out? For example, I’m speaking about maybe foreign students whose visa depends on them continuing their degree with their supervisor.

Morteza Mahmoudi: 12:56

Yeah, that’s unfortunately the sad reality.

The outcomes of our global survey, which we have done in 2019, and we received over 2000 responses to that, reveal that one of the main reasons that targets try to use code of silence instead of speaking up, is the fear of retaliation.

The examples like I mentioned, that came to the news shows that when a person basically complain, they receive serious direct or indirect mobbing which is basically ganging up against targets.

But at the same time, the recent awareness about the issue of academic polling basically forced other stakeholders to come in and take some actions.

For example, funding agencies now have a direct line for targets to basically report any abuse they receive, if the PIs are funded by that particular agency. One thing I always emphasize for international students is to be proactive about the lab that they want to do the research.

So if they try to reach out to the former lab members, they can get useful feedback.

So by being proactive, they can actually evaluate the lab health prior to joining a lab.

Adam Levy: 14:30

That note of doing research before moving a lab is actually something we touched on in a previous series of this podcast when we were discussing moving labs.

But a lot of what we’ve been talking about just now has been about what the victim of bullying can do if they find themselves in that situation.

What about third parties, people who perhaps witnessed this kind of behaviour taking place?

Morteza Mahmoudi: 14:55

Yeah, so first of all, I would like to change the word of victim to target.

It’s important because victim has kind of a negative feeling to the, to the basically target. Anyway, a witness can basically do a lot of things.

They can interfere with the situation to basically change the direction of the discussion. They can report what they witness, at least to the trusted internal resources, like to the ombudsperson. They can basically back up the claims of the targets, if they decide to speak up. There’s a kind of risk. But if they take the risk and want to report they can have a great effect.

Adam Levy: 15:44

As you’ve shared, a big part of why bullying and harassment are so commonplace is because there are all these structures in place which which effectively protect the bullier. What should institutions change in how they handle these kinds of cases?

Morteza Mahmoudi: 16:01

So institutions and universities by its own basically, have limited intention to fairly consider the cases of academic bullying and harassment. What we are basically advocating for is making a platform that all of the involved, the stakeholders, can be responsible and response able for those cases.

For example, if funding agencies gets involved in the cases, and they basically ban universities that have higher rate of bullying cases from funding they provide, then universities are forced to take more fair actions about, like those issues.

The other thing is to better understand the long-term effects of academic bullying and harassment on institutions and also on science.

The long-term side effect is far beyond the target. It causes many talented scientists to leave academia. It can cause data fabrication, because in many cases that the basically witness and reach to the reports, bowling was the initial force, to targets to fabricate data. And the other important stakeholders that needs to be involved, I think, are taxpayers.

All of the costs of the perpetrators are being covered by the university’s lawyer, which are basically taxpayers’ money and funding.

The other thing I think is very important that needs to be carefully considered in the field of academic bullying and harassment, is the accountability of the investigation, internal investigation committees, who basically made those decisions and what responsibilities they have over the decisions.

Adam Levy: 18:07

What does it mean to you purely on a personal level, to be able to carry out this work to try and address academic bullying and harassment?

Morteza Mahmoudi: 18:17

As a scientist and as a building block of the scientific community, we want to basically do something that matters. If the universities can’t handle the bullying and harassment, because it’s very unfortunate, but again, it’s a reality, that if targets of academic bullying and harassment remains unhealed, there’s a great risk that they would be a future bullies when they basically get to the power position.

So honestly, I get paid, like, for my works in nanomedicine, and regenerative medicine. But I value the work I do volunteering on, like, academic bullying and harassment, because I see in real time that it helps targets of academic bullying, and it may help the field to kind of move forward in creating a platform that finally all of their stakeholders and decision-makers and gatekeepers basically, can feel responsible and response able to finally put an end on this age-old issue.

Adam Levy: 19:32

Morteza Mahmoudi there. We mentioned in previous episodes that this series would be in seven parts, and this is indeed the seventh episode.

But in producing the series, in particular this episode, we’ve realized there’s just too much to say to fit it all in.

And so we'll be returning to the topic of harassment and misconduct in science in an episode coming soon, where we'll look specifically at the devastation that sexual harassment and assault can have on researchers, and on research.

That episode should be out in a couple of weeks. So make sure you’re subscribed so you don’t miss it. Until then, thanks for listening. I’m Adam Levy.

Faculty Positions in School of Engineering, Westlake University

The School of Engineering (SOE) at Westlake University is seeking to fill multiple tenured or tenure-track faculty positions in all ranks.

Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

Westlake University

High-Level Talents at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University

For clinical medicine and basic medicine; basic research of emerging inter-disciplines and medical big data.

Nanchang, Jiangxi, China

The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University

Professor/Associate Professor/Assistant Professor/Senior Lecturer/Lecturer

The School of Science and Engineering (SSE) at The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CUHK-Shenzhen) sincerely invites applications for mul...

Shenzhen, China

The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CUHK Shenzhen)

Faculty Positions& Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Optical and Electronic Information, HUST

Job Opportunities: Leading talents, young talents, overseas outstanding young scholars, postdoctoral researchers.

Wuhan, Hubei, China

School of Optical and Electronic Information, Huazhong University of Science and Technology

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Discrimination, Harassment, Abuse and Bullying in the Workplace: Contribution of Workplace Injustice to Occupational Health Disparities

Cassandra a. okechukwu.

1 Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Kerry Souza

2 Division of Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations and Field Studies, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Washington, District of Columbia, United States

Kelly D. Davis

3 Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, United States

A. Butch de Castro

4 Department of Psychosocial and Community Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States

This paper synthesizes research on the contribution of workplace injustices – discrimination, harassment, abuse and bullying – to occupational health disparities. A conceptual framework is presented to illustrate the pathways through which injustices at the interpersonal and institutional level lead to differential risk of vulnerable workers to adverse occupational health outcomes. Members of demographic minority groups are more likely to be victims of workplace injustice and suffer more adverse outcomes when exposed to workplace injustice compared to demographic majority groups. A growing body of research links workplace injustice to poor psychological and physical health, and a smaller body of evidence links workplace injustice to unhealthy behaviors. Although not as well studied, studies also show that workplace injustice can influence workers’ health through effects on workers’ family life and job-related outcomes. Lastly, this paper discusses methodological limitations in research linking injustices and occupational health disparities and makes recommendations to improve the state of research.

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this paper was to synthesize and evaluate research demonstrating how workplace injustice – discrimination, harassment, abuse and bullying –may contribute to occupational health disparities. Reflecting historical and current societal power imbalances, forces within and outside workplaces can result in the mistreatment of workers (individually or as a group) through unjust practices [ Jones 2000 , Turney 2003 , Hodson, et al. 2006 , Lopez, et al. 2009 ]. We theorize that mistreatment of workers in the workplace may exacerbate health disparities between groups of workers. We reviewed the peer-reviewed literature reporting direct and indirect associations of workplace injustices with health outcomes. The extant literature contains a diffuse body of work on workplace injustice from different disciplines; many of which are unrelated to health. Our synthesis is limited to papers that present evidence of the contribution of workplace injustice to occupational health disparities. Our review led us to propose a conceptual framework ( Figure 1 ) to illustrate the various relationships suggested by research studies. To complement conceptual models that illustrate relationships between other workplace factors and health, this model illustrates pathways between workplace injustices and health outcomes that are supported by the extant scientific literature. Our starting point for a conceptual framework for the contributions of work to health disparities is the Ecosocial approach advanced by Krieger [ Krieger 1994 , Krieger, et al. 2008 ].

A Model for understanding the contribution of workplace injustice to occupational health disparities

In summarizing this evidence, we acknowledge the vast literature on workplace/organizational justice that describes employees’ perceptions of equity between workers’ input and workplace procedures, interactions and outcomes [ Elovainio, et al. 2002 ]. Although this literature is relevant to the health of workers, our discussion does not extend to this topic.

Workplace Injustices: Definitions and Scope

Definitions and scope of workplace injustice(s) differ according to the discipline and body of literature reviewed. The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) protects workers from injustice based on age, disability, gender/sex, genetic information, national origin, pregnancy, race/color, or religion (2011). Though excluded from this EEOC definition, other federal agencies and some state and local laws also protect workers from workplace injustice based on sexual orientation and gender identity. For the purposes of this paper, we defined workplace injustice as workplace-related discrimination, harassment, abuse or bullying. We considered how these injustices, including bullying which is usually status-blind, might differentially impact workers who are socially disadvantaged. Perpetration of workplace injustice can occur at the institutional or interpersonal level.

Institutional or structural injustice

Jones’ (2000) characterization of institutional racism as structurally constructed differential access to societal opportunities, goods and services can be applied to the characterization of institutional workplace injustice. This injustice is “normative, sometimes legalized” and “structural, having been codified in our institutions of custom, practice, and law, so there need not be an identifiable perpetrator” (p. 1212). Institutional injustice can persist even after levels of individual injustice have lessened in a society [ Williams and Mohammed 2009 ].

Interpersonal injustice

At the individual/interpersonal level, workplace injustice can be intentional or unintentional and encompasses acts of commission and omission. Studies have documented a range of such unfair practices faced by vulnerable workers, from isolating or excluding socially/economically disadvantaged workers from workplace events and activities to subjecting them to overtly hostile actions and behaviors (e.g. being subjected to insults and jokes related to one's race/ethnicity). Studies suggest that African-American and other racial/ethnic minority workers are more likely to report being targets of derogatory comments and having their work duties and activities made difficult by others [ Alleyne 2004 ; Raver and Nishii 2010 ].

Types of Workplace Injustice

Workplace discrimination refers to actions of institutions and/or individuals within them, setting unfair terms and conditions that systematically impair the ability of members of a group to work [ Rospenda, et al. 2009 ]. Often, it is motivated by beliefs of inferiority of a disadvantaged outgroup compared to a dominant group [ Roberts, et al. 2004 ]. Racism, or discrimination based on race, justifies the mistreatment and dominance of members of a particular racial or ethnic group due to beliefs of their genetic and/or cultural inferiority; it also carries a history of societal power relationships between races [ Williams 1997 ]. Discrimination can also occur between disadvantaged groups themselves. For example, de Castro et al. (2006) found that some ethnic groups were favored over others among immigrant worker groups. This favoritism was initiated and perpetuated by both coworkers and employers/supervisors alike [ de Castro, et al. 2006 ]. Latino indigenous-speaking farm workers in Oregon reported differentially distributed hazardous work conditions, including lack of educational materials in languages they understood, between themselves and Spanish-speaking workers; they also reported that these conditions were often perpetrated by Spanish-speaking Latino former farmworkers who had risen through the ranks to become supervisors [ Farquhar, et al. 2008 ]. Similarly, in a study of 356 African-American workers, 43% of the 219 workers who reported workplace discrimination reported that the perpetrators included fellow African-Americans [ Din-Dzietham, et al. 2004 ].

Discrimination against workers with disabilities, younger and older workers, and gender persists, as well. Studies have shown that discrimination against workers with disabilities has both societal and historical influences and persists despite being prohibited by the Americans with Disabilities Act [ Scheid 2005 , Stuart 2006 , Snyder, et al. 2010 , Moore, et al. 2011 ]. Ageism, discrimination based on age, has been shown to have a curvilinear life course trajectory whereby it disproportionately impacts younger workers in their 20s and older workers above 50 [ Gee, et al. 2007 ].

Workplace harassment differs from discrimination because it involves negative actions toward a worker due to attributes, such as race/ethnicity, gender etc., that lead to a hostile workplace whereas discrimination involves unequal treatment or limiting of opportunities due to these attributes [ Rospenda et al, 2009 ]. Harassment must target workers’ protected EEOC status in order to meet the US legal definition [ Ehrenreich 1999 , Carbo 2008 ]. Sexual harassment is a type of workplace harassment that is typically characterized along gender/sex lines [ Pina et al, 2009 ]. Fitzgerald and colleagues (1999) delineated four types of sexual harassment—sexist behavior, sexual hostility, unwanted sexual attention, and sexual coercion. Sexist behaviors describe actions in which one's gender or sex is the primary target of discrimination [ Fitzgerald, et al. 1999 ]. This overlap in definition can make distinguishing between gender discrimination versus harassment difficult. The other three describe experiences that are more physical and sexual in nature.

Workplace bullying or abuse involves actions that offend or socially exclude a worker or group of workers, or actions that have a negative effect on the person or group's work tasks [ Grubb, et al. 2004 ]. These actions are often status-blind and occur repeatedly and regularly over a period of time [ Grubb, et al. 2004 ]. The actions taken and workers’ sensitivity to them can vary according to culture [ Cassitto, et al. 2003 ].

PATHWAYS: FROM INJUSTICE TO HEALTH DISPARITIES

Conceptual framework.

Using Ecosocial theory of disease distribution as a basis [ Krieger 1994 , Krieger, et al. 2008 ], we present a working model ( Figure 1 ) to illustrate potential pathways linking workplace injustice exposures and health disparities. In the following section, we define components of our model and discuss evidence from the literature to support the pathways between them. Our model is not a causal diagram; presence of arrows between components in the model does not imply that causal analyses have been conducted.

Labor stratification into Hazardous Positions

Our conceptual model ( Figure 1 ) shows labor stratification, in which minority and other disadvantaged workers are systematically hired into certain (usually lower power) positions [ Landsbergis, Grzywacz, & LaMontagne, 2012 ]. Labor stratification has been documented to occur upstream, before entry into the labor force, through unfair access to or denial of employment opportunities. Experimental studies have documented employers responding negatively to job applicants based on age, gender, race, and sexual orientation, thereby discriminating against or preferentially hiring applicants for certain types of jobs [ Crow, et al. 1998 , Hebl, et al. 2002 , Horvath and Ryan 2003 , Pager 2003 , Bertrand and Mullainathan 2004 , Pager, et al. 2009 ]. Other studies, based on self-report, have also found discrimination and bias in hiring and/or promotion based on sexual orientation and age of applicants [ Johnson and Neumark 1996 , Badgett, et al. 2007 ]. An analysis of court cases showed that, in some fields, women may encounter a “maternal wall,” whereby they are denied employment and/or promotion due to pregnancy or childbirth [ Williams and Westfall 2006 ].

The occupational health literature supports the observation that racial/ethnic minorities and immigrants are often over-represented in jobs with poorer working conditions [ Frumkin, et al. 1999 , Murray 2003 , Agudelo-Suarez, et al. 2009 , Berdahl 2008 ]. Among African-Americans, Haggerty and Johnson (1995) point out that labor stratification is part of broader societal level injustices, notably poor educational systems thereby predisposing African-American workers to limited, hazardous, poor-quality job opportunities in adulthood [ Haggerty and Johnson 1995 ].

Differential Assignment to Hazardous Duties

Even when workers are in the same occupational position, some workers are directly exposed to more occupational hazards through assignment of the most hazardous duties to socially and economically disadvantaged populations, thus increasing their risk for work-related injury or illness [ Murray 2003 , de Castro, et al. 2006 , Farquhar, et al. 2008 , Delp, et al. 2009 , Shannon, et al. 2009 ]. An early documented example is that of the Gauley Bridge/Hawk's Nest tunnel disaster in 1930 [ Cherniack 1986 ]. Although various explanations for disproportionate incidence of pneumoconiosis and associated death among African-American compared to White workers were posited, an examination of job placement of workers in the mine revealed race-based job assignment as the root cause. African-American workers were de facto assigned to the deepest, dustiest parts of the tunnel, while White workers were more likely to be assigned to work outside.

Available evidence suggests that, after controlling for differences in education and experience, African-American and Hispanic workers are consistently more likely to be employed in occupations where serious injuries and illnesses are more likely to occur [ Robinson 1984 , Robinson 1987 , Loomis and Richardson 1998 , Shannon, et al. 2009 ]. However, the social forces behind disproportionate exposures of minority worker groups to occupational hazards may be complex. An analysis of illnesses and injury rates over a 10-year period showed that disparities were dynamic and sometimes disappear when researchers control for job characteristics such as work schedule, union representation, health insurance and job hours [ Berdahl 2008 ].

A U.S. study of a unionized, multi-ethnic working class sample found that 85% of workers reported high exposure to at least one occupational hazard [ Quinn, et al. 2007 ]. A similar proportion of this same group of workers was exposed to one of three workplace injustices (bullying, sexual harassment, or racial discrimination) [ Krieger, et al. 2006 ]. Analyses of the same sample showed that exposure to occupational hazards was unevenly distributed based on race and gender: Being a minority in any way increased workers’ chances of being exposed to hazards [ Barbeau, et al. 2007 , Krieger, et al. 2005 , Krieger, et al. 2006 , Krieger, et al. 2008 , Krieger, et al. 2010 ].

Though empirical evidence is limited, some researchers have suggested that differential enforcement of occupational health and safety regulations or policies in industries and occupations where minority workers predominate may be another mechanism for disparities. One example is the OSHA exemption for farms with less than ten employees. Somervell and Conway (2011) showed that worker fatality rates in states that observe this exemption were higher than in states that do not. U.S. farm workers are largely immigrant, Latino workers [ Farquhar, et al. 2008 , Somervell and Conway 2011 ]. Other researchers have noted that a majority of the workers impacted by the suspension of both prevailing wage policies and enforcement of occupational safety and health regulations during the Hurricane Katrina and Rita cleanup process were Hispanic day laborers [ Delp et al, 2009 ; Pastor et al, 2006 ]. A more thorough analysis of the policies and decisions surrounding disaster cleanup events is needed to determine whether or not policies and decisions differentially impact minority workers.

The extent to which occupational factors contribute to overall health is inadequately described, but we hypothesize, based on our review of literature, that it is possible that differential exposure to occupational hazards among minority workers may be a significant contributor to the overall experience of health disparities. Several studies have explored the relative importance of work exposures to overall health, and the findings are intriguing. For example, a recent examination of government employees in an European city found that physical conditions at work explained most of the observed occupational class inequalities in health [ Kaikkonen, et al. 2009 ]. Likewise, a French study found a social gradient in exposure to physical, ergonomic and chemical hazards in addition to a gradient in experiences of workplace bullying, in which managers and professionals were less likely to be exposed to any hazard compared to associate professionals/technicians, clerks/service workers, and blue-collar workers [ Niedhammer, et al. 2008 ]. Similar studies with US samples could not be found. More research studies, in cohorts for which detailed occupation information is available, must be conducted to help explain observed differences in health outcomes.

PATHWAYS FROM EXPOSURE TO OUTCOME

Potential modifiers.

Some studies have identified factors that appear to modify observed effects of workplace injustices on health and other outcomes. In Figure 1 , these factors are represented as potential modifiers. Workplace injustice may further contribute to health disparities by having differential effects on disadvantaged populations compared to dominant groups. For example, racial/ethnic minorities have been reported to have increased risks of the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)-related effects when exposed to workplace bullying [ Rodríguez-Muñoz, et al. 2010 ]. Similarly, in another study, even though experiences of workplace bullying were significantly associated with negative emotional reactions for all targets, African-Americans reported significantly higher emotional response to racial/ethnic bullying compared to other groups [ Fox and Stallworth 2005 ]. Also, generalized bullying has been associated with higher numbers of psychological symptoms and increases in drinking to intoxication for women compared to men [ Rospenda, et al. 2009 ]. In contrast, an Italian study found that men were more likely to develop depressive disorder with increasing severity of bullying [ Nolfe, et al. 2010 ].

A study by Krieger (1990) demonstrated how keeping quiet about experiences of discrimination may take a toll on health. African-American women who did not tell others about the unfair treatment they received were four times more likely to report high blood pressure than women who told others (a similar association was not significant for White women) [ Krieger 1990 ]. Likewise, one study found that while lack of equality was associated with poorer self-reported health for both men and women, women's health was influenced when inequality existed for men and/or women whereas men's was only affected when men were the victims of inequality [ Bildt 2005 ].

Stress-Mediated Pathway

In Figure 1 , the main pathway linking exposures to workplace injustice and health outcomes is via stress. Evidence for this pathway in the model is derived from the psychological literature supporting the “stressor-stress-strain” framework. According to work by Lazarus and Folkman (1984) , negative health effects result when an individual perceives situational demands as stressful and this stress experience exceeds their capacity to cope [ Lazarus and Folkman 1984 ]. Experiences of discrimination, harassment and bullying in the workplace can operate as stressors provoking a psychological and/or physiological stress response. There is strong empirical evidence that psychological stress can affect biological host resistance through the activation of neuroendocrinological and immunological responses [ Cohen, et al. 2007 ]. The activation of these responses can include disturbances in the circadian cortisol profile, which several studies have found among targets of workplace injustice [ Kudielka and Kern 2004 , Huebner and Davis 2005 , Hansen, et al. 2006 , Townsend, et al. 2011 ]. These types of disruptions in cortisol have been shown to lead to a multitude of chronic negative health conditions [ Cohen, et al. 2007 ]. More studies are needed to directly and clearly show the link from exposure to workplace injustice to physiological responses and, in turn, to negative health outcomes.

OUTCOMES: CONTRIBUTIONS OF INJUSTICE TO HEALTH DISPARITES

Health outcomes.

The broader literature on stress and health has established links between experiences of discrimination and harassment and adverse health outcomes. Workplace injustices have been directly associated with three types of outcomes: psychological and physical health, health behaviors, and job outcomes. There is a small but suggestive body of evidence suggesting a fourth outcome—family well-being. These outcomes can be seen on the right-hand side of our model ( Figure 1 ).

Several cross-sectional studies have found evidence of symptoms and diagnosis of PTSD among workers exposed to workplace bullying and sexual harassment [ Leymann and Gustafsson 1996 , Schneider, et al. 1997 , Mikkelsen and Einarsen 2002 , Matthiesen and Einarsen 2004 , Tehrani 2004 , Willness, et al. 2007 , Buchanan and Fitzgerald 2008 , Larsen and Fitzgerald 2010 , Rodríguez-Muñoz, et al. 2010 ]. In explaining how bullying may lead to PTSD, Einarsen and colleague (2003) posit that although the experience of workplace injustice is often not life-threatening, the experience threatens the inner world of the target by shattering basic cognitive schema about fairness and justice and negatively influences one's social and personal identity leading to PTSD.

A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of sexual harassment found evidence for the association of sexual harassment with general poor mental health [ Willness, et al. 2007 ]. Although anxiety and depression were the most prevalent conditions, the strongest evidence of effect was found for PTSD [ Willness, et al. 2007 ]. These symptoms may be worsened for minorities through an interactive effect of sexual and racial/ethnic harassment [ Buchanan and Fitzgerald 2008 ].

Another mechanism through which minority workers might experience more severe outcomes is through attribution. A study, which included a meta-analysis, showed that social context (e.g. gender or racial composition of workplace) influenced workers’ attribution of their experiences of injustice; attribution in turn impacted the severity of outcomes with internal and personal attribution leading to worse health outcomes [ Hershcovis & Barling, 2010 ]. An association between workplace bullying and short- and long-term change in psychological distress and depression has been shown with both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies [ Kivimäki, et al. 2003 , Hogh, et al. 2005 , Nolfe, et al. 2010 ]. One longitudinal study suggested the possibility of a cyclical relationship in which developing depression increased the risk of workers becoming targets of bullying, which then increased depressive symptoms [ Kivimäki, et al. 2000 ]. However, worker inputs to injustice exposures are not represented on our conceptual model and are beyond the scope of this review.

Evidence from cross-sectional studies suggests that workers who experience racial/ethnic discrimination in the workplace suffer a range of negative psychological health outcomes, such as more days of poor mental health [ Roberts, et al. 2004 ], psychological distress [ Eaton 2003 , Krieger, et al. 2010 ], anxiety and depression [ Bhui et al, 2005 , Agudelo-Suarez, et al. 2009 , Hammond, et al. 2010 , Raver and Nishii 2010 ], negative emotions [ Fox and Stallworth 2005 ], and emotional trauma [ Alleyne 2004 ]. Although these studies utilized self–report of discrimination, experimental research has provided added evidence for the influence of work-related racial discrimination on mental health [ Salvatore and Shelton 2007 ]. Workplace ageism has been linked to psychological distress among older workers [ Yuan 2007 ]. This might particularly impact older women [ Encel and Studencki 1997 , Handy and Davy 2007 , Walker, et al. 2007 ]. A review of literature elucidated how ageism and sexism may operate concomitantly to negatively influence the health of older working women [ Payne and Doyal 2010 ].

Other studies suggest somatic health effects of workplace injustice. An experimental study found that working under an unfavorable supervisor (whose actions included bullying) led to clinically significant increases in workers’ blood pressure [ Wager, et al. 2003 ]. Cross-sectional studies provide other evidence of an association between workplace injustice and somatic health. Those who experience racial discrimination may be at increased risk for work-related injury or illness [ Murray 2003 , de Castro, et al. 2006 , Farquhar, et al. 2008 , Delp, et al. 2009 , Shannon, et al. 2009 ]. Racial/ethnic discrimination, sexual harassment and bullying have been negatively associated with self-rated health and unhealthy days [ Krieger 1999 , Nazroo 2003 , Gunnarsdottir, et al. 2006 , Fujishiro 2009 , de Castro, et al. 2010 ] while racial discrimination and workplace bullying were associated with bodily pain [ Burgess, et al. 2009 , Saastamoinen, et al. 2009 ]. Sexual harassment has also been linked to a host of physical health symptoms, including headaches, stomach aches and disrupted sleep [ Gutek and Koss 1993 , Goldenhar, et al. 1998 , Magley, et al. 1999 , Wasti, et al. 2000 , Willness, et al. 2007 ].

Non-targeted witnesses of workplace injustice may also be at risk for adverse health outcomes. Non-bullied witnesses to workplace bullying reported more anxiety [ Hansen, et al. 2006 ], and, workers who witnessed repeated bullying in their workplace were almost twice more likely to report acute pain than those who did not witness it [ Saastamoinen, et al. 2009 ]. A U.S. study found that bullying witnesses reported better outcomes (work quality and health) than bullying victims; however, witnesses’ outcomes were worse than those of non-witnesses [ Lutgen-Sandvik, et al. 2007 ]. Among a sample of female employees in a public utility and food processing plant, Glomb and colleagues found that observing sexual harassment was linked to lower psychological well-being, similar to individuals who experienced the harassment directly [ Glomb, et al. 1997 ]. Another study found that observing the mistreatment was linked to poor psychological well-being, even after controlling for one's own experiences [ Miner-Rubino and Cortina 2004 , Miner-Rubino and Cortina 2007 ]. Researchers have posited that the influence on bystander health is partly because bystanders develop a fear of becoming a target [ Hoel, et al. 2004 ]. Yet to be evaluated is whether bystander effects are worse when the witnesses are members of the same disadvantaged group as the target.

Health Behaviors

Experiencing workplace injustice may lead to unhealthy behaviors that likely operate as maladaptive coping mechanisms. Evidence from the stress and health literature suggests that stress influences health through changes in health behavior [ Steptoe, et al. 1998 , Droomers, et al. 1999 , Epel, et al. 2000 , Ng and Jeffery 2003 ]. Recent research suggests similar processes with workplace injustice. For example, workplace racial discrimination has been associated with smoking [ Okechukwu, et al. 2010 ], and heavy alcohol use has been linked to sexual harassment among women [ Gradus, et al. 2008 ] and to workplace bullying [ Rospenda, et al. 2009 ].

Job Outcomes

As illustrated in figure 1 , negative job outcome is a potential outcome of workplace injustices. Workplace racial discrimination and bullying have been linked to both self-reported and medically-certified sickness absence, although the strongest associations were between bullying and medically-certified sickness absence [ Kivimäki, et al. 2000 , Alleyne 2004 ]. A cross sectional study found that sexual harassment explained the greater risk for sickness absence among female metal workers in male-dominated worksites compared to those in female dominated worksites [ Hensing and Alexanderson 2004 ]. An important feature of bullying and discrimination includes restriction of information or services related to advancement [ Alexis and Vydelingum 2004 ]. With exposure to workplace injustice, targets may become socially isolated and/or ostracized [ Zapf, et al. 1996 , Lutgen-Sandvik, et al. 2007 ], and, might engage in higher levels of counterproductive work behaviors (e.g., tardiness) and reduced productivity, and/or withdraw from seeking promotions, thus lessening their credibility and value at work [ Spratlen-Price 1995 , Day and Schoenrade 1997 , Caver and Livers 2002 , Fox and Stallworth 2005 , Allan, et al. 2009 ].

Career advancement has also been shown to be hindered by workplace injustices leading directly to premature exit from the workforce, particularly among socially disadvantaged workers, or indirectly via sickness absence and other health consequences [ Alexis and Vydelingum 2004 , Giga, et al. 2008 ]. This premature exit may also result from behavioral hints encouraging them to quit their job, which disadvantaged workers may already be more likely to encounter in the workplace [ Giga, et al. 2008 ].

Income has been linked to both physical and mental health [ Pappas, et al. 1993 , Marmot 2002 ]. Thus, workplace injustice could influence health disparities by reducing wages available to socially and economically disadvantaged groups. White men in the U.S. still earn considerably more than equally qualified women and men of other races/ethnicities [ IWPR 2010 ]. Although the Equal Pay Act of 1963 prohibits employers from paying men and women who perform equal tasks at different pay rates, a gender wage gap persists [ IWPR 2010 , US Dept of Commerce 2011 ]. In some organizations, men are still promoted to management positions over their equal female counterparts [ Blau and DeVaro 2007 ]. Also, many women encounter a “glass ceiling,” unable to move up the corporate ladder despite their achievements [ Williams 2001 ]. A wage penalty between 9% and 18% per child has been noted among mothers [ Gangl and Ziefle 2009 ]. In contrast, men seem to benefit in career advancement from having families [ Friedman and Greenhaus 2000 ]. Studies have found that leaves of absence are associated with fewer promotions and smaller salary increases [ Poppleton, et al. 2008 ], and that women are more affected than men because of they usually have heavier caregiving burdens [ Kelly 2005 ]. The wage penalty based on sexual orientation, though, is more complicated. A review of nine studies found that gay and bisexual men earned 10% to 32% less than heterosexual men [ Badgett, et al. 2007 ]. However, the review also found no statistically significant difference in earnings by sexual orientation among male workers in California, demonstrating, in this case, that context at the state-level mattered. The results regarding wage differentials by sexual orientation among women is more equivocal with some studies finding that lesbians earned more while other studies found that they earned less than heterosexual women. [ Badgett 1995 , Black, et al. 2003 , Badgett, et al. 2007 ].

Family Well-Being

In Figure 1 , family well-being is the final component that may be linked to exposure to workplace injustice. From a family systems perspective, family members are linked, and, thus, what happens to one member can influence others through their interactions and communications [ Cox and Paley 1997 ]. As such, health outcomes of workplace injustice can extend beyond the worker via family interactions. One pathway, characterized as the “kick the dog” phenomenon by Hoobler and Brass (2010), occurs when an abused worker acts abusively towards family members. In one study, family members of workers who experienced bullying reported that the workers engaged in family undermining when they got home [ Hoobler, et al. 2010 ]. Furthermore, the stress and well-being of the victim of injustice may cross over and influence family members’ well-being [ Westman 2001 ]. For example, among Mexican-American families, Crouter and colleagues (2006) found that men's reports of workplace racism were associated with depressive symptoms for them and their wives. This effect was moderated by acculturation: the more workplace racism fathers in less acculturated families experienced, the more depressive symptoms family members reported. This association was not apparent in families with higher levels of acculturation [ Crouter, et al. 2006 ]. Thus, workplace injustice may affect family members directly, due to lack of resources from deserved pay and promotions for example, or indirectly due to the disadvantaged workers’ distress or health.

MEASUREMENT AND METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Qualitative studies have provided rich perspectives from workers to explain how workplace injustice plays out in the labor market, within their jobs, and at worksites [ Agudelo-Suarez, et al. 2009 , de Castro, et al. 2006 , Baillien, et al. 2008 , Bowleg, et al. 2008 , Farquhar, et al. 2008 , Allan, et al. 2009 , Delp, et al. 2009 , van Heugten 2010 ]. Some studies have taken a grounded theory approach to allow for the emergence of themes explicitly or implicitly indicative of workplace injustice. Some of these qualitative studies did not necessarily have a predetermined aim of documenting the occurrence of a particular injustice, but rather initially set out to examine physical and/or psychosocial working conditions of a particular racial/ethnic minority group or groups. For example, de Castro and colleagues (2006) reviewed worker complaints received at a community-based workers’ rights center. The authors discovered that many complaints about working conditions and arrangements were tinged with experiences of discrimination based on workers’ race or ethnicity.

Other studies have quantified workplace injustices using either a self-labeling or operational method through surveys [ Bond, et al. 2007 ]. With self-labeling, study participants indicate whether they have been exposed to a pre-defined type of injustice. The operational method commonly involves study participants indicating whether or not they have experienced different events in a list of acts within a specified period. The number and frequency of experienced acts is then used to classify whether one has or has not experienced a particular workplace injustice. Studies using both methods have shown that prevalence is consistently lower in the self-labeling versus operational method [ Mikkelsen and Einarsen 2001 , Krieger, et al. 2005 , Lutgen-Sandvik, et al. 2007 , Chan, 2008 , Hogh, et al. 2011 ].

An important issue for both methods relates to timing, duration, and severity of the experience, which are often not measured [ Rospenda, et al. 2005 , Badgett, et al. 2007 , Bond, et al. 2007 , Saunders, et al. 2007 , Williams, et al. 2008 , Estrada, et al. 2011 ]. Some measures have a wide window for capturing the timing of the injustice. For example, the widely used measure of sexual harassment (SEQ) has a 24-month reference period (see [ Gutek, et al. 2004 ] for a critique). One-time assessments do not capture the ebb and flow of emotions and experiences related to workplace injustice occurring over time. Sampling and the timing of study participant recruitment poses a barrier to elucidating injustice-health linkages.

Other limitations of studies linking workplace injustices and health outcomes are inconsistencies in measuring different exposures and their outcomes. Currently, no authoritative definitions of the various types of workplace injustice exist. As a result, studies have measured discrimination, harassment, bullying and abuse using different definitions; with some strictly employing legal definitions whereas others use more inclusive definitions. Also, some assessments consist of a one-item measure (e.g., whether a person has been ever discriminated/harassed/abused against at work because of race, religion, sex, age, marital status, nationality, disability, or for any other reason). A key finding in the literature on stress and health is that such failure to develop measures for and comprehensively assess stressful experiences has the end result of understating the impact of stress on health [ Thoits 2010 ].

Additionally, the majority of studies on workplace injustice have been cross-sectional. Although cross-sectional studies provide information about the distribution of disease and can suggest associations between exposures and health outcomes, they do not provide evidence of causality. Furthermore, cross-sectional designs provide little information in terms of temporality, severity of the injustice event(s), or predictability for worker health and organizational outcomes. Cross-sectional studies are valuable for describing the experience of specific worker groups at one point in time, but longitudinal study designs are needed to better understand the unfolding relationship of workplace injustice and health.

An added issue for occupational-related studies is that most samples are drawn from white-collar settings where fewer minority workers work [ Harris, et al. 2011 ]. Few studies of workplace injustice have targeted workers in service settings and even fewer have been of blue-collar workers. Further, studies often fail to consider contextual and historical contributions to workplace injustices such as the historical and current ratio of men to women in the workplace and the race, age, sexual orientation, and gender of supervisors. For example, men might become targets of bullying and sexual harassment in occupations that are historically female. This has been found among nursing assistants where one study found that male nursing assistants reported prevalence of bullying that was twice the prevalence reported by female nursing assistants [ Eriksen and Einarsen 2004 ].

More studies utilizing multiple reporters, such as manager, coworkers, and family members, are also needed. Experiencing injustice in the workplace may “ripple” beyond the parties involved through the work context and into the family and other contexts. Including a diverse sample of reporter perspectives could provide evidence of the extent to which incidents of workplace injustice occur, and, offer insight into possible interventions. Depending on the nature of the workplace injustice, obtaining multiple reports from others at work is not always feasible.

Studies examining interactions of more than one type of workplace injustice are needed. How much do workplace injustices co-occur and what are the health implications of concomitant exposures? One methodological obstacle to such studies is that distinguishing between exposures, (e.g. bullying of racial minorities versus racial discrimination) can be difficult. Being a minority appears to increase the likelihood of being a target of injustice and both bullying and sexual harassment occur in racialized forms [ Alexis and Vydelingum 2004 , Woods, et al. 2009 , Fielden, et al. 2010 ]. A study examining discrimination exposure among job applicants found that African-American male homosexual job candidates were the most likely target of discrimination while White female heterosexual candidates were the least likely to experience discrimination [ Crow, et al. 1998 ]. Several studies addressing the additive influence of minority and immigration status on health are suggestive. A Danish study of the intersection of race/ethnicity and immigration status found that Western immigrants reported the same level of bullying as Danish workers while non-Western immigrants had 85% higher risk of experiencing workplace bullying than Danish workers [ Hogh, et al. 2011 ].

One study suggested only a minimal additive effect of ethnic harassment, gender harassment, and generalized workplace harassment on mental and physical health [ Raver and Nishii 2010 ]. The investigators theorized that workers adapt, thus further harassment does not yield significantly higher negative effects. This is a premise of the adaptation level theory, which posits that people subconsciously adjust to exposure to one form of workplace injustice by using coping strategies that buffer them from further harm [ Raver and Nishii 2010 ]. However, other studies use comparisons of exposure to injustice to exposure to trauma to conclude that exposure to multiple injustices is associated with much greater distress (thus potentially more health harming) than exposure to one injustice [ Yoder and Aniakudo 1995 , Bowleg, et al. 2003 , Krupnick, et al. 2004 , Buchanan and Fitzgerald 2008 ]. These discrepant findings could be due to the timing, severity, and/or type of injustices experienced. The magnitude of additive or multiplicative effect of exposure to multiple workplace injustice is a question that can be answered empirically through more studies, particularly if designed longitudinally and informed by a lifecourse perspective. Studies could also incorporate recruitment strategies that allow the recruitment of study participants who have been exposed to the multiple exposures under study.

These study design issues may, in part, reflect the difficulties researchers face in gathering data on workplace injustice. As noted by Badgett and colleagues (2007) , employers do not easily cooperate with research on workplace injustice compared to other types of workplace studies (e.g. worksite health promotion), and findings from such studies could have legal and financial implications and/or cause damage to employer's image.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The extant literature describes the phenomena of discrimination, harassment, abuse and bullying in the workplace and the potential outcomes of these exposures. Although there are exceptions, these unjust experiences are most often described as affecting workers in non-dominant and/or disadvantaged worker groups. Our review pointed out that these same worker groups often hold more hazardous jobs and have been shown to experience poorer general health. We explored how various forms of workplace injustice have been shown to operate and contribute to disparate health among these workers. Additionally, we suggested a conceptual model informed by current evidence to illustrate pathways between workplace injustice experiences and health disparities. The model is offered as a starting point for researchers to build upon in exploring the potential mechanisms between these exposures and health disparities and under what conditions these disparities occur. The intent of this conceptual model is to contribute to the “unpacking” of the complex contributions of workplace injustices to health disparities.

Prospective studies and refinement of methods for characterizing and quantifying workplace injustices are needed to establish causative roles and to disentangle the contributions of various exposures. Future studies should employ representative samples and oversample disadvantaged worker groups. The literature on workplace ageism and its health effects are lacking; as the workforce ages and workers delay retirement, this is a timely area for study.

Though the body of literature directly linking workplace injustice and health is small, we believe that our conceptual model is a working model that incorporates the evidence to date. While more research should be done to characterize the relationship between workplace injustice and health, the current evidence supports the pathways in this model and points to a potentially important role for workplace injustice in the health status of working people and likely their families.

Evidence for the influence of workplace injustices on health outcomes

Conflict of Interest: The authors have no conflict of interest.

• Agudelo-Suarez A, Gil-Gonzalez D, Ronda-Perez E, Porthe V, Paramio-Perez G, Garcia AM, Gari A. Discrimination, work and health in immigrant populations in Spain. Social Science & Medicine. 2009; 68 :1866–1874. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alexis O, Vydelingum V. The lived experience of overseas black and minority ethnic nurses in the NHS in the south of England. Diversity in Health and Social Care. 2004; 1 :13–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Allan HT, Cowie H, Smith P. Overseas nurses’ experiences of discrimination: a case of racist bullying? J Nurs Manag. 2009; 17 :898–906. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Alleyne A. Black identity and workplace oppression. Counselling & Psychotherapy Research. 2004; 4 :4–8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Badgett M. The wage effects of sexual orientation discrimination. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 1995:726–739. [ Google Scholar ]
• Badgett M, Lau H, Sears B, Ho D. Other Recent Work. The Williams Institute, University of California Los Angeles School of Law; 2007. Bias in the workplace: Consistent evidence of sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination. Available from http://escholarship.ucop.edu/uc/item/5h3731xr . [ Google Scholar ]
• Baillien E, Neyens I, De Witte H. Organizational, team related and job related risk factors for bullying, violence and sexual harassment in the workplace: A qualitative study. International Journal of Organisational Behaviour. 2008; 13 :132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barbeau EM, Hartman C, Quinn MM, Stoddard AM, Krieger N. Methods for recruiting white, black, and hispanic working-class women and men to a study of physical and social hazards at work: the United for Health study. Int J Health Serv. 2007; 37 :127–144. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berdahl TA. Racial/ethnic and gender differences in individual workplace injury risk trajectories: 1988-1998. Am J Public Health. 2008; 98 :2258–2263. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bertrand M, Mullainathan S. Are Emily and Brendan more employable than Latoya and Tyrone? Evidence on racial discrimination in the labor market from a large randomized experiment. American Economic Review. 2004; 94 :991–1013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhui K, Stansfeld S, McKenzie K, Karlsen S, Nazroo J, Welch S. Racial/Ethnic discrimination and common mental disorders among workers: findings from the EMPIRIC study of ethnic minority groups in the United Kingdom. American Journal of Public Health. 2005; 95 :496. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bildt C. Sexual harassment: relation to other forms of discrimination and to health among women and men. Work. 2005; 24 :251–259. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Black DA, Makar HR, Sanders SG, Taylor LJ. The earnings effects of sexual orientation. Industrial and Labor Relations Review. 2003; 56 :449–469. [ Google Scholar ]
• Blau FD, DeVaro J. New evidence on gender differences in promotion rates: An empirical analysis of a sample of new hires. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society. 2007; 46 :511–550. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bond MA, Kalaja A, Markkanen P, Cazeca D, Daniel S, Tsurikova L, Punnett L, Baron S. [July 5th, 2011]; Expanding our understanding of the psychosocial work environment: a compendium of measures of discrimination, harassment and work-family issues. 2007 from http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2008-104/pdfs/2008-104.pdf .
• Bowleg L, Brooks K, Ritz SF. “Bringing home more than a paycheck:” an exploratory analysis of Black lesbians’ experiences of stress and coping in the workplace. J Lesbian Stud. 2008; 12 :69–84. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bowleg L, Huang J, Brooks K, Black A, Burkholder G. Triple jeopardy and beyond: Multiple minority stress and resilience among Black lesbians. Journal of Lesbian Studies. 2003; 7 :87–108. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Buchanan NT, Fitzgerald LF. Effects of racial and sexual harassment on work and the psychological well-being of African American women. J Occup Health Psychol. 2008; 13 :137–151. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burgess DJ, Grill J, Noorbaloochi S, Griffin JM, Ricards J, Van Ryn M, Partin MR. The Effect of Perceived Racial Discrimination on Bodily Pain among Older African American Men. Pain Medicine. 2009; 10 :1341–1352. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carbo JA. The right to dignity at work: Critical management studies and corporate social responsibility insights into workplace bullying. 2008.
• Cassitto MG, Fattorini E, Gilioli R, Rengo C, Gonik V, di Perfezionamento IC, Fingerhut MA, Kortum-Margot E. Psychological Harassment at Work: WHO, Protecting Workers’ Series. 2003.
• Caver KA, Livers AB. Dear White Boss... Harvard Business Review. 2002; 80 :76–83. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chan DK. Examining the job related, psychological, and physical outcomes of workplace sexual harassment: A meta analytic review. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 2008; 32 :362–376. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cherniack M. Hawk's nest incident: America's worst industrial disaster. 1986.
• Cohen S, Janicki-Deverts D, Miller GE. Psychological stress and disease. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. 2007; 298 :1685. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cox M, Paley B. Family as Systems. Annual Review of Psychology. 1997; 48 :243–267. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Crouter AC, Davis KD, Updegraff K, Delgado M, Fortner M. Mexican American fathers’ occupational conditions: Links to family members’ psychological adjustment. Journal of Marriage and Family. 2006; 68 :843–858. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Crow SM, Fok LY, Hartman SJ. Who is at Greatest Risk of Work-related Discrimination—Women, Blacks, or Homosexuals? Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal. 1998; 11 :15–26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Day NE, Schoenrade P. Staying in the closet versus coming out: Relationships between communication about sexual orientation and work attitudes. Personnel Psychology. 1997; 50 :147–163. [ Google Scholar ]
• de Castro AB, Fujishiro K, Sweitzer E, Oliva J. How immigrant workers experience workplace problems: a qualitative study. Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health. 2006; 61 :249–258. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• de Castro AB, Rue T, Takeuchi DT. Associations of employment frustration with self-rated physical and mental health among Asian American immigrants in the U.S. labor force. Public Health Nursing. 2010; 27 :492–503. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Delp L, Podolsky L, Aguilar T. Risk amid recovery: Occupational health and safety of Latino day laborers in the aftermath of the Gulf Coast hurricanes. Organization & environment. 2009; 22 (4):479–490. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Din-Dzietham R, Nembhard WN, Collins R, Davis SK. Perceived stress following race-based discrimination at work is associated with hypertension in African-Americans. The metro Atlanta heart disease study, 1999-2001. Soc Sci Med. 2004; 58 :449–461. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Droomers M, Schrijvers C, Stronks K, van de Mheen D, Mackenbach JP. Educational differences in excessive alcohol consumption: The role of psychosocial and material stressors. Preventive Medicine. 1999; 29 :1–10. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eaton SC. If you can use them: Flexibility policies, organizational commitment, and perceived performance. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society. 2003; 42 :145–167. [ Google Scholar ]
• EEOC Laws, regulations and guidance MOUs. [May 13th, 2011]; Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. 2011 from http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/harassment.cfm .
• Ehrenreich R. Dignity and Discrimination: Toward a Pluralistic Understanding of Workplace Harassment. Geo LJ. 1999; 88 :1. [ Google Scholar ]
• Elovainio M, Kivimaki M, Vahtera J. Organizational justice: evidence of a new psychosocial predictor of health. American Journal of Public Health. 2002; 92 :105. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Encel S, Studencki H. Gendered ageism: Job search experiences of older women. NSW Committee on Ageing and the Department for Women (NSW); Sydney, New South Wales: 1997. [ Google Scholar ]
• Epel ES, McEwen B, Seeman T, Matthews K, Castellazzo G, Brownell KD, Bell J, Ickovics JR. Stress and body shape: stress-induced cortisol secretion is consistently greater among women with central fat. Psychosomatic Medicine. 2000; 62 :623. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eriksen W, Einarsen S. Gender minority as a risk factor of exposure to bullying at work: The case of male assistant nurses. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 2004; 13 :473–492. [ Google Scholar ]
• Estrada AX, Probst TM, Brown J, Graso M. Evaluating the Psychometric and Measurement Characteristics of a Measure of Sexual Orientation Harassment. Military Psychology. 2011; 23 :220–236. [ Google Scholar ]
• Farquhar S, Samples J, Ventura S, Davis S, Abernathy M, McCauley L, Cuilwik N, Shadbeh N. Promoting the occupational health of indigenous farmworkers. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health. 2008; 10 :269–280. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fielden SL, Davidson MJ, Woolnough H, Hunt C. A model of racialized sexual harassment of women in the UK workplace. Sex Roles. 2010; 62 :20–34. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fitzgerald LF, Magley VJ, Drasgow F, Waldo CR. Measuring sexual harassment in the military: The sexual experiences questionnaire (SEQ-DoD). Military Psychology. 1999; 11 :243–263. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fox S, Stallworth LE. Racial/ethnic bullying: Exploring links between bullying and racism in the US workplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2005; 66 :438–456. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fox S, Stallworth LE. Building a framework for two internal organizational approaches to resolving and preventing workplace bullying: Alternative dispute resolution and training. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. 2009; 61 :220. [ Google Scholar ]
• Friedman SD, Greenhaus JH. What happens when business professionals confront life choices. Oxford University Press; USA: 2000. Work and family--allies or enemies? [ Google Scholar ]
• Frumkin H, Walker E, Friedman-Jimenez G. Minority workers and communities. Occupational Medicine. 1999; 14 :495–517. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fujishiro K. Is perceived racial privilege associated with health? Findings from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Soc Sci Med. 2009; 68 :840–844. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gangl M, Ziefle A. Motherhood, labor force behavior, and women's careers: An empirical assessment of the wage penalty for motherhood in britain, germany, and the united states. Demography. 2009; 46 :341–369. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gee GC, Long JS, Pavalko EK. Age, cohort and perceived age discrimination: Using the life course to assess self-reported age discrimination. Social Forces. 2007; 86 :265–290. [ Google Scholar ]
• Giga SI, Hoel H, Lewis D. A review of Black and minority ethnic (BME) employee experiences of workplace bullying. 2008:36–44. Dignity at Work Partnership Retrieved from http://wwwamicustheunionorg/docs/Research .
• Glomb TM, Richman WL, Hulin CL, Drasgow F. Ambient sexual harassment: An integrated model of antecedents and consequences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1997; 71 :309. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldenhar LM, Swanson NG, Hurrell JJ, Jr., Ruder A, Deddens J. Stressors and adverse outcomes for female construction workers. J Occup Health Psychol. 1998; 3 :19–32. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gradus JL, Street AE, Kelly K, Stafford J. Sexual harassment experiences and harmful alcohol use in a military sample: Differences in gender and the mediating role of depression. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. 2008; 69 (3):348–351. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grubb PL, Roberts RK, Grosch JW, Brightwell WS. Workplace bullying: What organizations are saying. Empl Rts & Employ Pol'y J. 2004; 8 :407–523. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gunnarsdottir HK, Sveinsdottir H, Bernburg JG, Fridriksdottir H, Tomasson K. Lifestyle, harassment at work and self-assessed health of female flight attendants, nurses and teachers. Work: Journal of Prevention, Assessment & Rehabilitation. 2006; 27 :165–172. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gutek BA, Koss MP. Changed women and changed organizations: Consequences of and coping with sexual harassment. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 1993 [ Google Scholar ]
• Gutek BA, Murphy RO, Douma B. A review and critique of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ). Law and Human Behavior. 2004; 28 :457–482. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haggerty M, Johnson C. The hidden barriers of occupational segregation. Journal of Economic Issues. 1995:211–222. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hammond WP, Gillen M, Yen IH. Workplace discrimination and depressive symptoms: A study of multi-ethnic hospital employees. Race and Social Problems. 2010; 2 :19–30. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Handy J, Davy D. Gendered ageism: Older women's experiences of employment agency practices. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. 2007; 45 :85. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hansen AM, Hogh A, Persson R, Karlson B, Garde AH, Orbaek P. Bullying at work, health outcomes, and physiological stress response. Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 2006; 60 :63–72. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harris JR, Huang Y, Hannon PA, Williams B. Low–socioeconomic status workers: their health risks and how to reach them. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2011; 53 :132. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hebl MR, Foster JB, Mannix LM, Dovidio JF. Formal and interpersonal discrimination: A field study of bias toward homosexual applicants. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2002; 28 :815. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hensing G, Alexanderson K. The association between sex segregation, working conditions, and sickness absence among employed women. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2004; 61 :e7. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hershcovis M, Barling J. Comparing victim attributions and outcomes for workplace aggression and sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010; 95 (5):874. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hodson R, Roscigno VJ, Lopez SH. Chaos and the abuse of power. Work and Occupations. 2006; 33 :382–416. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoel H, Faragher B, Cooper CL. Bullying is detrimental to health, but all bullying behaviours are not necessarily equally damaging. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling. 2004; 32 :367–387. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoel H, Giga SI. Destructive interpersonal conflict in the workplace: The effectiveness of management interventions. [July 5th, 2011]; Manchester Business School. 2006 from http://www.giy07.dial.pipex.com/downloads/bullyrpt.pdf .
• Hogh A, Carneiro IG, Giver H, Rugulies R. Are immigrants in the nursing industry at increased risk of bullying at work? A one year follow up study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology. 2011:49–56. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hogh A, Henriksson ME, Burr H. A 5-year follow-up study of aggression at work and psychological health. Int J Behav Med. 2005; 12 :256–265. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoobler JM, Rospenda KM, Lemmon G, Rosa JA. A within-subject longitudinal study of the effects of positive job experiences and generalized workplace harassment on well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. 2010; 15 :434. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Horvath M, Ryan AM. Antecedents and potential moderators of the relationship between attitudes and hiring discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Sex Roles. 2003; 48 :115–130. [ Google Scholar ]
• Huebner DM, Davis MC. Gay and bisexual men who disclose their sexual orientations in the workplace have higher workday levels of salivary cortisol and negative affect. Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 2005; 30 :260–267. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• IWPR [May 13, 2011]; The wage and gender gap: Institute for Women's Policy Research. 2010 from http://www.iwpr.org/publications/pubs/the-gender-wage-gap-2009 .
• Johnson R, Neumark D. Age discrimination, job separation, and employment status of older workers: Evidence from self-reports. National Bureau of Economic Research; Cambridge, Mass., USA: 1996. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jones CP. Levels of racism: A theoretic framework and a gardener's tale. American Journal of Public Health. 2000; 90 :1212. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaikkonen R, Rahkonen O, Lallukka T, Lahelma E. Physical and psychosocial working conditions as explanations for occupational class inequalities in self-rated health. The European Journal of Public Health. 2009; 19 :458. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kelly E. Discrimination against caregivers? Gendered family responsibilities, employer practices, and work rewards. Handbook of Employment Discrimination Research. 2005:353–374. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kivimäki M, Elovainio M, Vahtera J. Workplace bullying and sickness absence in hospital staff. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2000; 57 :656. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kivimäki M, Virtanen M, Vartia M, Elovainio M, Vahtera J, Keltikangas-Järvinen L. Workplace bullying and the risk of cardiovascular disease and depression. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2003; 60 :779. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krieger N. Racial and gender discrimination: risk factors for high blood pressure? Social Science & Medicine. 1990; 30 :1273–1281. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krieger N. Epidemiology and the web of causation: has anyone seen the spider? Social Science & Medicine. 1994; 39 :887–903. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krieger N. Embodying inequality: a review of concepts, measures, and methods for studying health consequences of discrimination. Int J Health Serv. 1999; 29 :295–352. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krieger N, Chen JT, Waterman PD, Hartman C, Stoddard AM, Quinn MM, Sorensen G, Barbeau EM. The inverse hazard law: Blood pressure, sexual harassment, racial discrimination, workplace abuse and occupational exposures in US low-income black, white and Latino workers. Social Science & Medicine. 2008; 67 :1970–1981. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krieger N, Kaddour A, Koenen K, Kosheleva A, Chen JT, Waterman PD, Barbeau EM. Occupational, social, and relationship hazards and psychological distress among low-income workers: implications of the ‘inverse hazard law’. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krieger N, Smith K, Naishadham D, Hartman C, Barbeau EM. Experiences of discrimination: validity and reliability of a self-report measure for population health research on racism and health. Soc Sci Med. 2005; 61 :1576–1596. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krieger N, Waterman PD, Hartman C, Bates LM, Stoddard AM, Quinn MM, Sorensen G, Barbeau EM. Social hazards on the job: workplace abuse, sexual harassment, and racial discrimination--a study of Black, Latino, and White low-income women and men workers in the United States. Int J Health Serv. 2006; 36 :51–85. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krupnick JL, Green BL, Stockton P, Goodman L, Corcoran C, Petty R. Mental health effects of adolescent trauma exposure in a female college sample: Exploring differential outcomes based on experiences of unique trauma types and dimensions. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes. 2004; 67 :264–279. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kudielka BM, Kern S. Cortisol day profiles in victims of mobbing (bullying at the work place): preliminary results of a first psychobiological field study. Journal of Psychosomatic Research. 2004; 56 :149–150. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Landsbergis PA, Grzywacz JG, LaMontagne AD. Work organization, job insecurity, and occupational health disparities. American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2012 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Larsen SE, Fitzgerald LF. PTSD Symptoms and Sexual Harassment: The Role of Attributions and Perceived Control. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2010 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. Springer Publishing Company; 1984. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leymann H, Gustafsson A. Mobbing at work and the development of post-traumatic stress disorders. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 1996; 5 :251–275. [ Google Scholar ]
• Loomis D, Richardson D. Race and the risk of fatal injury at work. American Journal of Public Health. 1998; 88 :40. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lopez SH, Hodson R, Roscigno VJ. Power, status, and abuse at work: General and sexual harassment compared. Sociological Quarterly. 2009; 50 :3–27. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lutgen-Sandvik P, Tracy SJ, Alberts JK. Burned by bullying in the American workplace: Prevalence, perception, degree and impact. Journal of Management Studies. 2007; 44 :837–862. [ Google Scholar ]
• Magley VJ, Hulin CL, Fitzgerald LF, DeNardo M. Outcomes of self-labeling sexual harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1999; 84 :390. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Marmot M. The influence of income on health: views of an epidemiologist. Health Affairs. 2002; 21 :31. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Matthiesen SB, Einarsen S. Psychiatric distress and symptoms of PTSD among victims of bullying at work. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling. 2004; 32 :335–356. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mikkelsen EG, Einarsen S. Bullying in Danish work-life: Prevalence and health correlates. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 2001; 10 :393–413. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mikkelsen EG, Einarsen S. Basic assumptions and symptoms of post-traumatic stress among victims of bullying at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 2002; 11 :87–111. [ Google Scholar ]
• Miner-Rubino K, Cortina LM. Working in a context of hostility toward women: implications for employees’ well-being. J Occup Health Psychol. 2004; 9 :107–122. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miner-Rubino K, Cortina LM. Beyond targets: Consequences of vicarious exposure to misogyny at work. J Appl Psychol. 2007; 92 :1254–1269. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moore ME, Konrad AM, Yang Y, Ng ESW, Doherty AJ. The vocational well-being of workers with childhood onset of disability: Life satisfaction and perceived workplace discrimination. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2011; 79 :681–698. [ Google Scholar ]
• Murray LR. Racial/ethnic bias and health. Sick and tired of being sick and tired: scientific evidence, methods, and research implications for racial and ethnic disparities in occupational health. American Journal of Public Health. 2003; 93 :221–226. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nazroo JY. The structuring of ethnic inequalities in health: Economic position, racial discrimination, and racism. American Journal of Public Health. 2003; 93 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ng DM, Jeffery RW. Relationships between perceived stress and health behaviors in a sample of working adults. Health Psychology. 2003; 22 :638. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Niedhammer I, Chastang JF, David S, Kelleher C. The contribution of occupational factors to social inequalities in health: Findings from the national French SUMER survey. Social Science and Medicine. 2008; 67 :1870–1881. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nolfe G, Petrella C, Zontini G, Uttieri S. Association between bullying at work and mental disorders: gender differences in the Italian people. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 2010; 45 :1037–1041. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Okechukwu CA, Krieger N, Chen J, Sorensen G, Li Y, Barbeau EM. The association of workplace hazards and smoking in a U.S. multiethnic working-class population. Public Health Rep. 2010; 125 :225–233. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pager D. The Mark of a Criminal Record1. American Journal of Sociology. 2003; 108 :937–975. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pager D, Western B, Bonikowski B. Discrimination in a low-wage labor market: A field experiment. American Sociological Review. 2009; 74 :777. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pappas G, Queen S, Hadden W, Fisher G. The increasing disparity in mortality between socioeconomic groups in the United States, 1960 and 1986. The New England Journal of Medicine. 1993; 329 :103. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pastor M, Bullard RD, Boyce JK, Fothergill A, Morello-Frosch R, Wright B. In the wake of the storm: Environment, disaster and race after Katrina. Russell Sage Foundation; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
• Payne S, Doyal L. Older women, work and health. Occupational Medicine. 2010; 60 :172. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pina A, Gannon TA, Saunders B. An overview of the literature on sexual harassment: Perpetrator, theory, and treatment issues. Aggression and Violent Behavior. 2009; 14 :126–138. [ Google Scholar ]
• Poppleton S, Briner RB, Kiefer T. The roles of context and everyday experience in understanding work-non-work relationships: A qualitative diary study of white-and blue-collar workers. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 2008; 81 :481–502. [ Google Scholar ]
• Quinn MM, Sembajwe G, Stoddard AM, Kriebel D, Krieger N, Sorensen G, Hartman C, Naishadham D, Barbeau EM. Social disparities in the burden of occupational exposures: results of a cross-sectional study. Am J Ind Med. 2007; 50 :861–875. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Raver JL, Nishii LH. Once, Twice, or Three Times as Harmful? Ethnic Harassment, Gender Harassment, and Generalized Workplace Harassment. Journal Of Applied Psychology. 2010; 95 :236–254. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roberts RK, Swanson NG, Murphy LR. Discrimination and occupational mental health. Journal of Mental Health. 2004; 13 :129–142. [ Google Scholar ]
• Robinson JC. Racial inequality and the probability of occupation-related injury or illness. The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly Health and Society. 1984:567–590. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Robinson JC. Trends in racial inequality and exposure to work-related hazards, 1968-1986. The Milbank Quarterly. 1987:404–420. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodríguez-Muñoz A, Moreno-Jiménez B, Vergel AIS, Hernández EG. Post-traumatic symptoms among victims of workplace bullying: Exploring gender differences and shattered assumptions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 2010; 40 :2616–2635. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rospenda KM, Richman JA, Ehmke JL, Zlatoper KW. Is workplace harassment hazardous to your health? Journal of Business and Psychology. 2005; 20 :95–110. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rospenda KM, Richman JA, Shannon CA. Prevalence and Mental Health Correlates of Harassment and Discrimination in the Workplace Results From a National Study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2009; 24 :819–843. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saastamoinen P, Laaksonen M, Leino-Arjas P, Lahelma E. Psychosocial risk factors of pain among employees. European Journal of Pain. 2009; 13 :102–108. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salvatore J, Shelton JN. Cognitive costs of exposure to racial prejudice. Psychological Science. 2007; 18 :810. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saunders P, Huynh A, Goodman-Delahunty J. Defining workplace bullying behaviour professional lay definitions of workplace bullying. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry. 2007; 30 :340–354. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Scheid TL. Stigma as a barrier to employment: Mental disability and the Americans with Disabilities Act. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry. 2005; 28 :670–690. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schneider KT, Swan S, Fitzgerald LF. Job-related and psychological effects of sexual harassment in the workplace: Empirical evidence from two organizations. J Appl Psychol. 1997; 82 :401–415. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shannon CA, Rospenda K, Richman J, Minich L. Race, racial discrimination, and the risk of work-related illness, injury, or assault: Findings from a national study. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2009; 51 :441–448. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Snyder LA, Carmichael JS, Blackwell LV, Cleveland JN, Thornton GC. Perceptions of Discrimination and Justice Among Employees with Disabilities. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal. 2010; 22 :5–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Somervell PD, Conway GA. Does the small farm exemption cost lives? American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2011; 54 :461–466. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Spratlen-Price L. Interpersonal conflict which includes mistreatment in a university workplace. Violence Vict. 1995; 10 :285–297. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steptoe A, Lipsey Z, Wardle J. Stress, hassles and variations in alcohol consumption, food choice and physical exercise: a diary study. British Journal of Health Psychology. 1998 [ Google Scholar ]
• Stuart H. Mental illness and employment discrimination. Current Opinion in Psychiatry. 2006; 19 :522. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tehrani N. Bullying: a source of chronic post traumatic stress? British Journal of Guidance & Counselling. 2004; 32 :357–366. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thoits PA. Stress and Health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 2010; 51 :S41. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Townsend SSM, Major B, Gangi CE, Mendes WB. From “In the Air” to “Under the Skin”: Cortisol Responses to Social Identity Threat. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2011; 37 :151. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Turney L. Mental health and workplace bullying: The role of power, professions and ‘on the job’ training. Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health. 2003; 2 :1–9. [ Google Scholar ]
• US Dept of Commerce . Women in America: Indicators of social and economic well-being. US Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration & Executice Office of the President; 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
• van Heugten K. Bullying of Social Workers: Outcomes of a Grounded Study into Impacts and Interventions. British Journal of Social Work. 2010; 40 :638–655. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wager N, Fieldman G, Hussey T. The effect on ambulatory blood pressure of working under favourably and unfavourably perceived supervisors. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2003; 60 :468. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Walker H, Grant D, Meadows M, Cook I. Women's Experiences and Perceptions of Age Discrimination in Employment: Implications for Research and Policy. Social Policy and Society. 2007; 6 :37–48. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wasti SA, Bergman ME, Glomb TM, Drasgow F. Test of the cross-cultural generalizability of a model of sexual harassment. Journal Of Applied Psychology. 2000; 85 :766. [ Google Scholar ]
• Westman M. Stress and strain crossover. Human Relations. 2001; 54 :717. [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams DR. Race and health: basic questions, emerging directions. Annals of Epidemiology. 1997; 7 :322–333. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams DR, Mohammed SA. Discrimination and racial disparities in health: Evidence and needed research. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 2009; 32 :20–47. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams DR, Neighbors HW, Jackson JS. Racial/ethnic discrimination and health: Findings from community studies. American Journal of Public Health. 2008; 98 :S29. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams J. Unbending gender: Why family and work conflict and what to do about it. Oxford University Press; USA: 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• Williams JC, Westfall ES. Deconstructing the Maternal Wall: Strategies for Vindicating the Civil Rights of Carers in the Workplace. Duke J Gender L & Pol'y. 2006; 13 :31. [ Google Scholar ]
• Willness CR, Steel P, Lee K. A meta-analysis of the antecedents and consequences of workplace sexual harassment. Personnel Psychology. 2007; 60 :127–162. [ Google Scholar ]
• Woods KC, Buchanan NT, Settles IH. Sexual harassment across the color line: experiences and outcomes of cross-versus intraracial sexual harassment among Black women. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2009; 15 :67. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yoder JD, Aniakudo P. The responses of African American women firefighters to gender harassment at work. Sex Roles. 1995; 32 :125–137. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yuan ASV. Perceived age discrimination and mental health. Social Forces. 2007; 86 :291–311. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zapf D, Knorz C, Kulla M. On the relationship between mobbing factors, and job content, social work environment, and health outcomes. European Journal of work and organizational psychology. 1996; 5 :215–237. [ Google Scholar ]

Bullying Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on bullying.

Bullying refers to aggressive behavior so as to dominate the other person. It refers to the coercion of power over others so that one individual can dominate others. It is an act that is not one time, instead, it keeps on repeating over frequent intervals.  The person(s) who bullies others can be termed as bullies, who make fun of others due to several reasons. Bullying is a result of someone’s perception of the imbalance of power.

Types of bullying :

There can be various types of bullying, like:

• Physical bullying:  When the bullies try to physically hurt or torture someone, or even touch someone without his/her consent can be termed as physical bullying .
• Verbal bullying:  It is when a person taunts or teases the other person.
• Psychological bullying:  When a person or group of persons gossip about another person or exclude them from being part of the group, can be termed as psychological bullying.
• Cyber bullying:  When bullies make use of social media to insult or hurt someone. They may make comments bad and degrading comments on the person at the public forum and hence make the other person feel embarrassed. Bullies may also post personal information, pictures or videos on social media to deteriorate some one’s public image.

Read Essay on Cyber Bullying

Bullying can happen at any stage of life, such as school bullying, College bullying, Workplace bullying, Public Place bullying, etc. Many times not only the other persons but the family members or parents also unknowingly bully an individual by making constant discouraging remarks. Hence the victim gradually starts losing his/her self-esteem, and may also suffer from psychological disorders.

A UNESCO report says that 32% of students are bullied at schools worldwide. In our country as well, bullying is becoming quite common. Instead, bullying is becoming a major problem worldwide. It has been noted that physical bullying is prevalent amongst boys and psychological bullying is prevalent amongst girls.

Prevention strategies:

In the case of school bullying, parents and teachers can play an important role. They should try and notice the early symptoms of children/students such as behavioral change, lack of self-esteem, concentration deficit, etc. Early recognition of symptoms, prompt action and timely counseling can reduce the after-effects of bullying on the victim.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Anti-bullying laws :

One should be aware of the anti-bullying laws in India. Awareness about such laws may also create discouragement to the act of bullying amongst children and youngsters. Some information about anti-bullying laws is as follows:

• Laws in School: To put a notice on the notice board that if any student is found bullying other students then he/she can be rusticated. A committee should be formed which can have representatives from school, parents, legal, etc.
• Laws in Colleges: The government of India, in order to prevent ragging , has created guideline called “UGC regulations on curbing the menace of ragging in Higher Education Institutions,2009”.
• Cyber Bullying Laws: The victim can file a complaint under the Indian Penal Code .

Conclusion:

It is the duty of the parents to constantly preach their children about not bullying anyone and that it is wrong. Hence, if we, as a society need to grow and develop then we have to collectively work towards discouraging the act of bullying and hence make our children feel secure.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

The Impact of Workplace Bullying Analytical Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Impact of workplace bullying on victims and the organization.

Bullying is one of the most common vices manifested in workplaces. Workplace Bullying Institute (WBI), explains it as a practice through which employees subject colleagues to patterns of psychological, physical, or collective behavior that compromise dignity, cause harm, or lead to various forms of threats (Wiedmer, 2010). Statistics indicate that 37% of the working population in the United States has been bullied at one point in their workplaces.

This behavior is prevalent among bosses who often look down on their juniors. Men constitute the highest number of bullies compared to women. Workplace bullies mainly target colleagues who pose potential threat to their careers due to their skills, work experience, and contributions towards the overall organizational success.

Employers have an ethical responsibility to ensure that they provide secure and inclusive work environments that allow employees to achieve maximum productivity (Wiedmer, 2010). This is attained through the development of effective policies and practices that govern employee behavior within the workplace. Workplace bullying has direct impact on victims and organizations.

The negative impacts of bullying in the workplace develop as a result of ignorance among employees regarding the vice, unreported cases, as well as the negligence of organizational leaders (Baack, 2011). Since there are various forms of workplace bullying, employees react differently whenever they are victimized.

The most notable outcomes of workplace bullying include impaired decision making, low self esteem, depression, reduced quality of life, stress, low productivity, as well as suicide in extreme cases. Reduced quality of life is exprienced when victims of bullying succumb to pressure and ultimately quit their jobs. Loss of jobs results in loss of medical cover and inability to sustain their families (Wiedmer, 2010).

Workplace bullying also impacts the organization heavily. Employers who fail to provide a secure workplace deal with various challenges related to unethical practices, such as bullying in their workforce.

Some of the negative outcomes experienced by organizations include increased costs of operation due to compensation claims, high levels of absenteeism, low employee morale, bad publicity, and reduced performance (Baack, 2011). Others include reduced efficiency in service provision, as well as increased expenses from recruitment and selection of employees.

Bullying in the workplace happens on a regular basis because people are involved in numerous activities that are not acceptable in the workplace. Culprits often resort to bullying in order to secure their interests and integrity, as well as to protect themselves (Lavan & Martin, 2008). I work as a United States Marine and an administrator. I have experienced a number of bullying practices in my workplace.

In certain cases, I was the victim. The first case of bullying occurred while working as an administrator with the United States Marine. My duties and responsibilities were very clear, and I worked diligently to ensure that everything was in place as expected (Wiedmer, 2010).

However, a slight collision with one of my seniors resulted in the emergence of an unhealthy working relationship between us. My senior stamped his authority over me by overly increasing my administrative responsibilities and simultaneously reducing my influence, which was not in line with contractual terms and conditions.

The second case of bullying that I have witnessed in my workplace involves the denial of rest for the employee by the senior management (Wiedmer, 2010). All United States marine officers sign contracts that allow them to take a short leave, at least three times a year. The senior management has been using the excuse of too much workload to deny employees their contractual rights and privileges.

This has greatly affected efficiency of service delivery, productivity, and organizational culture because employees lacked the morale to do their work. Working in the United States Marine is very demanding, thus there is a need to ensure that all employees enjoy their benefits to the maximum.

Employers have a responsibility to ensure that their workplaces are free of vices such as bullying. It is important for organizational leaders to understand that achieving this feat requires a lot of attention with regard to time, resources, and creation of the right atmosphere for change (Lavan & Martin, 2008).

Organizational leaders can apply a number of techniques to eradicate workplace bullying. First, I would recommend that organizational leaders establish causes and factors that promote the practice, and establish how employees feel about the problem. This would aid in the eradication of factors that encourage propagation of the vice. Bullying can be eradicated through fostering effective communication.

Secondly, I would recommend the identification of available resources and solutions to the problem from within the organization. This would entail the creation of awareness among the employees regarding the importance of teamwork and mutual respect. In addition, it would involve propagation of a culture of working together in order to develop and approve policies for eliminating the vice (Lavan & Martin, 2008).

Bullying is one of the barriers that hinder individual and organizational success within the workplace. The vice has a negative impact on victims, as well as employers. It is the responsibility of every employer to ensure that they provide their employees with a safe and inclusive work environment that motivates them to work and allows them freedom of expression. Organizational leaders must ensure that bullies within the workplace are not protected regardless of their status in the organization.

Baack, D. (2011). Management Communication . New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Lavan, H., & Martin, W. (2008). Bullying in the U.S. Workplace: Normative and process-oriented ethical approaches. Journal of Business Ethics, 83 , 147-165.

Wiedmer, T. (2010). Workplace bullying: costly and preventable. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 77 (2), 35-41.

• Nature of Bullying
• How to Reduce Bullying in Senior Facilities
• Workplace Bullying and Its Impact on Performance
• Social World Conflicts and Its Resolution Styles
• How Internet Communication Helps Graphic Designers to Spread Their Art Works to the World
• Communication Skills in Management
• Drive In Business Communication
• A Day in My Office Without Internet and New Social Media Technologies in My Workplace
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, June 13). The Impact of Workplace Bullying. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-impact-of-workplace-bullying/

"The Impact of Workplace Bullying." IvyPanda , 13 June 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/the-impact-of-workplace-bullying/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'The Impact of Workplace Bullying'. 13 June.

IvyPanda . 2019. "The Impact of Workplace Bullying." June 13, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-impact-of-workplace-bullying/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Impact of Workplace Bullying." June 13, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-impact-of-workplace-bullying/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Impact of Workplace Bullying." June 13, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-impact-of-workplace-bullying/.

Home / Essay Samples / Social Issues / Bullying

Bullying Essay Examples

Bullying in schools: an argument for zero tolerance policy.

In this era of globalization, 'Bullying' is a common problem and a hot issue to debate from people from all walks of life. Bullying is a basic thing that students are facing in school and it is difficult to escape. This is because based on...

Combating Bullying in Schools: a Call to Action

It is the best of times, it is the worst of times, it is the age of technological advancement, it is the age of old-world bullying, it is the epoch of tolerance, it is the epoch of bigotry, it is the season of ergonomic automobiles,...

Bullying in Public and Private Schools

Bullying is a pervasive issue that affects students of all ages, backgrounds, and educational settings. It has serious consequences for the well-being and development of young individuals. This essay aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of bullying in both public and private schools, shedding light...

No to Bullying: Advocating for a Kinder and More Inclusive Society

To start with, this is persuasive essay about no to bullying where will be discussed some statements of this topic. Bullying is a systematic abuse of power and is defined as aggressive behaviour or intentional harm-doing by peers that is carried out repeatedly and involves...

Bullying: Protecting Victims and Addressing Bullies

Bullying is a pervasive and harmful social issue that affects individuals of all ages, backgrounds, and demographics. In this argumentative essay, we will examine the critical importance of protecting bullying victims and implementing appropriate punishments for bullies. By addressing both sides of this complex problem,...

Preventing Bullying: the Role of Emotion Management

When it comes to bullying, often times, people talk about the key role prevention plays. Prevention is important, but it is not the only thing we should educate our kids about bullying. Before bullying occurs, we prevent it; after bullying occurs, we deal with it....

Persuasive Theme: Don’t Bully, Instead, Stand Up and Do Something!

Our rule to follow is: Don’t bully, Instead, Stand up and Do Something. If you follow this rule, then these following side effects won’t happen to you or others. Even though the bully is the one hurting others, bad things happen to the bully/bullies. Although...

Tips to Stop Cyberbullying: Creating a Safer Online Environment

Cyberbullying, the use of digital communication tools to harass, intimidate, or harm others, has become a concerning issue in today's interconnected world. As more individuals rely on online platforms for communication, it's crucial to address and prevent cyberbullying to ensure a safe and respectful online...

Examining Cyberbullying: Overview of the Issue

Cyberbullying is a recent form of aggression that scholars use to humiliate and assault their fewer famous peers. Like traditional bullying, this conduct is based totally on the imbalance of strength among bullies and victims. Cyberbullying grows itself in posting and sharing abusive comments, photos,...

Cyber Bullying: Causes and Effects

Cyber bullying, a form of harassment that takes place in the digital realm, has emerged as a concerning issue with far-reaching implications. Enabled by technology, this harmful behavior can lead to severe emotional and psychological consequences for victims. In this essay, we will explore the...

Trying to find an excellent essay sample but no results?

Don’t waste your time and get a professional writer to help!

You may also like

• Violence in Video Games
• Social Protection Programs Essays
• Globalization Essays
• Capital Punishment Essays
• Freedom of Speech Essays
• Moving to America Essays
• Malcolm X Essays
• Public Shaming Essays
• Affirmative Action Essays
• Daca Essays
• Gender Inequality Essays

About Bullying

Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior among school-aged children that involves a real or perceived power imbalance.

Impulsiveness Anger management problems Controlling, rather than leading Prone to frustration and feeling annoyed Lacking empathy; not sympathetic to the needs or desires of others Blames victims by saying things like, "If that geek didn't look so stupid, I wouldn't have to hit him." Difficulty following rules Little respect for authority Views violence in a positive way, such as a form of entertainment or a good way to get needs met Physically stronger than other children (common with boys who bully) Perceived as popular (common with girls who bully)

There are different classifications of bullying. Can be in the form of nonverbal, verbal, or physical behavior. Individual and collective bullying. Emotional and relational bullying in addition to physical harm inflicted towards another person or even property. Cyberbullying.

Bullying can cause loneliness, depression, anxiety, lead to low self-esteem and increased susceptibility to illness. Bullying has also been shown to cause maladjustment in young children. A mental health report also found that bullying was linked to eating disorders, anxiety, body dysmorphia, or even suicide. Some have argued that bullying can teach life lessons and instill strength. Also bulling has an influence on testosterone production.

In the US, 1 in 5 students ages 12-18 has been bullied during the school year and approximately 160,000 teens have skipped school because of bullying. More than half of bullying situations stop when a peer intervenes on behalf of the student being bullied. 6th grade students experience the most bullying (31%). Over half of students ages 12-18 who reported being bullied believed their bullies had the ability to influence what other students thought of them. Students are less likely to report bullying as they get older.

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->