Workplace Bullying in Nursing: A Study Review and Critique
This paper critically reviews Gaffney et al. (2012), a qualitative study examining how nurses respond to workplace bullying. The review evaluates the study's research questions, constructivist grounded theory methodology, data collection procedures, and key findings—including the core category of "making things right" and its subcategories. The paper also addresses the study's limitations, particularly concerns about participant verification and generalizability, and discusses the implications of the findings for evidence-based nursing practice. The author draws on personal clinical experience in a forensic psychiatric unit to ground the review's practical significance and to illustrate how the study's conclusions align with real-world observations of lateral violence and toxic workplace dynamics.
- Introduction and Research Purpose: Study purpose, research questions, and literature context
- Methods: Grounded theory design, sampling, and data collection critique
- Results: Core categories and subcategories of bullying behavior
- Discussion and Conclusion: Study conclusions, limitations, and generalizability concerns
- Implications for Nursing Practice: Clinical relevance and evidence-based practice application
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The review is systematically organized to mirror the structure of the article being critiqued — introduction, methods, results, discussion, and implications — making it easy to follow and compare against the source study.
- The author balances genuine praise for the study (appropriate methodology, relevant research questions) with specific, well-reasoned criticisms, such as the inability to verify participant credentials and the inadequate discussion of limitations.
- The implications section grounds the critique in authentic clinical experience, connecting abstract findings to observable phenomena like lateral violence in a psychiatric forensic unit, which strengthens the paper's practical relevance.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates systematic critical appraisal of a research article — a core skill in evidence-based practice. Rather than merely summarizing the study, the author evaluates each component (research design, sampling, validity, conclusions) against established research standards, identifying both strengths and weaknesses with justification. This approach is essential in nursing and health sciences courses at the graduate level.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with an introduction that describes the study's purpose and research questions, then moves section by section through the study's methodology, results, and conclusions. A dedicated implications section closes the paper by connecting the critique to the author's own clinical practice. The reference list follows APA format. The structure is tight and purposeful, with each section building on the last.
Introduction and Research Purpose
In "Making Things Right," Gaffney et al. (2012) examine how nurses respond to workplace bullying. The authors point out that although the consequences of workplace bullying include diminished performance and rises in problems like absenteeism and turnover, there is limited research and limited information about workplace bullying in the healthcare sector. The purpose of this study is to help administrators improve patient outcomes by reducing workplace bullying or aggression, which reflects a hostile work environment. This is a qualitative study with research questions related to the prevalence and specific manifestations or types of workplace bullying, as well as the strategies nurses use to minimize or mitigate it. Gaffney et al. (2012) set out to examine what workplace bullying looks like in different scenarios, how it is perceived and responded to by both nurses and patients, and how nurses respond to bullying that targets either themselves or their colleagues. The research questions are clearly stated prior to the methods section and within the introduction.
Because there is a dearth of literature on workplace bullying in nursing, the authors do not provide a comprehensive review of the literature. However, it would have been better had the authors cited studies on workplace bullying in other fields. Because the research is exploratory in nature, there are no directional hypotheses; the authors seek to understand the phenomenon and provide directions for future research and strategies for nurse management. The study is directly relevant to healthcare practice because of the clear impact bullying has on the workplace environment and on patient outcomes.
Methods
Constructivist grounded theory methods are used, whereby the researchers identify how participants construct their social realities both subjectively and objectively through qualitative research collected in online and offline settings. Data collection methods included a 30-item online survey administered with informed consent. In total, 81 different participant narratives were collected and analyzed. The narratives were systematically coded for content, themes, and patterns. A theoretical coding process was also used to discover relationships between the different categories that emerged during data collection.
The study population included nurses that "existed both online and offline," meaning no disembodied or unverifiable participants were permitted (Gaffney et al., 2012, p. 3). Despite the reliability and validity problems inherent in soliciting participants online, the researchers do not identify how they restricted participation to nurses. Although the sample size of 81 was adequate, it is impossible to know whether the participants were actually nurses, because their identification and credentialing could not be collected due to the need to protect anonymity, privacy, and confidentiality. Moreover, the researchers do not indicate the professional status, degree of experience, or nursing role of any participant.
The data collection method involved coding the responses, and no statistical tests or analyses were necessary. There is some degree of validity and reliability with the structured interview-type method using theoretical coding, and this method is appropriate for this research. However, there is an overall low degree of validity and reliability in the study due to design weaknesses.
References
Gaffney, D. A., et al. (2012). Making things right. Nursing Research and Practice 2012. doi:10.1155/2012/243210
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.