Statistical Analysis Paper Essay
Statistical Analysis Paper
The article was a cross- sectional, non- experimental case study of social worker’s perceptions of bullies at the workplace and the social worker’s ability to create coping responses to workplace bullying. To collect quantitative information a mail questionnaire was gathered, and individuals’ semi-structured interviews were assessed. The qualitative sample included 111 male and female social worker’s from Washington D.C. the final outcome result were three to five social worker’s reported that he or she were recipients of rude, unpleasant, and unfavorable workplace environmental interactions within a year. The bullies’ targets generally worked in military and mental health outpatient organizations or government agencies. About 35% of the targets held a discreet service role, and 29% held a management or administration role. The results outcome from the study provided evidence that in the social working profession the agencies and organizations need guidelines or tools to help discover, confront, and stop bullying behaviors in the workplace ( Whitaker, T., 2012).
Statistical Analysis in the Article
The article incorporates tables, descriptive statistics that helps with the understanding of the data, it also provides five tables of illustrations. Table one is about the demographic characteristics of the targets of the workplace bullies, it displays the characteristics of social workers ranging by age, gender, and demographics (Whitaker, T., 2012). Table two is about organizational settings and roles of target, it displayed supervisors, colleagues, subordinates, and clients were all identified as bullies. It showed that women were more than twice as likely (65%) to be identified as bullies as were men 33% (Whitaker, T., 2012). Table three is about the most troubling bullying behaviors, showing that verbally, and covertly hostile actions were the most troubling bullying behaviors in the workplace.
In addition, being treated with disrespect and having work de-valued as the hardest aspects of being bullied at the workplace. Table four was the summary characteristics of bullies, the study showed characteristics were either passive or assertive by the coping scale. The passive behavior ranging score of 24 and assertive score of 60. The median and mean scores were 42.5, and a multiple modal score. The last table, which was five was the classification of Reponses to the coping scale as passive or assertive coded in the same direction the table explained coping strategies and responses (Whitaker, T., 2012).
Descriptive Statistics and Inferential Statistics
In the article several questions were asked in a questionnaire. The more passive the response, the lower the value assigned to it, the more assertive the response, the higher the value was assigned to it. The targets had a range of coping strategies, the biggest response strategy was talking about the bullying with someone he or she trusted, 93% used this strategy more than once, 66% used the strategy of confronting the person more than once. However, only 17% used formal complaint (Whitaker, T., 2012). The data supported the research problem of workplace bullying. It was noteworthy and explained that three out of five social workers were recipients of rude, unpleasant, and unfavorable workplace environmental interactions. However, the article did not provide inferential statistics. The data was collected through questionnaire and based on actual results to determine the statistics (Whitaker, T., 2012).
In conclusion, this article explored the issues of workplace bullying of social workers and the coping responses, it included a number of concerned issues for the social working profession. Among these issues included the characteristics of workplace bullies, and coping Reponses. The article suggests that workplace bullying is a serious issue for social workers and needs to create guidelines and tools to help stop bullying behaviors (Whitaker, T., 2012).
Whitaker, T. (2012). Social workers and workplace bullying: Perceptions, responses and implications. Work, 42(1), 115-123.