Assessing psychological violence and harassment at work: reliability and i.e., Leymann Inventory of Psychological Terrorization (LIPT) and. ventory of Psychological Terrorization (LIPT) Leymann defines .. el LIPT (Leymann Inventory of Psychological. Terrorization) en. Important note in preface to Heinz Leymann, “Mobbing . questionnaire ( Leymann Inventory of Psychological Terrorization, Leymann, ).

Author: Goltijar Shaktishakar
Country: Gambia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Sex
Published (Last): 21 December 2007
Pages: 305
PDF File Size: 16.18 Mb
ePub File Size: 9.74 Mb
ISBN: 729-7-14676-829-6
Downloads: 80190
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Malalar

The column A responses were subjected to a factor analysis using principal component analysis with varimax rotation. The objective of this study was invventory examine reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Inventory of Violence and Psychological Harassment IVAPT Pando,a item measure of psychological harassment at work and presence and intensity of psychological violence widely used in Latin American countries.

February 15, Revised: Psychological violence and harassment at work were more frequent among older respondents.

Please enter a personalized message to the authors. I am continually interrupted when I try to speak. Second, the sample was from civil servants, particularly from nonmanual workers.

Then we tested this first translated version with a group of nine occupational health staff occupational physicians, occupational health nurses, and clinical psychologists in Japan to receive their feedback, and revised the translation accordingly.

The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of internal consistency reliability for responses concerning the frequency in column A were 0.

Leymann Inventory of Psychological Terror (LIPT)

Assessing psychological violence and harassment at work: My presence is ignored, for example, exclusively addressing others as if I did not exist. Then, press proceed to send the authors a message. Sign In Join Now. Twitter as a tool for practicing surgeons. Revista Mexicana de Salud en el Trabaj ; 1: Univ Psychol ; 7: Factor loadings greater than 0. This instrument consists of 22 items with two sets of response options see Appendix. Please type a message to the paper’s authors to explain your need for the paper.


Data did not well fit to previously reported one- or three-factor structures. An exploratory factor analysis showed that the first factor explained Viol Victims ; The work or activities given to me require more experience than that which I possess, and they are assigned to me with the intention of discrediting me. A replication study is needed among blue-collar workers and in private sectors.

These findings could be useful in classifying existing scales of psychological harassment at work and comparison of findings based on different scales. Both LIPT and NAQ-R may be sensitive for measurement of psychological violence, since when psychological violence becomes severe, it would increase the risk of psychological harassment at work as well.

The Negative Acts Questionnaire: Empirical findings on bullying in the workplace. The intensity of psychological violence at work was defined based on situations with sustained generic violence at work that can be received by all workers at a workplace. Only shared with authors of paper. This is almost consistent with previous studies using these three instruments. The prevalence of psychological harassment at work based on the IVAPT definition medium or high was 5.

There was a problem providing the content you requested

While the first factor explained a large proportion of the variance, the IVAPT seems to have a unique factor structure in the Japanese sample.

I am denied information that is important and necessary for me to carry out my work.

First, the response rate was not high. The content and development of mobbing at work. Second, respondents were asked to report the relative frequency of experiencing each item compared with their colleagues in the column Busing three response options: Distinguish the true from the false].


Cronbach’s alpha of the scale was 0. Bullying and emotional abuse in the workplace: Men accounted for Follow us on Twitter or Facebook to stay on top of the latest in scientific research.

More detailed explanations for your need are more likely to get a response. Request Full Text Paper. Several limitations should be noted.

Also, there were many respondents who failed to fill in column B. Already have an account? Distinguir lo verdadero de lo falso [Bullying at work. Previous studies showed that the IVAPT had an acceptable level of internal consistency Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 0. While the first factor explained a large proportion of the variance, the IVAPT seems to have a unique factor structure in the Japanese sample.

Respondents included managers, nonmanual workers clerksmanual workers food service, garbage collection, etc.

Leymann Inventory of Psychological Terror (LIPT)

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of internal consistency reliability was calculated for column A responses and column B responses for the total sample, terorization and women. Psychological violence and harassment at work were more frequent among older respondents. The IVAPT was translated into Japanese, and the translation was amended through a small pretest and a back-translation and finalized.

First, respondents were asked to answer the frequency of their experience of each item in the column A using five-point Likert-type options: New jobs are unceasingly assigned to me. Ten years of working conditions in the European Union.