Mediating Effect of Voice Behavior on Relationships between Empathy, Fairness and Intention in Helping Behavior of Nursing Students in Assumed Bullying Situations

Chung Hee Woo; Ju Young Park

doi:10.11111/jkana.2019.25.3.229

Journal List > J Korean Acad Nurs Adm > v.25(3) > 1129541

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Woo and Park: Mediating Effect of Voice Behavior on Relationships between Empathy, Fairness and Intention in Helping Behavior of Nursing Students in Assumed Bullying Situations

Original Article

Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration 2019; 25(3): 229-238.

Published online: 30 June 2019

DOI: https://doi.org/10.11111/jkana.2019.25.3.229

Mediating Effect of Voice Behavior on Relationships between Empathy, Fairness and Intention in Helping Behavior of Nursing Students in Assumed Bullying Situations

Chung Hee Woo

, Ju Young Park

College of Nursing, Konyang University, Korea.

Corresponding author: Park, Ju Young. College of Nursing, Konyang University, 158 Gwanjeodong-ro, Seo-gu, Daejeon 35365, Korea. Tel: +82-42-600-8563, Fax: +82-42-600-8555, jypark@konyang.ac.kr

Received 16 February 2019 Revised 3 April 2019 Accepted 22 April 2019

Korean Academy of Nursing Administration

(open-access):

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

The study was done to investigate the mediating effects of voice behavior on the relationships between empathy and fairness and intention in helping behavior of nursing students.

Methods

A structured self-report questionnaire was used to measure empathy, fairness, voice behavior and intention in helping behavior. During November 2018, data were collected from 128 nursing students in D and G cities. Data were analyzed using hierarchical multiple linear regression with the SPSS/WIN 24.0 program.

Results

Empathy, fairness and voice behavior were positively correlated with intention in helping behavior of participants and voice behavior was positively correlated with empathy, fairness and intention in helping behavior of participants respectively. Also, voice behavior had a partial mediating effect on the relationship between empathy, fairness and intention in helping behavior.

Conclusion

Findings indicate that empathy and fairness are important factors related to the intention in helping behavior of nursing students. It is also expected that voice behavior can further promote the intention in helping behavior of nursing students.

Keywords: Nursing student, Empathy, Fairness, Voice behavior, Intention in helping behavior

Figures and Tables

Table 1

Differences in Variables according to General Characteristics (N=128)

^*Mann-Whitney U test.

Table 2

Levels of Major Variables (N=128)

Table 3

Correlation among Variables (N=128)

Table 4

Mediating Effects of Voice Behavior on Intention in Helping Behavior (N=128)

Table 5

Bootstrapping Results on Mediating Effects of Voice Behavior (N=128)

Boot.=Bootstrapping; LLCI=Lower limit confidence interval; ULCL=Upper limit confidence interval.

Notes

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (NRF-2018R1C1B6002021).

References

1. Bae YH, Lee TW. Relationship of experience of violence and professional quality of life for hospital nurses. Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing Administration. 2015; 21(5):489–500. DOI: 10.11111/jkana.2015.21.5.489.

2. Kim MY, Kim JH, Ha SJ. Content analysis on university students who witnessed school violence during their formative years. Journal of Korean Academy of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing. 2017; 26(2):163–173. DOI: 10.12934/jkpmhn.2017.26.2.163.

3. Lynn Hawkins D, Pepler DJ, Craig WM. Naturalistic observations of peer interventions in bullying. Social Development. Social Development. 2001; 10:512–527. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9507.00178.

4. Oh IS. Psychological factors influencing bystanders' behavioral reactions to bullying: A focus on empathy and aggression. The Journal of Elementary Education. 2010; 23(1):45–63.

5. Chung JY, Lee SY, Oh IS, Kang T, Ryoo JS. The effectiveness of a school violence bystanders program. The Journal of Educational Studies. 2013; 44(2):119–143.

6. Hazler R. Bystanders: An overlooked factor in peer on peer abuse. Journal for the Professional Counselor. 1996; 11:11–21.

7. Salmivalli C. Participant role approach to school bullying: Implications for interventions. Journal of Adolescence. 1999; 22:453–459. DOI: 10.1006/jado.1999.0239.

8. Hong SJ, Choi YK. The effects of empathy, fairness, intention in helping behavior and social self-efficacy on bystanders' helping behavior in a cyber bullying situation. The Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology. 2017; 31(2):39–60. DOI: 10.21193/kjspp.2017.31.2.003.

9. Batson CD, Chang J, Orr R, Rowland J. Empathy, attitudes, and action: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group motivate one to help the group? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2002; 28(12):1656–1666. DOI: 10.1177/014616702237647.

10. Davis MH. A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy [dissertation]. Austin, TX: University of Texas at Austin;1979. 52. 52 p.

11. Barlinska J, Szuster A, Winiewski M. The role of short- and long-term cognitive empathy activation in preventing cyberbystander reinforcing cyberbullying behavior. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 2015; 18(4):241–244. DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2014.0412.

12. Peterson C, Seligman MEP. Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. New York: Oxford University Press;2004. 789 p.

13. Correia I, Dalber C. School bullying belief in a personal just world of bullies, victims, and defenders. European Psychologist. 2008; 13:248–254. DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.248.

14. Kim YH, Liw LN, Han SY. The way of the increase in helping behavior: The effects of empathy and fairness on intention for helping behavior. The Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issues. 2012; 18(3):349–366.

15. Van Dyne LV, Ang S, Botero IC. Conceptualizing employee silence and employee voice as multidimensional constructs. Journal of Management Studies. 2003; 40:1359–1392. DOI: 10.1111/1467-6486.00384.

16. LePine JA, Van Dyne LV. Voice and cooperative behavior as contrasting forms of contextual performance: Evidence of differential relationships with big five personality characteristics and cognitive ability. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2001; 86:326–336.

17. Park JY, Woo CH, Kim H. The effects of clinical practice stress, communication, voice behavior, silence behavior, and silence motivation on clinical performance ability in Korea armed forces nursing academy cadets. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction. 2019; 19(5):473–498. DOI: 10.22251/jlcci.2019.19.5.473.

18. Bryant BK. An index of empathy for children and adolescents. Child Development. 1982; 53(2):413–425. DOI: 10.2307/1128984.

19. Park SH. Empathy and prosocial behavior. Seoul: Moonumsa;1997. 214 p.

20. Kim H, Yi M. Factors influencing empathy in nursing students in Korea. The Journal of Korean Academic Society of Nursing Education. 2015; 21(2):237–245. DOI: 10.5977/jkasne.2015.21.2.237.

21. Kwon SM, Yoo SJ, Yim YJ, Kim JY. Character strengths test: Expert handbook. Seoul: Hakjisa;2010. 77 p.

22. Van Dyne LV, LePine JA. Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. The Academy of Management Journal. 1998; 41(1):108–119. DOI: 10.5465/256902.

23. Farrell D. Exit, voice, loyalty, and neglect as responses to job dissatisfaction: A multidimensional scaling study. The Academy of Management Journal. 1983; 26(4):596–607. DOI: 10.5465/255909.

24. Chung GE. Effect of person team value congruence on voice behavior: Mediating effect of peer trust and peer targeted voice behavior [masters thesis]. Seoul: Korea University;2014. 1–78.

25. Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986; 51:1173–1182.

26. Cho YI, Kim J, Han W, Jo Y. Differences and combinations of moderation and mediation effects: Definitions and statistical testing. Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology. 2015; 34(4):1113–1131.

27. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple meditation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers. 2004; 36:717–731. DOI: 10.3758/bf03206553.

28. Bastiaensens S, Vandebosch H, Poels K, Van Cleemput K, DeSmet A, De Bourdeaudhuij I. Cyberbullying on social network sites: An experimental study into bystanders' behavioral intentions to help the victim or reinforce the bully. Computers in Human Behavior. 2014; 31:259–271. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.036.

29. Jo HI, Lee MH. The mediating effect of prosocial behavior in the relation between empathic ability and psychological well-being. Korean Journal of Youth Studies. 2011; 17(11):139–158.

30. Morrison EW, Milliken FJ. Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review. 2000; 25(4):706–725.

TOOLS

ORCID iDs

Chung Hee Woo
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1082-4375

Ju Young Park
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8047-5492

Similar articles