Edited by: Dragan Mijakoski, Institute of Occupational Health of RNM, North Macedonia
Reviewed by: Hui Wang, Xiangtan University, China; Kamil Barański, Medical University of Silesia, Poland; Nurka Pranjic, University of Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina
†These authors have contributed equally to this work and share first authorship
This article was submitted to Organizational Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Remote work became the new normal during COVID-19 as a response to restrictions imposed by governments across the globe. Therefore, remote work’s impact on employee outcomes, well-being, and psychological health has become a serious concern. However, the knowledge about the mechanisms and outcomes of remote work is still limited. In this study, we expect remote work to be negatively related to bullying and assume that bullying will mediate remote work’s impact on work engagement and loneliness. To test our hypothetical model, we applied a cross-sectional design using data from a large representative sample of 1,511 Norwegian workers. The data were collected in September 2021 during a period of COVID-19 restrictions in Norway. The results confirmed our hypotheses: remote work was positively related to loneliness and work engagement but negatively related to bullying. Further, bullying was positively related to loneliness and negatively related to work engagement. Moreover, bullying was also found to play a partial mediating role, supporting our hypothesis. This study suggests that remote work is related to both positive and negative mechanisms in the workplace. Remote work can potentially reduce bullying and have a protective function in preventing bullying. However, since remote work has positive relations with both loneliness and work engagement, this study illustrates that organizations should be cautious and perhaps consider a moderate level of remote work. Hence, the results have several implications for HR policies and management.
The COVID-19 outbreak caused a rapid shift into full-time remote work for millions of employees all over the globe (
The extent to which employees were able to adjust to remote work is crucial for the individual- and organizational outcomes, such as mental health, well-being, and work engagement (
This study assumes that remote work will substantially influence social interactions at work, thereby reducing perceptions of bullying and influencing workers’ perceptions of loneliness and work engagement. We seek to understand the relationships between remote work, bullying, loneliness, and work engagement, and seek to gain information about these unexplored, yet important issues affected by remote work. Based on theory, we will develop and test a theoretical model in a representative sample of workers in Norway. This study will provide new insights and knowledge about the versatile influence of remote work in the workplace.
Loneliness is an important factor in organizational contexts. For example, employee loneliness is negatively related to well-being, creative performance, organizational citizenship behavior, job satisfaction, and job performance (
It was only recently that studies began investigating the relationship between remote work and loneliness. Remote work completely changes social interactions, social possibilities, and social relationships (
Organizations must facilitate and inspire full engagement for their employees. Work engagement can truly make a difference for employees and may result in competitive advantages, such as increased job performance (
Despite the increased prevalence of remote work, its direct impact on work engagement remains relatively unexplored. For example, new research on work engagement during COVID-19 explored predictors, gender differences, and possible relationships with work engagement (
Workplace bullying is defined as “repeating and enduring aggressive behaviors that are intended to be hostile and/or perceived as hostile by the recipient” (
As a response to being bullied, victims could see it as a psychological necessity to either quit the job or take sick leave (
Based on this, our study assumes that remote work will have a positive impact on workplace bullying. Remote work removes in-person contact between employees and physically separates perpetrators and victims. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed (H):
Being a target of bullying has negative consequences on health-related and job-related outcomes (
First, workplace bullying negatively affects the basic human need for belonging (
Second, workplace bullying has a negative impact on work engagement (
From the theoretical framework presented above, we predict that remote work is negatively associated with bullying. Furthermore, we propose that remote work is negatively related to loneliness and positively related to work engagement and that bullying is negatively associated with work engagement and positively related to loneliness. This study will explore how bullying might mediate remote work’s influence on work engagement and loneliness. We seek to investigate whether remote work provides a protective mechanism against bullying.
A study by
Moreover, bullying is an interpersonal behavior intentionally aimed at causing harm to another employee (
Based on the theoretical framework and the above hypotheses, the following research model (
The research model, with letters referring to the presented hypotheses.
In September 2021, data were collected by Norstat Norway through an electronic questionnaire assembled specifically for this research. From Norstat’s panel of 85,000 active participants, there was a total of 1,511 respondents. According to the sociodemographic structure described by Statistics Norway (
The respondents were granted anonymity through a two-step procedure. Norstat had access to their identities for future follow-up studies, but no identity information was shared with the researchers. Further, the respondents were informed about the purpose of the study, about their right to withdraw at any time, and that the data would be used for research only. Any questions that might arise were to be directed to the project leader.
Norstat operates within the Directive 95/46/EC General Data Protection Regulation and complies with Norwegian data protection laws and the main research standards and guidelines described in ICC/ESOMAR and the Quality Management System ISO9001:2015. The Norwegian Centre for Research Data (NSD) approved the research plan and had no comments to the ethical aspects of the research project. At the end of the process, an anonymized complete data file was made available to the research group.
Two items, each with a five-point scale (1 = less than before, 5 = much more than before), were used to measure remote work (
Exposure to bullying was measured with 11 items using a trimmed version of the Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised (NAQ-R) instrument (
Two items developed by
The ultra-short UWES–3 instrument (
Age and gender were included as control variables in the structural equation model and the correlation matrix.
Descriptive statistics, correlations, and Cronbach’s alphas were analyzed using SPSS 26.0, while confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) were conducted in AMOS 26.0. CFA using maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) was performed to test the validity of the constructs. The measurement model was validated before estimating the structural model (
Guidelines from (
The following indicators and thresholds were used to evaluate the model fit: the comparative fit index (CFI), incremental fit index (IFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR). An RMSEA of less than 0.05 indicates a “good” fit, while an RMSEA of less than 0.08 indicates an “acceptable” fit (
Bootstrapping was used to test for indirect effects and the mediating role of bullying. Bootstrapping is a method that involves repeatedly sampling from the dataset and estimating the indirect effect in each resampled dataset (
A total of 1,511 Norwegian workers participated in the study. Among them, 688 were female (45.5%), 771 were between 40 and 66 years old (50.9%), and 602 were less than 40 years old (39.8%). Further, 660 had been in their jobs for 5–20 years (43.7%), while 620 had been in their current jobs for four or fewer years (41%). Of the respondents, 1,053 worked from 21 to 40 h per week (69.7%), and 1,262 were full-time employees (83.5%). The demographic data are presented in
Characteristics of the study participants.
Demographic variables | Total Sample (N = 1,511) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Female | 688 | 45.5 |
Male | 823 | 54.5 | |
Age | 20–24 | 114 | 7.5 |
25–39 | 488 | 32.3 | |
40–54 | 486 | 32.2 | |
55–66 | 285 | 18.9 | |
67–74 | 138 | 9.1 | |
Years in current job | |||
≤ 4 | 620 | 41 | |
5–10 | 379 | 25.1 | |
11–20 | 281 | 18.6 | |
≥ 21 | 231 | 15.3 | |
Working hours per week | |||
≤ 20 | 119 | 7.9 | |
21–40 | 1,053 | 69.7 | |
41–60 | 308 | 20.4 | |
≥ 61 | 31 | 2.1 | |
Work situation | |||
Full-time | 1,262 | 83.5 | |
Part-time | 243 | 16.1 | |
Laid-off | 6 | 0.4 |
Descriptive statistics and correlations are presented in
Descriptive statistics and correlations.
Range | Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Age | 20–75 | 45.75 | 13.88 | – | |||||
2. Gender | 0–1 | 0.46 | 0.50 | −0.10 |
– | ||||
3. Remote work | 1–5 | 3.93 | 0.87 | 0.07 |
−0.04 | – | |||
4. Bullying | 1–5 | 1.27 | 0.47 | −0.15 |
−0.02 | −0.22 |
– | ||
5. Loneliness | 1–5 | 1.57 | 0.87 | −0.11 |
0.05 | 0.30 |
0.57 |
– | |
6. Work engagement | 1–5 | 3.38 | 0.87 | 0.14 |
−0.01 | 0.12 |
−0.22 |
−0.21 |
– |
Gender: 0 = Male, 1 = Female.
Relations among measurement concepts were measured by Pearson’s r. The correlations ranged from −0.22 to 0.57. Overall, nine correlations were negative and six were positive. Remote work was negatively correlated to gender and bullying. Bullying was negatively correlated to age, gender, remote work, and work engagement. Further, loneliness was negatively correlated with age, and work engagement, while work engagement was negatively correlated to bullying and loneliness. In general, all correlations were significant (
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed using maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) to assess the validity of all the concepts. All dimensions of associated items were included in the assessments (
Confirmatory factor loadings with standardized factor loadings, reliability, and convergent validity.
|
|
|
|
|
---|---|---|---|---|
0.76 | 0.61 | 0.75 | ||
Have the measures led to you working from home? | 0.80 | |||
Have the Covid-19 restrictions led to you using digital tools more often than before (Skype, Teams, Zoom, and similar services)? | 0.76 | |||
0.92 | 0.52 | 0.92 | ||
Being ignored or excluded. | 0.63 | |||
Having insulting or offensive remarks made about your person, attitudes, or your private life. | 0.74 | |||
Being shouted at or being the target of spontaneous anger. | 0.65 | |||
Repeated reminders of your errors and mistakes. | 0.74 | |||
Being ignored or facing a hostile reaction when you approach. | 0.76 | |||
Persistent criticism of your errors or mistakes. | 0.79 | |||
Having your opinion ignored. | 0.76 | |||
Practical jokes carried out by people you do not get along with. | 0.75 | |||
Being the subject of excessive teasing and sarcasm. | 0.67 | |||
Someone withholding information which affects your performance. | 0.68 | |||
Spreading of gossip and rumors about you. | 0.72 | |||
0.87 | 0.78 | 0.86 | ||
First, how often do you feel that you lack companionship? | 0.77 | |||
How often do you feel isolated from others? | 0.98 | |||
0.82 | 0.60 | 0.81 | ||
At my work, I feel bursting with energy. | 0.75 | |||
I am enthusiastic about my work. | 0.90 | |||
I am immersed in my work. | 0.66 |
CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance explained; Alpha = Cronbach’s alpha.
The theorized model (
Result of structural equation modeling conducted on Norwegian workers with standardized path coefficients. Gender (0 = Male, 1 = Female); ** p < 0.05, ***
Standardized path coefficients (direct effects).
|
|
|
|
---|---|---|---|
H1 | Remote work→Loneliness | 0.18 | 0.001 |
H2 | Remote work→Work engagement | 0.06 | 0.048 |
H3 | Remote work→Bullying | −0.14 | 0.001 |
H4 | Bullying→Loneliness | 0.48 | 0.001 |
H5 | Bullying→Work engagement | −0.25 | 0.001 |
Regarding the control variables, age had three significant relations while gender had one. Age was positively related to remote work (
Bootstrapping was used to test for indirect effects. With the data resampled 5,000 times, two significant indirect effects were discovered, these are presented in
Specific indirect effects.
|
|
|
|
---|---|---|---|
H6a | Remote work→Bullying→Loneliness | −0.07 | 0.001 |
H6b | Remote work→Bullying→Work engagement | 0.04 | 0.001 |
Research on remote work and social distancing has accelerated in the aftermath of COVID-19. However, this is the first study exploring the relationships between remote work, loneliness, work engagement, and bullying through a theoretical model that includes all factors simultaneously. The study was conducted almost two years into the COVID-19 pandemic with a large representative sample of Norwegian workers. Remote work seems to protect against bullying for workers in Norway. This finding is both interesting and important since bullying is associated with multiple unwanted outcomes (
Our study provides evidence of a positive association between remote work, loneliness, and work engagement, supporting H1 and H2. These results are also supported by previous studies that highlight changes in social interactions with colleagues, exposure to social isolation, and employee engagement when working remotely (e.g.,
Previous research suggests that people experiencing loneliness have lower levels of work engagement (
Our study indicates that remote work functions as a protective mechanism against bullying, which is a very interesting finding that supports hypothesis H3. Bullying should be taken seriously as it is considered as one of the most detrimental stressors in working life (
Remote work potentially involves fewer social interactions. Fewer social interactions might protect against or reduce bullying. This is supported by a study by
Building on this research, it can be argued that organizations can use remote work as a measure to address or reduce bullying. However, remote work must be considered carefully, as it does not solve the underlying issues of bullying and could potentially escalate relational problems if not handled properly (
In line with other studies in the field (
This study also investigated the mediating role of bullying. Interestingly, the results revealed that bullying partially mediates the influence of remote work on loneliness and work engagement, supporting H6a and H6b: bullying suppresses the positive influence of remote work on loneliness and strengthens the positive relationship between remote work and work engagement. This suggests that when victims of bullying, work remotely, they are more likely to experience lower levels of loneliness and be more engaged in their work, thus making social restrictions a welcome relief for bullied victims (
This study contributes to the literature on remote work by proposing a theoretical model including bullying, loneliness, and work engagement. Our findings offer valuable implications into the detrimental mechanisms related to in-person interactions for victims of workplace bullying. Furthermore, this study implicates that in-person interactions are major contributors to workplace bullying; thus, remote work and the associated perception of higher autonomy might prevent workplace bullying. Hence, implying that remote work could be considered when employees have high levels of sensitivity to the work environment, and managers could consider using this tool in periods with high levels of harassment or conflict. Based on the enormous increase in remote work during COVID-19 and the associated up- and downsides, it is important to interpret the findings in situations when the workforce returns to the workplace free of COVID-19 restrictions. Some organizations and employees may not want to return to the ways they operated before, as remote work’s value has been recognized and accepted (
The results can be applied to design work arrangements with the individual—not solely the organization—in mind to present risk of bullying. Top management cannot simply implement remote work as a common standard, as individuals may need different arrangements (
Our current study has many strengths: it was based on a representative sample of workers in Norway during the pandemic lockdown. However, some limitations must be acknowledged. The study uses a cross-sectional design, meaning that it is unable to determine the causation or direction of the effects. The pandemic brought extensive restrictions to society, interfering with our social, professional, and personal lives. This could make the participants more prone to other factors that potentially lead to loneliness. Furthermore, as the data are self-reported, the results may have been influenced due to common method variance. However, several measures such as CFA, AVE, and CR were applied to control the validity and objectivity of the study. Moreover, as our aim for this study was to investigate how remote work influences employees, self-reported appraisals are a great tool for identifying the perceptions and reactions of interest (
Another important note is that the participants in this study were Norwegian employees during the pandemic. Thus, our findings should be interpreted with some limitations in mind regarding generalization. Similar studies at different locations could help generalize and supplement our findings. Moreover, prior relevant research studies are limited. This presents an issue for this study but also indicates the importance of expanding research to cover the gap in the existing literature.
In conclusion, this study explores the relationship between remote work, loneliness, work engagement, and bullying among Norwegian workers during COVID-19 restrictions. The results suggest that employees felt lonelier when working remotely but experienced increased engagement in work, illustrating that remote work affects both mental health and productivity. The results also suggest that remote work reduced bullying and played a mediating role in the associations between remote work, loneliness, and work engagement. Remote work does not affect all employee’s equally, bullied victims were found to benefit most from working remotely, indicating a protective function against bullying. Hence, this study finds that remote work is related to both positive and negative mechanisms at work. Since remote work is positively related to both loneliness and work engagement, this study illustrates a distinct advantage of remote work, but its associated issue of loneliness cannot be overlooked. Therefore, it is suggested that organizations should consider more moderate levels of remote work in the aftermath of COVID-19. This study contributes to the established literature of remote work, extending our knowledge of remote work’s long-term impact on employees. Future research may examine differences in the effect of remote work during COVID-19 and after.
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
VB: introduction, article drafting, literature review, implication, limitation, and discussion. J-SA: method, analysis, result, literature review, implication, and conclusion. EO: data collection, supervision, study design, revised manuscript, and assessment support. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
This study was funded by the UiS Business School, Department of Innovation, Leadership and Marketing.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.