Workplace incivility as a risk factor for workplace bullying and psychological well-being: a longitudinal study of targets and bystanders in a sample of swedish engineers

Table 2 Dropout analysis with results from independent t-tests and χ²-tests for independence comparing study dropouts (completing only one survey at t1 or t2) to those retained (completing at least two surveys), and full adherence participants (completing all three surveys) to partial/non-adherence participants (completing one or two surveys)

	Not exposed	Exposed	Not exposed	Exposed	χ² statistic	p Value	Difference in proportions	95% CI	Cramer’s V
EB	213	19	224	29	1.45	0.287	− 0.03	− 0.09 to 0.02	0.05
WB	189	45	213	41	0.80	0.406	0.03	− 0.04 to 0.10	0.04
EB.t2	177	17	245	27	0.18	0.749	− 0.01	− 0.07 to 0.04	0.02
WB.t2	166	30	234	37	0.25	0.689	0.02	− 0.05 to 0.08	0.02

	Not exposed	Exposed	Not exposed	Exposed	χ² statistic	p Value	Difference in proportions	95% CI	Cramer’s V
EB	355	32	83	16	5.52*	0.024	0.08	0.01 to 0.16	0.11
WB	315	74	87	13	1.97	0.188	− 0.06	− 0.14 to 0.02	0.06
EB.t2	333	35	91	9	0.02	1.00	− 0.01	− 0.07 to 0.06	0.01
WB.t2	306	64	95	4	11.07***	< .001	− 0.13	− 0.19 to − 0.08	0.15

EI experienced incivility, WI witnessed incivility, EB experienced bullying, WB witnessed bullying, WeB well-being
^aThe Cohen’s d values are negative as the coding was 0 = retention group, 1 = dropout group. It does not change the interpretation of magnitude of d
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001

ISSN: 2050-7283