MOBING AND SEXISM IN THE ACADEMIA: THE CASE OF ÇUKUROVA UNIVERSITY

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 14, 421 - 441, 22.12.2020

Cansu Dağlıoğlu Deniz Ünal

Abstract

This study was carried out to examine the mobbing perceptions of employees at Çukurova University (ÇU) and whether this perception differs depending on gender, title or marital status. Although mobbing is a very old concept, people's awareness of the issue is very low, especially in our country. This is clearly demonstrated by the survey. Although s/he gave a positive answer to the detailed questions on the Likert-type scale about the existence of psychological pressures s/he was exposed to, there were quite a lot of data stating that s/he was not subject to mobbing. Unconscious responses, emotions hidden for promotion and the presence of incorrect answers due to fear were frequently encountered in individual interviews. With this three-part questionnaire study, 146 women and 162 men were interviewed, consisting of 33 professors, 15 associate professors, 23 assistant professors, 14 lecturers, 52 research assistants, 9 instructers, 162 administrative staff. However, although there is no significant difference between exposure to mobbing and gender in statistical analysis, the results incidate that female academicians are more disadvantaged than men in many aspects. In terms of the gender perspective, because it is one of the occupations considered suitable for women, the number of women academics in Turkey is above the world average (YÖK, 2020). In the findings of the research at ÇU, which is one of the universities that increased this average, it is also surprising that women are seen to be disadvantaged.

Keywords

Academia, Gender Inequality, Mobbing

AKADEMİDE MOBİNG VE CİNSİYETÇİLİK: ÇUKUROVA ÜNİVERSİTESİ ÖRNEĞİ

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Çukurova Üniversitesi’ndeki çalışanların mobing mağduriyet algılarının cinsiyet karşısında değişimini görmek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Mobing çok eski bir kavram olmasına rağmen özellikle ülkemizde insanların konuya ilişkin farkındalıkları oldukça düşüktür. Bunu ise yapılan anket açıklıkla gözler önüne sermektedir.
Zira ayrıntılı sorularda maruz kaldığı psikolojik baskıların varlığına ilişkin olumlu yanıt vermesine rağmen mobinge uğramadığını ifade eden oldukça fazla sayıda veriye rastlanmıştır. Bilinçsiz verilen yanıtlar, yükselme için saklanan duygular ve korku nedeniyle oluşan doğru olmayan cevapların varlığı da bireysel görüşmelerde sıklıkla rastlanmıştır.
3 bölümden oluşan bu anket çalışması ile 33 profesör, 15 doçent, 23 yardımcı doçent, 14 öğretim görevlisi, 52 araştırma görevlisi, 9 okutman, 154 idari personelden oluşan 300 kişi ile görüşülmüştür. 144 kadın,156 erkekten oluşan bu örneklemde analizler tanımlayıcı istatistikler ve ki-kare testlerinden oluşmaktadır.
Günümüzde Türkiye’de kadın akademisyen sayısı Dünya ortalamasının üzerindedir (https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr/). Bu ortalamayı yükselten üniversitelerden bir tanesi olan Çukurova Üniversitesi’ndeki araştırmanın bulgularında bile kadınların dezavantajlı olduğu görülmüştür. İstatistiksel analizlerde mobinge maruz kalma durumu ile cinsiyet arasında anlamlı bir farklılık olmamasına rağmen yine de kadın akademisyenlerin erkeklere oranla birçok konuda uğradığı haksızlıklar azımsanamayacak ölçüdedir.

Keywords

Akademi, Mobbing, Cinsiyet Eşitsizliği

References

• Abelson, R. P. (2012). Statistics as Principled Argument. Psychology Press.
• Brown, M. B., &Forsythe, A. B. (1974). The Small Sample Behavior of some Statistics which Test the equality of Several Means. Technometrics, 16, 129-132.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2004). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı. (4. Baskı). Ankara: Pagem A Yayıncılık.
• Çögenli, M. Z., & Asunakutlu, T. (2016). Akademide mobbing: ADIM üniversiteleri örneği. Erzincan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(1), 17-32.
• De Beuckelaer, A. (1996). A Closer Examination on Some Parametric Alternatives to the ANOVA F-test. Statistical Papers, 37(4), 291-305.
• Gage, M. J. (1870). Women as Inventors. Woman Suffrage Tracts, No. 1. Fayetteville, NY: FA Darling.
• Hewish, J. (1969). Emily Brontë: A Critical and Biographical Study. Springer.
• Huizingh, E. (2007). Applied statistics with SPSS. Sage.
• Ján, J., & Eva, L. (2008). Demographic and Organization Factors Analyses in Relation to Mobbing in Companies. In Proceedings of the Management 2008 conference in Times of Global Change and Uncertainity (p. 430). FON.
• Kline, P. (1994). A general description of factor analysis. An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis.
• Leymann, H. (1990). Mobbing and Psychological Terror at Workplaces. Violence and victims, 5(2), 119-126.
• Leymann, H. (1996). The Content and Development of Mobbing at Work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(2), 165-184.
• Mahbuba, D., & Rousseau, R. (2011). Matthew, Matilda and the others. September 20-23, Istanbul Bilgi University, Turkey, 348.
• McKay, R., Arnold, D. H., Fratzl, J., & Thomas, R. (2008). Workplace bullying in academia: A Canadian study. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 20(2), 77-100.
• Namie, G. (2007). The Challenge of Workplace bullying. Employment Relations Today, 34(2), 43.
• Nordstokke, D. W., & Zumbo, B. D. (2010). A New Nonparametric Levene test for Equal Variances. Psicologica, 31(2), 401-430.
• Palaz, S., & Boz, İ. (2008). Üniversite Mezunu Yetişkinlerin Farklı Organizasyonlarda Gönüllü Hizmet Vermesini Etkileyen Faktörler. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(19), 95-106.
• Park, H. M. (2009). Comparing group means: t-tests and one-way ANOVA using Stata, SAS, R, and SPSS.
• Prevost, C., & Hunt, E. (2018). Bullying and Mobbing in Academe: A literature. European Scientific Journal, 14(8), 15.
• Rossiter, M. W. (1993). The Matthew Matilda effect in science. Social Studies of Science, 23(2), 325-341.
• Salin, D. (2001). Prevalence and forms of bullying among business professionals: A comparison of two different strategies for measuring bullying. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(4), 425-441.
• Sevinç, E. T. (2011). Mobbing with a gender perspective: how women perceive, experience and are affected from it. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Ortadoğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Sonzamacı, E. (2013). Bilim Dünyasında Alışılmadık Bir Kadın Portresi: Marie Cruie. Retrieved from http://politikart1.blogspot.com.tr/2013/07/bilim-dunyasinda alisilmadik-bir-kadin.html
• Strickland, O. L. (2003). Using Factor Analysis for Validity Assessment: Practical Considerations.
• Stevens, J. (1996). Appied Multivariate Statistics For The Social Science (Third Edition). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Ullman, J. B. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics (Vol. 5, pp. 481-498). Boston, MA: Pearson.
• Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s Alpha when Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273-1296.
• Tigrel, E. Y., & Kokalan, O. (2009). Academic Mobbing in Turkey. International Journal of Behavioral, Cognitive, Educational and Psychological Sciences, 1(2), 91-99.
• Tomić, M. (2012). Mobbing: The incidence of Mobbing Activities and Differences Regarding Workplace and Gender. Megatrend Review, 9(1).
• Vveinhardt, J., & Štreimikienė, D. (2017). Demographic, Social and Organizational Characteristics on the Levels of Mobbing and Single Cases of Harassment: The Multicomplex Approach. Economics and Management.
• Yıldırım, H., & Uysaloglu, B. (2012). Impact of Demographic Factors on Employee's Perception of Mobbing: A Case Study from a Logistics Company. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 634-644.
• YÖK. https://istatistik.yok.gov.tr/ . Date of Access: 5 Temmuz 2020.
• Žukauskas, P., & Vveinhardt, J. (2009). Socio-demographic Characteristics of Mobbing and Discrimination in Employee Relations. Transformations in Business & Economics, 8(3), 18.