Excessive smartphone use has been associated with a number of negative consequences for the individual and the environment. Some similarities can be observed between excessive smartphone usage and several behavioural addictions, and continual usage constitutes one of several characteristics included in addiction. In the extreme high end of the distribution of smartphone usage, smartphone restriction might be expected to elicit negative effects for individuals. These negative effects may be regarded as withdrawal symptoms traditionally associated with substance-related addictions. To address this timely issue, the present study examined scores on the Smartphone Withdrawal Scale (SWS), the Fear of Missing Out Scale (FoMOS) and the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) during 72 h of smartphone restriction. A sample of 127 participants (72.4% women), aged 18–48 years (M = 25.0, SD = 4.5), were randomly assigned into one of two conditions: a restricted condition (experimental group, n = 67) or a control condition (control group, n = 60). During the restriction period participants completed the aforementioned scales three times a day. The results revealed significantly higher scores on the SWS and FoMOS for participants allocated to the restricted condition than those assigned to the control condition. Overall the results suggest that smartphone restriction could cause withdrawal symptoms.

Background: Targets of workplace bullying tend to develop severe mental health complaints, having increased risk of sick leave and expulsion from the workplace. Hence, these individuals are likely to be overrepresented among patients seeking treatment for common mental disorders (CMD). This study investigated the prevalence of exposure to workplace bullying in a patient group seeking treatment for CMD. Further we explored if exposed and non-exposed patients differed on clinical and workrelated characteristics. Methods: The sample comprised of 675 patients from an outpatient clinic in Norway and consisted of 70% women and had a mean age of 39 (SD = 10.5) years. The study had a cross-sectional design and differences between the patient groups were analysed using chi-square, Mann-Whitney U-tests and independent sample t-tests. Results: The prevalence of exposure to bullying was 25.8%. The patients exposed to bullying reported significantly more major depressive disorders (MDDs) measured with the MINI psychiatric interview, higher levels of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, subjective health complaints, alcohol use, and lower resilience as measured with questionnaires. Twice as many were on full-time sick leave, reported lower work ability, lower return to work self-efficacy, and lower job satisfaction. A majority preferred another job than the one they have today over returning to their current employment. Conclusion: Victims of workplace bullying are a vulnerable group at risk of expulsion from working life, being overrepresented among patients seeking mental health treatment for CMD. One in four patients represented with such experience have higher levels of psychological symptoms and are more often diagnosed with depression as compared to other patients. Thus, this is a problem that should be addressed in clinical settings. If not addressed there is an increased risk of sick leave and permanent exclusion from working life.

The study investigated relationships between exposure to bullying behaviours, return to work self-efficacy (RTW-SE) and resilience, and if resilience moderates the bullying-RTW-SE relationship among patients on sick leave or at risk of sick leave due to common mental disorders (CMD). A sample of 675 patients treated in an outpatient clinic was analysed using regressions and moderation analyses by employing SPSS and the Process macro SPSS supplement. The results showed a negative relationship between exposure to bullying behaviours and RTW-SE. There was also a positive main effect for resilience, as patients with high resilience score significantly higher on RTW-SE than patients with low resilience irrespective of levels of bullying. Further, the resilience sub-dimension personal resilience moderated the bullying-RTW-SE relationship, while the sub-dimension interpersonal resilience did not. Patients high on personal resilience showed relatively lower RTW-SE scores when exposed to bullying behaviours, compared to those that were not bullied with high personal resilience levels. Hence, one should take note of the fact that even if resilience may strengthen RTW-SE, bullying is an adverse event which particularly affects individuals who present with relatively high levels of resilience resources, at least when it comes to RTW-SE.

BACKGROUND: Victims of workplace bullying represent a group characterised by severe negative health complaints at risk of losing their foothold in working life. To date, very few studies have investigated the effect of psychological treatment of the health-related problems often facing victims of bullying. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to investigate if victims of workplace bullying suffering from common mental disorders (CMD) benefit from clinical treatment for their mental help problems at an outpatient clinic treating patients using Metacognitive or Cognitive Behavioural Therapy with work-focus. Criteria were symptom reduction and change in workplace participation. Comparisons were made between the victims of workplace bullying with CMD, a wait-list control group consisting of patients who had also been exposed to bullying yet now awaiting treatment, and other patients not exposed to bullying. METHODS: The sample comprised of 405 patients from an outpatient clinic in Norway. The study used a naturalistic observational design and data was collected pre-treatment and post-treatment. RESULTS: The results showed the treatment to be effective in symptom reduction for victims of bullying to a similar degree as patients otherwise not exposed to bullying. Even more, victims receiving treatment had a larger improvement compared to the wait-list control group (p < 0.001). Yet, among patients on sick leave pre-treatment, fewer victims of bullying were fully working by the end of treatment compared to the patients not exposed to workplace bullying. CONCLUSION: The findings provide ground for optimism for this treatment as an efficient way of dealing with the aftermath of workplace bullying.