Agreeableness and self-reported bullying-related perpetration behaviors among health-professions undergraduates in the United Arab Emirates: a cross-sectional study

Résumé fourni par la source

Bullying and peer mistreatment in health-professions education may undermine psychological safety, wellbeing, and professional learning. This study examined the association between agreeableness and self-reported bullying-related perpetration behaviors among health-professions undergraduates in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Other Big Five domains and age-band modification of the openness association were secondary or exploratory. This single-institution cross-sectional survey used a non-probability sample of 307 undergraduates from medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, and nursing. The outcome was the mean of the six perpetration-oriented items of the Bullying Prevalence Questionnaire (range 1–4), interpreted as behavior frequency rather than a bullying diagnosis or prevalence estimate. Personality was assessed with the English 44-item Big Five Inventory (BFI-44). Age band, year, and college were modeled categorically. Welch’s analysis of variance was used when variances were unequal. Hierarchical linear regression used HC3 heteroskedasticity-consistent standard errors; bootstrap, Huber M-estimation, and fractional-logit analyses assessed robustness. The mean bullying-related behavior score was 1.56 (SD 0.66); 109 participants (35.5%) scored 1.00. Age-band means differed, Welch F(2, 96.35) = 7.75, p <.001. In the fully adjusted model, lower agreeableness was associated with higher behavior scores (standardized β=−0.455, HC3 95% CI − 0.583 to − 0.326, p <.001) and remained consistent in sensitivity analyses. However, the agreeableness estimate was derived from a scale with only modest internal consistency (α = 0.642; ω = 0.632) and reverse-keying anomalies. The categorical age band × openness block was not statistically significant (ΔR²=0.015, F-change(2, 290) = 3.02, p =.0502). BFI reliability was weak for extraversion, conscientiousness, and neuroticism; therefore, corresponding null findings are uncertain. Lower agreeableness was the most consistent measured personality correlate among the assessed domains, but the estimate rests on a psychometrically imperfect scale. The cross-sectional design, self-report, omitted sociocultural covariates, and BFI measurement limitations preclude causal, mechanistic, or diagnostic interpretation. The findings should inform general institution-level prevention research—not personality screening, student labeling, or trait-based intervention—and require replication with locally validated measures.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.