Repository logo

Students’ evaluations as antecedents of faculty-to-faculty incivility: a theoretical examination

Faculty Advisor




workplace incivility, faculty, universities, discrimination in higher education

Abstract (summary)

Faculty-to-faculty incivility is a common occurrence in academia and presents deleterious outcomes for those targeted by such behaviours (Clark, 2013; Keashly, 2021; Keashly & Neuman, 2010; McClendon et al., 2019; Peters & King, 2017; Twale & DeLuca, 2008). Workplace incivility is defined as a “low intensity deviant behaviour with ambiguous intent to harm the target in violation of workplace norms for mutual respect. Uncivil behaviours are characteristically rude and discourteous, displaying a lack of regard for others” (Andersson & Pearson, 1999, p. 457). Faculty-to-faculty incivility occurs when faculty members of higher learning institutions perpetrate uncivil behaviours against other faculty members (Clark et al., 2013). Examples of faculty-to faculty incivility behaviours include rude and condescending behaviours, opposing change, threatening comments, physical threats, slurs, personal attacks, not paying attention during meetings, and failing to meet assigned workload (Clark, 2013; McClendon et al., 2019). In a study that examined the prevalence of faculty-to-faculty incivility among nursing faculty, Clark et al. (2013) found that 68% of respondents (n = 588) reported faculty-to-faculty incivility to be a moderate to serious problem. In a more recent study, McClendon et al. (2019) reported that over 58% of respondents surveyed (n = 215) indicated that faculty-to-faculty incivility is a moderate to serious problem in the social work academic discipline.

Publication Information

Oyet, M. C. & Chika-James, T. A. (2022). Students’ evaluations as antecedents of faculty-to-faculty incivility: A theoretical examination. In Christine L. Cho, & Julie K. Corkett (Eds.) Global Perspectives on Microaggressions in Higher Education: Understanding and Combating Covert Violence in Universities, Routledge, Ch. 9, pp 141-156. DOI: 10.4324/9781003244394-11


Item Type

Book Chapter



All Rights Reserved