The Student Occupational Therapist Experience of Bullying on Fieldwork Placement: An Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bullying is a widespread issue in higher education, notably in healthcare disciplines like nursing, medicine, and physical therapy. However, there is a paucity of research addressing bullying within occupational therapy, which is a relational healthcare discipline emphasizing meaningful relationships, mutual trust, and respect. This study investigated the experiences of student occupational therapists in Canada regarding bullying during their fieldwork placements through exploratory phenomenology. Data from nine former occupational therapy students were collected via focus groups and interviews. Thematic analysis unveiled common experiences including passive aggression, demeaning comments, and a lack of support. Three key themes emerged: the impact of power dynamics between students and preceptors, reduced learning opportunities and emotional distress, and the necessity for coping strategies. Participants highlighted the detrimental effects of bullying in learning and well-being. We advocate for developing processes to address bullying in placement settings and creating educational resources for students and preceptors to ensure the establishment of safe and conducive learning environments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".