Workplace Incivility Scale
Also known as: WIS, Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ) - adapted
The Workplace Incivility Scale (WIS) is an assessment tool measuring exposure to low-intensity interpersonal mistreatment in occupational settings. Based on the concept of 'incivility' developed by Andersson and Pearson, and operationalized by Cortina and colleagues in 2001, the WIS captures rude, condescending, and hostile communication, excluding the overt aggression characteristic of workplace bullying or harassment. Workplace incivility is increasingly recognized as a significant occupational health risk with consequences for employee wellbeing, productivity, and organizational culture.
Key highlights
- Captures common, everyday mistreatment that may be overlooked compared to overt bullying but accumulates to cause significant stress.
- Brief (7-9 items, ~3-5 minutes) enabling routine organizational assessment and large-scale surveys.
- Research evidence links incivility to burnout, depression, health problems, reduced performance, and turnover, validating its occupational health relevance.
- Distinguishes incivility (ambiguous, low-intensity) from harassment (intentional, severe), providing nuanced understanding of workplace social climate.
- Applicable across diverse occupations with consistent evidence of negative health and performance consequences.
Intuition
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
How it works
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
When to use it
The WIS is appropriate for occupational health research examining incivility prevalence and impact on employee wellbeing. It is valuable in organizational climate assessments to identify whether disrespect is a concern. It can be used in intervention studies evaluating whether management training, communication norms, or leadership changes reduce incivility. In occupational medicine, it helps contextualize an employee's stress and workplace relationships. It is less appropriate when formal harassment or bullying is suspected; those require specific assessment tools designed for severe mistreatment and legal/investigative contexts.
Strengths & limitations
- Captures common, everyday mistreatment that may be overlooked compared to overt bullying but accumulates to cause significant stress.
- Brief (7-9 items, ~3-5 minutes) enabling routine organizational assessment and large-scale surveys.
- Research evidence links incivility to burnout, depression, health problems, reduced performance, and turnover, validating its occupational health relevance.
- Distinguishes incivility (ambiguous, low-intensity) from harassment (intentional, severe), providing nuanced understanding of workplace social climate.
- Applicable across diverse occupations with consistent evidence of negative health and performance consequences.
- Self-report bias: employees may under-report incivility if they fear retaliation, or over-report if distressed. Organizational context influences honesty.
- Causality unclear: does incivility cause burnout, or do burned-out employees perceive more rudeness? Longitudinal data needed to establish direction.
- Cultural sensitivity: expectations of politeness and directness vary across cultures; 'rude' is interpreted differently in different national or organizational contexts.
- Does not measure context or intent; an interruption may reflect enthusiasm rather than disrespect; a curt tone may reflect time pressure rather than hostility. Interpretation can be ambiguous.
- Remedy options are limited compared to formal harassment; organizations struggle with addressing 'rude' behavior through established channels.
Common pitfalls
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
Applications
This section is available to Pro members. Upgrade to Pro
Frequently asked
Is incivility the same as bullying or harassment?
No. Incivility is low-intensity, often ambiguous mistreatment (rudeness, interruption, condescension). Bullying is repeated, intentional, severe mistreatment with power imbalance. Harassment is legally defined mistreatment based on protected characteristics (race, gender, etc.). Incivility is more common, less obvious, and often not legally actionable, but cumulatively damaging. Organizations should address all three, but at different levels.
Can incivility be addressed without formal investigation or discipline?
Yes. Incivility prevention focuses on organizational culture: leadership modeling respect, communication norms and training, feedback to staff on unprofessional tone, team norms emphasizing courtesy. Formal investigation is reserved for harassment or severe bullying. Incivility is prevented through culture and prevention, not only investigation.
What if an employee experiences high incivility but is in an inherently fast-paced, demanding role?
High workload or time pressure may result in curt communication, but this is different from intentional incivility. Organizations can address this by managing workload, providing communication training, and establishing norms that pressure does not excuse rudeness. Stressful roles require more, not fewer, emphasis on professional courtesy.
Does reporting incivility lead to retaliation?
Risk of retaliation exists if organizational culture does not support reporting or protect reporters. Effective incivility prevention requires explicit protection of reporters and clear non-retaliation policies. If employees fear retaliation, WIS scores may under-represent true incivility, and organizational intervention must build psychological safety before measurement.
Sources
- 1.Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 452-471.
- 2.Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J. H., & Langhout, R. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(1), 64-80.
You have read it. What now?
Cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Workplace Incivility Scale. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/occupational-health/workplace-incivility-scale