Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 0

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 68 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Adapting and validating the workplace weight-based teasing scale and its relationship with workplace aggression and psychological distress

Bansal, Suhans, Kumar, Dinesh, Garg, Naval·2026·International Journal of Conflict Management
DOI 10.1108/ijcma-06-2025-0186
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: The Western literature presents scales that measure weight-based teasing; however, their applicability is limited to adolescents and patients. There are limited studies that have explored this teasing in organizational settings, specifically in as culturally diverse and sensitive work environments as those in India. Given the rising cases of weight-based teasing toward both obese and skinny people, a dedicated measurement tool that is applicable in organizational settings is required. Hence, this study aims to develop the Workplace Weight-Based Teasing Scale (W-WBTS), investigate its psychometric properties in the Indian context, and examine its relationship with aggression, psychological distress, and subjective well-being. Design/methodology/approach: Data was collected from the employees working at multi-national companies in the Delhi NCR region. This study adopted a systematic scale development methodology involving a literature review and focused group discussions to generate scale items. The study then conducted two independent studies to explore the psychometric properties of the W-WBTS in India. The factorial structure in Study 1 was assessed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) (using SPSS) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (using AMOS). Study 2 evaluated the reliability and validity of the scale. Finally, gender-based invariances were tested using the measurement invariance test. Findings: EFA and CFA validated a single-factor five-item scale in Study 1. The second study’s results established the criterion validity of this scale. Furthermore, the results suggest that weight-based teasing is one of the statistically significant predictors of psychological distress in organizations, thus recommending and affirming its predictive validity. The study confirmed the scale’s incremental validity by explaining variance in psychological distress over aggression and control variables, suggesting its added predictive value over existing scales. Finally, the results confirmed the measurement invariance test of W-WBTS in Indian context. Originality/value: Existing scales predominantly focus on adolescents and patients, emphasizing only on obese populations. This study is first of its kind that fills a critical gap by adapting and validating a scale tailored for working professionals, encompassing both skinny and obese people.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/ijcma-06-2025-0186

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Cooper, 1987, The development and validation of the body shape questionnaire, International Journal of Eating Disorders, 6, 485, 10.1002/1098-108X(198707)6:4<485::AID-EAT2260060405>3.0.CO;2-O · DOI
  2. Garner, 1991, Eating Disorder Inventory2: Professional Manual
  3. Melick, S. (2020), “Development and validation of a measure of algorithm aversion”, Master’s thesis, Bowling Green State University.

Metadata

Authors
Bansal, S., Kumar, D., & Garg, N.
Venue
International Journal of Conflict Management
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2026-01-23
Volume
37
Issue
3
Pages
578-604
ISSN
  • 1044-4068
  • 1758-8545
DOI
10.1108/ijcma-06-2025-0186
Cited by
0
References
68
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.