Association Between Negative Workplace Gossip, Mental Health and Professional Life Among Nurses: A Cross-Sectional Study in Greece

1. Introduction

Gossip has long been an integral part of human social life and interpersonal interaction. Consequently, it has attracted scholarly attention across a range of disciplines. Integrating the theoretical perspectives developed within these different fields can provide a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding the nature, functions, and dynamics of gossip.

Across anthropology, evolutionary and social psychology, and organizational behavior, a cross-disciplinary consensus has converged on a neutral definition of gossip as informal, evaluative talk, positive or negative, about an absent third party [1,2,3,4]. So defined, gossip is distinct from rumor, which is by definition unverified, often concerns events rather than persons, and is intended for wide circulation [5,6]. The literature’s point of departure is the paradox noted by Foster (2004): despite persistent moral censure, gossip is ubiquitous, accounting for a substantial share of everyday interaction [7], and those who abstain from it tend to be marginalized from their groups [8]. This persistence is explained by reference to the social functions gossip serves. Following Stirling [9], Foster [3] organizes these into four categories: information, entertainment, friendship or intimacy, and influence. Gossip provides individuals with a map of their social environment and access to evaluative knowledge unavailable through formal channels [10,11]; it signals trust and cements dyadic and group boundaries [12]; and it operates as an informal policing device that articulates and enforces group norms [13]. Literature further extends this reasoning. In particular, Dunbar [13,14] treats language and gossip as “grooming at a distance”, a bonding mechanism enabling social coherence in large groups, whereas Baumeister et al. [15] conceptualize gossip as cultural learning through which normative knowledge is acquired vicariously. Wert and Salovey [16] further frame it as a social comparison process serving the validation of opinions, abilities, and emotions. Empirically, prosocial gossip has been shown to protect groups from exploitation and promote cooperation [17], and information gathering rather than intent to harm emerges as the dominant self-reported motive [18]. In the organizational domain, Kurland and Pelled [4] modeled workplace gossip along the dimensions of valence, credibility, and work-relatedness, linking them to the gossiper’s power. Brady et al. [1] subsequently rejected the categorization of gossip as interpersonal deviance [19], showing that typical gossip is neither statistically rare, nor condemned by recipients, nor norm-violating, and reconceptualized it along valence and gossip subject. Lee and Barnes [20] shifted attention to the recipient, proposing an attributional model in which inferred motives -prosocial, relational, or self-interested- determine reciprocation and the sender’s perceived trustworthiness. Collectively, this work reframes gossip as a multidimensional, goal-directed behavior whose consequences depend on its content, motives, context, and interpretation.

A considerable number of studies conducted in different populations, including health professionals, have examined the occurrence of gossip in everyday social conversations, as well as the characteristics of those who engage in it. A study in the general population of Poland, which also included children, showed that 30% of conversational content consisted of gossip, with women and individuals aged 25–29 years and over 40 years devoting the most time to gossiping [21]. Evidence from five independent studies, encompassing two student samples, two patient samples, and one community sample, demonstrates that neutral gossip represents the predominant form of gossip, while negative gossip ranges from 8.5% to 32.5% and exceeds positive gossip across most samples [22]. At the organizational level, healthcare settings, and hospitals in particular, are workplaces that employ large numbers of staff who interact frequently with one another, making gossip an inherent feature of their everyday working life. Findings concerning gossip among nursing personnel are consistent with those observed in other populations. In particular, approximately half of all recorded gossip events were classified as neutral. Negative gossip ranked second and was substantially more frequent than positive gossip, while gossip statements accounted for 12.9% of all behavioural events observed per meeting [23].

The determinants that contribute to the emergence of gossip within healthcare organizations can be broadly categorized as intrinsic and extrinsic motivations. Extrinsic are driven by factors related to the work environment. Hospital settings are characterized by demanding working conditions, substantial patient workloads, and frequent interpersonal exchanges among healthcare professionals, all of which may facilitate the circulation of informal information. Nurses working in these environments are required to manage complex interactions with patients, colleagues, and other members of the healthcare team. Furthermore, the continuous provision of nursing care across 24-hour shifts involves the ongoing exchange of information regarding patients’ needs, clinical events, workplace experiences, and professional concerns. Consequently, in such communication-intensive settings, workplace gossip may develop as an informal communication mechanism through which employees exchange, interpret, and make sense of work-related information [24]. Three intrinsic motivations underline nurses’ workplace gossip. Informationally, formal channels in complex healthcare organizations rarely suffice, so informal exchanges supply the practical knowledge required for coordination and professional development. Affectively, nurses confronting distress and incivility while expected to remain composed use gossip as an outlet for suppressed emotion. Relationally, sharing personal and occupational difficulties elicits peer advice and reassurance, fostering supportive networks that sustain resilience in an emotionally demanding profession [24].

At the organizational level, and particularly within the nursing context, workplace gossip produces predominantly adverse outcomes. Targets of negative gossip may develop emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and substantial damage to reputation, self-esteem, and self-confidence, culminating in reduced engagement, elevated burnout risk, and deteriorating care quality [24,25,26]. Initiators of negative gossip frequently report guilt and psychological distress, alongside compromised credibility [24]. Also, senders and recipients experience guilt, role ambiguity, lower job-related affective well-being, poorer supervisory performance ratings and eroded trust. At the collective level, gossip has been associated with ostracism, incivility, social loafing and lower team performance, fostering a broader climate of distrust [27]. Recipients repeatedly exposed to gossip experience eroded psychological safety, fearing they may become the next target, and consequently withdraw from candid expression. Organizationally, gossip transmits inaccurate information, intensifies interpersonal tension, fractures collaboration, and jeopardizes patient safety [24]. Also, gossip targets report psychological distress, work–family conflict, diminished organization-based self-esteem and perceived insider status, reduced organizational citizenship behaviour driven by social exclusion, and impaired in-role performance [27]. Nonetheless, gossip also compensates for deficiencies in formal communication, alleviates accumulated emotional strain, reinforces collegial bonds and shared norms, facilitates the professional socialization of newly recruited nurses, and alerts managers to emerging dissatisfaction or risk [24].

The aim of this study was to examine the association between perceived negative workplace gossip and nurses’ psychological and occupational well-being. Specifically, we assessed whether exposure to negative workplace gossip was associated with (a) mental health outcomes, namely anxiety and depressive symptoms; (b) self-evaluative outcomes, namely self-esteem; and (c) work-related outcomes, namely burnout, work engagement, job satisfaction, quiet quitting and turnover intention. Although negative workplace gossip has been associated with anxiety and psychological distress in general employee samples [28,29], no study has to date examined its association with symptoms of anxiety and depression among nurses using a validated screening instrument. Similarly, while two recent studies have linked negative gossip to quiet quitting in multi-sector and general workforce samples [30,31], neither examined nurses specifically, despite evidence that quiet quitting in nursing carries distinctive implications for patient care [32]. Also, to the best of our knowledge, the present study is the first to investigate the association between negative workplace gossip and organization-based self-esteem among nurses. The present study therefore addresses two gaps: it is the first to assess anxiety and depressive symptomatology in relation to negative workplace gossip among nurses, and the first to examine quiet quitting and organization-based self-esteem as an outcome of negative workplace gossip in a nursing population.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

A cross-sectional study was conducted in Greece. Data collection was conducted in May 2026 through an online questionnaire developed with Google Forms. The survey was disseminated through professional nursing groups on social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn, resulting in a convenience sample. Participants were eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: (a) employment as a clinical nurse in a healthcare setting, (b) a minimum of one year of professional experience, and (c) provision of informed consent to participate in the study. We applied the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines in our study [33].

In the present analysis, we included one predictor (negative workplace gossip) alongside four potential confounding variables (sex, age, educational level, and work experience). Based on an anticipated conservative effect size of 0.03 for the association between negative workplace gossip and the study outcomes, a statistical power of 95%, and an alpha probability error of 5%, the required sample size was estimated at 436 nurses. The sample size calculation was performed using G*Power software (version 3.1.9.2).

2.2. Measurements

2.2.1. Demographic Characteristics

We measured the following demographic characteristics of nurses: sex (females or males), age (continuous variable), educational level (MSc/PhD diploma; no or yes), and work experience (continuous variable).

2.2.2. Perceived Negative Workplace Gossip Scale

We used the Perceived Negative Workplace Gossip Scale (PNWGS) to measure levels of negative workplace gossip among nurses [34]. The PNWGS is a three-item scale; (1) “In the past six months, others (e.g., coworkers and/or supervisors) communicated damaging information about me in the workplace,” (2) “In the past six months, others (e.g., coworkers and/or supervisors) spread unfavorable gossip about me in the workplace,” and (3) “In the past six months, others (e.g., coworkers and/or supervisors) made negative allegations about me in the workplace”. Answers are on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (daily). Total score on PNWGS is computed by adding answers on three items and dividing by three. Thus, total score on PNWGS ranges from 1 to 5 with higher values indicating higher levels of negative workplace gossip among nurses. We used the valid Greek version of the PNWGS [35]. Cronbach’s alpha in our study was 0.888.

2.2.3. Patient Health Questionnaire-4

The assessment of anxiety and depressive symptoms within the study sample was conducted using the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) [36]. This brief instrument comprises four items, with two items evaluating anxiety and two assessing depression. Responses are measured on a four-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every day). Subscale scores for both anxiety and depression range from 0 to 6, with higher scores reflecting greater symptoms of severity. The validated Greek version of the PHQ-4 was employed in this study [37]. Internal consistency reliability analysis demonstrated satisfactory Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 0.724 for the anxiety subscale and 0.765 for the depression subscale. Moreover, Cronbach’s alpha for the PHQ-4 was 0.819.

2.2.4. Quiet Quitting Scale

The level of quiet quitting among the participating nurses was assessed using the Quiet Quitting Scale (QQS) [38]. This instrument comprises nine items, with responses measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree/never) to 5 (strongly agree/always). The QQS encompasses three distinct dimensions: detachment (four items), lack of initiative (three items), and lack of motivation (two items). Scores for each dimension are calculated as the mean of the corresponding item responses, yielding a range from 1 to 5, with higher values indicating greater levels of quiet quitting behavior. The validated Greek version of the QQS was utilized in the present study [39]. Internal consistency analysis demonstrated good reliability, with an overall Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.832 for the total scale. Additionally, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the subscales were 0.724 for detachment, 0.703 for lack of initiative, and 0.777 for lack of motivation.

2.2.5. Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-3

Work engagement in the study sample was assessed using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-3 (UWES-3) [40]. This concise instrument consists of three items, with responses measured on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (every day). The overall UWES-3 score is calculated as the mean of the item responses, producing a range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater levels of work engagement. The validated Greek version of the UWES-3 was employed in the present study [41]. Internal consistency reliability was found to be satisfactory, with a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.737.

2.2.6. Organizational-Based Self-Esteem Scale

We used the Organizational-Based Self-Esteem Scale (OBSES) to measure level of organizational self-esteem in our nurses [42]. The OBSES consists of 10 items, with responses measured on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The overall OBSES score is calculated as the mean of the item responses, producing a range from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater levels of organizational-based self-esteem. The validated Greek version of the OBSES was employed in the present study [43]. Internal consistency analysis demonstrated very good reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.935.

2.2.7. Single-Item Job Satisfaction Measure

Job satisfaction among the study participants was assessed using the Single-Item Job Satisfaction (SIJS) measure [44]. The SIJS includes only the following question “Taking everything into consideration, how do you feel about your job as a whole?”. Answers are on a seven-point Likert scale from 1 (extremely dissatisfied) to 7 (extremely satisfied). Higher values indicate higher levels of job satisfaction. The validated Greek version of the SIJS was employed in the present study [45].

2.2.8. Single-Item Burnout Measure

Job burnout among our nurses was evaluated using the Single-Item Burnout (SIB) measure [46]. The SIB consists of a single question: “On a scale from 0 (not at all) to 10 (totally), how tired do you feel because of your job?”. Higher scores indicate greater levels of overall job burnout. The validated Greek version of the SIB was employed in the present study [47].

2.2.9. Turnover Intention

Turnover intention among participants was assessed using a single-item measure: “How often have you seriously considered leaving your current job?” [48]. This item has been widely recognized as a valid indicator of turnover intention; the Turnover Intention Scale. Responses are recorded on a six-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 6 (extremely often). Overall scores range from 1 to 6, with higher values corresponding to greater turnover intention. Scores of 4 or higher are indicative of a high level of turnover intention, whereas scores of 3 or lower reflect a low level.

2.3. Ethical Issues

Ethical approval for the study protocol was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Nursing, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (approval number: 59; March 03, 2026). The study was conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki [49]. Data collection was carried out anonymously and on a voluntary basis. Participants were provided with detailed information regarding the study’s aims and design, and informed consent was obtained prior to their participation.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

We present categorical variables as numbers and percentages. Also, we use mean, standard deviation (SD), median, interquartile range (IQR), minimum value, and maximum value to present continuous variables. We considered workplace gossip as the independent variable and anxiety, depression, quiet quitting, work engagement, organizational-based self-esteem, job satisfaction, job burnout and turnover intention as the dependent variables. We considered our demographic variables as potential confounders. We examined correlation between study scales with Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Since anxiety, depression, quiet quitting, work engagement, organizational-based self-esteem, job satisfaction, job burnout were continuous variables that followed normal distribution, we performed a linear regression analysis. First, we performed a simple regression analysis, and then we constructed a final multivariable model by eliminating confounders to estimate the independent effect of workplace gossip on anxiety, depression, quiet quitting, work engagement, organizational-based self-esteem, job satisfaction, job burnout. We calculated variance inflation factors (VIFs) to assess multicollinearity in the multivariable models. A VIF greater than 5 indicates multicollinearity between independent variables. In the case of linear regression, we present unadjusted and adjusted unstandardized regression coefficients (B), 95% confidence intervals (CI), standardized beta coefficients, adjusted R², p-values and VIFs. Moreover, logistic regression analysis was conducted to examine the effect of workplace gossip on turnover intention since turnover intention was dichotomized. First, we performed a simple logistic regression analysis, and then we constructed a final multivariable logistic regression model by eliminating confounders to estimate the independent effect of workplace gossip on turnover intention. Odds ratios (OR), 95% confidence intervals, and p-values are presented for logistic regression models. Pearson’s correlation coefficient between age and work experience was very high (r = 0.921, p-value < 0.001). Thus, to avoid multicollinearity issues in the multivariable regression models, we included work experience in the final multivariable models instead of including age and work experience simultaneously. P-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant. We used the IBM SPSS 28.0 (IBM Corp. Released 2021. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 28.0. Armonk, NY, USA: IBM Corp) for analysis.

3. Results

3.1. Demographic Characteristics

The demographic characteristics of the nurses are presented in Table 1. The study sample comprised 440 nurses, the majority of whom were female (79.3%). The mean age of participants was 39.89 years (SD = 10.43), with a median age of 40 years (IQR = 18), a minimum value of 22 years, and a maximum value of 61 years. Four out of ten nurses held a postgraduate degree (MSc/PhD). The mean duration of work experience was 15.43 years (SD = 10.48), while the median was 15 years (IQR = 15), the minimum value was one year, and the maximum value of 40 years.

3.2. Study Scales

Descriptive statistics for the study scales are presented in Table 2. The mean score for the PNWGS was 2.31. Mean anxiety score was 2.16, while mean depression score was 2.31. Mean QQS score was 2.23, while among its dimensions, lack of motivation was the most prevalent (mean = 2.69), followed by lack of initiative (mean = 2.26) and detachment (mean = 1.98). Mean UWES-3 score was 3.74, while mean OBSES was 3.99. Moreover, mean job satisfaction score was 4.61, and mean job burnout score was 6.89. Almost half of nurses (45.5%) showed a high level of turnover intention.

Table 3 presents the Pearson correlation coefficients examining the correlations among the study scales. We found a statistically significant positive correlation between negative workplace gossip and anxiety (r=0.120), depression (r=0.180), detachment (r=0.127), lack of initiative (r=0.132), lack of motivation (r=0.172), and burnout (r=0.171). Also, we found a statistically significant negative correlation between workplace gossip and work engagement (r = -0.140), organizational-based self-esteem (r = -0.216), and job satisfaction (r = -0.173).

3.3. Regression Analysis

Table 4 shows linear regression analyses with score on the Perceived Negative Workplace Gossip Scale as the independent variable and mental health, and professional life of nurses as the dependent variables. Our findings indicated that negative workplace gossip is associated with increased levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms among nurses. After adjusting for sex, educational level, and work experience, a significant positive association was observed between PNWGS scores and both anxiety (adjusted B = 0.221, 95% CI: 0.056 to 0.386, p = 0.009), and depression symptoms (adjusted B = 0.333, 95% CI: 0.166 to 0.501, p < 0.001). These results suggest that nurses who reported higher exposure to negative workplace gossip also exhibited elevated levels of anxiety and depressive symptomatology.

Similar results were found for the association between negative workplace gossip and quiet quitting. In particular, multivariable linear regression analysis identified a positive association between negative workplace gossip and detachment (adjusted B = 0.121, 95% CI: 0.051 to 0.191, p < 0.001), lack of initiative (adjusted B = 0.163, 95% CI: 0.080 to 0.245, p < 0.001), and lack of motivation (adjusted B = 0.187, 95% CI: 0.100 to 0.275, p < 0.001). These findings indicated that nurses who reported greater exposure to negative workplace gossip also demonstrated higher levels of quiet quitting.

Moreover, we found a positive association between negative workplace gossip and job burnout (adjusted B = 0.305, 95% CI: 0.077 to 0.532, p < 0.001), and, thus, nurses who reported increased exposure to negative workplace gossip also exhibited higher levels of job burnout.

Multivariable linear regression analysis showed a negative association between negative workplace gossip and work engagement (adjusted B = -0.259, 95% CI: -0.400 to -0.118, p < 0.001), organizational-based self-esteem (adjusted B = -0.175, 95% CI: -0.246 to -0.104, p < 0.001), and job satisfaction (adjusted B = -0.271, 95% CI: -0.417 to -0.124, p < 0.001). In other words, our findings suggested that nurses who reported greater exposure to negative workplace gossip exhibited lower levels of work engagement, organizational-based self-esteem, and job satisfaction.

All multivariable linear regression models supported the assumption of multivariate normality for the dependent variables, since the residuals align with a normal distribution; “score on the PHQ-4 (anxiety)” (Supplementary Figure 1), “score on the PHQ-4 (depression)” (Supplementary Figure 3), “score on the QQS (detachment)” (Supplementary Figure 5), “score on the QQS (lack of initiative)” (Supplementary Figure 7), “score on the QQS (lack of motivation)” (Supplementary Figure 9), “score on the UWES-3” (Supplementary Figure 11), “score on the OBSES” (Supplementary Figure 13), “score on the SIJS” (Supplementary Figure 15), and “score on the SIB” (Supplementary Figure 17). Moreover, scatterplots of residuals versus predicted values of the dependent variables supported the assumptions of homoscedasticity and linearity for the multivariable models (Supplementary figures 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 and 18). Also, there were no multicollinearity issues since the VIFs were 1.035 in all multivariable linear regression models.

Additionally, simple logistic regression analysis showed that higher level of negative workplace gossip was associated with an increased probability of turnover intention (odds ratio = 1.465, 95% confidence interval = 1.180 to 1.819, p-value < 0.001). Our multivariable logistic regression model confirmed the findings of the simple logistic regression analysis (odds ratio = 1.459, 95% confidence interval = 1.168 to 1.823, p-value < 0.001).

4. Discussion

The present study showed that nurses experience a low-to-moderate level of negative workplace gossip from colleagues or supervisors, and that such gossip is associated with all outcomes examined. Specifically, negative workplace gossip was found to be negatively associated with nurses’ mental health, particularly with increased symptoms of anxiety and depression, while it was positively associated with quiet quitting. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate these specific associations among nurses. The observed association between exposure to negative gossip and symptoms of anxiety and depression can be interpreted through the lens of chronic interpersonal stress. Unlike overt aggression, negative gossip operates covertly and in the target’s absence, denying nurses the opportunity to respond or restore their reputation. Negative gossip from supervisors constitutes a persistent source of stress, ultimately contributing to exhaustion [50], which, in turn, may contribute to the development of anxiety and depression [51]. Given that gossip constitutes a recognized form of bullying behavior [52], our findings align with meta-analytic evidence linking workplace bullying to depression and anxiety [53]. Individuals within organizations often engage systematically in workplace gossip as a means of gaining influence. Gossip can substantially shape individuals’ reputations within organizations, either positively or negatively; in the case of negative gossip, it can seriously damage the target’s reputation, thereby making gossip a particularly powerful form of informal social influence [54]. Moreover, individuals occupying lower hierarchical positions may use gossip as a means of exercising informal power, strategically employing it to influence or manipulate the actions and decisions of those in positions of authority [54]. This ambiguity resembles the reality-eroding dynamics described in accounts of psychological manipulation (gaslighting), whereby targets come to doubt their own judgment and perceptions of the work environment. Nurses who experience workplace gaslighting are more likely to report symptoms of anxiety and depression [55].

Our findings indicate that nurses exposed to negative gossip from colleagues or supervisors report lower work engagement and higher levels of quiet quitting. Quiet quitting began to attract increasing attention from organizations shortly before the end of the COVID-19 pandemic and was soon observed among healthcare professionals internationally, becoming an emerging phenomenon within healthcare settings [39,56]. Regarding quiet quitting, our finding is consistent with evidence that supervisor-sent negative gossip predicts quiet quitting indirectly, through diminished psychological safety and quiescent silence, where employees are afraid to speak up, raise questions about important issues, or express new ideas due to concerns that they may face rejection, embarrassment, or punishment [31]. Furthermore, negative workplace gossip can hinder employees’ innovative behavior by limiting their willingness to seek out new ideas and put them into practice [57]. Proposing a new idea is itself an act of interpersonal exposure: it invites evaluation, marks the proposer as visible, and carries the risk of being judged. Where negative gossip circulates, that visibility becomes hazardous, and the target has good reason to retreat into routine, unremarkable task performance. Conversely, when nurse managers provide nurses with opportunities to propose new ideas and ensure access to the necessary resources for their implementation, thereby fostering a supportive environment for innovation, nurses are less likely to engage in quiet quitting [58]. The inverse association between negative gossip and work engagement observed in our sample is consistent with recent evidence identifying affective rumination as the operative mechanism: negative gossip has been shown to diminish engagement by prompting repetitive, emotionally charged thinking about the experience, whereas positive gossip enhances engagement through organisation-based self-esteem [59]. Because gossip is typically covert, ambiguous, and difficult to confront directly, targeted nurses may repeatedly revisit the incident, question colleagues’ intentions, and worry about their professional reputation and acceptance within the team. This emotionally charged thinking prolongs the psychological impact of gossip beyond the actual workplace encounter and prevents effective detachment from work. This mechanism may be particularly important in nursing, where emotional demands, rotating shifts, and limited recovery time already place considerable pressure on employees’ psychological resources. Consequently, nurses preoccupied with negative gossip may begin their next shift with insufficiently replenished resources, resulting in reduced vigour, dedication, and absorption. Thus, workplace gossip should not be regarded merely as an unpleasant interpersonal episode, but as an occupational stressor whose effects may persist across shifts and gradually undermine nurses’ engagement with their work.

To our knowledge, the association between perceived negative gossip and organization-based self-esteem has not previously been examined in nursing populations. Existing evidence derives almost exclusively from business sector [25,60]. The observed association between negative workplace gossip and lower organization-based self-esteem may indicate that nurses interpret unfavorable comments from colleagues as social signals that their competence, contribution, and professional standing are not valued within the organization. Drawing on self-consistency theory, employees’ self-esteem within the organization is shaped in part by the evaluative cues they receive from others, and their subsequent behaviour tends to be congruent with that self-view [61]. Consequently, repeated exposure to negative gossip may lead nurses to question their usefulness and importance within the healthcare organization [25]. This process may be particularly pronounced in nursing, where care delivery depends heavily on teamwork, trust, and continuous interpersonal interaction. Moreover, the covert and difficult-to-confront nature of gossip may foster feelings of rejection, isolation, and workplace exclusion, thereby weakening nurses’ sense of belonging and organizational worth. Previous evidence similarly suggests that workplace exclusion represents an important mechanism through which negative gossip undermines organization-based self-esteem [60].

The finding that negative workplace gossip was associated with lower job satisfaction, and higher burnout suggests that gossip constitutes not merely an informal communication practice but a persistent relational job stressor. The association between negative workplace gossip and lower job satisfaction may reflect the erosion of the personal and relational resources on which satisfying work depends. Recent evidence indicates that negative gossip diminishes targets’ work-related well-being by weakening self-efficacy, suggesting that unfavourable evaluation leads targets to question their capacity to function effectively within the organisation [62]. A four-wave, two-source study further found that negative gossip prompted prevention-oriented cognitive responses and interaction avoidance, ultimately reducing relational satisfaction with colleagues and supervisors [63]. Although both studies were conducted in Chinese corporate settings, the mechanisms they identify are plausibly amplified in nursing, where job satisfaction rests substantially on professional recognition, supportive relationships and mutual trust, and where avoidance of colleagues is difficult to sustain without cost. Nurses subject to such talk may therefore come to appraise both their immediate work environment and their broader employment experience less favourably.

The positive association between perceived negative gossip and burnout is consistent with evidence from a multi-country study of hospitals, including Greek sites, in which negative gossip was positively related to emotional exhaustion and depersonalisation even after controlling for negative affect [26]. Our findings extend that pattern to a Greek nursing sample specifically. Two mechanisms plausibly account for the relationship. The first is resource depletion: negative gossip constitutes a chronic social stressor that cannot be resolved through the means ordinarily available for workplace conflict, since neither its content nor its extent is known to the target, so that emotional resources are drawn down without replenishment [64]. The second concerns the coping response it provokes. Employees who perceive themselves to be the subject of unfavourable talk from supervisors tend to engage in impression management, and it is this effortful self-presentation, rather than the gossip itself, that predicts emotional exhaustion, an effect amplified where tasks are highly interdependent [50]. Nursing is characterised by precisely such interdependence.

The management of negative gossip falls primarily to nurse managers and requires an organizational rather than an individual response. Four priorities emerge. First, open and frequent communication reduces the informational vacuum in which gossip flourishes; where formal channels are sparse, informal evaluative talk becomes the principal means of learning about one’s standing, and hierarchical hospital cultures are particularly susceptible. Second, structured team meetings provide a practical vehicle. Brief unit-level huddles have been shown to improve nurses’ perceptions of teamwork and their willingness to raise concerns, and offer a routine setting in which issues can be surfaced openly rather than discussed behind colleagues’ backs [65]. Third, targets require active support. Because attempts to repair one’s reputation are themselves depleting, managers should address the substance of any concern through formal appraisal channels while explicitly affirming the nurse’s standing in the unit, rather than leaving the target to infer where they stand. Fourth, and underpinning the rest, managers should cultivate a climate in which questions can be asked without fear of appearing incompetent. A recent systematic review of psychological safety in healthcare practice settings identifies leadership behaviour as central to its establishment, and links psychological safety to improved workforce and patient outcomes [66]. Nurse managers should also recognize the weight of their own informal talk, since evaluative comments from a position of authority carry both reputational threat and the absence of recourse. Prohibiting gossip outright is neither feasible nor advisable; strengthening the formal channels that render it unnecessary is the more defensible aim.

Our finding regarding the positive association between negative workplace gossip and turnover intention is consistent with evidence from a study conducted in China [67]. Conversely, a study from South Korea found that positive workplace gossip was negatively associated with nurses’ turnover intention [68]. Nurse staffing continues to face a persistent global crisis, as an increasing number of nurses report intentions to leave either their current positions or the nursing profession altogether. Globally, the prevalence of turnover intention among nurses has been estimated at 38.4% [69], while among newly graduated nurses it ranges from 6% to 61% [70]. In Greece, turnover intention has also been reported at particularly high levels, reaching 56.4% [71]. Several mechanisms may account for the association between negative gossip and turnover intention. Drawing on Conservation of Resources (COR) theory, negative gossip depletes two resources that are difficult to replenish within the same unit: professional reputation and supportive collegial relationships. When such losses persist and cannot be countered, withdrawal from the depleting environment becomes a rational conservation strategy, with turnover intention representing its most extreme expression. This interpretation is supported by the wider pattern observed in our data. Nurses exposed to negative gossip reported higher anxiety and depression, and elevated psychological distress is itself a well-documented antecedent of intention to leave [72,73], suggesting that impaired mental health may constitute one pathway linking gossip to turnover intention. Similarly, the concurrent association with quiet quitting and the inverse association with work engagement indicate that turnover intention does not emerge in isolation but forms part of a broader continuum of withdrawal, in which psychological disengagement precedes the intention to exit [71,74].

Several limitations of this study should be considered when interpreting the findings. The cross-sectional design precludes causal inference and, more importantly, cannot rule out reverse or reciprocal pathways. This concern is not merely formal. Gossip serves a norm-enforcement function within work groups, so nurses who have already withdrawn from the team may become more likely to be discussed unfavourably. Similarly, burnout and depressive symptoms may heighten sensitivity to, and recall of, unfavourable talk. Anxiety and depression were assessed by screening instrument, which identifies symptom levels rather than diagnosable disorder; the findings should not be read as establishing clinical cases. The associations reported here are therefore best read as evidence of co-occurrence rather than of directional influence, and longitudinal or multi-wave designs are required to establish temporal ordering. The instrument captures perceived negative gossip rather than gossip verified independently, and perception is the theoretically appropriate construct for self-evaluative outcomes; nonetheless, targets may be inaccurate about the extent and content of talk about them. Participants were recruited by convenience sampling from social media, and nurses who have experienced gossip may be either more motivated to participate or, conversely, more inclined to avoid a survey on the topic. The sample was drawn exclusively from Greek healthcare settings, and generalisation to other national or organisational cultures should be made cautiously.

5. Conclusions

This study examined perceived negative gossip from colleagues and supervisors among nurses and its associations with psychological, attitudinal and behavioural outcomes. Nurses reporting greater exposure to negative gossip also reported higher levels of anxiety, depression and burnout, lower job satisfaction, diminished organization-based self-esteem and work engagement, and greater quiet quitting. Taken together, these findings suggest that negative gossip is not a trivial feature of informal hospital communication but a social stressor whose consequences extend across the wellbeing, self-evaluative and motivational domains simultaneously. The pattern is consistent with a process in which covert unfavourable talk erodes nurses’ perceived standing within the unit, prompting a protective withdrawal of discretionary effort. Given the cross-sectional design, these associations should not be interpreted causally, and the source of gossip could not be disaggregated. Nonetheless, the results indicate that efforts to protect nurses’ wellbeing and retain their engagement must address the informal relational climate of the unit, not only its formal working conditions.