Examining academicians' perception levels of positive and negative rumor

Communication has emerged with the existence of humanity and continues to develop with the progress of humanity. Communication is vitally important for the development of society. Similarly, communication is also very necessary for organizations/institutions that bring society together. However, there is a structured, formal communication in organizations. Employees provide information about their work or workplace through formal communication channels. However, these formal communication channels cannot fully meet the communication needs of employees or even managers. Therefore, informal, natural communication channels have emerged. Gossip is considered one of these channels. The aim of the study is to investigate the definitions of gossip that have been made so far and to examine the effects of whether the positive and negative workplace gossip to which academics are exposed differs according to the demographic characteristics of academics. In addition to the main purpose of the research, the determination of the relationship between academics' positive workplace gossip perceptions and negative workplace gossip perceptions constitutes the sub-objective of the research. In the research part of the study, online surveys were conducted with participants with different demographic characteristics. These surveys cover university academic staff. The data obtained from the questionnaires were analyzed using IBM SPSS 22 program. Positive and negative gossip scales were used. In the study, positive workplace gossip levels of academics did not show a statistically significant difference in terms of gender, age, title and years of service variables (p>0.05). However, a statistically significant difference was found in academicians' positive workplace gossip levels according to the faculty variable (p<0.05). When the mean scores were examined, it was seen that the positive gossip perceptions of the academic staff working in the faculty of veterinary medicine (mean: 4.90 ss: 0.14) were higher than the academic staff working in other faculties. In the study, the negative workplace gossip levels of academics did not show a statistically significant difference in terms of gender, age, title, faculty and years of service variables (p>0.05). In the study, a negative, moderately significant relationship was found between academics' perception of negative workplace gossip and positive workplace gossip (r=,-376, p=,000, p<,01). Accordingly, as positive gossip increases, negative gossip decreases or as negative gossip increases, positive gossip decreases and this relationship is statistically significant. As a result, when the studies in the literature are examined, it is seen that similar results are reached with this study. In this respect, it can be said that this study is an important source for the literature.