RESUMO
The literature on abusive supervision largely presumes that employees respond to abuse in a relatively straightforward way: When abuse is present, outcomes are unfavorable, and when abuse is absent, outcomes are favorable (or, at least less unfavorable). Yet despite the recognition that abusive supervision can vary over time, little consideration has been given to how past experiences of abuse may impact the ways employees react to it (or, its absence) in the present. This is a notable oversight, as it is widely acknowledged that past experiences create a context against which experiences in the present are compared. By applying a temporal lens to the experience of abusive supervision, we identify abusive supervision inconsistency as a phenomenon that may have different outcomes than would otherwise be predicted by the current consensus in this literature. We draw from theories on time and stress appraisal to develop a model that explains when, why, and for which employees, inconsistent abusive supervision may have negative outcomes (specifically, identifying anxiety as a proximal outcome of abusive supervision inconsistency that has downstream effects on turnover intentions). Moreover, the aforementioned theoretical perspectives dovetail in identifying employee workplace status as a moderator that may buffer employees from the stressful consequences of inconsistent abusive supervision. We test our model using two experience sampling studies with polynomial regression and response surface analyses. Our research makes important theoretical and practical contributions to the abusive supervision literature, as well as the literature on time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
RESUMO
Engagement is widely viewed as a motivational state that captures the degree to which individuals apply their physical, cognitive, and emotional energies to their jobs, and ultimately improves job performance. However, this job-level view overlooks the possibility that engagement may vary across the different tasks within a job and that engagement in one task may influence engagement and performance in a subsequent task. In this article, we develop and test hypotheses based on a task-level view of engagement and the general notion that there is "residual engagement" from a task that carries forward to a subsequent task. We propose that although task engagement (engagement in a specific task that comprises a broader role) positively spills over to influence task engagement and performance in a subsequent task, in part because of the transmission of positive affect, task engagement simultaneously engenders attention residue, which in turn impedes subsequent task engagement and performance. These predictions were supported in a study of 477 task transitions made by 20 crew members aboard The National Aeronautics and Space Administration's Human Exploration Research Analog (Study 1) and in a laboratory study of 346 participants who transitioned between a firefighting task and an assembly task (Study 2). Our investigation explains how engagement flows across tasks, illuminates a negative implication of engagement that has been masked by the predominant job-level perspective, and identifies completeness as a task attribute that reduces this negative consequence of engagement. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
