Consistent and low is the only way to go: A polynomial regression approach to the effect of abusive supervision inconsistency.

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).

Unbalanced, Unfair, Unhappy, or Unable? Theoretical Integration of Multiple Processes Underlying the Leader Mistreatment-Employee CWB Relationship with Meta-Analytic Methods.

Although a litany of theoretical accounts exists to explain why mistreated employees engage in counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs), little is known about whether these mechanisms are complementary or mutually exclusive, or the effect of context on their explanatory strength. To address these gaps, this meta-analytic investigation tests four theoretically-derived mechanisms simultaneously to explain the robust relationship between leader mistreatment and employee CWB: (1) a social exchange perspective, which argues that mistreated employees engage in negative reciprocal behaviors to counterbalance experienced mistreatment; (2) a justice perspective, whereby mistreated employees experience moral outrage and engage in retributive behaviors against the organization and its members; (3) a stressor-emotion perspective, which suggests that mistreated employees engage in CWBs to cope with their negative affect; and (4) a self-regulatory perspective, which proposes that mistreated employees are simply unable to inhibit undesirable behaviors. Moreover, we also examine whether the above model holds across cultures that vary on power distance. Our meta-analytic structural equation model demonstrated that all but the justice mechanism significantly mediated the relationship between leader mistreatment and employee CWBs, with negative affect emerging as the strongest explanatory mechanism in both high and low power distance cultures. Given these surprising results, as the stressor-emotion perspective is less frequently invoked in the literature, this paper highlights not only the importance of investigating multiple mechanisms together when examining the leader mistreatment-employee CWB relationship, but also the need to develop more nuanced theorizing about these mechanisms, particularly for negative affect.

Can two wrongs make a right? The buffering effect of retaliation on subordinate well-being following abusive supervision.

Subordinates who are abused by a supervisor tend to experience violated perceptions of interpersonal justice and deteriorated well-being. One way in which they may seek to cope with these consequences is by engaging in retaliatory behaviors intended to "get back" at their supervisor and even the score. Based on research suggesting that acts of retaliation can restore perceptions of justice, we propose a model whereby retaliation alleviates the effect of abusive supervision on subordinate well-being by restoring subordinates' interpersonal justice perceptions. In two studies, using multiwave (Study 1) and time-lagged (Study 2) designs, we found general support for our predictions, even when controlling for the alternative mechanism of victim identity and subordinates' baseline well-being. These results suggest that retaliation reduces the harmful consequences of supervisory abuse on well-being not only in the short term but also in the long run. Theoretical and practical implications surrounding this increased understanding of the effectiveness of retaliation as a strategy for coping with the effects of abusive supervision over time are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Subordinate poor performance as a stressor on leader well-being: The mediating role of abusive supervision and the moderating role of motives for abuse.

Drawing upon Stress-as-Offense-to-Self theory, we develop a moderated mediation model whereby subordinate poor performance and leader well-being is linked by abusive supervision and this mediated relationship is further moderated by leaders' motives for abuse. Specifically, we posit that higher performance promotion motives will attenuate, whereas higher injury motives will exacerbate the relationship between abusive supervision and leader emotional exhaustion, due to their differential implications for leaders' ability to see themselves in a positive light. In a pilot study, we first examined and found support for the theorized mediation chain in a multiwave field study of organizational leaders (N = 71). In Study 1, we conducted a multiwave and multisource field study of leader-follower dyads (N = 274), which supported our predictions that the indirect effect between subordinate poor performance and leader emotional exhaustion via abusive supervision was strengthened for leaders higher on injury motives. In Study 2, we undertook a 2-week daily diary study with leaders (N = 129) to hone in on the latter half of our model, focusing on within-person dynamics linking abusive supervision and leader well-being and the moderating role of leader motives for abuse. Although the within-person relationship between abusive supervision and emotional exhaustion was positive within a given day across leaders, the lagged within-person relationship between abusive supervision and emotional exhaustion unfolded differently for leaders higher versus lower on injury motives. Namely, abusive supervision had a lingering detrimental effect on leader emotional exhaustion among leaders higher on injury motives. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The dimensions and mechanisms of mindfulness in regulating aggressive behaviors.

On the basis of the notion that the ability to exert self-control is critical to the regulation of aggressive behaviors, we suggest that mindfulness, an aspect of the self-control process, plays a key role in curbing workplace aggression. In particular, we note the conceptual and empirical distinctions between dimensions of mindfulness (i.e., mindful awareness and mindful acceptance) and investigate their respective abilities to regulate workplace aggression. In an experimental study (Study 1), a multiwave field study (Study 2a), and a daily diary study (Study 2b), we established that the awareness dimension, rather than the acceptance dimension, of mindfulness plays a more critical role in attenuating the association between hostility and aggression. In a second multiwave field study (Study 3), we found that mindful awareness moderates the association between hostility and aggression by reducing the extent to which individuals use dysfunctional emotion regulation strategies (i.e., surface acting), rather than by reducing the extent to which individuals engage in dysfunctional thought processes (i.e., rumination). The findings are discussed in terms of the implications of differentiating the dimensions and mechanisms of mindfulness for regulating workplace aggression. (PsycINFO Database Record

Effects of Culture and Gender on Judgments of Intent and Responsibility.

Do different cultures hold different views of intentionality? In four studies, participants read scenarios in which the actor's distal intent (a focus on a broader goal) and proximal intent (a focus on the mechanics of the act) were manipulated. In Studies 1-2, when distal intent was more prominent in the actor's mind, North Americans rated the actor more responsible than did Chinese and South Asian participants. When proximal intent was more prominent, Chinese and South Asian participants, if anything, rated the actor more responsible. In Studies 3-4, when distal intent was more prominent, male Americans rated the actor more responsible than did female Americans. When proximal intent was more prominent, females rated the actor more responsible. The authors discuss these findings in relation to the literatures on moral reasoning and cultural psychology.