Why do some employees respond well to negative feedback, whereas others respond poorly? We suggest it depends on two factors: first, employees’ attribution of the feedback, or why employees believe their supervisor provides negative feedback in the first place, and second, employees’ core self-evaluation (CSE). These factors have implications for employees’ motivation to learn and learning performance. We tested our hypotheses using two three-wave time-lagged survey data from 370 employees in the United States (Study 1) and 302 hospital nurses in China (Study 2). Results suggest that for employees with high CSE, negative feedback is positively associated with the attribution that the feedback is given for performance-driven purposes (i.e. external attribution), which is in turn positively related to their motivation to learn. For employees with low CSE, negative feedback is positively related to the attribution that the feedback is given for self-serving purposes (i.e. internal attribution). Such attribution is negatively related to motivation to learn (Study 1), which further predicts the increase in their learning performance (Study 2). This study not only extends the theoretical understanding of negative feedback effectiveness, but also offers implications for supervisors to better deliver and for employees to better receive negative feedback.
AikenLSWestSG (1991) Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
2.
AnseelFBeattyASShenW, et al (2015) How are we doing after 30 years? A meta-analytic review of the antecedents and outcomes of feedback-seeking behavior. Journal of Management41(1): 318–348.
3.
AshfordSJ (1986) Feedback-seeking in individual adaptation: A resource perspective. Academy of Management Journal29(3): 465–487.
4.
AtwaterLECamobrecoJFDionneSD, et al (1997) Effects of rewards and punishments on leader charisma, leader effectiveness and follower reactions. The Leadership Quarterly8(2): 133–152.
5.
AudiaPGLockeEA (2003) Benefiting from negative feedback. Human Resource Management Review13(4): 631–646.
6.
BagozziRPEdwardsJR (1998) A general approach for representing constructs in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods1(1): 45–87.
7.
BannisterBD (1986) Performance outcome feedback and attributional feedback: Interactive effects on recipient responses. Journal of Applied Psychology71(2): 203–210.
8.
BelschakFDDen HartogDN (2009) Consequences of positive and negative feedback: The impact on emotions and extra-role behaviors. Applied Psychology58(2): 274–303.
9.
BezuijenXMVan DamKVan Den BergPT, et al (2010) How leaders stimulate employee learning: A leader–member exchange approach. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology83(3): 673–693.
10.
BezuijenXMVan Den BergPTVan DamK, et al (2009) Pygmalion and employee learning: The role of leader behaviors. Journal of Management35(5): 1248–1267.
11.
BillettSNewmanJ (2010) Learning practice: Conceptualising professional lifelong learning for the health-care sector. In: BradburyHFrostNKilminsterS, et al (eds) Beyond Reflective Practice: New Approaches to Professional Lifelong Learning. London: Routledge, 172–185.
12.
BonoJEColbertAE (2005) Understanding responses to multi-source feedback: The role of core self-evaluations. Personnel Psychology58(1): 171–203.
13.
BoothJEShantzAGlombTM, et al (2020) Bad bosses and self-verification: The moderating role of core self-evaluations with trust in workplace management. Human Resource Management59(2): 135–152.
14.
BrettJFAtwaterLE (2001) 360° feedback: Accuracy, reactions, and perceptions of usefulness. Journal of Applied Psychology86(5): 930–942.
15.
BrocknerJ (1988) Self-Esteem at Work: Research, Theory, and Practice. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
16.
BurtonJPTaylorSGBarberLK (2014) Understanding internal, external, and relational attributions for abusive supervision. Journal of Organizational Behavior35(6): 871–891.
17.
CannonMDWitherspoonR (2005) Actionable feedback: Unlocking the power of learning and performance improvement. Academy of Management Perspectives19(2): 120–134.
18.
CarlsonKDWuJ (2012) The illusion of statistical control: Control variable practice in management research. Organizational Research Methods15(3): 413–435.
19.
CarverCSScheierMF (1998) On the Self-Regulation of Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.
20.
ChangCHFerrisDLJohnsonRE, et al (2012) Core self-evaluations: A review and evaluation of the literature. Journal of Management38(1): 81–128.
21.
ChenXLiaoJWuW, et al (2017) Perceived insider status and feedback reactions: A dual path of feedback motivation attribution. Frontiers in Psychology8: 668.
22.
CheungJHBurnsDKSinclairRR, et al (2017) Amazon Mechanical Turk in organizational psychology: An evaluation and practical recommendations. Journal of Business and Psychology32(4): 347–361.
23.
ChiangFFBirtchTA (2007) Examining the perceived causes of successful employee performance: An East–West comparison. International Journal of Human Resource Management18(2): 232–248.
24.
ColquittJALePineJANoeRA (2000) Toward an integrative theory of training motivation: A meta-analytic path analysis of 20 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology85(5): 678–707.
25.
CramptonSMWagnerIIIJA (1994) Percept–percept inflation in micro organizational research: An investigation of prevalence and effect. Journal of Applied Psychology79(1): 67–76.
26.
DasboroughMTAshkanasyNM (2002) Emotion and attribution of intentionality in leader–member relationships. The Leadership Quarterly13(5): 615–634.
27.
DengHLeungK (2014) Contingent punishment as a double-edged sword: A dual-pathway model from a sense-making perspective. Personnel Psychology67(4): 951–980.
28.
DimotakisNMitchellDMaurerT (2017) Positive and negative assessment center feedback in relation to development self-efficacy, feedback seeking, and promotion. Journal of Applied Psychology102(11): 1514–1527.
29.
DonovanJJWilliamsKJ (2003) Missing the mark: Effects of time and causal attributions on goal revision in response to goal–performance discrepancies. Journal of Applied Psychology88(3): 379–390.
30.
EberlyMBHolleyECJohnsonMD, et al (2011) Beyond internal and external: A dyadic theory of relational attributions. Academy of Management Review36(4): 731–753.
31.
EhrhartMGKleinKJ (2001) Predicting followers’ preferences for charismatic leadership: The influence of follower values and personality. The Leadership Quarterly12(2): 153–179.
32.
ElliotAJThrashTM (2002) Approach-avoidance motivation in personality: Approach and avoidance temperaments and goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology82(5): 804–818.
33.
FedorDBBuckleyMREderRW (1990) Measuring subordinate perceptions of supervisor feedback intentions: Some unsettling results. Educational and Psychological Measurement50(1): 73–89.
34.
FedorDBEderRWBuckleyMR (1989) The contributory effects of supervisor intentions on subordinate feedback responses. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes44(3): 396–414.
35.
FeitosaJJosephDLNewmanDA (2015) Crowdsourcing and personality measurement equivalence: A warning about countries whose primary language is not English. Personality and Individual Differences75: 47−52.
36.
FerrisDLRosenCRJohnsonRE, et al (2011) Approach or avoidance (or both?): Integrating core self-evaluations within an approach/avoidance frameworkPersonnel Psychology64(1): 137–161.
37.
FerrisGRBhawukDPSFedorDF, et al (1995) Organizational politics and citizenship: Attributions of intentionality and construct definition. In: MartinkoMJ (ed.) Advances in Attribution Theory: An Organizational Perspective. Delray Beach, FL: St Lucie Press, 231–252.
38.
FishbeinMAjzenI (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
39.
ForgasJPGeorgeJM (2001) Affective influences on judgments and behavior in organizations: An information processing perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes86(1): 3–34.
40.
FulmerCAOstroffC (2017) Trust in direct leaders and top leaders: A trickle-up model. Journal of Applied Psychology102(4): 648–657.
41.
GabrielASDanielsMADiefendorffJM, et al (2015) Emotional labor actors: A latent profile analysis of emotional labor strategies. Journal of Applied Psychology100(3): 863–879.
42.
GaddisBConnellySMumfordMD (2004) Failure feedback as an affective event: Influences of leader affect on subordinate attitudes and performance. The Leadership Quarterly15(5): 663–686.
43.
GardinerISheenJ (2016) Graduate nurse experiences of support: A review. Nurse Education Today40: 7–12.
44.
GardnerDGPierceJL (2010) The core self-evaluation scale: Further construct validation evidence. Educational and Psychological Measurement70(2): 291–304.
45.
GoelSBellGGPierceJL (2005) The perils of Pollyanna: Development of the over-trust construct. Journal of Business Ethics58(1–3): 203–218.
46.
HarveyPMadisonKMartinkoM, et al (2014) Attribution theory in the organizational sciences: The road traveled and the path aheadAcademy of Management Perspectives28(2): 128–146.
47.
HeiderF (1958) The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.
48.
HempelPS (2008) Chinese reactions to performance feedback: Non-task attributions of feedback intentions. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources46(2): 196–219.
49.
HewettRShantzAMundyJ (2019) Information, beliefs, and motivation: The antecedents to human resource attributions. Journal of Organizational Behavior40(5): 570–586.
50.
HewettRShantzAMundyJ, et al (2018) Attribution theories in Human Resource Management research: A review and research agenda. International Journal of Human Resource Management29(1): 87–126.
51.
HuSHoodMCreedPA (2018) Negative career feedback and career outcomes: The mediating roles of self-regulatory processes. Journal of Vocational Behavior106: 180–191.
52.
HuangXWrightRPChiuWC, et al (2008) Relational schemas as sources of evaluation and misevaluation of leader–member exchanges: Some initial evidence. The Leadership Quarterly19(3): 266–282.
53.
IlgenDDavisC (2000) Bearing bad news: Reactions to negative performance feedback. Applied Psychology49(3): 550–565.
54.
IlgenDRFisherCDTaylorMS (1979) Consequences of individual feedback on behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology64(4): 349–371.
55.
IliesRJudgeTAWagnerDT (2010) The influence of cognitive and affective reactions to feedback on subsequent goals. European Psychologist15(2): 121–131.
56.
JonesEEDavisKE (1965) From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perception. In: BerkowitzL (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 2. New York: Academic Press, 219–266.
57.
JohnsonRERosenCCLevyPE (2008) Getting to the core of core self-evaluation: A review and recommendations. Journal of Organizational Behavior29(3): 391–413.
58.
JudgeTAKammeyer-MuellerJD (2011) Implications of core self-evaluations for a changing organizational context. Human Resource Management Review21(4): 331–341.
59.
JudgeTAErezABonoJE (1998) The power of being positive: The relation between positive self-concept and job performance. Human Performance11(2–3): 167–187.
60.
JudgeTAErezABonoJE, et al (2003) The Core Self-Evaluation Scale: Development of a measure. Personnel Psychology56(2): 303–331.
61.
JudgeTALockeEADurhamCC (1997) The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core evaluations approach. Research in Organizational Behavior19: 151–188.
62.
JudgeTALockeEADurhamCC, et al. (1998) Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology83(1): 17–34.
63.
JudgeTAPiccoloRFIliesR (2004) The forgotten ones? The validity of consideration and initiating structure in leadership research. Journal of Applied Psychology89(1): 36–51.
64.
KacmarKMCollinsBJHarrisKJ, et al (2009) Core self-evaluations and job performance: the role of the perceived work environment. Journal of Applied Psychology94(6): 1572–1580.
65.
KarasekRA (1979) Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly24(2): 285–308.
66.
KelleyHHMichelaJL (1980) Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology31(1): 457–501.
67.
KimYJKimJ (2020) Is negative feedback good or bad for creativity? The role of the direction of feedback flow. Academy of Management Journal63(2): 584–612.
68.
KlugerANDeNisiA (1996) The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin119(2): 254–284.
69.
LePineJALePineMAJacksonCL (2004) Challenge and hindrance stress: Relationships with exhaustion, motivation to learn, and learning performance. Journal of Applied Psychology89(5): 883–891.
70.
LeungKSuSMorrisMW (2001) When is criticism not constructive? The roles of fairness perceptions and dispositional attributions in employee acceptance of critical supervisory feedback. Human Relations54(9): 1155–1187.
71.
LiCWuKJohnsonDE, et al (2017) Going against the grain works: An attributional perspective of perceived ethical leadership. Journal of Business Ethics141(1): 87–102.
72.
LiGLiuHShangY, et al (2014) Leader feedback and knowledge sharing: A regulatory focus theory perspective. Journal of Management & Organization20(6): 749–763.
73.
LidenRCMitchellTR (1985) Reactions to feedback: The role of attributions. Academy of Management Journal28(2): 291–308.
74.
LitmanLRobinsonJAbberbockT (2017) TurkPrime.com: A versatile crowdsourcing data acquisition platform for the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods49(2): 433–442.
75.
LiuDLiaoHLoiR (2012) The dark side of leadership: A three-level investigation of the cascading effect of abusive supervision on employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal55(5): 1187–1212.
76.
LiuWXiangS (2018) The positive impact of guilt: How and when feedback affect employee learning in the workplace. Leadership & Organization Development Journal39(7): 883–898.
77.
McNattDBJudgeTA (2008) Self-efficacy intervention, job attitudes, and turnover: A field experiment with employees in role transition. Human Relations61(6): 783–810.
78.
MajorDATurnerJEFletcherTD (2006) Linking proactive personality and the Big Five to motivation to learn and development activity. Journal of Applied Psychology91(4): 927–935.
79.
MartinkoMJGardnerWL (1987) The leader/member attribution process. Academy of Management Review12(2): 235–249.
80.
MartinkoMJDouglasSCHarveyP (2006) Attribution theory in industrial and organizational psychology: A review. In: HodgkinsonGPFordKJ (eds) International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chichester: Wiley, 127–187.
81.
MasonWSuriS (2012) Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods44(1): 1–23.
82.
MathieuJETannenbaumSISalasE (1992) Influences of individual and situational characteristics on measures of training effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal35(4): 828–847.
MulderREllingerAD (2013) Perceptions of quality of feedback in organizations: Characteristics, determinants, outcomes of feedback, and possibilities for improvement: Introduction to a special issue. European Journal of Training and Development37(1): 4–23.
85.
MuthénLKMuthénBO (2015) MPLUS User’s Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén and Muthén.
86.
NikulaRE (1999) Organisational learning within health care organisations. International Journal of Medical Informatics56(1–3): 61–66.
87.
NishiiLHLepakDPSchneiderB (2008) Employee attributions of the “why” of HR practices: Their effects on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customer satisfaction. Personnel Psychology61(3): 503–545.
88.
PodsakoffPMFarhJL (1989) Effects of feedback sign and credibility on goal setting and task performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes44(1): 45–67.
89.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBPodsakoffNP (2012) Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology63: 539–569.
90.
PorterCOOutlawRGaleJP, et al (2019) The use of online panel data in management research: A review and recommendations. Journal of Management45(1): 319–344.
ReganDT (1978) Attributional aspects of interpersonal attraction. In: HarveyJHIckesWKiddRF (eds) New Directions in Attribution Research, Vol. 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 207–233.
93.
ReijntjesAThomaesSKamphuisJH, et al (2011) Explaining the paradoxical rejection–aggression link: The mediating effects of hostile intent attributions, anger, and decreases in state self-esteem on peer rejection–induced aggression in youth. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin37(7): 955–963.
94.
RestubogSLDBordiaPTangRL, et al (2010) Investigating the moderating effects of leader–member exchange in the psychological contract breach–employee performance relationship: A test of two competing perspectives. British Journal of Management21(2): 422–437.
95.
RodeJCJudgeTASunJM (2012) Incremental validity of core self-evaluations in the presence of other self-concept traits: An investigation of applied psychology criteria in the United States and China. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies19(3): 326–340.
96.
RossL (1977) The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology10: 173–220.
97.
SalancikGRPfefferJ (1978) A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly23(2): 224–253.
98.
SchaubroeckJMShaoP (2012) The role of attribution in how followers respond to the emotional expression of male and female leaders. The Leadership Quarterly23(1): 27–42.
99.
SchippersMCHomanACVan KnippenbergD (2013) To reflect or not to reflect: Prior team performance as a boundary condition of the effects of reflexivity on learning and final team performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior34(1): 6–23.
100.
ScottKAZweigD (2016) Understanding and mitigating cynicism in the workplace. Journal of Managerial Psychology31(2): 552–569.
101.
ShantzABoothJE (2014) Service employees and self-verification: The roles of occupational stigma consciousness and core self-evaluations. Human Relations67(12): 1439–1465.
102.
ShaoBWangLTseHM (2018) Motivational or dispositional? The type of inference shapes the effectiveness of leader anger expressions. The Leadership Quarterly29(6): 709–723.
103.
SteelmanLALevyPESnellAF (2004) The feedback environment scale: Construct definition, measurement, and validation. Educational and Psychological Measurement64(1): 165–184.
104.
Sue-ChanCChenZLamW (2011) LMX, coaching attributions, and employee performance. Group & Organization Management36(4): 466–498.
105.
SwannWBJr (1987) Identity negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology53(6): 1038–1051.
106.
TarisTWKompierMADe LangeAH, et al (2003) Learning new behaviour patterns: A longitudinal test of Karasek’s active learning hypothesis among Dutch teachers. Work & Stress17(1): 1–20.
107.
ThomasKMMathieuJE (1994) Role of causal attributions in dynamic self-regulation and goal processes. Journal of Applied Psychology79(6): 812–818.
108.
ThomasKWPondyLR (1977) Toward and “intent” model of conflict management among principal parties. Human Relations30(12): 1089−1102.
109.
Van De VoordeKBeijerS (2015) The role of employee HR attributions in the relationship between high-performance work systems and employee outcomes. Human Resource Management Journal25(1): 62–78.
110.
WalterSLSeibertSEGoeringD, et al (2019) A tale of two sample sources: Do results from online panel data and conventional data converge?Journal of Business and Psychology34(4): 425–452.
111.
WaltherETrasselliC (2003) I like her, because I like myself: Self-evaluation as a source of interpersonal attitudes. Experimental Psychology50(4): 239–246.
112.
WangZXingLXuH, et al (2021) Not all followers socially learn from ethical leaders: The roles of followers’ moral identity and leader identification in the ethical leadership process. Journal of Business Ethics 170(3): 449–469.
113.
WayneSJShoreLMLidenRC (1997) Perceived organizational support and leader–member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal40(1): 82–111.
114.
WeinerB (2011) Ultimate and proximal determinants of motivation given an attribution perspective and the metaphors guiding attribution theory. Group & Organization Management36(4): 526–532.
115.
WiesenfeldBMBrocknerJMartinC (1999) A self-affirmation analysis of survivors’ reactions to unfair organizational downsizings. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology35(5): 441–460.
116.
WuPLeungK (2000) Negative feedback and responses from subordinates. Journal of Human Resource Costing and Accounting5(1): 37–44.
117.
XuAJLoiRLamLW (2015) The bad boss takes it all: How abusive supervision and leader–member exchange interact to influence employee silence. The Leadership Quarterly26(5): 763–774.
118.
YoungSFRichardEMMoukarzelRG, et al (2017) How empathic concern helps leaders in providing negative feedback: A two-study examination. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology90(4): 535–558.
119.
YuklG (1998) Leadership in Organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
120.
ZhangHKwanHKZhangX, et al (2014) High core self-evaluators maintain creativity: A motivational model of abusive supervision. Journal of Management40(4): 1151–1174.
121.
ZhangYSunJMJLinCHV, et al (2020) Linking core self-evaluation to creativity: The roles of knowledge sharing and work meaningfulness. Journal of Business and Psychology35(2): 257–270.
122.
ZhaoB (2011) Learning from errors: The role of context, emotion, and personality. Journal of Organizational Behavior32(3): 435–463.
123.
ZhouZEYanYCheXX, et al (2015) Effect of workplace incivility on end-of-work negative affect: Examining individual and organizational moderators in a daily diary study. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology20(1): 117–130.
124.
ZingoniMByronK (2017) How beliefs about the self influence perceptions of negative feedback and subsequent effort and learning. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes139: 50–62.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
