Studies on abusive supervision have adopted justice and resource perspectives to explain its effects on employee organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) and counterproductive work behavior (CWB). However, these studies have not provided a comprehensive account of why abusive supervision affects OCB and CWB and which of these two mediating mechanisms matters more. To address these questions, we conducted two studies using meta-analytic structural equation modeling. In the main study, we analyzed 427 primary studies that incorporated 973 independent correlations (N = 336,236). The results showed that both organizational justice (the justice lens) and work stress (the resource lens) mediated the influence of abusive supervision on OCB and CWB. Furthermore, organizational justice accounted for a greater proportion of abusive supervision’s effect on OCB than did work stress, whereas work stress accounted for a greater proportion of abusive supervision’s effect on CWB than did organizational justice. Finally, between-study moderation analyses showed that the effect of abusive supervision on CWB was stronger in masculine cultures than in feminine cultures. The supplementary study incorporated effect sizes from six existing meta-analyses (N = 151,381) and largely replicated the main study’s findings.
AguinisH.PierceC. A.BoscoF. A.DaltonD. R.DaltonC. M.2011. Debunking myths and urban legends about meta-analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 14: 306-331.
2.
AmbroseM. L.ArnaudA.2005. Are procedural justice and distributive justice conceptually distinct? In GreenbergJ.ColquittJ. A. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational justice: 59-84. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3.
AmbroseM. L.HarlandL. K.KulikC. T.1991. Influence of social comparisons on perceptions of organizational fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76: 239-246.
4.
AmbroseM. L.SchminkeM.2009. The role of overall justice judgments in organizational justice research: A test of mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94: 491-500.
5.
AmbroseM. L.SeabrightM. A.SchminkeM.2002. Sabotage in the workplace: The role of organizational injustice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89: 947-965.
6.
AryeeS.ChenZ. X.SunL. Y.DebrahY. A.2007. Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: Test of a trickle-down model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 191-201.
7.
AryeeS.SunL. Y.ChenZ. X.DebrahY. A.2008. Abusive supervision and contextual performance: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion and the moderating role of work unit structure. Management and Organization Review, 4: 393-411.
8.
BaumeisterR. F.BratslavskyE.MuravenM.TiceD. M.1998. Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74: 1252-1265.
BennettR. J.RobinsonS. L.2003. The past, present, and future of workplace deviance research. In GreenbergJ. (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of science: 349-360. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11.
BerghD. D.AguinisH.HeaveyC.KetchenD. J.BoydB. K.SuP.LauC. L.JooH.2016. Using meta-analytic structural equation modeling to advance strategic management research: Guidelines and an empirical illustration via the strategic leadership-performance relationship. Strategic Management Journal, 37: 477-497.
12.
BerryC. M.OnesD. S.SackettP. R.2007. Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, and their common correlates: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 410-424.
13.
BeusJ. M.DhananiL. Y.McCordM. A.2015. A meta-analysis of personality and workplace safety: Addressing unanswered questions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100: 481-498.
14.
BiesR. J.MoagJ. S.1986. Interactional justice: Communication criteria of fairness. Research on Negotiation in Organizations, 1: 43-55.
15.
BlauP.1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
16.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P.RothsteinH. R.2011. Introduction to meta-analysis. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
17.
BurtonJ. P.HooblerJ. M.2011. Aggressive reactions to abusive supervision: The role of interactional justice and narcissism. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 52: 389-398.
18.
CarlsonD.FergusonM.HunterE.WhittenD.2012. Abusive supervision and work-family conflict: The path through emotional labor and burnout. The Leadership Quarterly, 23: 849-859.
19.
ChanM. E.McAllisterD. J.2014. Abusive supervision through the lens of employee state paranoia. Academy of Management Review, 39: 44-66.
20.
ChangC.-H.JohnsonR. E.YangL.-Q.2007. Emotional strain and organizational citizenship behaviours: A meta-analysis and review. Work & Stress, 21: 312-332.
21.
CheungM. W. L.2015. Meta-analysis: A structural equation modeling approach. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
22.
CheungM. W. L.2014. Fixed-and random-effects meta-analytic structural equation modeling: Examples and analyses in R. Behavior Research Methods, 46: 29-40.
23.
CheungM. W. L.ChanW.2005. Meta-analytic structural equation modeling: A two-stage approach. Psychological Methods, 10: 40-64.
24.
Cohen-CharashY.SpectorP. E.2001. The role of justice in organizations: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86: 278-321.
25.
ColquittJ. A.2012. Organizational justice. In KozlowskiS. W. J. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational psychology: 526-547. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
ColquittJ. A.ConlonD. E.WessonM. J.PorterC. O. L. H.NgK. Y.2001. Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25 years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 425-445.
27.
ColquittJ. A.ScottB. A.RodellJ. B.LongD. M.ZapataC. P.ConlonD. E.WessonM. J.2013. Justice at the millennium, a decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98: 199-236.
28.
CropanzanoR.ByrneZ. S.2000. Workplace justice and the dilemma of organizational citizenship. In VanVugtM.TylerT.BielA. (Eds.), Collective problems in modern society: Dilemmas and solutions: 142-161. London: Routledge.
29.
CropanzanoR.MitchellM. S.2005. Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31: 874-900.
30.
CropanzanoR.RuppD. E.MohlerC. J.SchminkeM.2001. Three roads to organizational justice. In FerrisJ. (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management: 1-113. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
31.
DalalR. S.2005. A meta-analysis of the relationship between organizational citizenship behavior and counterproductive work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 1241-1255.
32.
DetertJ. R.TreviñoL. K.BurrisE. R.AndiappanM.2007. Managerial modes of influence and counterproductivity in organizations: A longitudinal business-unit-level investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 993-1005.
33.
DuffyM. K.GansterD. C.PagonM.2002. Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 331-351.
34.
EarnestD. R.AllenD. G.LandisR. S.2011. Mechanisms linking realistic job previews with turnover: A meta-analytic path analysis. Personnel Psychology, 64: 865-897.
35.
FieldA. P.GillettR.2010. How to do a meta-analysis. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 63: 665-694.
36.
FolgerR.1998. Fairness as a moral virtue. In SchminkeM. (Ed.), Managerial ethics: Moral management of people and processes: 13-34. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
37.
FolgerR.2001. Fairness as deonance. In GillilandS.SteinerD.SkarlickiD. (Eds.), Theoretical and cultural perspectives on organizational justice: 3-33. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
38.
FolgerR.CropanzanoR.2001. Fairness theory: Justice as accountability. In GreenbergJ.CropanzanoR. (Eds.), Advances in organization justice: 1-55. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
39.
ForgasJ. P.VargasP. T.1999. Goals, affect, and the self-regulation of behavior. In WyerR. S.SrullT. (Eds.), Advances in social cognition: 119-146. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
40.
GolemanD.BoyatzisR. E.McKeeA.2002. Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
41.
GouldnerA. W.1960. The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25: 161-178.
42.
HobfollS. E.1989. Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44: 513-524.
43.
HobfollS. E.2002. Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6: 307-324.
44.
HobmanE. V.RestubogS. L. D.BordiaP.TangR. L.2009. Abusive supervision in advising relationships: Investigating the role of social support. Applied Psychology–An International Review—Psychologie Appliquee–Revue Internationale, 58: 233-256.
45.
HoffmanB. J.BlairC. A.MeriacJ. P.WoehrD. J.2007. Expanding the criterion domain? A quantitative review of the OCB literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 555-566.
46.
HofstedeG. H.2001. Cultures consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47.
HoganR.EmlerN. P.1981. Retributive justice. In LernerM. J.LernerS. C. (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior: Adapting to times of scarcity and change: 125-143. New York: Plenum.
48.
HülshegerU. R.AlbertsH. J.FeinholdtA.LangJ. W.2013. Benefits of mindfulness at work: The role of mindfulness in emotion regulation, emotional exhaustion, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98: 310-325.
49.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L.2004. Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50.
JiangK.LepakD. P.HuJ.BaerJ. C.2012. How does human resource management influence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediating mechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55: 1264-1294.
51.
JosephD. L.JinJ.NewmanD. A.O’BoyleE. H.2015. Why does self-reported emotional intelligence predict job performance? A meta-analytic investigation of mixed EI. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100: 298-342.
52.
LandisR. S.2013. Successfully combining meta-analysis and structural equation modeling: Recommendations and strategies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 28: 251-261.
53.
LazarusR. S.1991. Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.
54.
LeeR. T.AshforthB. E.1990. On the meaning of Maslach’s three dimensions of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 743-747.
55.
LePineJ. A.ErezA.JohnsonD. E.2002. The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 52-65.
56.
LiN. Q.YiX. N.2012. An empirical study on organizational justice, abusive supervision and job burnout. Science and Technology and Managment, 12: 46-49.
57.
LianH.BrownD. J.FerrisD. L.LiangL. H.KeepingL. M.MorrisonR.2014. Abusive supervision and retaliation: A self-control framework. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 116-139.
58.
LianH.FerrisD. L.BrownD. J.2012. Does taking the good with the bad make things worse? How abusive supervision and leader–member exchange interact to impact need satisfaction and organizational deviance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117: 41-52.
59.
LianH.FerrisD. L.MorrisonR.BrownD. J.2014. Blame it on the supervisor or the subordinate? Reciprocal relations between abusive supervision and organizational deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99: 651-664.
60.
LidenR. C.WayneS. J.ZhaoH.HendersonD.2008. Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19: 161-177.
LiuD.JiangK.ShalleyC. E.KeemS.ZhouJ.2016. Motivational mechanisms of employee creativity: A meta-analytic examination and theoretical extension of the creativity literature. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 137: 236-263.
63.
MackeyJ. D.FriederR. E.BreesJ. R.MartinkoM. J.2017. Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management, 43: 1940-1965.
64.
MartinkoM. J.HarveyP.BreesJ. R.MackeyJ.2013. A review of abusive supervision research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34: S120-S137.
65.
MawritzM. B.GreenbaumR. L.ButtsM. M.GrahamK. A.2017. I just can’t control myself: A self-regulation perspective on the abuse of deviant employees. Academy of Management Journal, 60: 1482-1503.
66.
MawritzM. B.MayerD. M.HooblerJ. M.WayneS. J.MarinovaS. V.2012. A trickle-down model of abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 65: 325-357.
67.
MitchellM. S.AmbroseM. L.2007. Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92: 1159-1168.
68.
MuthénL.MuthénB.2013. Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
69.
NgT. W. H.FeldmanD. C.2015. Ethical leadership: Meta-analytic evidence of criterion-related and incremental validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100: 948-965.
70.
OehlertG. W.1992. A note on the delta method. The American Statistician, 46: 27-29.
71.
OgunfoworaB.2009. The consequences of ethical leadership: Comparisons with transformational leadership and abusive supervision. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Calgary, Canada.
OrganD. W.RyanK.1995. A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48: 775-802.
74.
PreacherK.HayesA.2008. Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40: 879-891.
75.
PreacherK. J.SeligJ. P.2012. Advantages of Monte Carlo confidence intervals for indirect effects. Communication Methods and Measures, 6: 77-98.
76.
PriesemuthM.SchminkeM.AmbroseM. L.FolgerR.2014. Abusive supervision climate: A multiple-mediation model of its impact on group outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1513-1534.
77.
RaffertyA. E.RestubogS. L. D.2011. The influence of abusive supervisors on followers’ organizational citizenship behaviours: The hidden costs of abusive supervision. British Journal of Management, 22: 270-285.
78.
RestubogS. L. D.ScottK. L.ZagenczykT. J.2011. When distress hits home: The role of contextual factors and psychological distress in predicting employees’ responses to abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96: 713-729.
79.
RobinsonS. L.BennettR. J.1995. A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38: 555-572.
80.
RosenthalR.DimatteoM. R.2001. Meta-analysis: Recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews. Annual Review of Psychology, 52: 59-82.
81.
RothsteinH. R.HopewellS.2009. Grey literature. In CooperH.HedgesL. V.ValentineJ. C. (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis: 103-125. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
82.
ShaoR.RuppD. E.SkarlickiD. P.JonesK. S.2013. Employee justice across cultures: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 39: 263-301.
83.
SkarlickiD. P.2001. Cross-cultural perspectives of organizational justice. International Journal of Conflict Management, 12: 292-294.
84.
TepperB. J.2000. Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 178-190.
85.
TepperB. J.2007. Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33: 261-289.
86.
TepperB. J.HenleC. A.LambertL. S.GiacaloneR. A.DuffyM. K.2008. Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organization deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93: 721-732.
87.
TepperB. J.MossS. E.LockhartD. E.CarrJ. C.2007. Abusive supervision, upward maintenance communication, and subordinates’ psychological distress. Academy of Management Journal, 50: 1169-1180.
88.
TepperB. J.SimonL.ParkH. M.2017. Abusive supervision. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4: 123-152.
89.
ThauS.MitchellM. S.2010. Self-gain or self-regulation impairment? Tests of competing explanations of the supervisor abuse and employee deviance relationship through perceptions of distributive justice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95: 1009-1031.
90.
Van den BosK. 2015. Humans making sense of alarming conditions: Psychological insight into the fair process effect. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
91.
ViswesvaranC.OnesD. S.1995. Theory testing: Combining psychometric meta-analysis and structural equations modeling. Personnel Psychology, 48: 865-885.
92.
WangW.MaoJ. Y.WuW. K.LiuJ.2012. Abusive supervision and workplace deviance: The mediating role of interactional justice and the moderating role of power distance. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 50: 43-60.
93.
WeiF.SiS.2013. Psychological contract breach, negative reciprocity, and abusive supervision: The mediated effect of organizational identification. Management and Organization Review, 9: 541-561.
94.
WheelerA. R.HalbeslebenJ. R. B.WhitmanM. V.2013. The interactive effects of abusive supervision and entitlement on emotional exhaustion and co-worker abuse. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 86: 477-496.
95.
WhitmanM. V.HalbeslebenJ. R. B.HolmesO. I. V.2014. Abusive supervision and feedback avoidance: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35: 38-53.
96.
ZellarsK. L.TepperB. J.DuffyM. K.2002. Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87: 1068-1076.
97.
ZhangY.BednallT. C.2016. Antecedents of abusive supervision: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 139: 455-471.
98.
ZhangY.LiaoZ.2015. Consequences of abusive supervision: A meta-analytic review. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 32: 959-987.
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.
