In a time when organizations must cope with an increasingly volatile and spatially dispersed workforce, understanding how to facilitate newcomers’ perceptions of insider status is of both theoretical and practical importance. However, knowledge regarding how and why these desirable perceptions unfold over time during the socialization period is limited. Drawing on affective event theory and feelings-as-information theory, this research derives predictions about the influence of change in newcomers’ perceptions of abusive supervision and change in newcomer negative affect toward their supervisors on change in newcomers’ perceived insider status. Furthermore, considering perceived insider status through the lens of COR theory, its change is expected to have an impact on newcomers’ well-being. To test our predictions, we used a latent growth modeling (LGM) approach to analyze longitudinal data collected from newcomers working in a variety of organizations at four times across a year after organizational entry. Our results reveal a temporal process whereby change in perceptions of abusive supervision influence newcomers’ well-being and demonstrate that changes in newcomers’ negative affect toward the supervisor and in newcomers’ perceived insider status sequentially mediate these relationships. Overall, this research illustrates the temporal dynamics of the socialization process and highlights the key role of supervisors and newcomers’ affect on newcomers’ transition from outsiders to organizational insiders as well as the corresponding impact on their well-being.
AllenD. G. (2006). Do organizational socialization tactics influence newcomer embeddedness and turnover?Journal of Management, 32(2), 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305280103
2.
AndersonJ. C.GerbingD. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411
Armstrong-StassenM.SchlosserF. (2011). Perceived organizational membership and the retention of older workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(2), 319–344. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.647
5.
AshforthB. E. (2012). The role of time in socialization dynamics. In WanbergC. R. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational socialization (pp. 161–186). Oxford University Press.
6.
AshforthB. E.SaksA. M. (2002). Feeling your way: Emotion and organizational entry. In LordR. G.KlimoskiR. J.KanferR. (eds.), Emotions in the workplace: Understanding the structure and role of emotions in organizational behavior (pp. 331–369). Jossey-Bass.
7.
BarnesC. M.LucianettiL.BhaveD. P.ChristianM. S. (2015). “You wouldn’t like me when i’m sleepy”: Leaders’ sleep, daily abusive supervision, and work unit engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1419–1437. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.1063
8.
BaschJ.FisherC. D. (1998). Affective events-emotions matrix: A classification of work events and associated emotions. School of Business Discussion Papers. Paper 65. Bond University.
9.
BauerT. N.ErdoganB. (2011). Organizational socialization: The effective onboarding of new employees. In ZedeckS. (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology maintaining, expanding, and contracting the organization (pp. 51–64). American Psychological Association.
10.
BauerT. N.ErdoganB.CaughlinD.EllisA. M.KurkoskiJ. (2021). Jump-starting the socialization experience: The longitudinal role of day 1 newcomer resources on adjustment. Journal of Management, 47(8), 2226–2261. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320962835
11.
BauerT. N.MorrisonE. W.CallisterR. R. (1998). Organizational socialization: A review and directions for future research. In FerrisG. R. (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management (pp. 149–214). JAI Press.
12.
BenteinK.VandenbergheC.VandenbergR.StinglhamberF. (2005). The role of change in the relationship between commitment and turnover: A latent growth modeling approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(3), 468–482. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.3.468
13.
BentlerP. M.BonettD. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588
14.
BrannickM. T.ChanD.ConwayJ. M.LanceC. E.SpectorP. E. (2010). What is method variance and how can we cope with it? A panel discussion. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 407–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428109360993
ByrneA.DionisiA. M.BarlingJ.AkersA.RobertsonJ.LysR.WylieJ.DupréK. (2014). The depleted leader: The influence of leaders’ diminished psychological resources on leadership behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(2), 344–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.09.003
17.
CaiD.LiuS.LiuJ.YaoL.JiaX. (2021). Mentoring and newcomer well-being: A socialization resources perspective. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 36(3), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1108/jmp-08-2019-0485
18.
ChanD. (1998). The conceptualization and analysis of change over time: An integrative approach incorporating longitudinal mean and covariance structures analysis (LMACS) and multiple indicator latent growth modeling (MLGM). Organizational Research Methods, 1(4), 421–483. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819814004
19.
ChanD.SchmittN. (2000). Interindividual differences in intraindividual changes in proactivity during organizational entry: A latent growth modeling approach to understanding newcomer adaptation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(2), 190–210. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.190
20.
ColeM. S.ShippA. J.TaylorS. G. (2016). Viewing the interpersonal mistreatment literature through a temporal lens. Organizational Psychology Review, 6(3), 273–302. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386615607095
21.
CramptonS. M.WagnerJ. A. (1994). Percept-percept inflation in microorganizational research: An investigation of prevalence and effect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1), 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.1.67
22.
CredéM.HarmsP.NiehorsterS.Gaye-ValentineA. (2012). An evaluation of the consequences of using short measures of the Big Five personality traits. Journal of personality and social psychology, 102(4), 874–888.
23.
DemeroutiE.BakkerA. B.NachreinerF.SchaufeliW. B. (2001). The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499
24.
DimotakisN.LambertL. S.FuS.BoulamatsiA.SmithT. A.RunnallsB.CornerA. J.TepperB. J.MaurerT. (2022). Gains and losses: Week-to-week changes in leader–follower relationships. Academy of Management Journal, 66(1), 248–275. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2019.1100
25.
DuffyM. K.GansterD. C.PagonM. (2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 45(2), 331–351. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069350
26.
EllisA. M.BauerT. N. (2020). Organizational entry and workplace affect. In YangL. Q.CropanzanoR.DausC. S.Martinez-TurV. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of workplace affect (pp. 325–337). Cambridge University Press.
27.
EllisA. M.BauerT. N.MansfieldL. R.ErdoganB.TruxilloD. M.SimonL. S. (2015). Navigating uncharted waters: Newcomer socialization through the lens of stress theory. Journal of Management, 41(1), 203–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314557525
28.
FarhC. I. C.LiaoH.ShapiroD. L.ShinJ.GuanO. Z. (2021). Out of sight and out of mind? Networking strategies for enhancing inclusion in multinational organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(4), 582–598. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000647
29.
FlynnP. J.BlieseP. D.KorsgaardM. A.CannonC. (2021). Tracking the process of resilience: How emotional stability and experience influence exhaustion and commitment trajectories. Group and Organization Management, 46(4), 692–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011211027676
GoldbergD. P.GaterR.SartoriusN.UstunT. B.PiccinelliM.GurejeO.RutterC. (1997). The validity of two versions of the GHQ in the WHO study of mental illness in general health care. Psychological Medicine, 27(1), 191–197. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291796004242
33.
GoldbergD. P.WilliamsP. (1988). A user’s guide to the GHQ. NFER-Nelson.
34.
Gonzalez-MoralesM. G.KernanM. C.BeckerT. E.EisenbergerR. (2018). Defeating abusive supervision: Training supervisors to support subordinates. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 23(2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000061
35.
GoodmanJ. S.BlumT. C. (1996). Assessing the non-random sampling effects of subject attrition in longitudinal research. Journal of Management, 22(4), 627–652. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639602200405
36.
GrandeyA. A.TamA. P.BrauburgerA. L. (2002). Affective states and traits in the workplace: Diary and survey data from young workers. Motivation and Emotion, 26(1), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015142124306
37.
HalbeslebenJ. R. B.NeveuJ.-P.Paustian-UnderdahlS. C.WestmanM. (2014). Getting to the “COR”: Understanding the role of resources in conservation of resources theory. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1334–1364. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527130
HobfollS. E.HalbeslebenJ.NeveuJ.-P.WestmanM. (2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 103–128. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640
40.
HuiC.LeeC.WangH. (2015). Organizational inducements and employee citizenship behavior: The mediating role of perceived insider status and the moderating role of collectivism. Human Resource Management, 54(3), 439–456. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21620
41.
JohnO. P.DonahueE. M.KentleR. L. (1991). The big five inventory: Versions 4a and 54. University of California, Institute of Personality and Social Research. [Technical Report].
42.
JohnsonR. E.VenusM.LanajK.MaoC.ChangC. H. (2012). Leader identity as an antecedent of the frequency and consistency of transformational, consideration, and abusive leadership behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(6), 1262–1272. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029043
43.
JokisaariM.NurmiJ.-E. (2009). Change in newcomers’ supervisor support and socialization outcomes after organizational entry. Academy of Management Journal, 52(3), 527–544. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.41330971
44.
Kammeyer-MuellerJ.WanbergC.RubensteinA.SongZ. (2013). Support, undermining, and newcomer socialization: Fitting in during the first 90 days. Academy of Management Journal, 56(4), 1104–1124. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0791
45.
KhanA. K.MossS.QuratulainS.HameedI. (2018). When and how subordinate performance leads to abusive supervision: A social dominance perspective. Journal of Management, 44(7), 2801–2826. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316653930
46.
KiewitzC.RestubogS. L.ShossM. K.GarciaP. R.TangR. L. (2016). Suffering in silence: Investigating the role of fear in the relationship between abusive supervision and defensive silence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(5), 731–742. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000074
47.
KingK.AllumN.StonemanP.CernatA. (2021). Estimating measurement equivalence of the 12-item general health questionnaire across ethnic groups in the UK. Psychological Medicine, 53(5), 1778–1786. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721003408
48.
KniffinK. M.NarayananJ.AnseelF.AntonakisJ.AshfordS. P.BakkerA. B.BambergerP.BapujiH.BhaveD. P.ChoiV. K.CrearyS. J.DemeroutiE.FlynnF. J.GelfandM. J.GreerL. L.JohnsG.KesebirS.KleinP. G.LeeS. Y.VugtM. V. (2021). COVID-19 and the workplace: Implications, issues, and insights for future research and action. American Psychologist, 76(1), 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000716
49.
KorteR. (2010). ‘First, get to know them’: A relational view of organizational socialization. Human Resource Development International, 13(1), 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678861003588984
50.
KulikC. T.CreganC.MetzI.BrownM. (2009). HR managers as toxin handlers: The buffering effect of formalizing toxin handling responsibilities. Human Resource Management, 48(5), 695–716. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20311
51.
LanceC. E.VandenbergR. J.SelfR. M. (2000). Latent growth models of individual change: The case of newcomer adjustment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 83(1), 107–140. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2904
52.
LapalmeM.-È.StamperC. L.SimardG.TremblayM. (2009). Bringing the outside in: Can “external” workers experience insider status?Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(7), 919–940. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.597
53.
LeeA.ThomasG.MartinR.GuillaumeY. (2019). Leader-member exchange (LMX) ambivalence and task performance: The cross-domain buffering role of social support. Journal of Management, 45(5), 1927–1957. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317741190
54.
LiY.WuM.LiN.ZhangM. (2019). Dual relational model of perceived overqualification: Employee's self‐concept and task performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 27(4), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12261
55.
LiaoZ. (2020). Intimidating bosses can change-they just need a nudge. Harvard Business Review.
56.
LiaoZ.LeeH. W.JohnsonR. E.SongZ.LiuY. (2020). Seeing from a short-term perspective: When and why daily abusive supervisor behavior yields functional and dysfunctional consequences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(3), 377–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000508
57.
LiaoZ.PengA. C.LiW. D.SchaubroeckJ. (2016). Is abuse always bad? A latent change score approach to examine consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Proceedings, 2016(1), 11621.
58.
LiaoZ.YamK. C.JohnsonR. E.LiuW.SongZ. (2018). Cleansing my abuse: A reparative response model of perpetrating abusive supervisor behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(9), 1039–1056. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000319
59.
MackeyJ. D.FriederR. E.BreesJ. R.MartinkoM. J. (2017). Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1940–1965. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315573997
60.
MartinkoM. J.HarveyP.BreesJ. R.MackeyJ. (2013). A review of abusive supervision research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(S1), S120–S137. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1888
61.
MastersonS. S.StamperC. L. (2003). Perceived organizational membership: An aggregate framework representing the employee-organization relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(5), 473–490. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.203
62.
MattaF. K.Erol‐KorkmazH. T.JohnsonR. E.BiçaksizP. (2014). Significant work events and counterproductive work behavior: The role of fairness, emotions, and emotion regulation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(7), 920–944. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1934
63.
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(4), 1482–1503. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0409
64.
MayerD. M.ThauS.WorkmanK. M.DijkeM. V.CremerD. D. (2012). Leader mistreatment, employee hostility, and deviant behaviors: Integrating self-uncertainty and thwarted needs perspectives on deviance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 117(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.07.003
65.
McCormickB. W.ReevesC. J.DownesP. E.LiN.IliesR. (2020). Scientific contributions of within-person research in management: Making the juice worth the squeeze. Journal of Management, 46(2), 321–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318788435
66.
MeierL. L.KellerA. C.ReisD.NoheC. (2023). On the asymmetry of losses and gains: Implications of changing work conditions for well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(8), 1408–1424. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001080
67.
MitchellM. S.AmbroseM. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1159
68.
MuthénL.MuthénB. (1998–2017). Mplus user’s guide. Muthén and Muthén.
69.
NavarroP.AscasoC.Garcia-EsteveL.AguadoJ.TorresA.Martin-SantosR. (2007). Postnatal psychiatric morbidity: A validation study of the GHQ-12 and the EPDS as screening tools. General Hospital Psychiatry, 29(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2006.10.004
70.
NifadkarS.TsuiA. S.AshforthB. E. (2012). The way you make me feel and behave: Supervisor-triggered newcomer affect and approach-avoidance behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 55(5), 1146–1168. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0133
71.
OhJ. K.FarhC. I. C. (2017). An emotional process theory of how subordinates appraise, experience, and respond to abusive supervision over time. Academy of Management Review, 42(2), 207–232. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2014.0347
72.
OuZ.WangJ.ChenT. (2018). Managing organizational entry in China: The roles of newcomer–supervisor exchange, incumbent support, and perceived insider status. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(3), 485–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1216879
73.
PanaccioA.VandenbergheC. (2012). Five-factor model of personality and organizational commitment: The mediating role of positive and negative affective states. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(3), 647–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2012.03.002
74.
PengA. C.SchaubroeckM. J.ChongS.LiY. (2019). Discrete emotions linking abusive supervision to employee intention and behavior. Personnel Psychology, 72(3), 393–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12310
75.
PlaisantO.CourtoisR.RéveillèreC.MendelsohnG. A.JohnO. P. (2010). Validation par analyse factorielle du big five inventory Français (BFI-Fr). Analyse convergente avec le NEO-PI-R. Annales Médico-Psychologiques, Revue Psychiatrique, 168(2), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amp.2009.09.003
76.
PloyhartR. E.VandenbergR. J. (2010). Longitudinal research: The theory, design, and analysis of change. Journal of Management, 36(1), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309352110
77.
QuekK. F.LowW. Y.RazackA. H.LohC. S. (2001). Reliability and validity of the general health questionnaire (GHQ-12) among urological patients: A Malaysian study. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 55(5), 509–513. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1819.2001.00897.x
78.
RaubS. P. (2018). Perceived insider status and job design predict job attitudes and work performance of restaurant employees. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 42(6), 880–903. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348016654974
79.
Rosado-SolomonE. H.KoopmannJ.LeeW.CroninM. A. (2023). Mental health and mental illness in organizations: A review, comparison, and extension. Academy of Management Annals, 17(2), 751–797. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2021.0211
80.
SaksA. M.AshforthB. E. (1996). Proactive socialization and behavioral self-management. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48(3), 301–323. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.0026
81.
SaksA. M.GrumanJ. A. (2012). Getting newcomers on board: A review of socialization practices and introduction to socialization resources theory. In WanbergC. R. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational socialization (pp. 27–55). Oxford University Press.
82.
SchafferB. S.RiordanC. M. (2003). A review of cross-cultural methodologies for organizational research: A best- practices approach. Organizational Research Methods, 6(2), 169–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428103251542
SchutteN.ToppinenS.KalimoR.SchaufeliW. (2000). The factorial validity of the Maslach burnout inventory-general survey (MBI-GS) across occupational groups and nations. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(1), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317900166877
85.
SchwarzN. (2012). Feelings-as-information theory. In LangeP. A. M. V.KruglanskiA. W.HigginsE. T. (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 289–308). Sage Publications Ltd.
86.
ShinJ.TaylorM. S.SeoM.-G. (2012). Resources for change: The relationships of organizational inducements and psychological resilience to employees’ attitudes and behaviors toward organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 727–748. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0325
87.
ShoreL. M.RandelA. E.ChungB. G.DeanM. A.Holcombe EhrhartK.SinghG. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1262–1289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310385943
88.
SimonL. S.HurstC.KelleyK.JudgeT. A. (2015). Understanding cycles of abuse: A multimotive approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(6), 1798–1810. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000031
89.
SlussD. M.AshforthB. E. (2007). Relational identity and identification: Defining ourselves through work relationships. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 9–32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.23463672
90.
SlussD. M.ThompsonB. S. (2012). Socializing the newcomer: The mediating role of leader–member exchange. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119(1), 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.05.005
SotoC. J.JohnO. P. (2009). Ten facet scales for the big five inventory: Convergence with NEO PI-R facets, self-peer agreement, and discriminant validity. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(1), 84–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.10.002
93.
StamperC. L.MastersonS. S. (2002). Insider or outsider? How employee perceptions of insider status affect their work behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(8), 875–894. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.175
94.
SuiY.WangH. (2014). Relational evaluation, organization-based self-esteem, and performance. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 21(1), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051813486833
95.
TabachnickB. G.FidellL. S.UllmanJ. B. (2013) Using multivariate statistics (Vol. 6, pp. 497–516). Pearson.
96.
TepperB. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556375
97.
TepperB. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812
98.
TepperB. J.CarrJ. C.BreauxD. M.GeiderS.HuC.HuaW. (2009). Abusive supervision, intentions to quit, and employees’ workplace deviance: A power/dependence analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109(2), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.03.004
99.
TisakJ.MeredithW. (1990). Descriptive and associative developmental models. In EyeA. V. (Ed.), Statistical methods in longitudinal research (pp. 387–406). Academic Press.
100.
TonkinK.MalinenS.NäswallK.KuntzJ. C. (2018). Building employee resilience through wellbeing in organizations. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 29(2), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21306
101.
TseH. H. M.TrothA. C.AshkanasyN. M.CollinsA. L. (2018). Affect and leader-member exchange in the new millennium: A state-of-art review and guiding framework. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.10.002
102.
VandenbergR. J.LanceC. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810031002
103.
VandenbergheC.LandryG.BenteinK.AnseelF.MignonacK.RousselP. (2019a). A dynamic model of the effects of feedback-seeking behavior and organizational commitment on newcomer turnover. Journal of Management, 47(2), 519–544. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319850621
104.
VandenbergheC.PanaccioA.BenteinK.MignonacK.RousselP. (2011). Assessing longitudinal change of and dynamic relationships among role stressors, job attitudes, turnover intention, and well-being in neophyte newcomers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(4), 652–671. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.732
105.
VandenbergheC.PanaccioA.BenteinK.MignonacK.RousselP.AyedA. K. B. (2019b). Time-based differences in the effects of positive and negative affectivity on perceived supervisor support and organizational commitment among newcomers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(3), 264–281. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2324
106.
VanhoveA. J.HerianM. N.PerezA. L. U.HarmsP. D.LesterP. B. (2016). Can resilience be developed at work? A meta-analytic review of resilience-building programme effectiveness. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(2), 278–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12123
107.
WalterF.LamC. K.van der VegtG. S.HuangX.MiaoQ. (2015). Abusive supervision and subordinate performance: Instrumentality considerations in the emergence and consequences of abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(4), 1056–1072. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038513
108.
WangH.FengJ.PrevellieP.WuK. (2017). Why do I contribute when I am an “insider”? A moderated mediation approach to perceived insider status and employee’s innovative behavior. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 30(7), 1184–1197. https://doi.org/10.1108/jocm-06-2016-0109
109.
WangJ.KimT.-Y. (2013). Proactive socialization behavior in China: The mediating role of perceived insider status and the moderating role of supervisors’ traditionality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(3), 389–406. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1811
110.
WeissH.CropanzanoR. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, cause and consequences of affective experiences at work. In StawB. M.CummingsL. L. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews (pp. 1–74). JAI Press.
111.
WeissH. M.BealD. J. (2005). Reflections on affective events theory. In AshkanasyN.ZerbeW.HärtelC. (Eds.), The effect of affect in organizational settings (pp. 1–21). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
112.
ZhangY.BednallT. C. (2016). Antecedents of abusive supervision: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2657-6
113.
ZhaoH.KesselM.KratzerJ. (2014). Supervisor-subordinate relationship, differentiation, and employee creativity: A self-categorization perspective. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 48(3), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.46
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.
