Prior abusive supervision research focuses on subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervision. Recent research suggests that a variety of factors may be related to these perceptions, including subordinates’ self-esteem, personality traits, and negative affectivity, as well as supervisors’ perceptions of justice and breaches of psychological contracts. In this article, the authors propose and argue that a significant proportion of the variance in members’ perceptions of abuse by their leaders can be explained by the interactions of leaders’ and members’ attribution styles and that abuse perceptions may be considered to be a subset of subordinates’ perceptions of the quality of their leader–member exchange relationships. The authors also make the case that attribution styles affect the likelihood of abusive supervisory behavior as well as the perception of such behaviors.
AbramsonL.Y.SeligmanM. E.TeasdaleJ. D. (1978). Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 49-74.
2.
AquinoK.ByronK. (2002). Dominating interpersonal behavior and perceived victimization in groups: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship. Journal of Management, 28, 69-87.
3.
AquinoK.DouglasS. C.MartinkoM. (2004). Overt expressions of anger in response to perceived victimization by co-workers: Attributional style, hierarchical status, and organizational norms. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9, 152-164.
4.
AquinoK.GroverS. L.BradfieldM.AllenD. G. (1999). The effects of negative affectivity, hierarchical status and self-determination on workplace victimization. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 260-272.
5.
AquinoK.LamertzK. (2004). Relational model of workplace victimization: Social roles and patterns of victimization in dyadic relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1023-1034.
6.
AryeeS.ChenZ. X.SunL.DebrahY. A. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: Test of a trickle-down model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 191-201.
7.
BambergerP. A.BacharachS. B. (2006). Abusive supervision and subordinate problem drinking: Taking resistance, stress, and subordinate personality into account. Human Relations, 59, 1-30.
8.
BurtonJ. P.HooblerJ. M. (2006). Subordinate self-esteem and abusive supervision. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18, 340-355.
9.
DetertJ. R.TrevinoL. K. (2007). Managerial modes of influence and counterproductivity in organizations: A longitudinal business-unit-level investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 993-1005.
10.
DieneschR. M.LidenR. C. (1986). Leader-member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development. Academy of Management Review, 11, 618-634.
11.
DouglasS. C.MartinkoM. J. (2001). Exploring the role of individual differences in the prediction of workplace aggression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 547-559.
12.
DuffyM. K.GansterD. C.PagonM. (2002). Social undermining at work. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 331-351.
13.
GistM.MitchellT. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of Management Review, 17, 183-211.
14.
GreenS. G.MitchellT. R. (1979). Attributional processes of leaders in leader-member interactions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 429-458.
15.
HarrisK. J.KacmarK. M.ZivnuskaS. (2007). An investigation of abusive supervision as a predictor of performance and the meaning of work as a moderator of the relationship. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 252-263.
16.
HarveyP.StonerJ.HochwarterW.KacmarC. (2007). Coping with abusive supervision: The neutralizing effects of ingratiation and positive affect on negative employee outcomes. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 264-280.
17.
HeskethB. (1984). Attribution theory and unemployment: Kelly’s covariation model, self-esteem, and locus of control. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 24, 94-109.
18.
HooblerJ.BrassD. (2006). Abusive supervision and family undermining as displaced aggression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1125-1133.
19.
KnowltonW. A.MitchellT. R. (1980). Effects of causal attributions on a supervisor’s evaluation of subordinate performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 459-466.
20.
LidenR. C.WayneS. J.StilwellD. (1993). A longitudinal study on the early development of leader-member exchanges. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 662-674.
21.
MartinkoM. J.DouglasS. C.FordR.GundlachM. J. (2004). Dues paying: A theoretical explication and conceptual model. Journal of Management, 30, 49-69.
22.
MartinkoM. J.DouglasS. C.HarveyP. (2006). Attribution theory in industrial and organizational psychology: A review. In HodgkinsonG. P.FordJ. K. (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 127-187). Chichester, England: Wiley.
23.
MartinkoM. J.GardnerW. L. (1987). The leader member attribution process. Academy of Management Review, 12, 235-249.
24.
MartinkoM. J.HarveyP.DouglasS.C. (2007). The role, function, and contribution of attribution theory to leadership: A review. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 561-585.
25.
MartinkoM. J.HarveyP.SikoraD.DouglasS. (2011). Perceptions of abusive supervision: The role of subordinates’ attribution styles. Leadership Quarterly, 22, 751-764.
26.
MartinkoM. J.MossS. E.DouglasS. C.BorkowskiN. (2007). Anticipating the inevitable: When leader and member attribution styles clash. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 158-174.
27.
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.
28.
MitchellT. R.KalbL. S. (1981). Effects of outcome knowledge and outcome valence on supervisors’ evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 604-612.
29.
OlweusD. (1978). Aggression in schools: Bullies and whipping boys. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
30.
RussellD. W. (1991). The measurement of attribution process: Trait and situational approaches. In ZelenS. L. (Ed.), New models, new extensions of attribution theory (pp. 55-83). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
31.
SilverW. S.MitchellT. R.GistM. E. (1995). Responses to successful and unsuccessful performance: The moderating effect of self-efficacy on the relationship between performance and attributions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 286-299.
32.
SkogstadA.EinarsenS.TorshiemT.AaslandM. S.HetlandH. (2007). The destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership behavior. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 80-92.
33.
TepperB. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 178-190.
34.
TepperB. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33, 261-281.
35.
TepperB. J.DuffyM. K.HenleC. A.LambertL. S. (2006). Procedural injustice, victim precipitation, and abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 59, 101-123.
36.
TepperB. J.DuffyM. K.HooblerJ. M.EnsleyM. D. (2004). Moderators of the relationship between coworkers’ organizational citizenship behavior and fellow employees’ attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 455-465.
37.
ThauS.BennettR. J.MitchellM. S.MarrsM. B. (2009). How management style moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and workplace deviance: An uncertainty management theory perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108, 79-92.
38.
WeinerB. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion (Springer Series in Social Psychology). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
39.
WoodR. E.MitchellT. R. (1981). Manager behavior in a social context: The impact of impression management on attributions and disciplinary action. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 28, 356-378.
40.
WuT.HuC. (2009). Abusive supervision and employee emotional exhaustion: Dispositional antecedents and boundaries. Group & Organization Management, 34, 143-169.
41.
ZellarsK. L.TepperB. J.DuffyM. K. (2002). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1068-1076.
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.
