Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 122, Issue 3, pp 461–474 | Cite as

What Have I Done to Deserve This? Effects of Employee Personality and Emotion on Abusive Supervision

Article

Abstract

Drawing on victim precipitation theory, we propose that certain employees are more likely to perceive abusive supervision because of their personality traits. Specifically, we hypothesize that subordinates’ emotional stability, conscientiousness, and agreeableness will be negatively related to perceived abuse from their supervisor and that negative emotions at work will mediate these relationships. We surveyed 222 employees and found that emotional stability and conscientiousness negatively predicted employees’ self-reports of abusive supervision and that this relationship was mediated by negative emotions. Thus, employees lower in emotional stability or conscientiousness are more likely to experience negative emotions, which in turn is related to higher levels of abuse.

Keywords

Abusive supervision Negative emotion Personality Victim precipitation theory 

References

  1. Aquino, K. (2000). Structural and individual determinants of workplace victimization: The effects of hierarchical status and conflict management style. Journal of Management, 26, 171–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aquino, K., & Byron, K. (2002). Dominating interpersonal behavior and perceived victimization in groups: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship. Journal of Management, 28, 69–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aquino, K., Grover, S. L., Bradfield, M., & Allen, D. G. (1999). The effects of negative affectivity, hierarchical status, and self-determination on workplace victimization. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 260–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aquino, K., & Lamertz, K. (2004). A relational model of workplace victimization: Social roles and patterns of victimization in dyadic relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1023–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aquino, K., & Thau, S. (2009). Workplace victimization: Aggression from the target’s perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 717–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aryee, S., Chen, Z. X., Sun, L., & Debrah, Y. A. (2007). Antecedents and outcomes of abusive supervision: Test of a trickle-down model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bamberger, P. A., & Bacharach, S. B. (2006). Abusive supervision and subordinate problem drinking: Taking resistance, stress and subordinate personality into account. Human Relations, 59, 723–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2003). The past, present and future of deviance research. In J. Greenberg (Ed.), Organizational behavior: The state of the science (pp. 247–281). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  11. Biron, M. (2010). Negative reciprocity and the association between perceived organizational ethical values and organizational deviance. Human Relations, 63, 875–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bowling, N. A., & Beehr, T. A. (2006). Workplace harassment from the victim’s perspective: A theoretical model and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 998–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bowling, N. A., Beehr, T. A., Bennett, M. M., & Watson, C. P. (2010). Target personality and workplace victimization: A prospective analysis. Work & Stress, 24, 140–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 22, 279–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clark, M. S., & Isen, A. M. (1982). Toward understanding the relationship between feeling states and social behavior. In A. H. Hastrof & A. M. Isen (Eds.), Cognitive social psychology (pp. 73–108). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  16. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO personality inventory manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  17. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1988). Personality in adulthood: A six-year longitudinal study of self-reports and spouse ratings on the NEO personality inventory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 853–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Costa, P. T., McCrae, R. R., & Dembroski, T. M. (1989). Agreeableness versus antagonism: Explication of a potential risk factor for CHD. In A. Siegman & T. M. Dembroski (Eds.), In search of coronary-prone behavior (pp. 41–63). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  19. Crampton, S. M., & Wagner, J. A. (1994). Percept-percept inflation in microorganizational research: An investigation of prevalence and effect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 67–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Curtis, L. A. (1974). Victim precipitation and violent crime. Social Problems, 21, 594–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Review of Psychology, 41, 417–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Einarsen, S. (1999). The nature and causes of bullying at work. International Journal of Manpower, 20, 16–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Elias, R. (1986). The politics of victimization: Victims, victimology, and human rights. New York: Oxford Press.Google Scholar
  24. Frijda, N. H. (1993). Moods, emotion episodes, and emotions. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 381–403). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  25. George, J. M. (1992). The role of personality in organizational life: Issues and evidence. Journal of Management, 18, 185–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Glasø, L., Matthiesen, S. B., Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2007). Do targets of workplace bullying portray a general victim personality profile? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 48, 313–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The big-five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., et al. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gottfredson, M. R. (1981). On the etiology of criminal victimization. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 72, 714–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Graziano, W. G., Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Hair, E. C. (1996). Perceiving interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: The case for agreeableness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 820–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Gross, J. J. (1998). Antecedent- and response-focused emotion regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 224–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 348–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Harvey, P., Stoner, J., Hochwarter, W., & Kacmar, C. (2007). Coping with abusive supervision: The neutralizing effects of ingratiation and positive affect on negative employee outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 264–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hayes, A. F. & Preacher, K. J. (2011). Indirect and direct effects of a multicategorical causal agent in statistical mediation analysis. Manuscript under review. MEDIATE macro. http://www.afhayes.com. Accessed 17 Nov 2011.
  35. Hoel, H., & Cooper, C. L. (2001). Origins of bullying: Theoretical frameworks for explaining workplace bullying. In N. Tehrani (Ed.), Building a culture of respect: Managing bullying at work (pp. 3–19). London: Taylor & Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hoobler, J. M., & Brass, D. J. (2006). Abusive supervision and family undermining as displaced aggression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1125–1133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hoobler, J. M., & Hu, L. (2013). A model of injustice, abusive supervision, and negative affect. Leadership Quarterly, 24, 256–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Izard, C. E. (1977). Human emotions. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jang, K. L., Livesley, W. J., & Vernon, P. A. (1996). Heritability of the big five personality dimensions and their facets: A twin study. Journal of Personality, 64, 575–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jensen-Campbell, L. A., Knack, J. M., Waldrip, A. M., & Campbell, S. D. (2007). Do big five personality traits associated with self-control influence the regulation of anger and aggression? Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 403–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. John, O. P., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Individual differences in emotion regulation. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 351–372). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  42. Kim, E., & Glomb, T. M. (2010). Get smarty pants: Cognitive ability, personality, and victimization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 889–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lamertz, K., & Aquino, K. (2004). Social power, social status and perceptual similarity of workplace victimization: A social network analysis of stratification. Human Relations, 57, 795–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Leymann, H. (1996). The content and development of mobbing at work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5, 165–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Milam, A. C., Spitzmueller, C., & Penney, L. M. (2009). Investigating individual differences among targets of workplace incivility. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 14, 58–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1159–1168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Monks, C. P., Smith, P. K., Naylor, P., Barter, C., Ireland, J. L., & Coyne, I. (2009). Bullying in different contexts: Commonalities, differences and the role of theory. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14, 146–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mount, M., Ilies, R., & Johnson, E. (2006). Relationship of personality traits and counterproductive work behaviors: The mediating effects of job satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 59, 591–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Olweus, D. (1978). Aggression in schools: Bullies and whipping boys. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
  52. Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Dilchert, S. (2005). Personality at work: Raising awareness and correcting misconceptions. Human Performance, 18, 389–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Assessing moderated mediation hypotheses: Theory, methods, and prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rafferty, A. E., Restubog, S. D., & Jimmieson, N. L. (2010). Losing sleep: Examining the cascading effects of supervisors’ experience of injustice on subordinates’ psychological health. Work & Stress, 24, 36–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Reis, H. T., & Gable, S. L. (2000). Event-sampling and other methods for studying everyday experience. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 190–222). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Robinson, M. D., & Clore, G. L. (2002). Episodic and semantic knowledge in emotional self-report: Evidence for two judgment processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 198–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schultz, L. (1968). The victim–offender relationship. Crime and Delinquency, 4, 135–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Staw, B. M., Sutton, R. I., & Pelled, L. H. (1994). Employee positive emotion and favorable outcomes at the workplace. Organization Science, 5, 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Sutton, R. I., & Rafaeli, A. (1988). Untangling the relationship between displayed emotions and organizational sales: The case of convenience stores. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 461–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 178–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33, 261–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tepper, B. J., Carr, J. C., Breaux, D. M., Geider, S., Hu, C., & Hua, W. (2009). Abusive supervision, intentions to quit, and employees’ workplace deviance: A power/dependence analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109, 156–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Henle, C. A., & Lambert, L. S. (2006). Procedural injustice, victim precipitation, and abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 59, 101–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., & Shaw, J. D. (2001). Personality moderators of the relationship between abusive supervision and subordinates’ resistance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 974–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Tepper, B. J., Henle, C. A., Lambert, L., Giacalone, R. A., & Duffy, M. K. (2008). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ organization deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 721–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tepper, B. J., Moss, S. E., & Duffy, M. K. (2011). Predictors of abusive supervision: Supervisor perceptions of deep-level dissimilarity, relationship conflict, and subordinate performance. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 279–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Thau, S., Bennett, R. J., Mitchell, M. S., & Marrs, M. (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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Thau, S., & Mitchell, M. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Tice, D. M., & Bratslavsky, E. (2000). Giving into feel good: The place of emotion regulation in the context of general self-control. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tobin, R. M., Graziano, W. G., Vanman, E. J., & Tassinary, L. G. (2000). Personality, emotional experience, and efforts to control emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 656–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Trierweiler, L. I., Eid, M., & Lischetzke, T. (2002). The structure of emotional expressivity: Each emotion counts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 1023–1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Van Katwyk, P. T., Fox, S., Spector, P. E., & Kelloway, E. K. (2000). Using the job-related affective well-being scale (JAWS) to investigate affective responses to work stressors. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 219–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1984). Negative affectivity: The disposition to experience aversive emotional states. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 465–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wolfgang, M. (1958). Patterns in criminal homicide. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  81. Wu, T., & Hu, C. (2009). Abusive supervision and employee emotional exhaustion: Dispositional antecedents and boundaries. Group & Organization Management, 34, 143–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Yagil, D., Ben-Zur, H., & Tamir, I. (2011). Do employees cope effectively with abusive supervision at work? An exploratory study. International Journal of Stress Management, 18, 5–23.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ManagementColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations