Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

It Matters! Emotion Regulation Strategy Use Moderates the Relationship Between Abusive Supervision and Supervisor-Directed Deviance

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Occupational Health Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study examined the moderating effects of cognitive reappraisal and emotional suppression, two contrasting and representative emotion regulation strategies, on the abusive supervision - supervisor-directed deviance relationship. We tested the moderation hypotheses with two samples. Sample 1 consisted of a group of 499 English-speaking full-time workers recruited from TurkPrime. Sample 2 included a group of 318 Chinese full-time workers from various organizations. These two samples provided convergent evidence for the moderation effects of both cognitive reappraisal and emotional suppression. Specifically, cognitive reappraisal weakened the relationship between abusive supervision and supervisor-directed deviance such that the relationship was weaker among employees with higher than lower cognitive reappraisal. Emotional suppression exaggerated the association between abusive supervision and supervisor-directed deviance such that this association was stronger for employees with higher than lower emotional suppression. Our findings highlight the differential effectiveness of cognitive reappraisal and emotional suppression in coping with abusive supervision. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In sample 1, we adapted a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

  2. Including these 2 items in the model did not affect the results of hypotheses testing.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Review, 24, 452–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (1998). Revenge in organizations: The good, the bad, and the ugly. In R. W. Griffin, A. O’Leary-Kelly, & J. M. Collins (Eds.), Monographs in organizational behavior and industrial relations, Vol. 23, Parts A & B. Dysfunctional behavior in organizations: Violent and deviant behavior (pp. 49–67). Stamford: Elsevier Science/JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, R. J., & Robinson, S. L. (2000). Development of a measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 349–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, C. M., Carpenter, N. C., & Barratt, C. L. (2012). Do other-reports of counterproductive work behavior provide an incremental contribution over self-reports? A meta-analytic comparison. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 613–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boswell, W. R., & Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (2004). Experiencing mistreatment at work: The role of grievance filing, nature of mistreatment, and employee withdrawal. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 129–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, N. A., & Michel, J. S. (2011). Why do you treat me badly? The role of attributions regarding the cause of abuse in subordinates' responses to abusive supervision. Work & Stress, 25, 309–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, N. A., Wang, M., Matthews, R. A., Shi, J., & Wang, Q. (2020). Experienced aggression and target-perpetrated deviance: Is the relationship linear or non-linear? Occupational Health Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41542-020-00060-7 Advance online publication.

  • Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 137–164). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brotheridge, C. M., & Lee, R. T. (2002). Testing a conservation of resources model of the dynamics of emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 7, 57–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. P., Hoobler, J. M., & Scheuer, M. L. (2012). Supervisor workplace stress and abusive supervision: The buffering effect of exercise. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27, 271–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, D. (2009). So why ask me? Are self-report data really that bad? In C. E. Lance & R. J. Vandenberg (Eds.), Statistical and metholodogical myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 311–338). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, S. C. S., & Liang, S. G. (2013). When do subordinates' emotion-regulation strategies matter? Abusive supervision, subordinates' emotional exhaustion, and work withdrawal. The Leadership Quarterly, 24, 125–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 325–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dan-Glauser, E. S., & Gross, J. J. (2011). The temporal dynamics of two response-focused forms of emotion regulation: Experiential, expressive, and autonomic consequences. Psychophysiology, 48, 1309–1322.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Denny, B. T., & Ochsner, K. N. (2014). Behavioral effects of longitudinal training in cognitive reappraisal. Emotion, 14, 425–433.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, D. L., Spence, J. R., Brown, D. J., & Heller, D. (2012). Interpersonal injustice and workplace deviance: The role of esteem threat. Journal of Management, 38, 1788–1811.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotional regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 95–110.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, J. J. (1998a). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, J. J. (1998b). Antecedent - and response - focused emotion regulation: Divergent consequences for experience, expression, and physiology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 224–237.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, J. J. (1999). Emotion regulation: Past, present, future. Cognition & Emotion, 13, 551–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, J. J. (2013). Conceptualizing emotional labor: An emotion regulation perspective. In A. A. Grandey, J. M. Diefendorff, & D. E. Rupp (Eds.), Emotional labor in the 21st century: Diverse perspectives on emotion regulation at work (pp. 288–294). New York: Psychology Press/Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, J. J., & Thompson, R. A. (2007). Emotion regulation: Conceptual foundations. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 3–24). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halbesleben, J. R. B., Neveu, J., Paustian-Underdahl, S. C., & Westman, M. (2014). Getting to the “COR”: Understanding the role of resources in conservation of resources theory. Journal of Management, 40, 1334–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henle, C. A., & Gross, M. A. (2014). What have I done to deserve this? Effects of employee personality and emotion on abusive supervision. Journal of Business Ethics, 122, 461–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertel, G., Rauschenbach, C., Thielgen, M. M., & Krumm, S. (2015). Are older workers more active copers? Longitudinal effects of age-contingent coping on strain at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, 514–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50, 337–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hülsheger, U. R., & Schewe, A. F. (2011). On the costs and benefits of emotional labor: A meta-analysis of three decades of research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16, 361–389.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalokerinos, E. K., Greenaway, K. H., & Denson, T. F. (2015). Reappraisal but not suppression downregulates the experience of positive and negative emotion. Emotion, 15, 271–275.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, S., Bradley, J. C., Luchman, J. N., & Haynes, D. (2009). On the role of positive and negative affectivity in job performance: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 162–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krischer, M. M., Penney, L. M., & Hunter, E. M. (2010). Can counterproductive work behaviors be productive? CWB as emotion-focused coping. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15, 154–166.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Litman, L., Robinson, J., & Abberbock, T. (2017). TurkPrime.com: A versatile crowdsourcing data acquisition platform for the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 433–442.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackey, J. D., Frieder, R. E., Brees, J. R., & Martinko, M. J. (2017). Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management, 43, 1940–1965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makel, M. C., Plucker, J. A., & Hegarty, B. (2012). Replications in psychology research: How often do they really occur? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 537–542.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martinko, M. J., Harvey, P., Brees, J. R., & Mackey, J. (2013). A review of abusive supervision research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, S120–S137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michel, J. S., Newness, K., & Duniewicz, K. (2016). How abusive supervision affects workplace deviance: A moderated-mediation examination of aggressiveness and work-related negative affect. Journal of Business and Psychology, 31, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. (1998–2017). Mplus user's guide, 6th. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

    Google Scholar 

  • Open Science Collaboration, T. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, aac4716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peltokorpi, V., & Ramaswami, A. (2019). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ physical and mental health: The effects of job satisfaction and power distance orientation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2018.1511617.

  • Peng, A. C., Schaubroeck, J. M., Chong, S., & Li, Y. (2019). Discrete emotions linking abusive supervision to employee intention and behavior. Personnel Psychology, 72, 393–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, Y., Tian, B., Jex, S. M., & Chen, Y. (2017). Employees’ age moderates relationships of emotional suppression with health and well-being. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3, 89–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinones, C., Rodríguez-Carvajal, R., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). Testing a eustress–distress emotion regulation model in British and Spanish front-line employees. International Journal of Stress Management, 24, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Restubog, S. L. D., Scott, K. L., & Zagenczyk, T. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberton, T., Daffern, M., & Bucks, R. S. (2012). Emotion regulation and aggression. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 72–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, S. L., & Bennett, R. J. (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. The Academy of Management Journal, 38, 555–572.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruan, Y., Reis, H. T., Zareba, W., & Lane, R. D. (2019). Does suppressing negative emotion impair subsequent emotions? Two experience sampling studies. Motivation and Emotion. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-019-09774-w Advance online publication.

  • Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. (2010). Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational Research Methods, 13, 456–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, N. A., Sabat, I. E., Martinez, L. R., Weaver, K., & Xu, S. (2015). A convenient solution: Using MTurk to sample from hard-to-reach populations. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 8, 220–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smithikrai, C. (2008). Moderating effect of situational strength on the relationship between personality traits and counterproductive work behaviour. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 11, 253–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, P. E., & Fox, S. (2005). The stressor-emotion model of counterproductive work behavior. In S. Fox & P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work behavior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp. 151–174). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, J. P. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, S. M., Bing, M. N., Davison, H. K., Woehr, D. J., & McIntyre, M. D. (2009). In the eyes of the beholder: A non-self-report measure of workplace deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 207–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sulea, C., Fine, S., Fischmann, G., Sava, F. A., & Dumitru, C. (2013). Abusive supervision and counterproductive work behaviors: The moderating effects of personality. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12, 196–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 178–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., Hoobler, J., & Ensley, M. D. (2004). Moderators of the relationships between coworkers' organizational citizenship behavior and fellow employees' attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 455–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, B. J., Moss, S. E., Lockhart, D. E., & Carr, J. C. (2007). Abusive supervision, upward maintenance communication, and subordinates’ psychological distress. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1169–1180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, B. J., Simon, L., & Park, H. M. (2017). Abusive supervision. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 123–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Troy, A. S., Shallcross, A. J., & Mauss, I. B. (2013). A person-by-situation approach to emotion regulation: Cognitive reappraisal can either help or hurt, depending on the context. Psychological Science, 24, 2505–2514.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, J. C., Edwards, B. D., Shull, A., & Finch, D. M. (2009). Examining the consequences in the tendency to suppress and reappraise emotions on task-related job performance. Human Performance, 22, 23–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, B. M., Matthews, R. A., Toumbeva, T. H., Kabat-Farr, D., Philbrick, J., & Pavisic, I. (2019). Failing to be family-supportive: Implications for supervisors. Journal of Management, 45, 2952–2977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Z., Jex, S., Peng, Y., Wang, S., & Liu, L. (2019). The relationship between emotion regulation in supervisory interactions and marital well-being: An examination of spillover-crossover mechanisms. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology., 24, 467–481.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, T. L., Miles, E., & Sheeran, P. (2012). Dealing with feeling: A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 775–808.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Availability of Data and Material

NA.

Code Availability

NA

Funding

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant # 71472082).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Organizational Science and Communication, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, 20052, USA

    Yisheng Peng

  2. Department of Psychology, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA

    Xiaohong Xu

  3. School of Management, Jinan University, Guangzhou, 510632, Guangdong Province, China

    Jie Ma

  4. School of Business Administration, Nanjing University of Finance and Economics, Nanjing, 210023, Jiangsu, China

    Wenqin Zhang

Authors
  1. Yisheng Peng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiaohong Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jie Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wenqin Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yisheng Peng.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Peng, Y., Xu, X., Ma, J. et al. It Matters! Emotion Regulation Strategy Use Moderates the Relationship Between Abusive Supervision and Supervisor-Directed Deviance. Occup Health Sci 4, 471–491 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41542-020-00074-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41542-020-00074-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation