Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Abusive Supervision as a Response to Follower Hostility: A Moderated Mediation Model

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A general is just as good or just as bad as the troops under his command make him.

Macarthur, Douglas

Abstract

How and when does followers’ upward hostile behavior contribute to the emergence of abusive supervision? Although from a normative or ethical point of view, supervisors should refrain from displaying abusive supervision, in line with a social exchange perspective, we argue that abusive followership causes supervisors to experience low levels of interpersonal justice, stimulating abusive supervision in response. Based on uncertainty management theory, we further expect that the extent to which supervisors reciprocate the experienced injustice with abusive supervisory behavior is moderated by supervisors’ self-doubt. A multi-source field study as well as a vignette study following an experimental-causal-chain approach supported our hypotheses. Specifically, our results revealed that the indirect effect of abusive followership on abusive supervision through supervisors’ interpersonal justice is most pronounced when supervisors experience high levels of self-doubt. The practical and theoretical implications of our findings are 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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For the supervisor reports of abusive followership (α = 0.90) all items were prefaced with the statement “My employee …” in order to refer to the focal employee. A sample item is “My employee gives me the silent treatment.”

  2. When we retested our Hypotheses with the abusive followership measure obtained from the supervisors (instead of the scores obtained from the co-workers), one noteworthy difference emerged. That is, our results revealed that the direct effect of abusive followership on abusive supervision was not significant.

References

  • Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aquino, K., & Douglas, S. (2003). Identity threat and antisocial behavior in organizations: The moderating effects of individual differences, aggressive modeling, and hierarchical status. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 195–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avolio, B. J. (2007). Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory-building. American Psychologist, 62, 25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardes Mawritz, M., Folger, R., & Latham, G. P. (2014). Supervisors’ exceedingly difficult goals and abusive supervision: The mediating effects of hindrance stress, anger, and anxiety. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 358–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaman, L., Duflo, E., Pande, R., & Topalova, P. (2012). Female leadership raises aspirations and educational attainment for girls: A policy experiment in India. Science, 335(6068), 582–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, T. (2005). Potential problems in the statistical control of variables in organizational research: A qualitative analysis with recommendations. Organizational Research Methods, 8, 274–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, C. M., Ones, D. S., & Sackett, P. R. (2007). Interpersonal deviance, organizational deviance, and their common correlates: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 410–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., & Moag, J. S. (1986). Interactional justice communication criteria of fairness. In R. Lewicki, B. H. Sheppard & M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (pp. 43–55). Greenwich: JAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bies, R. J., & Tripp, T. M. (2001). A passion for justice: The rationality and morality of revenge. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: From theory to practice (pp. 197–226). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D. J., & Lord, R. G. (1999). The utility of experimental research in the study of transformational/charismatic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 10, 531–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burris, E. (2012). The risks and rewards of speaking up: Managerial responses to employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 55, 851–875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsmith, K., Darley, J. M., & Robinson, P. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 386–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., Rodell, J. B., Long, D. M., Zapata, C. P., Conlon, D. E., & Wesson, M. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conger, J. A., & Fulmer, R. M. (2003). Developing your leadership pipeline. Harvard Business Review, 81, 76–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31, 874–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D. (2003). Noneconomic motives predicting cooperation in public good dilemmas: The effect of received respect on contributions. Social Justice Research, 16, 367–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., & Sedikides, C. (2005). Self-uncertainty and responsiveness to procedural justice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 157–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D., & Sedikides, C. (2009). The whys and whens of personal uncertainty. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 218–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decoster, S., Stouten, J., Camps, J., & Tripp, T. M. (2014). The role of employees’ OCB and leaders’ hindrance stress in the emergence of self-serving leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 647–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, H., Wu, C. H., Leung, K., & Guan, Y. (2016). Depletion from self-regulation: A resource-based account of the effect of value incongruence. Personnel Psychology, 69, 431–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeRue, D. S., & Wellman, N. (2009). Developing leaders via experience: The role of developmental challenge, learning orientation, and feedback availability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 859–875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubois, D., Rucker, D. D., & Galinsky, A. D. (2015). Social class, power, and selfishness: When and why upper and lower class individuals behave unethically. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 436–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fast, N. J., & Chen, S. (2009). When the boss feels inadequate power, incompetence, and aggression. Psychological Science, 20, 1406–1413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleeson, W., Malanos, A. B., & Achille, N. M. (2002). An intraindividual process approach to the relationship between extraversion and positive affect: Is acting extraverted as “good” as being extraverted? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1409–1422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foa, E., & Foa, U. (1980). Resource theory: Interpersonal behavior as exchange. In K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg & R. H. Willis (Eds.), Social exchange: Advances in theory and research (pp. 77–94). New York: Plenum Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Inesi, M. E., & Gruenfeld, D. H. (2006). Power and perspectives not taken. Psychological Science, 17, 1068–1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. A., & Tang, T. L. (1998). An examination of organizational trust antecedents. Public Personnel Management, 27, 321–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., Gino, F., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011). Reversing the extraverted leadership advantage: The role of employee proactivity. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 528–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J. (1993). The social side of fairness: Interpersonal and informational classes of organizational justice. In R. Cropanzano (Ed.), Justice in the workplace: Approaching fairness in human resource management (pp. 79–103). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, L., & Barling, J. (1999). Predicting employee aggression against coworkers, subordinates and supervisors: The roles of person behaviors and perceived workplace factors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 897–913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, G. H., Harms, P. D., & Bai, Y. (2017). Nightmare bosses: The impact of abusive supervision on employees’ sleep, emotions, and creativity. Journal of Business Ethics, 145, 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, K. J., Harvey, P., & Kacmar, K. M. (2011). Abusive supervisory reactions to coworker relationship conflict. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 1010–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, S. J., & Harris, O. J. (1992). The role of parental influence in leadership. The Journal of Social Psychology, 132, 153–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A. F. (2015). An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 50, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henle, C. A., Giacalone, R. A., & Jurkiewicz, C. L. (2005). The role of ethical ideology in workplace deviance. Journal of Business Ethics, 56, 219–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogg, M. A., Sherman, D. K., Dierselhuis, J., Maitner, A. T., & Moffitt, G. (2007). Uncertainty, entitativity, and group identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 135–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollander, E. P. (1992). The essential interdependence of leadership and followership. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 71–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., & Colquitt, J. A. (2004). Organizational justice and stress: The mediating role of work-family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 395–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., Simon, L. S., Hurst, C., & Kelley, K. (2014). What I experienced yesterday is who I am today: Relationship of work motivations and behaviors to within-individual variation in the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 199–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, R. P., Snoek, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. Oxford: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karelaia, N., & Guillén, L. (2014). Me, a woman and a leader: Positive social identity and identity conflict. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 125, 204–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kausel, E. E., Culbertson, S. S., Leiva, P. I., Slaughter, J. E., & Jackson, A. T. (2015). Too arrogant for their own good? Why and when narcissists dismiss advice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 131, 33–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lian, H., Ferris, D. L., & Brown, J. (2012). Does power distance exacerbate or mitigate the effects of abusive supervision? It depends on the outcome. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lian, H., Ferris, D. L., Morrison, R., & Brown, D. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, L. H., Lian, H., Brown, D., Ferris, D. L., Hanig, S., & Keeping, L. (2016). Why are abusive supervisors abusive? A dual-system self-control model. Academy of Management Journal, 59, 1385–1406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liden, R. C., Sparrowe, R. T., & Wayne, S. J. (1997). Leader-member exchange theory: The past and potential for the future. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management (pp. 47–119). Greenwich: JAI Press.

    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 

  • Martinko, M. J., Harvey, P., Brees, J. R., & Mackey, J. (2013). A review of abusive supervision research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 120–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinko, M. J., Harvey, P., Sikora, D., & Douglas, S. C. (2011). Perceptions of abusive supervision: The role of subordinates’ attribution styles. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 751–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mawritz, M. B., Greenbaum, R. L., Butts, M. M., & Graham, K. (in press). I just can’t control myself: A self-regulation perspective on the abuse of deviant employees. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0409.

  • Mayer, D. M., Thau, S., Wokrman, K. M., Van Dijke, M., & De Cremer, 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, 24–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montada, L., & Maes, J. (2016). Justice and self-interest. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 109–125). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Okimoto, T. G., & Wenzel, M. (2008). The symbolic meaning of transgressions: Towards a unifying framework of justice restoration. In K. A. Hegtvedt & J. Clay-Warner (Eds.), Advances in Group Processes: Justice (Vol (25, pp. 291–326). Oxford: Elsevier Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oleson, K. C., Poehlmann, K. M., Yost, J. H., Lynch, M. E., & Arkin, R. M. (2000). Subjective overachievement: Individual differences in self-doubt and concern with performance. Journal of Personality, 68, 491–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer, D. M., Meyvis, T., & Davidenko, N. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 867–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, H., Hoobler, J. M., Wu, J., Liden, R. C., Hu, J., & Wilson, M. S. (in press). Abusive Supervision and Employee Deviance: A Multifoci Justice Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics.

  • 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 

  • R Core Team (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rafferty, A. E., Restubog, S. L. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36. http://www.jstatsoft.org/v48/i02/.

  • Rus, D., van Knippenberg, D., & Wisse, B. (2010). Leader self-definition and leader self-serving behavior. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 509–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawaoka, T., Hughes, B. L., & Ambady, N. (2015). Power heightens sensitivity to unfairness against the self. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 1023–1035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schat, A. C., & Kelloway, E. K. (2003). Reducing the adverse consequences of workplace aggression and violence: The buffering effects of organizational support. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8, 110–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schat, A. C. H., Frone, M. R., & Kelloway, E. K. (2006). Prevalence of workplace aggression in the U.S. workforce: Findings from a national study. In E. K. Kelloway, J. Barling & J. J. Hurrell (Eds.), Handbook of workplace violence (pp. 47–89). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shao, R., Rupp, D. E., Skarlicki, D. P., & Jones, K. S. (2013). Employee justice across cultures: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 39, 263–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, L. S., Hurst, C., Kelley, K., & Judge, T. A. (2015). Understanding cycles of abuse: A multimotive approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1798–1810.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., & Fong, G. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 845–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stouten, J., De Cremer, D., & Van Dijk, E. (2005). I’m doing the best I can (for myself): Leadership and variance of harvesting in resource dilemmas. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 9, 205–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stouten, J., van Dijke, M., & De Cremer, D. (2012). Ethical leadership. An overview and future perspectives. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 11, 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and directions for future research. Journal of Management, 33, 261–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, B. J., Duffy, M. K., & Breaux-Soignet, D. M. (2011). Abusive supervision as political activity: Distinguishing impulsive and strategic expressions of downward hostility. In G. Ferris & D. Treadway (Eds.), Politics in Organizations: Theory and Research Considerations (pp. 191–212). Abingdon: Taylor-Francis/Routledge Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tepper, B. J., & Henle, C. A. (2011). A case for recognizing distinctions among constructs that capture interpersonal mistreatment in work organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 487–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  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 

  • Thau, S., Aquino, K., & Wittek, R. (2007). An extension of uncertainty management theory to the self: The relationship between justice, social comparison orientation, and antisocial work behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 250–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, E. R. (2007). Development and validation of an internationally reliable short-form of the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS). Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology, 38, 227–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tost, L. P., Gino, F., & Larrick, R. P. (2013). When power makes others speechless: The negative impact of leader power on team performance. Academy of Management Journal, 56, 1465–1486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trevino, L. K., Hartman, L. P., & Brown, M. (2000). Moral person and moral manager: How executives develop a reputation for ethical leadership. California Management Review, 42, 128–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhl-Bien, M., Riggio, R. E., Lowe, K. B., & Carsten, M. K. (2014). Followership theory: A review and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 83–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ünal, A. F., Warren, D. E., & Chen, C. C. (2012). The normative foundations of unethical supervision in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K. (2001). Uncertainty management: The influence of uncertainty salience on reactions to perceived procedural fairness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 931–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K. (2009). Making sense of life: The existential self trying to deal with personal uncertainty. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 197–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgments. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (pp. 324–336). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bos, K., Wilke, H. A. M., & Lind, E. A. (1998). When do we need procedural fairness? The role of trust in authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1449–1458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vroom, V. H., & Yetton, P. W. (1973). Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburgh: University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Walter, F., Lam, C. K., Van Der Vegt, G. S., Huang, X., & Miao, Q. (2015). Abusive supervision and subordinate performance: Instrumentality considerations in the emergence and consequences of abusive supervision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1056–1072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, M., & Okimoto, T. G. (2016). Retributive justice. In C. Sabbagh & M. Schmitt (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 237–256). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zacharatos, A., Barling, J., & Kelloway, E. K. (2000). Development and effects of transformational leadership in adolescents. The Leadership Quarterly, 11, 211–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and their support during the review process.

Funding

Research funded by a Ph.D. Grant (Award Number: 111538) of Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology (IWT). The first author gratefully acknowledges Agency for Innovation by Science and Technology (IWT) for providing this grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Thomas More, Molenstraat 8, 2018, Antwerp, Belgium

    Jeroen Camps

  2. KU Leuven, Dekenstraat 2 - bus 3725, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Jeroen Camps, Jeroen Stouten & Martin Euwema

  3. Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, CB2 1AG, UK

    David De Cremer

Authors
  1. Jeroen Camps
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeroen Stouten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martin Euwema
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David De Cremer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeroen Camps.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Camps, J., Stouten, J., Euwema, M. et al. Abusive Supervision as a Response to Follower Hostility: A Moderated Mediation Model. J Bus Ethics 164, 495–514 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4058-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4058-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation