You are an outsider! How and when observed leader incivility affect hospitality employees’ social categorization and deviant behavior
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
When holding responsibility attribution constant, observers' justification attributions for abusive supervision will be positively associated with the frequency and severity of victim-directed deviant behaviors.
“When holding responsibility attribution constant, observers’ justification attributions for abusive supervision will be positively associated with the frequency and severity of victim-directed deviant behaviors.”
From Blame or Justification: A Conceptual Model of How Attributions Shape Observers’ Deviant Responses to Abusive Supervision (2026) · cites this paper as P. Liu et al., 2022
The deontic justice perspective is insufficient as a theoretical explanation of observer aggression, particularly because it fails to explain antisocial behaviors directed at the victim.
“That is, while the deontic justice approach explains observers’ aggression toward agents who are perceived as distorting justice, it fails to explain the antisocial behaviors directed at the victim.”
From Blame or Justification: A Conceptual Model of How Attributions Shape Observers’ Deviant Responses to Abusive Supervision (2026) · cites this paper as P. Liu et al., 2022
Observers of mistreatment can also develop destructive behaviors directed at the victim.
“However, some studies’ results indicate that observers of mistreatment can also develop destructive behaviors directed at the victim (e.g., Xu et al., 2020; Bai et al., 2022; P. Liu et al., 2022; Hill et al., 2025)”
From Blame or Justification: A Conceptual Model of How Attributions Shape Observers’ Deviant Responses to Abusive Supervision (2026) · cites this paper as P. Liu et al., 2022
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194 · see citing works
Ego depletion and the strength model of self-control: a meta-analysis
Hagger, M. S., Wood, C., Stiff, C., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0019486 · Cited by 2,265 · see citing works
Third parties’ reactions to the abusive supervision of coworkers
Mitchell, M. S., Vogel, R. M., & Folger, R. (2015) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/apl0000002 · Cited by 337 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ağaoğlu, M., & Erdil, O. (2026) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs16071191
- Authors
- Liu, P., An, X., & Li, X.
- Affiliations
- Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
- Jinan University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Li, Xin
- ORCID
- Liu, Pei
- Venue
- International Journal of Hospitality Management
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-09
- Volume
- 106
- Pages
- 103273
- ISSN
- 0278-4319 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4283728461
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6
- FWCI
- 6.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- International Journal of Hospitality Management (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Workplace Violence and Bullying
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Emotional Labor in Professions
- Keywords
- social categorization, deviance, leader-member exchange, outsider status, trait self-control, social identity theory, hospitality employees, supervisor-employee relationship
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review