CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 489Workplace Violence and BullyingJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorBullying, Victimization, and Aggression

Does power distance exacerbate or mitigate the effects of abusive supervision? It depends on the outcome.

Lian, Huiwen, Ferris, D. Lance, Brown, Douglas J.·2012·Journal of Applied Psychology
DOI 10.1037/a0024610
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We predicted that the effects of abusive supervision are likely to be moderated by subordinate power distance orientation and that the nature of the moderating effect will depend on the outcome. Drawing upon work suggesting that high power distance orientation subordinates are more tolerant of supervisory mistreatment, we posited that high power distance orientation subordinates would be less likely to view abusive supervision as interpersonally unfair. Drawing upon social learning theory suggestions that high power distance orientation subordinates are more likely to view supervisors as role models, we posited that high power distance orientation subordinates would be more likely to pattern their own interpersonally deviant behavior after that of abusive supervisors. Across 3 samples we found support for our predicted interactions, culminating in a mediated moderation model demonstrating that social learning mediates the interaction of abusive supervision and power distance on subordinate interpersonal deviance, while ruling out alternate self-regulation impairment or displaced aggression explanations. Implications for the abusive supervision literature are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0024610

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Subordinates with high power distance belief tend to tolerate supervisory mistreatment.

    “Meanwhile, subordinates with high power distance belief tend to rely on superiors’ opinions for decision-making [7], tolerate supervisory mistreatment [28], and perform more upward ingratiatory behavior to please leaders even if it is against objective facts [29].”

    From Power Distance Belief and Workplace Communication: The Mediating Role of Fear of Authority (2022) · cites this paper as [28]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lian, H., Ferris, D. L., & Brown, D. J.
Affiliations
  • Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HK)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2012-01
Volume
97
Issue
1
Pages
107-123
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
DOI
10.1037/a0024610
OpenAlex
W1964687491
Cited by
489
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 10
FWCI
58.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
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 › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Keywords
abusive supervision, power distance, interpersonal deviance, social learning theory, displaced aggression, moderating effect
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Learning, Male, Personnel Management, Power, Psychological, Role, Social Behavior, Psychological Distance, Social Justice, Workplace

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