Cited by 231Workplace Violence and BullyingJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorTeam Dynamics and Performance

Abusive Supervision Climate: A Multiple-Mediation Model of its Impact on Group Outcomes

Open access
Priesemuth, Manuela, Schminke, Marshall, Ambrose, Maureen L., Folger, Robert·2014·Academy of Management Journal

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce the construct of abusive supervision climate, the collective perceptions employees hold regarding abusive supervision in their work unit. We thereby extend research on abusive supervision to the team level, which allows us to explore its relationship with outcomes not addressed by individual-level theories of abuse. First, we explain the emergence of abusive supervision climate through the lens of social information processing theory. Then, drawing on team process and effectiveness models, we develop a multiple-mediation model that identifies two distinct mechanisms by which abusive supervision climate impacts group-level outcomes: social identity and collective efficacy. Results demonstrate that abusive supervision climate influences social- and task-related group outcomes through these two mediation processes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5465/amj.2011.0237

Cites

158 of 158 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?

  • Research outside the technostress literature has linked destructive leadership behaviors to group-level outcomes such as cooperation or good citizen behavior.

    “Research outside the technostress literature had linked destructive leadership behaviors to outcomes on the group level such as cooperation or good citizen behavior (Priesemuth et al. 2014).”

    From Leadership and technostress: A systematic literature review (2025) · cites this paper as Priesemuth et al. 2014

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Priesemuth, M., Schminke, M., Ambrose, M. L., & Folger, R.
Affiliations
  • Wilfrid Laurier University (CA)
  • University of Central Florida (US)
Venue
Academy of Management Journal
Published
2014-10
Volume
57
Issue
5
Pages
1513-1534
ISSN
  • 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-0989
OpenAlex
W1964337316
Cited by
230
References
156
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 3
FWCI
24.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Academy of Management Journal (publishedVersion)
  • Journal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research (submittedVersion)
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 › Team Dynamics and Performance
Keywords
abusive supervision, team processes, team effectiveness, social identity, collective efficacy, social information processing theory, group outcomes, multiple mediation

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