Abusive Supervision: A Meta-Analysis and Empirical Review
verifiedrich profile · Journal of Management · 2015
Mackey, Jeremy D.; Frieder, Rachel E.; Brees, Jeremy R.; Martinko, Mark J.
How this was studied
A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.
What this article reports
The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.
abusive supervision → work stress
abusive supervision → task performance
abusive supervision → organizational citizenship behavior ocb
abusive supervision → emotional exhaustion
abusive supervision → task performance
abusive supervision → job satisfaction
abusive supervision → job satisfaction
abusive supervision → emotional exhaustion
abusive supervision → counterproductive work behaviours
abusive supervision → counterproductive work behaviours
abusive supervision → job satisfaction
Models this article informs
The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.
abusive supervision correlates emotional exhaustion
abusive supervision correlates job satisfaction
abusive supervision predicts counterproductive work behaviours
abusive supervision predicts emotional exhaustion
abusive supervision predicts job satisfaction
abusive supervision predicts organizational citizenship behavior ocb
abusive supervision predicts task performance
abusive supervision predicts work stress
In the authors’ words
The article’s own abstract.
We conducted a meta-analysis and empirical review of abusive supervision research in order to derive meta-analytic population estimates for the relationships between perceptions of abusive supervision and numerous demographic, justice, individual difference, leadership, and outcome variables. The use of psychometric correction enabled us to provide weighted mean correlations and population correlation estimates that accounted for attenuation due to measurement error and sampling error variance. Also, we conducted sensitivity analyses that removed the effects of large samples from analyses. Then, we conducted subgroup analyses using samples drawn from the United States to provide population correlation estimates that corrected for attenuation due to measurement error, sampling error variance, and indirect range restriction. Finally, we examined measurement artifacts resulting from various adaptations of Tepper’s abusive supervision measure. The results reveal that although the associations between perceptions of abusive supervision and outcome variables appear to be universally negative, the magnitude of the relationships between perceptions of abusive supervision and antecedent and outcome variables varies according to the design features of studies. Contributions to theory and practice, strengths and limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.
What the literature says about it
Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.
supports “Scholars have utilized the lenses of organizational justice, social exchange, and stress to understand the consequences of abusive supervision (Mackey et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2019).”
supports “Employees who have faced abusive supervision have experienced emotional exhaustion that has, in turn, led to counterproductive work behaviors [14].”
supports “We also used the correlations between abusive supervision and overall performance ( r = −.19) and OCB ( r = −.24) reported by Mackey et al. (2017) in their meta-analysis as benchmark effects and calculated the necessary sample size to achieve a power of 0.80.”
supports “Employees who have faced abusive supervision have experienced emotional exhaustion that has, in turn, led to counterproductive work behaviors [14].”
supports “Abusive supervision is detrimental to both organizations and employees, being viewed as an important source of employees’ reduced wellbeing and job satisfaction, as well as increased turnover, interpersonal deviance and counterproductive work behavior (Liu et al., 2010; Mackey et al., 2017; Tepper, 2000).”
supports “Across various work contexts, perceptions of abusive supervision induce employees’ ill-being and harm their task performance (Fischer et al., 2021; Mackey et al., 2017; Martinko et al., 2013; Tepper, 2000; Zhang et al., 2019).”
supports “…supervision is detrimental to both organizations and employees, being viewed as an important source of employees’ reduced wellbeing and job satisfaction, as well as increased turnover, interpersonal deviance and counterproductive work behavior (Liu et al., 2010; Mackey et al., 2017; Tepper, 2000).”
supports “Abusive supervision is detrimental to both organizations and employees, being viewed as an important source of employees’ reduced wellbeing and job satisfaction, as well as increased turnover, interpersonal deviance and counterproductive work behavior (Liu et al., 2010; Mackey et al., 2017; Tepper, 2000).”
supports “Subsequently, a meta-analysis showed that a dark leader who perpetrates abusive supervision adversely impacts the employees’ psychological state, such as increased stress, decreased well-being, and performance (Mackey, Frieder, Brees, & Martinko, 2017).”
supports “In addition, employees working under conditions involving long-term abusive supervision are prone to suffering increased stress, which leads to emotional exhaustion, job burnout, anxiety, and other negative psychological outcomes [11].”
supports “…supervision is detrimental to both organizations and employees, being viewed as an important source of employees’ reduced wellbeing and job satisfaction, as well as increased turnover, interpersonal deviance and counterproductive work behavior (Liu et al., 2010; Mackey et al., 2017; Tepper, 2000).”
supports “The past literature indicates that abusive supervision is negatively associated with a negative organization and employee performance outcomes [58].”
supports “Early meta-analyses (Mackey et al., 2015; Zhang and Liao, 2015) has found abusive supervision is positively related to a series of bad consequence such as counterproductive work behavior, emotional exhaustion, and so on.”
supports “Subsequently, a meta-analysis showed that a dark leader who perpetrates abusive supervision adversely impacts the employees’ psychological state, such as increased stress, decreased well-being, and performance (Mackey, Frieder, Brees, & Martinko, 2017).”
supports “In addition, employees working under conditions involving long-term abusive supervision are prone to suffering increased stress, which leads to emotional exhaustion, job burnout, anxiety, and other negative psychological outcomes [11].”
supports “…of abusive supervision have reported low associations between abusive supervision and organizational citizenship behavior and in particular OCBI and these associations are typically weaker when compared with relations between abusive supervision and other outcomes (Mackey et al., 2017).”
supports “Early meta-analyses (Mackey et al., 2015; Zhang and Liao, 2015) has found abusive supervision is positively related to a series of bad consequence such as counterproductive work behavior, emotional exhaustion, and so on.”
supports “Furthermore, results of a metaanalysis supported a modest association of abusive supervision with emotional exhaustion (Mackey et al., 2017).”
Ancillary research
Neighbouring works in the citation graph around this article.
- 10.1080/08959285.2025.2463647
- 10.3390/ijerph16183300
- 10.1108/ejm-03-2019-0265
- 10.1007/s12144-022-03939-6
- 10.51629/ijeamal.v4i2.167
- 10.3390/ijerph17217773
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0284884
- 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.941161
- 10.1177/19389655231209912
- 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746823
- 10.1111/peps.12494
Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.