Search results

Extant abusive supervision research has predominantly studied its prevalence and destructive effects through the lens of victims, potential victims, or third-party observers who witness such mistreatments. In the present research, we examine a neglected group of individuals—employees who are able to develop high-quality relationships and are closely associated with their abusive supervisors. Drawing insights from the stigma-by-association literature, we conceptualize abusive supervision as a unique form of moral stigma that might result in unintended spillover effects. Specifically, we found that observers tend to perceive employees who are closely associated with an abusive supervisor to be less moral and trustworthy for seemingly sharing a similar set of unethical values and beliefs, even though this might not necessarily be true in reality. As a downstream consequence, these employees are subject to unintended interpersonal backlashes (i.e., withdrawal from helping behaviors) imposed by their fellow coworkers. Furthermore, we investigate the moderating role of voluntary motive attribution, revealing that those who were attributed to voluntarily associate themselves with abusive supervisors received the highest levels of interpersonal backlashes. Results from one pilot study, one multiwave survey study (Study 2), and three preregistered experiments (Studies 1, 3, 4) supported our full theoretical model. Our research adds new insights to the abusive supervision literature by introducing a new unintended consequence on a previously overlooked group of employees who are presumed to be shielded from the negative impact of abusive supervision. Funding: This work was supported by the Singapore Ministry of Education [Grant R-317-000-164-115]. Supplemental Material: The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.1678 .

COVID-19 has emerged as one of the deadliest and most disruptive events in recent human history. Drawing from political science and psychological theories, we examine the effects of daily confirmed cases in a country on citizens' support for the political leader through the first 120 d of 2020. Using three unique datasets which comprise daily approval ratings of head of government (n = 1,411,200) across 11 world leaders (Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and the United States) and weekly approval ratings of governors across the 50 states in the United States (n = 912,048), we find a strong and significant positive association between new daily confirmed and total confirmed COVID-19 cases in the country and support for the heads of government. These analyses show that political leaders received a boost in approval in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, these findings suggest that the previously documented "rally 'round the flag" effect applies beyond just intergroup conflict.