Perceptions of Abusive Supervision: The Role of Subordinates' Attribution Styles

Mark J. Martinko, Paul Harvey, David Sikora, Scott C. Douglas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

137 Scopus citations

Abstract

Empirical work on the concept of abusive supervision typically employs measurements of subordinates' perceptions of abuse as the primary dependent variable. This study began with a test of the notion that a significant proportion of subordinates' perceptions of abuse can be explained by individual differences in subordinates' attribution styles and their perceptions of the quality of their Leader–Member Exchange (LMX) relationships. Results indicated that subordinates' hostile attribution styles were positively related to subordinates' perceptions of abuse and negatively related to subordinates' LMX perceptions. We also found evidence that the abusive supervision and LMX constructs are confounded. The results call into question the conceptual and empirical distinctions between the abusive supervision and LMX constructs and indicate that attribution style plays a significant role in these perceptions.

Original languageAmerican English
JournalThe Leadership Quarterly
Volume22
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2011

Keywords

  • Abusive supervision
  • Attribution styles
  • Attributions
  • LMX

DC Disciplines

  • Business

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Perceptions of Abusive Supervision: The Role of Subordinates' Attribution Styles'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this