An Identity Threat Appraisal Framework Explaining Distinct Reactions to Active- and Passive-Aggressive Abusive Supervision

Abstract

Previous research has predominantly focused on the overt acts of supervisory abuse or has taken a general approach that fails to differentiate between its distinctive forms. Integrating the literature on hot versus cold identity threats and identity threat appraisal, we examine how different forms of abusive supervision influence employee outcomes. We argue that active-aggressive abusive supervision, characterized by supervisors’ overt acts of abuse, embodies a hot identity threat that stimulates employees’ identity-protection responses, such as supervisor-directed aggression, a form of derogation. By contrast, passive-aggressive abusive supervision, involving covert acts of abuse, represents a cold identity threat that triggers employees’ identity-restructuring responses, manifesting as feedback seeking directed at coworkers and work withdrawal. These two pathways operate through distinct mechanisms—decreased group self-esteem and increased self-uncertainty, respectively—and are influenced by different moderators. The results from two experiments and one field study largely supported the hypothesized relationships. By differentiating between two forms of abusive supervision and examining their distinct effects, this study enhances our understanding of the nuanced nature of abusive supervision, its impacts, underlying mechanisms, and contingencies.