Abusive supervision and workplace deviance: the mediating role of interactional justice and the moderating role of power distance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study replicates previous studies by examining the effects of abusive supervision on employee deviant behaviours in the C hinese organisational context. It extends the existing research of abusive supervision by investigating the mediating role of the perception of interactional justice and the moderating role of individual‐level power distance in the link between abusive supervision and workplace deviance. Regression analyses on data of 283 employee–supervisor dyads revealed that the perception of interactional justice mediates the link between abusive supervision and workplace deviance. We also found that abusive supervision has a stronger negative relationship with the perception of interactional justice for employees low in power distance than for employees high in power distance. These findings provide both replications of and extensions to western theories of abusive supervision and workplace deviance. Practical implications of this study include hints for reducing both financial and psychological costs of deviant behaviour.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it