Professional Documents
Culture Documents
97502201-221
223
Duffy, Ganster,
& Pagon, 2002
Kelloway,
Sivanathan, Francis, & Barling, 2005; Tepper, 2000,
2007
NSC 95-2413-H-031-006
202
Maslach, 1982
Witt,
Andrews, & Carlson, 2004; Wright & Cropanzano,
1998
Tepper2000
justice perception
emotional labor
( 1 )
2006bGrandey, 2000
( 2 )
cognitive appraisal
coping
Cropanzano,
Goldman, & Benson III, 2005
b o u n d a r i e s Te p p e r
2000perceived
job mobility
Tepper2000abusive
supervision
p.178
actor
target
Fox & Spector, 2005
Tepper
2000
Tepper, 2000
Tepper
2000(1)
(2)
Tepper2000
Duffy et
al., 2002; Dupr et al., 2006; Mitchell & Ambrose, 2007;
Tepper, 2000; Zellars et al., 2002
Tepper2000justice theory
organizational justice
203
( 1 )
distributive injustice
( 2 )
procedural injustice
(3)interactional injustice
Zohar1995
dynamic role theory
role sender
limiting
conditions
VermuntSteensma
2001injustice-stress
theory
gap
internalized norm
Tepper, 2000Taris
PeetersLeBlancSchaufeliSchreurs2001
Tepper2001
204
KaustoEloLipponenElovainio2005
1443
Va n
DierendonckSchaufeliSixma1994567
H1a
1.
2006b
Grandey, 2000; Hochschild, 1983
Hochschild1983
affective delivery
Barger & Grandey, 2006; Pugh, 2002
2006a
2003
2002
psychological distress
205
BrotheridgeLee2002
236
Wilk
Moynihan2005
948
H1b
2.
power
resource dependence
response
modificationGrandey
& Brauburger, 2002; Gross, 1998
emotional
dissonanceHochschild, 1983
H2
(1)
206
EMBA
( 2 )
289
23179.93%
223
77.16%
32.3%
18.4%
9.9%8.1%
7.6%6.7%
44.8%54.7%58.7%
51.6%
23.3%
22.4%3.1%
46.2%19.7%17.9%
11.7%6.05
5.703.26
3.24
1.
Tepper2000
15
(1)
(2)
( 3 ) ( 4 )
( 5 ) ( 6 )
back
translation
,
Cronbach s .92
2.
N i e h o ffM o o r m a n
1993
4
4
6
14
(1)(2)(3)(4)
( 5 ) ( 6 )
,
Cronbach s .94
3.
2006bSchaubroeckJones2000
3
(1)
(2)(3)(4)
( 5 ) ( 6 )
,
Cronbach s .86
4.
Tepper2000
TepperMaslach
Maslach Burnout Inventory, MBIMaslach &
Jackson, 19816
(1)
( 2 ) ( 3 ) ( 4 )
,
Cronbach s .84
5.
Ashforth 1997
3
(1)(2)(3)
(4)(5)(6)
,
Cronbach s
.81
207
6.
1
Pugliesi Shook
1997
MaslachJackson1985
2006b
2002
Kilpatrick1989
Lively, 2000
Stahl &
Caligiuri, 2005
4
1999
2006a
2006
5
Tsai,
2001
2007
Wu & Hu,
2006
6
Mitchell
& Ambrose, 2007
7.
c o m m o n
Podsakoff2003
n e g a t i v e
affectivityWatsonClark
Tellegen 198810
4
Tsai20014
( 1 ) ( 2 ) ( 3 )
(4)
4
1038MBA
410
.92p < .014
Watson1988Tsai
2001general
XX
XX
XX
,
Cronbach s
.83
L I S R E L 8.72
AndersonGerbing1988
208
1
101
nested model10
10
21, N = 214
30.03326.39
1
r = -.23, p < .01
(3)
complete mediation
= -.28 , p <.01
= .18 , p <.01
= -.05, n.s.M6
H1a
H1b
2M1M6
1.12
0.76
38.90
0.64
2.89
3.94
39.15
2.09
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
1.15
3.14
B4
.10
-.00
-.04
-.03
-.04
.02
.05
-.08
.18**
.22**
-.16*
.28**
-.03
.18**
A3
-.23** -.18**
.04
-.00
-.03
.02
-.01
.41**
-.04
.42**
-.13*
-.10
.32**
A2
-.12
-.31**
-.20**
A1
.01
.01
-.00
-.08
.09
.02
-.13*
-.15*
A4
.09
.11
-.14*
.13
.06
.03
.04
A5
-.13
-.05
.09
.18**
.03
-.12
A6
.51**
.25**
-.13
.01
.11
(.83)
A7
.28**
.59**
-.55**
.06
(.92)
B1
-.03
.14*
.10
(.81)
B2
-.38**
-.49**
(.94)
B3
.40**
(.86)
B4
(.84)
C1
1.2.3.4.5.12
Cronbach s 121.2.3.4.5.
C1
0.56
0.88
3.93
B3
2.42
1.10
4.47
B2
0.72
1.82
B1
68.37
72.54
A2
A1
1N = 223
209
210
M1
(R2)
/
(R2)
R2
R2
F
M2
M3
M4
M5
M6
.03
-.22**
-.08
-.02
.06
-.02
.50**
(.35)**
.03
-.22**
-.08
-.02
.06
-.02
.50**
(.35)**
.02
-.01
-.16*
.04
-.14
.13
-.14
(.06)
-.06
.05
.06
-.04
.14
-.09
.26**
(.09)**
.03
-.22**
-.08
-.02
.06
-.02
.50**
(.35)**
.03
-.22**
-.08
-.02
.06
-.02
.50**
(.35)**
-.56**
.57**
.21**
.03
-.32**
(.29)**
.35
.33
13.10**
8,191
(.30)**
.40
.37
15.70**
8,191
(.04)**
.39
.37
15.30**
8,191
(.11)**
.46
.43
17.87**
9,190
.07
.25**
(.08)**
.43
.40
15.79**
9,190
-.05
-.28**
.18**
(.13)**
.48
.45
17.27**
10,189
( ) ( ) R2M1-M6M1
M2
M3M4
M5
M6
2.
BaronKenny
1986
AikenWest 1991
0
centered to means
= .03, n.s.
211
AikenWest 1991
H2
bootstrap method
H2
(R2)
(R2)
(R2)
(R2)
R2
R2
F
( ) ( ) R2
.02
-.03
-.12
.02
-.17*
.15
(.05)
-.06
.06
.06
-.01
.15
-.10
(.03)
-.55**
(.28)**
.61**
(.35)**
.14*
(.02)*
.13*
(.02)*
.03
(.00)
.35
.32
12.30**
9,205
.12*
(.02)*
.41
.39
15.92**
9,205
212
(2)
(3)
223
with replacement
2331000
233
10001000
bias-correction
percentile
Edwards Lambert
2007Stine 1989
4
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
100
0.50
0.00
p < .01
p < .01
2
H2
-.18
.14.18
= .69
= .49
p < .10
95.00, .38
0pp
.05
-.52-.59
3H2
.44
.14p < .05
213
Tepper2000
R2 = .01,
p < .10Tepper
Tepper, 2000
Grandey2000emotional labor
model
Tepper2000
.59**
-.56**
.69**
-.52**
.49**
-.59**
.27**
-.26**
.26*
-.21+
.28**
-.30*
-.01
.16**
.14**
.02
.29**
.16
-.18
.18*
.11+
.07
.44**
.14**
.18*
-.04
.14
.20+
.07
-.02
.10
.34
.04
-.07
--.31*
0
+1 (1)
-1(1)
214
Stahl
& Caligiuri, 2005
Tsui
& O'Reilly III, 1989
2007
(1)
( 2 )
,
Harman s one-factor test
unrotated
32.35%68.01%
(3)Tepper2000
.28-.45-.31-.27Tepper
2000
.36-.39-.38-.40
-.45Tepper2000
-.39
Tepper2000
Tepper2000
Tepper2000
Grandey, 2000Brotheridge
& Lee, 2002
215
Hochschild 1983
surface
actingdeep acting
216
Halbesleben
& Bowler, 2007; Wright & Cropanzano, 1998
BrotheridgeGrandey 2002
job-focused
emotional labor
= 0 +1 +2 +3 +4
+5 +6
+Z7 +Z8
+ZZ9
ZZ
01
-1, -11, -1-1, 11, 1
Z
Z
2.393.57
2.41
4.10
2.393.57
2.414.101
1999
2003
2002
193-49
2006a
4869-87
2006b
95 581-599
2007
49433-450
2006
2006
2377-98
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression:
Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural
217
218
219
220
221
,
The current study tries to explore the mediating process from abusive supervision to subordinates emotional
,
exhaustion. Past research has shown that subordinates justice perception mediates the relationship between abusive
supervision and emotional exhaustion. In this study, I further hypothesize that emotional labor serves as another mediator.
In addition, I investigate how the moderating role of perceived supervisory power plays on the relationship between
abusive supervision and the two mediators (justice perception and emotional labor).
Two hundred and twenty three valid questionnaires were collected from full-time employees in Taiwan using
,
survey research techniques. The results show that, after controlling altogether the respondents gender, tenure, rank,
education, gender combination, length of working years, and negative affectivity, abusive supervision predicts emotional
,
,
exhaustion not only through subordinates justice perception, but also through subordinates emotional labor. In addition,
,
subordinates perception of supervisory power is found to moderate the relationship between abusive supervision and
emotional labor, but not the relationship between abusive supervision and justice perception. Finally, abusive supervision
is found to be more strongly related to emotional labor when individuals perceive more supervisory power.
The implications of the findings, limitations, future research directions, and managerial implications are discussed at
the end of this paper.
Keywords: abusive supervision, justice perception, emotional labor, emotional exhaustion, perceived supervisory
power