Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Abusive supervision

Abusive supervision:
What is abusive supervision, what motivates it, and what can be done about it?

Multimedia presentation (3 min)

Overview

Case study/scenario Jane's supervisor, Mark, often belittled Jane's ideas in meetings and berated her work in front of coworkers while the office was busy. Jane's self-worth and job satisfaction suffered as a result of Mark's abusive supervision and this went on to impact her general performance and well-being.

Figure 1. workplace hostility

• Definition of abusive supervision
• Impact on Employee Well-being
• Underlying Factors and Hierarchical Societies
• Erosion of Job Satisfaction and Performance
• Negative Ripple Effect on Organisational Climate

Focus questions: What is abusive supervision? How does abusive supervision impact wellbeing? How does abusive supervision effect motivation? What motivates abusive supervision in hierarchical societies? How can organisations and individuals proactively prevent abusive supervision?

What is abusive supervision?

Why is abusive supervision important to understand?

Abusive supervision refers to a subordinates' perception of the extent to which supervisors engage in the sustained display of hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviours, excluding physical contact. It is from the profound and widespread impact on individual wellbeing and organisational functioning that an urgent need arises for understanding abusive supervision (Tepper, 2007). Due to the severe consequences that it creates, understanding the nuance of this detrimental phenomenon is more important than ever. The vast majority of the meta-analytic research on abusive supervision to date has not examined causative correlations, but rather elements that are merely correlated with it. However, quite a number of variables that are connected to abusive supervision are thought to be influences (Fischer et al., 2021). These elements can be divided into three groups: organisation, supervisor, and subordinate. When supervisors are stressed, treated poorly, or feel that something is unfair, they are more prone to behave abusively (Paul, 2021). Supervisors with authoritarian or unethical leadership styles, low emotional intelligence, or a propensity for anxiety or anger are also more prone to engage in abusive behaviours (Paul, 2021). The effects have an adverse impact on staff morale, worker satisfaction and overall performance across a range of dimensions. The potential escalation of mental health issues among workers is of equal concern, perpetuating a cycle that undermines both their psychological well-being and the delicate equilibrium between work and personal life (Zhang & Yu, 2021).

From an organisational perspective, the effects of abusive supervision throw a shadow that reverberates across the organisational fabric (see Figure 1). These ramifications resonate throughout different social strata. The increase in hiring and training costs is a direct outcome of the rising turnover rates brought on by the migration of workers seeking safety from an oppressive and hostile workplace (Oliveira & Najnudel, 2022). As the surviving workforce struggles with low morale and engagement, this attrition feeds a domino effect that reverberates across team dynamics and productivity, inevitably affecting the organisational output (Domino theory 2023). Beyond these internal repercussions, abusive supervision can have a negative impact on the organization's reputation. A damaged reputation can make it difficult to deal with clients, partners, and stakeholders as well as deter potential hires from applying (Chatgpt 2023).

Individuals need to recognise and understand these harmful behaviours as abusive supervision if they want to reduce the negative effects (Paul, 2021). People who experience such mistreatment frequently lack the insight to trace it to outside forces, which causes them to internalise responsibility for perceived failings. Employees are forced to tolerate humiliation and harassment under the mistaken belief that it reflects their weaknesses because of this lack of clarity, which feeds a destructive cycle (Cremer et al., 2016). Understanding the dynamics of abusive supervision, identifying its distinguishing characteristics, and seeing the subtle signs it leaves behind are the keys to empowerment. With this information, workers may easily distinguish between genuine, constructive criticism and unjustified hatred, busting the myth that being treated unfairly signals their worth or ability (Sun et al., 2022). As a result of their newly acquired knowledge, people feel empowered to confront and stop abusive behaviour. The end result of this team effort is a culture that encourages dignity, respect, and professional development (Clercq et al., 2021).

Characteristics and behaviours of abusive supervision

Supervisors exhibit a variety of abusive behaviours and attitudes, including intimidation, mockery, criticism, excessive micromanagement, the imposition of control, verbal abuse, belittling, and the destabilisation of the psychological contract between employees and managing. Through highly aggressive verbal interactions and subtly assertive non-verbal indicators, while avoiding physical touch, this abusive conduct pattern is made clear (Bhattacharjee & Sarkar, 2022).

When the psychological agreement between managers and employees is broken, an adverse reaction occurs. Employees who feel their trust has been violated frequently intentionally hide their expertise and significant contributions, creating a guarded atmosphere (Topa et al., 2022).

Despite the significance of these dynamics, it is remarkable that there is still lack of research exploring the complex link between knowledge hoarding and abusive supervision (Ghani et al., 2020). The negative effects of abusive supervision can, however, be addressed in a hopeful way. Strategies to mitigate the effects of such behaviour can be developed by utilising individual qualities and attributes. This demonstrates the possibility for individual development and proactive management techniques to lessen the negative effects of abusive monitoring (Ahmad et al., 2018).

Effects on physical wellbeing

Cardiovascular health

The complex and frequently harmful relationship between chronic stress and its effects on the cardiovascular system assumes a prominent position in the field of cardiovascular health, especially when evaluated through the lens of abusive supervision (Satyjeet et al., 2020). The development of a hostile and persistently stressful work environment acts as a trigger for the emergence of cardiovascular issues. The deteriorating consequences of abusive supervision can fuel the rise in stress levels, which can have a significant impact on physiological functions. This can then lead to a variety of problems, including high blood pressure, a known risk factor for heart disease and a source of a number of cardiovascular disorders. The likelihood of cardiovascular hazards manifesting is increased by the interaction of mechanisms brought on by stress and the predominance of a hostile and demanding environment. The increased risk of heart attacks is one of the most alarming effects, and the complex interaction between chronic stress and the cardiovascular system emphasises the real effects of dealing with abusive supervision on people's physical health, particularly the delicate balance of cardiovascular wellbeing.

Immune system impact

The prolonged and constant stress caused by abusive surveillance can have a significant negative effect on the delicate balance of the immune system (Segerstrom & Miller, 2004). The interaction between psychological distress and physiological reaction demonstrated  by this impact reveals a nuanced interplay with important consequences for people's general health. Chronic stress brought on by abusive supervision can serve as a catalyst for the immune system's suppression, which makes people predisposed to a variety of diseases and disorders. Stress hormones can cause a cascade of metabolic changes that prevent the immune system from mounting a strong defence against infections as they rise in reaction to the hostile environment (Morey et al., 2015). This weakened immune response in turn makes the body less capable of fending off illnesses and preserving good health (Segerstrom & Miller, 2004). The complex relationship between abusive supervision and immune system suppression thus emphasises the general impact of psychological stress on physiological mechanisms, underscoring the need for a comprehensive approach to preserving wellness in the face of difficult workplace dynamics.

Fatigue and depleted energy

An atmosphere that is hostile and persistently exposed to unpleasant interactions might combine to cause a noticeable decline in energy levels and a pervasive sense of exhaustion (Li et al., 2022). This climax has a broad effect and casts doubt on the state of general physical vitality. People's emotional reserves are continually depleted by abusive monitoring, which results in a physical and perceptible decline in their ability to maintain ideal energy levels (Li et al., 2022). This exhaustion enters the physical world and manifests as fatigue and decreased dynamism, matching the psychological upheaval experienced. The resulting effect spreads beyond the confines of the job, having an effect on people's general sense of wellbeing and their capacity to actively participate in daily life (Ramaswami & Peltokorpi, 2019).

Unhealthy coping mechanisms

As a result of the ongoing stress that abusive monitoring causes, some people may be tempted to use unhealthy coping strategies. While acting as a momentary haven, these tactics ultimately worsen the toll on both physical and mental health. The range of these processes is broad, including behaviours like adopting a bad dietary strategy, starting to smoke, or consuming too much alcohol (Montal-Rosenberg et al., 2022). Although these actions are attempts to lessen mental suffering, they paradoxically have a greater overall negative impact on physical health. It is important to understand the complex relationship between psychological stress and its physical effects because the cycle of stress and unhelpful coping techniques generates a feedback loop that weakens resilience and jeopardises overall wellbeing (Roche et al., 2015).

Quiz

1 Chronic stress from abusive supervision can lead to cardiovascular problems

	True
	False

2 Muscular tension resulting from abusive supervision is mainly felt in the legs.

	True
	False

3 Abusive supervision can lead to headaches due to tension and stress

	True
	False

Mental health issues

{should have an introductory and brief paragraph having more depth about mental health disorders and how they connect to abusive supervision}

Anxiety disorders

The persistent exposure to hostile interactions and an environment characterised by toxicity can act as catalysts for the development of anxiety disorders (Sannes et al., 2021). Individuals subjected to such conditions may experience heightened levels of worry, nervousness, and a pervasive sense of unease. These emotional responses can evolve into various forms of anxiety disorders, encompassing conditions like generalised anxiety disorder and social anxiety disorder. The ongoing strain of navigating a hostile workplace can fuel these psychological reactions, ultimately contributing to the emergence of anxiety-related challenges that impact individuals' overall mental wellbeing (Zhang & Yu, 2021).

Depression

The enduring emotional burden and continuous exposure to negative interactions inherent in abusive supervision can be instrumental in fostering a sense of depression (Zhang & Yu, 2021).Within this context, individuals may grapple with feelings of hopelessness, overwhelming sadness, and a pronounced lack of interest in activities that previously elicited joy. These emotional markers align closely with the characteristics of clinical depression, underscoring the profound impact that the toxic work environment can exert on individuals' psychological wellbeing (worlds health organisation, 2023).

Burnout

Abusive supervision has the potential to cultivate a state of burnout, characterised by emotional exhaustion, depersonalisation, and diminished personal accomplishment (M. Inmaculada López-Núñez et al., 2020). This condition stems from the unrelenting strain of chronic stress and excessive demands, ultimately resulting in detachment from work responsibilities and a profound sense of depletion (Liu et al., 2022). The pervasive influence of a toxic work environment becomes a breeding ground for this state of burnout, accentuating the disconnect individuals feel from their roles and the depletion of their emotional and psychological resources (O’Donoghue et al., 2023).

Low self-esteem

Sustained belittlement and ongoing criticism originating from abusive supervisors can erode an individual's self-esteem and sense of self-worth (Burton & Hoobler, 2006). This erosion can lead to the emergence of feelings of inadequacy and a notable decline in self-confidence. The persistent barrage of negative interactions and demeaning behaviour contributes to this process, shaping a landscape where individuals grapple with a diminished perception of their own value and abilities (Burton & Hoobler, 2006).

Isolation and social withdrawal

The strain imposed by abusive supervision can result in a trajectory towards isolation and a deliberate withdrawal from social interactions. ( Kemper, 2016). This response stems from individuals' feelings of alienation and the perception of being stigmatised due to their experiences. The toxic environment fosters a sense of detachment, prompting individuals to distance themselves from interpersonal engagements, thereby reinforcing the psychological impact of the abusive dynamics they encounter (Isolation to facilitate abuse, 2023).

Effects on concentration and cognitive functioning

The mental health challenges arising from abusive supervision can have tangible effects on concentration and cognitive functioning. Individuals grappling with these issues might experience difficulties in maintaining focus, encounter memory-related problems, and witness a decline in overall cognitive performance. As a result, the ability to carry out tasks effectively becomes an uphill battle, compounded by the cognitive toll exacted by the toxic work environment and the accompanying psychological strain.

Impacts on motivation

• Intrinsic motivation: intrinsic motivation is a powerful force that is supported by a person's interests and the fulfilment they gain from their work. The shadow of abusive supervision, makes this internal drive vulnerable to disintegration (Hur et al. 2016). When there is abusive supervision present, the internal cognitive and emotional processes that control an individual's motivation interact in a subtle way with the external workplace dynamics. The psychological well-being of people at work is impacted by abusive supervision, which is a powerful psychological stressor (Tepper, 2000). People's enthusiasm and engagement in their work noticeably wane as they struggle to deal with unfavourable interactions and navigate a hostile atmosphere. This decrease, which is a psychological reaction to the hardship caused by abusive supervision, shows itself as an impairment in intricate motivation to do well. The decline in intrinsic motivation serves as a stark reminder of the complex interactions between the psychological environment of the workplace and the cognitive and emotional resources employees devote to their work. Understanding these dynamics is critical for creating a work environment that actively fosters intrinsic drive, which is necessary for both individual and organisational success, as well as mitigates the negative impacts of abusive supervision (Ali et al., 2021).
• Extrinsic motivation: Extrinsic motivation, which is based on incentives or consequences from outside sources, is crucial in determining how people behave in organisational contexts. However, the effectiveness of extrinsic motivation is not immune to harmful influences, and abusive supervision is one important aspect that can have a negative impact on it (ChatGPT, 2023). Employees lose faith in the worth and legitimacy of external incentives in these circumstances because the administration of rewards and punishments is tainted by notions of arbitrariness and injustice (Mitchell & Ambrose, 2007). Consequently, the total effectiveness of extrinsic motivators in encouraging desired behaviours among employees may be reduced. This loss of trust and perceived injustice. Research emphasises perceived injustice's significance in influencing employee attitudes and behaviours, emphasising the negative impacts of abusive supervision on employee outcomes (Tepper, 2000). Furthermore, according to previous studies, organisational fairness is important in affecting the effectiveness of extrinsic motivators (Mitchell & Ambrose, 2007). Because of this, organisations need to be aware of the potentially damaging consequences that abusive supervision can have on employees' intrinsic motivation and take proactive steps to promote a healthy, equitable workplace.

Psychological theories into abusive supervision

Social identity theory

Social Identity Theory emphasises how supervisors can imitate abusive behaviours they have observed in other role models or in their own supervisors, providing insightful explanations for the phenomenon of abusive supervision. According to this theoretical framework, people get a significant amount of their sense of self from the social groupings they are a part of (Dixon, 2021). Supervisors may internalise the behaviours they see in their leadership or organisational role models when it comes to abusive supervision. According to Hogg (2001), abusive supervision can be seen as a kind of social differentiation and classification, where supervisors may feel the need to establish dominance or preserve control within their social group (Hogg, 2001). The observed abusive behaviours can be interpreted as successful strategies for consolidating power and upholding social hierarchies inside the organisation. The Social Identity Theory also emphasises the significance of learning through reinforcement and observation. Supervisors who have witnessed or personally experienced abusive behaviour may be more prone to replicating it in their own leadership. The process entails coming to identify with the 'perceived norms and behaviours' of their reference group, which in this case may include abusive supervisors.

Cognitive dissonance theory

Cognitive Dissonance Theory illuminates the phenomenon of abusive supervision by demonstrating how supervisors deal with the cognitive dissonance brought on by the discrepancy between their behaviour and self-perception. This idea, developed by Festinger in 1957, contends that people feel psychological discomfort when their views or beliefs conflict with their actions (Mcleod, 2023). This contradiction becomes particularly apparent in the context of abusive supervision, in which supervisors engage in damaging behaviour towards subordinates. Supervisors often find themselves acting in ways that go against their basic sense of themselves as just or moral leaders. The cognitive dissonance that this incongruity causes causes supervisors to use a variety of coping mechanisms. Among these strategies, rationalization mechanisms take on an essential purpose. In order to match their behaviour with a perceived higher purpose, supervisors may misinterpret their abusive acts as required for upholding discipline or accomplishing organisational goals. Additionally, cognitive restructuring is at work, allowing bosses to change how they perceive abusive behaviours so that they are consistent with how they see themselves (Mcleod, 2023). They could persuade themselves that their behaviour is not actually abusive but rather a necessary reaction to difficult circumstances. Supervisors can maintain a positive self-concept and reduce cognitive dissonance by using this complex process of rationalisation and cognitive restructuring as a psychological defence mechanism even when they engage in behaviours that may run counter to their perception of themselves as effective leaders (ChatGPT, 2023).

Personality theories

According to Bushman and Baumeister (1998), narcissistic supervisors have an excessive desire for adulation, a sense of entitlement, and a lack of empathy. Because they want to retain their inflated self-image and assert power, they act abusively due to their self-centered attitude (Tepper, 2007). They may abuse their power and use their employees as instruments to satisfy their egos due to an overpowering craving for adoration.

Additionally, deception, lying, and a strategic focus on personal interests are traits of supervisors that exhibit a high degree of (Jones & Paulhus, 2014). To accomplish their objectives, these people may resort to abusive methods, employing crafty techniques to manage subordinates and deal with office politics. Machiavellian managers are prone to putting their own goals first, even at the expense of the welfare of their employees.

Furthermore, Psychopathy involving impulsivity, lack of empathy, and remorse (Hare, 1991). Supervisors who have psychopathic tendencies may act abusively without feeling regret or guilt. Their activities are frequently motivated by a strong desire for control and power (Babiak & Hare, 2007), which causes them to abuse their position of power to further their own agendas at the expense of their subordinates.

The common thread linking these personality traits to abusive supervision is the profound desire for power and control over subordinates. Individuals with high levels of the Dark Triad traits may be more prone to exploiting their position of authority, using abusive tactics to assert dominance and fulfill their egoistic needs. This exploitation often involves a disregard for the well-being and rights of subordinates, highlighting a toxic leadership style that prioritizes self-interest over the welfare of the team. The intense desire for power and control over subordinates unites these personality traits with abusive supervision. People who exhibit a high level of the Dark Triad traits may be more likely to abuse their power in order to assert their supremacy and satisfy their egoistic demands. This exploitation frequently involves a disdain for the rights and wellbeing of subordinates, illuminating a poisonous leadership approach that places the interests of the individual before the welfare of the group (ChatGPT, 2023).

Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory

This theory offers a window through which we can view how abusive supervision affects the dynamics at work. According to this theory, abusive supervision is consistent with hygiene factors, which are outside forces that, in the absence of them, cause unhappiness (Syptak et al., 1999). Unfair treatment or harassment are examples of abusive behaviours that contribute to a bad work environment and unhappiness among employees. Moreover, intrinsic components such as accountability and recognition that serve as motivators may also be negatively impacted by abusive supervision. Persistent critique and an antagonistic environment can undermine self-worth and impede one's progress on both a personal and professional level. Herzberg's thesis essentially highlights how abusive supervision undermines hygienic elements, which in turn lowers job satisfaction, and also interferes with the intrinsic motivators that are necessary to create a positive and engaging work environment (Syptak et al., 1999).

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

This theory sheds light on how employees' basic needs are impacted by abusive supervision. Maslow's hierarchy of requirements reveals basic physiological and safety demands that are immediately threatened by abusive monitoring (Maslow, 1943). A hostile work environment is created by abusive behaviours, endangering the basic safety and well-being of employees. Moving up the ladder, abusive supervision damages trust and creates a hostile work environment, which might obstruct social requirements. When workers encounter humiliation and abuse, their demands for respect and acknowledgment are compromised. Lastly, abusive supervision impedes both professional and personal development by impeding self-actualization. To put it simply, abusive supervision has the potential to upset every level of Maslow's Hierarchy, which has a significant negative effect on workers' general wellbeing and impedes their progress towards job satisfaction and self-fulfillment (Maslow,1943).

Cultivating respectful leadership: Preventing abusive supervision

Abusive supervision poses an imminent threat to the organisation's health, having an effect on both individual workers and the workplace's culture as a whole. Organisations can use a holistic approach that incorporates intervention techniques and preventative actions to oppose and avoid abusive supervision (ChatGPT, 2023).

Organisations can employ specific measures to intervene and take immediate action when abusive supervision is discovered. As a fundamental component, training and awareness programmes instruct managers and staff members on how to spot abusive behaviour and how to lead with respect (Ghani et al., 2020). Employees can express issues confidentially and without fear of punishment through anonymous reporting channels, which helps with early detection and action (Aquino & Thau, 2009). Conflict resolution and mediation processes promote collaboration and open communication by providing organised methods for addressing interpersonal problems (De Dreu & Van Vianen, 2001).

Proactive steps aimed at fostering a corporate culture that values respect and moral leadership are the first step in preventing harassment. In order to prevent abusive supervision, leadership development programmes give managers the abilities to lead with empathy and emotional intelligence. By highlighting ideals like justice, integrity, and teamwork and prohibiting abusive behaviour, organisations can strengthen their positive organisational cultures (Porath & Pearson, 2012). Utilising 360-degree feedback systems provides a comprehensive understanding of a supervisor's leadership style, allowing for the early detection of possible problems and assisting in the direction of remedies. A commitment to a respectful workplace is communicated through the formulation of clear policies and the constant enforcement against abusive supervision, which clearly define the standards and repercussions ( Hershcovis & Barling, 2010).

Conclusion

Abusive supervision is a widespread problem with wide-ranging effects that damage both individual employees and the general health of an organisation. The negative effects on well-being, motivation, and organisational climate highlight how urgent it is to address this situation. A wide range of hostile actions, from intimidation to micromanagement, are included in abusive supervision. These actions have a significant negative impact on both physical and mental health. Understanding abusive supervision is crucial because it has the power to undermine confidence, reduce job satisfaction, and cause havoc across a whole organisation. People who are mistreated could internalise blame, which would keep the downward spiral going. Understanding the telltale indications and traits of abusive supervision equips people to differentiate between fair criticism and unfair treatment, promoting a climate of respect and professional advancement.The crux of the matter resides in encouraging awareness, instruction, and all-encompassing interventions. Organisations can use a holistic approach that includes leadership development, training initiatives, and confidential reporting channels to foster a culture that values respect and moral leadership. Abuse may be identified and distinguished, which empowers people, ends the cycle of degradation, and fosters healthy organisational cultures and well-being at work. Organisations can actively combat abusive supervision by putting a strong emphasis on empathy, emotional intelligence, and ethical leadership. This fosters personal and professional growth for employees in a friendly and encouraging work environment.

See also

• Cognitive dissonance and motivation (Book chapter, 2021)
• social undermining (Wikiversity)
• Abusive supervision (Wikipedia)
• Leadership and morale (Wikiversity)
• Workplace deviance (Wikipedia)

References

Paul, M. (2021, June 23). Umbrella summary: Abusive supervision. Quality Improvement Center for Workforce Development. https://www.qicwd.org/umbrella/abusive-supervision

Porath, C. L., & Pearson, C. M. (2012). Emotional and behavioral responses to workplace incivility and the impact of hierarchical status. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(S1), E326–E357. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.01020.x

Ramaswami, A., & Peltokorpi, V. (2019). Abusive supervision and subordinates’ physical and mental health: The role of power distance orientation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(13), 1651–1680. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2018.1511617

Roche, A. M., Lee, N. K., Battams, S., Fischer, J. A., Cameron, J., & McEntee, A. (2015). Abusive supervision: Abusive supervision overview. Abusive Supervision. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/social-sciences/abusive-supervision

Sannes, A.-C., Christensen, J. O., Nielsen, M. B., & Gjerstad, J. (2021). The association between abusive supervision and anxiety in female employees is stronger in carriers of the CRHR1 TAT haplotype. Current Research in Behavioral Sciences, 2, Article 100021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crbeha.2021.100021

Satyjeet, F., Naz, S., Kumar, V., Aung, N. H., Bansari, K., Irfan, S., & Rizwan, A. (2020). Psychological stress as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease: A case-control study. Curēus, 12(10), Article e10757. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.10868

Segerstrom, S. C., & Miller, G. E. (2004). Psychological stress and the human immune system: A meta-analytic study of 30 years of inquiry. Psychological Bulletin, 130(4), 601-630. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.4.601

Sun, W., Dedahanov, A. T., Fayzullaev, A. K. U., & Abdurazzakov, O. S. (2022). Abusive supervision and employee voice: The roles of positive reappraisal and employee cynicism. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 927948. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.927948

Syptak, J. M., Marsland, D. W., & Ulmer, D. (1999). Job satisfaction: Putting theory into practice. Family Practice Management, 6(9), 26-30. https://www.aafp.org/pubs/fpm/issues/1999/1000/p26.html

Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812

Topa, G., Aranda-Carmena, M., & De-Maria, B. (2022). Psychological contract breach and outcomes: A systematic review of reviews. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(23), Article 15527. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315527

Wikimedia Foundation. (2023). Isolation to facilitate abuse. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolation_to_facilitate_abuse

World Health Organization. (2023, March 31). Depressive disorder (depression). https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/depression

Zhang, X., & Yu, J. (2023). Impact of abusive supervision on psychological engagement and absorptive capacity among students: Mediating role of knowledge hiding. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 818197. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.818197

External links

• Abusive Supervision (QIC-WD)
• Abusive Supervision and Integrated Organizational Concerns (psychologytoday.com)
• Combating Toxic Workplaces (American Psychological Association)
• The blurred line between motivation and abuse (Human Resources Director)
• Dealing with abusive supervisors (Knowable Magazine)
• Psychological Abuse & Destructive Leadership (California Review)
• [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN_dLxe7RnM Abusive supervision yt video (GreggU)