Does Intent Regarding Abusive Supervision Really Matter? The Moderating Effect of Performance-Promotion and Injury-Initiation Attributions Between Abusive Supervision and Emotional Exhaustion

Abstract

While prior research shows that subordinates’ attributions can amplify or buffer the negative effects of abusive supervision on performance outcomes, it remains unclear whether similar moderating effects extend to subordinate well-being. Drawing on attribution theory and conservation of resources (COR) theory, this study investigates whether performance-promotion and injury-initiation attributions moderate the relationship between abusive supervision and emotional exhaustion. Applying a time-lagged research design, we surveyed full-time employees (N = 224) within a single Chinese transportation company and tested the proposed hypotheses using structural equation modeling (SEM). Contrary to the expectations and prior evidence, the moderating effect of injury-initiation attribution between abusive supervision and emotional exhaustion is nonsignificant. Moreover, performance-promotion attribution significantly moderates this relationship, in the opposite direction to the expectations: It exacerbates (rather than buffers) the positive association between abusive supervision and emotional exhaustion. These findings complicate the assumption that performance-promotion attributions are protective whereas injury-initiation attributions are destructive, instead suggesting a different pattern of attributional effects. The study advances the understanding of abusive supervision attributions and provides implications for management practice.