Stigma by Association: The Unintended Interpersonal Consequences of Associating Oneself with an Abusive Supervisor

Extant abusive supervision research has predominantly studied its prevalence and destructive effects through the lens of victims, potential victims, or third-party observers who witness such mistreatments. In the present research, we examine a neglected group of individuals—employees who are able to develop high-quality relationships and are closely associated with their abusive supervisors. Drawing insights from the stigma-by-association literature, we conceptualize abusive supervision as a unique form of moral stigma that might result in unintended spillover effects. Specifically, we found that observers tend to perceive employees who are closely associated with an abusive supervisor to be less moral and trustworthy for seemingly sharing a similar set of unethical values and beliefs, even though this might not necessarily be true in reality. As a downstream consequence, these employees are subject to unintended interpersonal backlashes (i.e., withdrawal from helping behaviors) imposed by their fellow coworkers. Furthermore, we investigate the moderating role of voluntary motive attribution, revealing that those who were attributed to voluntarily associate themselves with abusive supervisors received the highest levels of interpersonal backlashes. Results from one pilot study, one multiwave survey study (Study 2), and three preregistered experiments (Studies 1, 3, 4) supported our full theoretical model. Our research adds new insights to the abusive supervision literature by introducing a new unintended consequence on a previously overlooked group of employees who are presumed to be shielded from the negative impact of abusive supervision.