↓ Skip to main content

The Relation Between Supervisors’ Big Five Personality Traits and Employees’ Experiences of Abusive Supervision

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Relation Between Supervisors’ Big Five Personality Traits and Employees’ Experiences of Abusive Supervision
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00112
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeroen Camps, Jeroen Stouten, Martin Euwema

Abstract

The present study investigates the relation between supervisors' personality traits and employees' experiences of supervisory abuse, an area that - to date - remained largely unexplored in previous research. Field data collected from 103 supervisor-subordinate dyads showed that contrary to our expectations supervisors' agreeableness and neuroticism were not significantly related to abusive supervision, nor were supervisors' extraversion or openness to experience. Interestingly, however, our findings revealed a positive relation between supervisors' conscientiousness and abusive supervision. That is, supervisors high in conscientiousness were more likely to be perceived as an abusive supervisor by their employees. Overall, our findings do suggest that supervisors' Big Five personality traits explain only a limited amount of the variability in employees' experiences of abusive supervision.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 146 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 12%
Student > Master 15 10%
Researcher 12 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 57 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 42 29%
Business, Management and Accounting 23 16%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Engineering 3 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 9 6%
Unknown 60 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2020.
All research outputs
#6,842,605
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,780
of 35,210 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,165
of 414,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#183
of 470 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,210 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 414,156 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 470 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.