Too Many Constructs in the Kitchen: Toward a Feature-Based Approach to Mistreatment
Abstract
The field of workplace mistreatment has grown considerably over the last two decades yet continues to be plagued by construct overload and measurement challenges. Constructs such as incivility, bullying, abusive supervision, and social undermining are definitionally distinct in terms of their frequency, intensity, and intentionality but this is seldom explicitly measured. Across three studies, we created and developed the Features of Mistreatment (FOM) measure to explicitly measure frequency, intensity, and perceived intentionality. In Study 1 (N = 282), we examined the psychometric properties of the initial 28-item FOM measure and revised the subscales to four items each. We found that a three-factor ESEM yielded good model fit and factor loadings. In Study 2, using both two-wave (N = 89) and cross-sectional analyses (N = 257), we assessed a SEM mediation model of workplace mistreatment in which we used frequency, intensity, and intentionality of mistreatment to predict work-related outcomes via negative affective reactions. We found that the relationships between workplace mistreatment and affective commitment and turnover intentions (but not retaliation) were mediated by negative affective reactions. Finally, in Study 3, we conducted a Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) and found support for four distinct profiles of workplace mistreatment. The largest profile included the Low Mistreatment group (43.10%). The other profiles included Intense Mistreatment (8.70%), Moderate Mistreatment (19.10%), and High Perceived Intent (29.10%). Members in the Low Mistreatment profile had the best work outcomes overall, reporting the highest scores on affective commitment and lowest scores on turnover intentions and retaliation. Thus, directly measuring the features of workplace mistreatment allowed us to empirically distinguish how mistreatment strength, frequency, and perceived intentionality combine across different profiles of mistreatment and assess each profile’s distinct relationships with important work outcomes.