Adaptation of The Abusive Supervision Scale with Indonesian Version
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35134/jpsy165.v19i1.644Keywords:
Abusive Supervision, Adaptation of Measuring Instruments, Indonesian Language VersionAbstract
Abusive supervision can have a negative impact on employee welfare and performance. Unfortunately, there are still very few questionnaires available that can measure abusive supervision in a standardized and psychometrically tested Indonesian language version. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to adapt and test the validity and reliability of the abusive supervision measurement tool in Indonesian. The population in this study consisted of 1,280 cigarette production workers, with the sample calculated using the Slovin formula at a 5% error rate, resulting in a minimum of 304 respondents. In this study, the researchers successfully involved 486 participants as research subjects using purposive sampling. The analysis used in this study was confirmatory factor analysis to test whether the data obtained by the researchers was in accordance with the predetermined measurement model in order to test the construct validity of the measurement tool. The results of this study indicate that the fit index parameters have been met (GFI = 0.984, RMSEA = 0.054, SRMR = 0.029, NFI = 0.961, CFI = 0.976, & TLI = 0.967). The reliability test results using the ω coefficient (0.892) and α coefficient (0.884) show excellent results. However, one dimension of abusive supervision, namely credit stealing, has a reliability value (ω = 0.110 & α = 0.111) and validity (AVE = 0.292) that are less than ideal. The implication of this study is the availability of an Indonesian version of the abusive supervision measurement tool that can be used to assess the harsh behavior of supervisors in the Indonesian work context. The suggestion for future researchers is that it is very necessary to further develop and test the items in the credit stealing dimension.
References
Mackey, J. D., Frieder, R. E., Brees, J. R., & Martinko, M. J. (2017). Abusive supervision: A meta-analysis and empirical review. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1940–1965. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315573997
Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.2307/1556375
Hanifah, S., Pramesti, M., & Wahyuni, S. (2021). The effects of verbal abuse and abusive supervision towards turnover intention through emotional exhaustion: An empirical study of garment workers in Indonesia. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 554–562. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210531.070
Kuzaimah, R., Meutia, M., & Srimindarti, C. (2022). Pengaruh abusive supervision, emotional exhaustion, stres kerja dan perilaku cyberloafing terhadap kinerja pegawai di Badan Pusat Statistik Sumatera Selatan. Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen, Ekonomi, & Akuntansi (MEA), 8(3). https://doi.org/10.31955/mea.v8i3.4530
Wulani, F., Purwanto, B. M., & Hani, H. (2014). Abusive supervision scale development in Indonesia. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 16(1), 55-68.
Riyanto, S., Endri, E., & Sasmoko. (2021). The influence of abusive supervision on work engagement: The mediating role of work stress and organizational trust. Management Science Letters, 11(3), 813–822. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2020.12.025
Schyns, B., & Schilling, J. (2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-analysis of destructive leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 138–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.09.001
Zhang, Y., & Bednall, T. C. (2016). Antecedents of abusive supervision: A longitudinal study. Applied Psychology, 65(2), 454–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12078
Wang, S., Lin, X., & Wu, J. (2023). The effect of abusive supervision variability on work–family conflict: The role of psychological detachment and optimism. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.973634
Malik, O. F., Jawad, N., Shahzad, A., & Waheed, A. (2023). Longitudinal relations between abusive supervision, subordinates’ emotional exhaustion, and job neglect among Pakistani Nurses: The moderating role of self-compassion. Current Psychology, 42(31), 26945-26965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03817-1
Fischer, T., Tian, A. W., Lee, A., & Hughes, D. (2021). Abusive supervision: A systematic review and fundamental rethink. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(6), 101540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2021.101540
Bhattacharjee, A., Banerjee, P., & Ghosh, R. (2022). Abusive supervision: A systematic literature review. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 9(3), 343–371. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-10-2021-0250
Hillman Wirawana, Samad, M. A., & Khairil. (2023). Investigating the effect of abusive supervision on work engagement through the role of employee creativity: the moderating effect of interpersonal communication competence. Human Resource Development International, 27(1), 36-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2023.2193809
Asim, M., Liu, Z., Nadeem, M. A., Ghani, U., Khalid, J., & Xu, Y. (2023). Relationship of abusive supervision and employees’ helping behaviors: moderated-mediation perspective. International Journal of Conflict Management, 34(2), 367-391. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-11-2021-0185
Sümer, H. C., Göncü-Köse, A., Toker-Gültaş, Y., Acar, F. P., Karanfil, D., & Ok, A. B. (2024). Incivility, mobbing, and abusive supervision: A tripartite scale development study. Middle Western Psychological Research Journal, 158(6), 428–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2024.2321881
Mitchell, M. S., & Ambrose, M. L. (2007). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance and the moderating effects of negative reciprocity beliefs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1159
Ghayas, MM., & Jabeen, R., (2020). Abusive supervision: Dimensions & scale. New Horizons, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.2.9270/NH.14.1(20).07
Tepper, B. J. (2000). Abusive Supervision Scale [Database record]. APA PsycTests. https://doi.org/10.1037/t11760-000
Gallegos, I., Guàrdia-Olmos, J., & Berger, R. (2022). Abusive supervision: A systematic review and new research approaches. Frontiers in Communication, 6, Article 640908. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.640908
Wang, H., et al. (2022). How and when daily abusive supervision affects organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: A daily diary study. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 791803. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.791803
Labrague, L. J. (2024). Stress as a mediator between abusive supervision and clinical nurses’ work outcomes. International Nursing Review, 71(4), 997–1004. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12961
Guo, D., et al. (2024). The hidden cost of abusive supervision: rudeness, sabotage and mediating mechanisms in healthcare settings. BMC Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-02060-6
Sujarweni, V. W., & Endrayanto, P. (2012). Statistika untuk penelitian. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.
Sugiyono, 2017. Statistika untuk penelitian. Bandung: Alfa Beta.
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Guilford publications.
Netemeyer, R. G., Bearden, W. O., & Sharma, S. (2003). Scaling procedures: Issues and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985772
Giyantika, F. N. (2021). Analisis kemampuan membaca pemahaman pada teks eksplanasi siswa kelas V sekolah dasar [Skripsi, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia]. UPI Repository. https://repository.upi.edu/64736
Li, Y., Jiang, Y., Luo, Y., Ma, X., & Zhou, Q. (2025). Influence of socioeconomic status on children’s reading abilities: The mediating role of home learning environment and the moderating role of grade level. BMC Psychology, 13(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-03203-z
Psyche 165 Journal has launched a new template since Vol. 18, No. 2 (2025)
