Workplace Mistreatment and Emotional Exhaustion: the Interaction Effects of Self-Compassion

Home , Emotional exhaustion, Occupational stress, Social undermining

Current Psychology https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00673-9

Workplace mistreatment and emotional exhaustion: The interaction effects of self-compassion

Muhammad Adeel Anjum1 & Dapeng Liang1 & Dilawar Khan Durrani2 & Anjum Parvez3

# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract Extant research has shown that experiencing incivility and ostracism can increase the risk of emotional exhaustion, however, lesser is known about the factors that mitigate such risk. Framed through the conservation of resources theory, this study identifies and tests the hitherto unexplored moderating role of self-compassion in the relationships between workplace incivility and emotional exhaustion, and workplace ostracism and emotional exhaustion. A total of 310 employees working in the service- sector organizations (higher education institutions, banks, and telecom companies) in Pakistan participated in this cross-sectional study. While workplace incivility and workplace ostracism were positively correlated with emotional exhaustion, self- compassion was negatively correlated with workplace incivility, workplace ostracism, and emotional exhaustion. Results further revealed that self-compassion moderated the workplace incivility–emotional exhaustion and workplace ostracism–emotional exhaustion relationships such that people high in self-compassion felt less emotionally exhausted. The findings indicate that there is potential value in developing self-compassion, for which a number of interventions are discussed.

Keywords Workplace mistreatment . Self-compassion . Emotional exhaustion . Moderation

Introduction behaviors, ranging from ‘social slights’ to ‘violence’ on a subtle–blatant continuum (Cortina and Magley 2003). To date, In the past two decades, research in the field of workplace mis- many constructs have been introduced in the lexicon of mistreat- treatment has grown exponentially, providing a wealth of knowl- ment with examples including workplace incivility, mobbing, edge and valuable insights (Hershcovis 2011). Mistreatment is a emotional abuse, abusive supervision, social undermining, work- dark side of organizational life and has been defined as “aspe- place victimization, bullying, aggression, interpersonal conflicts, cific, antisocial variety of organizational deviance, involving a anti-social behavior, interpersonal deviance, counterproductive situation in which at least one organizational member takes work behaviors, retaliation, and revenge (Hershcovis 2011). counter normative negative actions—or terminates normative This study examines the relationships of two misbehaviors, positive actions—against another member” (Cortina and namely workplace incivility (WI) – being berated or belittled Magley 2003, p. 247). As explained in the definition, mistreat- by others (Andersson and Pearson 1999) – and workplace ment encompasses a variety of counter-normative actions and ostracism (WO) – being shunned and excluded at work (Ferris et al. 2008) – with emotional exhaustion (EE) –“feelings of being emotionally overextended and depleted of one’s Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article emotional resources” (Maslach 1993,p.20–21) – by taking (https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00673-9) contains supplementary into consideration the hitherto unexplored moderating role of material, which is available to authorized users. self-compassion (SC) – a positive self-attitude that helps people suffer less from adversities (Neff 2003a). In so doing, the * Muhammad Adeel Anjum [email protected] present study attempts to contribute to the relevant literature in following ways. First, whilst several studies have shown that WI and WO can increase the risk of EE (e.g., Jahanzeb and 1 School of Management, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China Fatima 2018; Han et al. 2019;HuangandLin2019; Karatepe et al. 2019;Koay2018), lesser is known about the factors that 2 University of Balochistan, Quetta, Pakistan mitigate such risk (Cho et al. 2016;Choi2019; Karatepe et al. 3 ’ Sardar Bahadur Khan Women s University (SBKWU), 2019;Rheeetal.2017;Wuetal.2012). The main purpose of Quetta, Pakistan Curr Psychol this study is therefore, to extend this relatively limited body of may require considerable effort and resources (Rhee et al. knowledge. Particularly, we assume that SC would moderate 2017). Similar could be the case in WO, as the intent of this the WI–EE and WO–EE relationships. We assume this based misbehavior is also ambiguous (for a discussion, see Ferris on SC’s positive implications for emotional and subjective et al. 2017). Hence, the entire process of experiencing, man- well-being (Neff 2003b;Neffetal.2018; Stoeber et al. aging and/or avoid having to endure WI and WO could be 2020), and its role in attenuating people’s reactions to negative very stressful and resource-draining for the targets, which may events and stressful situations (Leary et al. 2007). Second, aggravate strain (EE) in them (Karatepe et al. 2019;Rheeetal. whilst research on SC has flourished mainly in social and 2017;Wuetal.2012). clinical settings, the role of this positive self-attitude in orga- COR theory’s principle that resource investment can aid nizational settings has seldom been examined (Reizer 2019,p. stress resistance (Hobfoll 2001) provides sound basis for the 4). By drawing sample from organizations in Pakistan, the buffering role of SC. Researchers have also asserted that per- current study seeks to contribute to this still burgeoning stream sonal resources can help people deal better with stress- of research (Dev et al. 2018; Rafique et al. 2018;Reizer2019). inducing and resource depleting situations (De Clercq et al. Finally, this study is an addition to the existing indigenous 2018, 2019). A wealth of empirical evidence suggesting that research explicating the buffering role of personal resources personal resources can mitigate the deleterious effects of against the adverse effects of WI and WO (e.g., Bibi et al. workplace stressors also exists (for a review, see De Clercq 2013;DeClercqetal.2019;Jahanzebetal.2019). et al. 2019;Jahanzebetal.2019; Karatepe et al. 2019; Rhee et al. 2017;Wuetal.2012). In keeping with these facts and the theoretical rationale, it is expected that SC would moderate the Theory and Hypotheses WI–EE and WO–EE relationships.

This study uses COR theory (Hobfoll 1989, 2001) as its theoretical lens to expound: i) the WI–EE and WO–EE relation- Workplace Incivility and Emotional ships; and ii) the moderating role of SC. COR is a broad-based Exhaustion stress and motivation theory that follows from a set of tenets, principles (e.g., resource loss and resource investment) and Extant research has shown that small acts of rudeness and related corollaries (Hobfoll 2001). It delineates how stressful derision can lead on to a wide array of negative affective circumstances can impact individuals and organizations, and outcomes such as psychological distress (Cortina et al. 2001; how they might act during them (Westman et al. 2005). COR Lim and Cortina 2005;Parketal.2018); negative emotions theory’s(Hobfoll2001) basic tenet states that individuals en- (Sakurai and Jex 2012); end-of-work negative affect (Zhou deavor to attain, sustain, protect, and foster their resources, et al. 2015); emotional labor (Sliter et al. 2010); sadness, fear, whichhavebeenreferredtoas“objects, personal character- and guilt (Kabat-Farr et al. 2018; Porath and Pearson 2012); istics, conditions, or energies that are valued by the individual deteriorated mental-health (Lim et al. 2008); feelings of being or that serve as a means for attainment of these objects, per- ostracized (Caza and Cortina 2007); and heightened emotion- sonal characteristics, conditions, or energies” (Hobfoll 1989, ality and reduced optimism (Bunk and Magley 2013). p. 516). Feeling valuable to others, support from co-workers, A large majority of researchers also agree that being and affection from others are a few examples of resources berated or belittled by others (e.g., supervisors, co-workers, (Hobfoll 2001,p.342). family, and customers) can emotionally exhaust the targets From the standpoint of COR theory, EE is likely to occur (Alola et al. 2019; Cho et al. 2016;DeClercqetal.2018; when resources are threatened, lost, or anticipated returns/ Han et al. 2019;HuangandLin2019; Hur et al. 2015, 2016; gains in resources following resource investment are not ob- Karatepe et al. 2019;Rheeetal.2017;Sliteretal.2010; Tong tained. In other words, people might feel emotionally et al. 2019). The strength of incivility–EE relationship, as exhausted when they perceive that their emotional resources reported in these studies, ranged from r = 0.26 to 0.58. are no longer sufficient to handle workplace stressors (Wright Concurrent with these findings, we also expect a positive re- and Cropanzano 1998, p. 487). WI and WO are such work- lationship between WI and EE. The main theoretical explana- place stressors that can deplete targets’ resources (Karatepe tion for why incivility seems likely to invoke EE is that it can et al. 2019;Rheeetal.2017; Wu et al. 2012). In fact, the deplete targets’ social and emotional resources, which may sustained exposure to these stressors/misbehaviors depletes lead them to feel emotionally exhausted. Targets also have targets’ social and emotional resources, which culminates in to expend extra effort and considerable resources (emotional EE. Researchers note that the targets of uncivil behaviors, in and cognitive) to deal with such a conduct (Cho et al. 2016; addition to experiencing stress and adverse emotional conse- Rhee et al. 2017), which could be emotionally demanding. quences, also incur an additional cognitive burden of Researchers have asserted that emotional demands made on interpreting the ‘ambiguous intent’ of such a conduct, which people can induce EE (Hur et al. 2015). The purported Curr Psychol relationship may also be explained from the standpoint of Self-Compassion and Emotional Exhaustion stressor–strain relationship. EE is a specific type of work- related strain that results from workplace stressors Derived from Buddhist psychology, the SC construct was (Cropanzano et al. 2003, p. 160), and stressors like coworker conceptualized as a positive/healthy self-attitude that may and supervisor incivility have been found linked to work- help people suffer less from adversities (Neff 2003a). The related strain (EE) (Karatepe et al. 2019). In keeping with construct has been operationalized in terms of three main these empirical findings and the theoretical rationale components. While SC’s first component entails being kind (Hobfoll 1989, 2001), the following hypothesis is proposed: and understanding towards oneself rather than being self- critical and harsh, the essence of its second dimension is to & H1: Workplace incivility and emotional exhaustion are recognize that hardships are common human experiences rath- positively associated. er than something that separates or isolates one from others. The core of SC’s third dimension, meanwhile, is to hold painful thoughts and feelings in balanced awareness, without sup- pressing and/or exaggerating them (Neff 2003a,p.89;Neff 2003b, p. 224). Recently, the theoretical structure of SC has Workplace Ostracism and Emotional been called into question by some researchers (see López et al. Exhaustion 2015); however, Neff (2016,p.265)arguesthatSC’saspects/ components are conceptually distinct and mutually impact Ostracism literature is replete with the findings that be- each other. A mindful view of one’s emotional pain, for in- ing ostracized can adversely affect targets’ psychological stance, facilitates self-kindness and decreases over-identifica- health and well-being. Some examples of the ‘ailments’ tion. Similarly, recognizing hardships as common human ex- to which ostracism has been found linked are: anxiety perience lessens the feelings of isolation and increases mind- and depression (Ferris et al. 2008;Ferrisetal.2016; fulness. She further notes that SC’s aspects, in combination, Niu et al. 2016); sadness and hurt feelings (Buckley constitute a “compassionate frame of mind”. et al. 2004); lower positive and depressed moods In keeping with SC’s conceptualization and taking insights (Lustenberger and Jagacinski 2010;Choi2019;Wu from previous empirical works which have shown SC to be et al. 2012); stress (Chung 2018); poor self-control positively correlated with markers of emotional and subjective (DeWall et al. 2012); lower self-esteem (Ferris et al. well-being (e.g., optimism, happiness, positive affect, and life 2008); and decreased levels of relatedness and emotion- satisfaction), and negatively correlated with psychopathology al energy (Lustenberger and Jagacinski 2010;Xiaetal. (e.g., anxiety, depression, worry, rumination, and stress) (Neff 2019). Being ostracized is psychologically painful to 2003b;Neffetal.2005, 2007, 2018;NeffandVonk2009; such an extent that it can even lead the targets to feel Stoeber et al. 2020), burnout (r=−0.35; Dev et al. 2018,see less human (Bastian and Haslam 2010). also Kyeong 2013), and EE (r=−0.30;Reizer2019, see also Research has also shown ostracism to be positively Barnard and Curry 2012), this study predicts a negative rela- linked to EE (Chen and Li 2018; Choi 2019; Jahanzeb tionship between SC and EE. and Fatima 2018;Koay2018;Wuetal.2012). The strength of WO–EE relationship in most of these studies & H3: Self-compassion and emotional exhaustion are nega- wasreportedtober≥ 0.30, with an exception of r = tively associated. 0.10 (Choi 2019). Being a workplace stressor, WO depletes targets’ social resources, which can induce stress/ strain (EE) in them. COR theory also posits that people who run out of resources are likely to experience stress/ Self-Compassion as a Moderator strain (Hobfoll 1989, 2001;Wuetal.2012). Simply put, people’s social contacts, which serve as a means Having explained the SC–EE relationship, let us now turn to its of sharing thoughts, emotions and feelings are cut in moderating role, for which we draw upon the work of Leary et al. cases of ostracism. As such, their need for sharing emo- (2007), recent empirical findings on the moderating role of SC, tions remains unmet, due to which they might feel help- and COR theory’s resource investment principle (Hobfoll 2001). less, distraught, and emotionally exhausted (Chen and Particularly, we expect that self-compassionate individuals, when Li 2018;Koay2018;Wuetal.2012). Hence, the fol- faced with uncivil and exclusionary behaviors, will treat lowing hypothesis is proposed: themselves kindly, recognize such instances as common experiences in workplaces, and will not get carried away with & H2: Workplace ostracism and emotional exhaustion are the ensuing negative feelings and emotions; and thus be less positively associated. emotionally exhausted. This is indeed similar to what Leary Curr Psychol et al. (2007) asserted in their article. These authors tested the & H4: SC moderates the WI–EE relationship such that this premise that SC moderates people’ reactions to negative life relationship will be weaker when SC is high. events and distressing situations in a series of five studies. In study two, for example, SC buffered participants (n = 123 stu- & H5: SC moderates the WO–EE relationship such that this dents) against negative self-feelings when they imagined some relationship will be weaker when SC is high. stressful hypothetical situations/events. In study three, meanwhile, SC moderated participants’ (66 students) reactions to un- The research model, based on these hypotheses, is shown pleasant events (e.g., neutral/mediocre feedback). Specifically, in Fig. 1. participants’ reactions to feedback varied according to their SC levels such that respondents high in SC reacted more similarly both to neutral/ mediocre and positive feedback than those low in Methodology SC, who attributed neutral feedback less to themselves and positive feedback more to themselves. In sum, the study concluded Context and Design that SC is a useful resource that moderates people’s reactions to stressful situations (Leary et al. 2007). Terry et al. (2013)also Data for the current study were gathered from service-sector or- found that people (first-year students in their case) high in SC ganizations in Pakistan, which included higher education institu- handled distressing and difficult situations (e.g., home sickness) tions (HEIs), banks, and telecom companies. One main reason moreeffectivelythanthoselowinSC.Anotherstudybasedona for drawing such diverse sample was to extend the generalizabil- sample of 350 university students also demonstrated that aca- ity of this study’s findings (e.g., SC’s beneficial role in work- demic burnout’s effects on psychological well-being and depres- places) to various employment groups in the service sector orga- sion were moderated by SC (Kyeong 2013). nizations. Due to time and access constraints, especially in the Körner et al.’s(2015) study furthers our understanding of banking and telecom sectors, data were collected via a cross- SC’s moderating role. The study corroborated that SC [being sectional and self-reported online survey which was administered composed of self-kindness (SK), common humanity (CH), in English as this is the business language in Pakistan (e.g., De and mindfulness(MI)] significantly moderated the relationship Clercq et al. 2019; Jahanzeb and Fatima 2018; Jahanzeb et al. between self-coldness [being composed of self-judgement 2018). (SJ), isolation (IS), and over-identification (OI)] and depression in a large sample of 2404 Germans (general population) Participants and Procedure such that the said relationship was significantly weaker for individuals high in SC, indicating that the unique combination Using personal and official contacts, supervisors of potential re- of SK, CH, and MI can protect people against depression, spondents in the target organizations were approached by one of especially those who experience high self-coldness (Körner the researchers and requested to disseminate the web link of this et al. 2015). SC’s protective role against depression was fur- study’s survey among their fellow colleagues and subordinates ther substantiated by Chung (2016), who also demonstrated via communication channels (email) in their respective organiza- that the lack of forgiveness–depression relationship was weak- tions. The body of email served as a cover letter as well as an er for high self-compassion subgroup. Ferrari et al. (2018) informed consent form, with following information provided: provided similar insights, finding that the maladaptive perfectionism–depression relationship was moderated by SC a) A brief introduction to the research. such that the positive association between the two constructs b) A declaration that the survey to be completed was was significant at low and average (at mean) levels of SC and completely anonymous and voluntary. non-significant at high levels of SC in adolescents’ sample c) A note that participation in the survey entailed no costs, (n = 541); whilst still significant at all levels in adults’ sample nor were incentives/benefits of any kind offered. (n = 515), the perfectionism–depression relationship was sig- d) An assurance that the information provided would not be nificantly weaker for the individuals high in SC. Finally, the used other than for research purposes and reported only as construct also buffered work–family conflict’s negative ef- aggregate results. fects on psychological well-being in a recently conducted study with a purposive sample of 300 employees drawn from A formal statement of consent and the web link to the survey the telecom sector in Pakistan (Rafique et al. 2018). In light of followed above stated details. The first page of the survey, along these findings and the theoretical rationale, it may be argued with a note of thanks, had test-related instructions, an explanation that SC would moderate the WI–EE and WO–EE relation- that the survey had no ‘right/wrong’ answers, and a request to the ships, hence, we propose that: respondents to express their true/honest feelings. The purpose of these ex-antes was to reduce the possibility of social desirability bias (Podsakoff et al. 2003). Curr Psychol

Fig. 1 Research model

A total of 310 respondents participated in the survey, of Self-Compassion which 188 (60.6%) were men, 120 (38.7%) were women, and 2 (0.6%) preferred ‘not to say.’ Most of the respondents Respondents’ SC levels were assessed with the short [n = 142 (45.8%)] were in the age range of 31–40 years, form of self-compassion scale (12 items; Raes et al. followed by the age ranges of 30 years and less [n = 140 2011);asampleitemwas“I try to be understanding (45.2%)]; 41–50 years [n = 19 (6.1%)], and 51 years and and patient towards those aspects of my personality I above [n = 9 (2.9%)]. 38 (12.3%) respondents had a PhD de- don’tlike”. Five response options with anchors “almost gree, 97 (31.3%) had an MPhil/MS degree, 149 (48.1%) had a never = 1” to “almost always = 5” were provided. The master’s degree, and 26 (8.4%) had a bachelor’s degree. The reliability coefficient for this scale was α =0.932. frequency distribution of respondents’ work experience showed the following results: 10 years and less [n =215 (69.4%)]; 11–15 years [n =60(19.4%)];16–20 years [n =22 Emotional Exhaustion (7.1%)]; 21–25 years [n = 09 (2.9%)]; and 26 years and above [n = 04 (1.3%)]. 151 respondents were employed in academia The criterion variable in this study (i.e., EE) was mea- (48.7%), 93 (30%) were employed in banks, and 66 (21.3%) sured with six items (Maslach and Jackson 1986)as were employed in telecom companies. used by Cho et al. (2016) and included, for example, “I feel emotionally drained from my work.” Five response options with anchors “strongly disagree = 1” to “strongly agree = 5” were provided. The reliability co- Measures efficient for the six items was α = 0.871. Workplace Incivility Control Variables Cortina et al.’s(2001) seven-item workplace incivility scale (WIS) was used to assess respondents’ perceptions about their Consistent with Jahanzeb and Fatima (2018), Jahanzeb et al. experiences of derogatory and demeaning behaviors. Using (2018), and Wu et al. (2012), the effects of gender, age, edu- the instruction “how often have others at work….” respon- cation and work experience/tenure were controlled. dents were asked to indicate the frequency with which they “ had experienced the situations/uncivil behaviors like Put you Note: down or were condescending to you?” on a five point scale with anchors “never (1) to always (5)”. The reliability coeffi- 1. Full items for the scales used are provided in online sup- cient for was α =0.925. plementary material. 2. The reference period to recall and report the frequency Workplace Ostracism with which respondents had experienced uncivil and exclusionary behaviors was 30 days. We decided on this Using Ferris et al.’s(2008) 10-item workplace ostracism scale reference period being short so that respondents would (WOS), respondents were asked to indicate how often they accurately recall the frequency of such misbehaviors. had experienced the situations/exclusionary behaviors like “Others ignored you at work?” on a five point scale with anchors “never (1) to always (5)”. The reliability coefficient for WOS was α =0.938. Curr Psychol

Results Table 2 Intercation effects of SC in the WI/WO–EE relationships Model Variables B SE tp95% CI Model Fitting, Descriptive and Correlation Analyses, and Common Method Variance LLCI ULCI

Using AMOS (24.0), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was 1 WI 0.430 0.046 9.357 0.000 0.340 0.521 − − − − first run to assess the fit of measurement model (Hair et al. SC 0.189 0.048 3.924 0.000 0.284 0.094 − − − − 2010). CFA results indicated that the four-factor model fitted WI × SC 0.168 0.046 3.634 0.000 0.259 0.077 thedatamuchbetter(χ2/df = 1.785; GFI = 0.855; NFI = Model Variables B SE tp95% CI 0.878; NNFI/TLI = 0.937; CFI = 0.942; RMSEA = 0.050; LLCI ULCI PCLOSE = 0.443) than the single-factor model (χ2/df = 2 WO 0.340 0.054 6.220 0.000 0.232 0.448 − − − − 8.029; GFI = 0.363; NFI = 0.436; NNFI/TLI = 0.433; CFI = SC 0.182 0.052 3.455 0.000 0.286 0.078 0.466; RMSEA = 0.151; PCLOSE = 0.000). Since the data WO × SC −0.149 0.051 −2.925 0.003 −0.250 −0.049 were collected at a single point in time from the single source, B = unstandardized coefficient; SE = Standard error the presence of common method variance cannot be completely ignored. For this, a commonly used diagnostic technique Hypotheses Testing namely, ‘Harman’s single factor test’, using both the constrained exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and CFA was Hayes’ (2017) PROCESS macro for SPSS (version 3.0, performed (Podsakoff et al. 2003). A single-factor solution did Model 1) was used to test the hypotheses. Two separate mod- not emerge in the EFA, nor did one factor account for majority eration analyses (Model 1 and Model 2) were run, complete of variance. The fit indices for the single-factor model in terms results of which are presented in Table 2 and Table 3.As of CFA (as reported above) were also worse, indicating that shown in Table 2 (Model 1), the WI–EE and SC–EE relation- common method variance was not a serious concern. ships, after controlling for the covariates [gender (B = 0.192, Having determined the fit of measurement model, bivariate p < 0.05); age (B = −0.080, p > 0.05), education (B = −0.036, correlation analysis was run, for which four composite vari- p > 0.05) and work experience (B = −0.087, p > 0.05)], were ables (WI, WO, SC, and EE) were computed by averaging the significant. Hence, H1 and H3 were supported. The interac- items measuring each construct. For the composite score of tion term ‘WI × SC’ that PROCESS automatically calculated SC, items measuring SJ, IS, and OI were reverse-scored, the by mean centering the WI and SC variables, was also signif- average of all scale-items was then computed (Raes et al. icant (B = −0.168, p < 0.05). 95% confidence intervals for this ’ 2011). The use of SC s single score has been recommended term did not include zero [LLCI = −0.259; ULCI = −0.077]; (Neff 2016). As can be seen in Table 1, all inter-construct thus, H4 was supported. The variance (ΔR2) accounted for by correlations were in expected direction, indicating small the interaction term was 0.029. As such, Model 1 was overall (e.g., the relationship between WI and SC) to large (e.g., the statistically significant (R = 0.570; R2 =0.325;F=20.846, relationship between WI and WO) effect sizes (Cohen 1988). p <0.001).Figure2 and Table 3 corroborate the moderation In addition to the hypothesized relationships, a relatively effect, indicating that the WI–EE relationship was stronger relationship was also observed between WI and WO. This is not surprising as both these misbehaviors have a lot in common [e.g., low intensity, common occurrence, Table 3 Conditional effects of WI and WO on EE at different levels of ambiguous intent, and detrimental outcomes (Ferris et al. SC 2017)] and evidence indicating a strong positive correlation Conditional effects of WI on EE between them also exists (see Mahfooz et al. 2017). SC Effect SE tp95% CI Table 1 Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations LLCI ULCI −1 SD 0.586 0.060 9.717 0.000 0.467 0.705 VariablesMeanSD1234 Mean 0.430 0.046 9.357 0.000 0.340 0.521 1) WI 2.125 0.967 – +1 SD 0.274 0.065 4.203 0.000 0.146 0.403 2) WO 1.873 0.878 0.654** – Conditional effects of WO on EE 3) SC 3.574 0.924 −0.128* −0.171** – SC Effect SE tp95% CI 4) EE 2.364 0.918 0.480** 0.379** −0.255** – LLCI ULCI Minimum ––1.00 1.00 1.25 1.00 −1 SD 0.478 0.068 7.029 0.000 0.344 0.612 Maximum ––5.00 4.80 4.83 5.00 Mean 0.340 0.054 6.220 0.000 0.232 0.448 +1 SD 0.201 0.076 2.642 0.008 0.051 0.352 ** p <0.01;*p <0.05;SD=Standarddeviation Curr Psychol

Fig. 2 Moderation effects of SC on the WI–EE relationship

significantly weaker when SC was high (+1 SD) than when it moderation effect is elucidated in Fig. 3 and further explained was low (−1 SD), in further support of H4. in Table 3. SC moderated the WO–EE relationship such that Results for Model 2 revealed that WO had a significant the strength of this relationship was particularly weaker when positive relationship with EE, thus, H2 was supported. As SC was high (+1 SD) than when it was low (−1SD). can be seen in Table 2, the SC–EE relationship was also sig- Consistent findings were obtained when both the models were nificant, providing additional support to H3. The effects of all rerun without covariates. covariates, meanwhile, were non-significant [gender (B = 0.121, p > 0.05); age (B = −0.115, p > 0.05); education (B = 0.026, p > 0.05); and work experience (B = −0.048, p >0.05)]. Discussion and Conclusion The interaction term ‘WO × SC’ was also significant (B = −0.149, p < 0.05), and the variance explained by this term The present study was set out to examine SC’smoder- was 0.022. The corresponding 95% confidence intervals for ating role in the WI–EE and WO–EE relationships. We the interaction term did not overlap with zero [LLCI = −0.250; chose to focus on general incivility and ostracism, as ULCI = −0.049]; hence, H5 was supported. As the model these misbehaviors occur commonly in workplaces summary results indicate, Model 2 was overall significant (Cortina et al. 2001; Ferris et al. 2017;Foxand (R = 0.470; R2 = 0.221; F = 12.280, p < 0.001). The Stallworth 2005). Consistent with H1 and H2, WI and

Fig. 3 Moderation effects of SC on the WO–EE relationship Curr Psychol

WO were found to be positively correlated with EE, from the adverse emotional outcomes of workplace supporting the well-researched notion that these misbe- stressors (e.g., WI and WO). haviors often carry the risk of EE. The effect sizes for In sum, all the findings reported are consistent with the WI–EE and WO–EE relationships identified herein COR theory’s tenets (Hobfoll 1989, 2001) and deepen are similar to that of Hur et al. (2015; r = 0.41) and our understanding of previously established WI/WO–EE Chen and Li (2018; r = 0.34), respectively. WI/WO’s relationships and moderating role of SC. This study is significant positive associations with EE corroborate that unique in that it extends the mistreatment literature by these misbehaviors, regardless of their low-intensity introducing and testing the buffering role of SC. (Ferris et al. 2017), are powerful to such an extent that these can use up targets’ emotional resources, leaving them feel emotionally exhausted (Rhee et al. 2017; Limitations and Future Research Wu et al. 2012). The finding also verifies that the increased emotional demands that continued episodes/ As with all research, this study has several limitations which exposure of WI and WO place on targets can be emo- we have discussed in an intertwined manner with future re- tionally exhausting (Hur et al. 2015; Chen and Li search directions. First, although the model we developed and 2018). Moreover, the very finding also reflects that tested was theoretically informed, it is however, narrow in our sample is no different from a variety of samples scope. Only one component of job-burnout (i.e. EE), for ex- studied across the globe, including in Pakistan, in terms ample, was considered. Though the selection of EE as the only of respondents’ emotional reactions to WI and WO, outcome variable is consistent with the explanation that EE verifying the notion that these misbehaviors are emo- represents the ‘core meaning’ of job burnout (for a discussion, tionally debilitating and can occur anywhere (Cortina see Cropanzano et al. 2003, p. 160; Wright and Cropanzano et al. 2001;Ferrisetal.2017). 1998, p. 487), future researchers are encouraged to consider In line with H3, a negative relationship was noted be- other components of burnout. This would allow them to ex- tween SC and EE (r = −0.255). Although the size of this amine i) differential patterns of relationships that WI and WO relationship was slightly lower than that of Reizer (2019;r might have with those components, and ii) SC’smoderating = –0.30), the finding is important as it points to SC’s role therein. Similarly, the buffering role of personal resources beneficial role in reducing EE induced by WI and WO. such as religiosity, spirituality, waypower and willpower may Further, results also indicated that the WI–EE and WO–EE also be explored, as these resources have been asserted to be relationships were moderated by SC. The size of SC’s helpful in protecting employees from the deleterious effects of interaction effects (ΔR2)issimilartothatofChung stressors (De Clercq et al. 2018; Wesselmann and Williams (2016; ΔR2= 0.02) and Ferrari et al. (2018; ΔR2=0.02). 2010). Second, since the SCS-SF is not recommended for Although the individuals high in SC felt emotionally examining SC’s dimensions separately (Raes et al. 2011; exhausted (i.e., WI/WO’s significant relationships with Neff 2016), a detailed (i.e., dimension wise) moderation anal- EE at high levels of SC), the extent of their ‘suffering’ ysis was therefore, not possible. This limitation may however, was however, considerably less compared to those low in be addressed with the use of the full form of SCS (Neff SC.Thisisconsistentwithself-compassion theory which 2003b), which would allow researchers to explore in detail states that self-compassionate individuals do not suppress which elements of SC are more beneficial in attenuating the their negative thoughts and feelings. Further, viewing WI–EE and WO–EE relationships. This could be a promising painful and negative experiences as common human expe- area for future research, as studies examining the relationships riences helps them keep their sense of connectedness in- of SC’s dimensions/elements with EE and their moderating tact. As a result, they do not feel overly anxious and emo- role in the stressor–strain relationship are particularly sparse. tionally distraught, as these feelings are likely to arise Third, one ubiquitous concern associated with this kind of when one feels isolated and disconnected. Moreover, the research is of ‘causality’, which cannot be inferred due to ability to extend compassion to oneself also enables indi- cross-sectional survey design (Sedgwick 2014). Therefore, viduals to hold painful feelings and emotions in a bal- all conclusions drawn, especially that pertain to the anced way, without exaggerating the extent of one’ssuf- moderation/interaction effects of SC, should be interpreted fering, which thereby reduces the likelihood to ruminate with caution as such effects cannot be determined using and/or get overwhelmed by negative emotions/feelings cross-sectional data. Nonetheless, continued research may (Neff 2003a, 2003b). Despite the fact that the variance take on a longitudinal and/or experimental approach to help accounted for by the interaction terms (ΔR2) in both the establish the causality of proposed links and SC’smoderation models was low [Model 1 = 0.029; Model 2 = 0.022]; it effects. Despite this limitation of cross-sectional design, one can however, be carefully concluded that SC is a protec- major strength of present study is that it provides preliminary tive personal resource that may help employees suffer less evidence on SC’s moderating role in the stressor–strain Curr Psychol relationship – a worth investigating agenda for future re- should also adopt a proactive approach to gather information searchers. Fourth, although several ex-antes were undertaken about the presence and root causes of ‘bad behaviors’ (e.g., to avoid social desirability bias and common method variance, ostracizing acts; De Clercq et al. 2019). For this, an effective these issues cannot be completely overruled because of the feed-back system may be devised and put in place. Such an self-reported and single-source survey data. Multi-source initiative would help organizations to monitor, manage, and and time-lagged data are therefore recommended (Podsakoff control workplace misbehaviors (Porath et al. 2015). et al. 2003). Fifth, as the data were collected from various Furthermore, organization could develop specific guidelines organizations (higher education, telecom, and banks), there for when and how organizational members should interact is a possibility that certain organizational factors such as with each other (De Clercq et al. 2019). This could also help ‘workplace environment’ and ‘company size’ might influence organizations to curtail incivility and ostracism. Besides, or- the associations between this study’s variables. For example, ganization may also consider developing ‘emotional control uncivil workplace environment might exacerbate the strength capabilities’ in their employees via training programs to di- of WI–EE relationship, as working in uncivil environment can minish the feelings of EE that workplace misbehaviors might make employees more prone to uncivil incidents and distress induce (Tong et al. 2019). Since WI and WO are detrimental (Miner et al. 2019). Similarly, employees working in smaller to employees’ emotional well-being, they must also endeavor organizations might have stronger expectations to be included to buffer such harmful effects. As Porath et al. (2015)sug- in social interactions (De Clercq et al. 2019, p. 296). As such, gested, employees should pay special attention to taking care it is likely that being ignored or excluded can deeply hurt and of themselves. Thriving outside work places in evenings or at /or emotionally devastate them. It is therefore, suggested that weekends and spending time with friends and family mem- these factors may be taken into account while investigating bers, for instance, can rejuvenate them and reduce their work- WI/WO’s relationships with EE. Finally, it should be noted related strain (Porath et al. 2015). that the sample size for the current study was not estimated a Since SC buffered employees against EE induced by priori. Since sample sizes can affect the robustness of results, WI and WO, there may a potential value in nurturing this future researchers are particularly encouraged to adopt an a resource. Unlike self-esteem, SC is more pliable and can priori power analysis approach to ascertain appropriate sample be easily developed, increased and learned (Neff 2003a). sizes (Cohen 1988). Experimental studies have also suggested that SC can be enhanced/ induced (Leary et al. 2007). There are several prospective ways via which this resource can be raised, Implications for Theory and Practice ranging from short activities, to extended programs, to self-help initiatives. The first possible intervention could Despite the shortcomings noted above, the current study has be a short writing activity, which involves asking partic- important implications both for theory and management prac- ipants to recall a negative past event (e.g., humiliation tice. One notable theoretical contribution of this study is that it and rejection) that made them feel bad and then respond provides a first glimpse of SC’s role in reducing the feelings of to some ‘prompts’ designed to lead them think about the EE that may arise from having been treated uncivilly and/or imagined events in a self-compassionate manner. This ostracized – a perspective that has not been considered in activity has been found effective in inducing a self- previous research. compassionate perspective (see Leary et al. 2007). WI and WO may appear subtle, their effects are not (for a Organizations may consider including this activity in review, see Mao et al. 2018; Schilpzand et al. 2016). One such their regular training programs/refresher courses for em- example is EE – a phenomenon that has serious ramifications ployees. The assessment of employees’ SCmayalsobe for organizations such as decreased job performance and in- made part of organizations’ training need assessment creased turnover (Cropanzano et al. 2003;Wrightand (TNA), and depending upon results (i.e., low levels of Cropanzano 1998). Organizations should therefore pay due SC), specialized training programs such as ‘mindful self- attention to curtail and manage these misbehaviors. Since compassion’ (MSC) may be launched. Since MSC is a WI and WO have a lot in common, the advice for curtailing/ hybrid program applicable to both the clinical and gen- managing one should also apply to the other (Ferris et al. eral populations, it can thus be employed by organiza- 2017). In this regard, a range of organizational interventions tions. Unlike the traditional formats of general workplace such as having strong organizational norms for respect, sensi- trainings, MSC workshop consists of eight weekly tizing organizational members about incivility and ostracism, meetings/sessions of approximately 2.5 hours each, cov- developing civility interventions (i.e., teaching civility), and ering a range of topics such as how to deal with difficult educating supervisors on how to prevent and deal with inci- emotions and challenging interpersonal relationships. vility and ostracism incidents have been suggested (Ferris Results of the randomized control trail assessing this et al. 2017), which could be opted. Alongside, organizations programs’ effectiveness identified a significant increase Curr Psychol

Choi, Y.(2019). The moderating effect of leader member exchange on the in participants’ SC levels [Pretest (SC-Mean) = 2.65; relationship between workplace ostracism and psychological dis- Posttest (SC-Mean) = 3.78; Cohen’s d = 1.67] (p. 37). The ’ tress. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration. https://doi. program also increased participants levels of mindful- org/10.1108/APJBA-11-2018-0205. ness and compassion for others, while it decreased their Chung, M. S. (2016). Relation between lack of forgiveness and depres- anxiety, depression, and stress (Neff and Germer 2013). sion: The moderating effect of self-compassion. Psychological – Individuals may also benefit from a variety of online Reports, 119(3), 573 585. Chung, Y. W. (2018). Workplace ostracism and workplace behaviors: A resources (activities and exercises) and books (Neff moderated mediation model of perceived stress and psychological 2011, 2019; Shapira and Mongrain 2010)tofostertheir empowerment. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 31(3), 304–317. inner resource of ‘self-compassion’ on self-help basis Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences and effectively counter various adversities in the work- (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. places and daily lives. Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2003). Raising voice, risking retaliation: Events following interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8(4), 247–265. Compliance with Ethical Standards Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J. H., & Langhout, R. D. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(1), 64–80. interest. Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., & Byrne, Z. S. (2003). The relationship of emotional exhaustion to work attitudes, job performance, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, Ethical Approval All procedures performed were in accordance with the – ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its 88(1), 160 169. later amendments or comparable ethical standards. De Clercq, D., Haq, I. U., Azeem, M. U., & Raja, U. (2018). Family incivility, emotional exhaustion at work, and being a good soldier: The buffering roles of waypower and willpower. Journal of Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained from all participants Business Research, 89,27–36. in the study. De Clercq, D., Haq, I. U., & Azeem, M. U. (2019). Workplace ostracism and job performance: Roles of self-efficacy and job level. Personnel Review, 48(1), 184–203. References Dev, V., Fernando III, A. T., Lim, A. G., & Consedine, N. S. (2018). Does self-compassion mitigate the relationship between burnout and bar- riers to compassion? A cross-sectional quantitative study of 799 Alola, U. V., Olugbade, O. A., Avci, T., & Öztüren, A. (2019). Customer nurses. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 81,81–88. ’ incivility and employees outcomes in the hotel: Testing the medi- DeWall, C. N., Gilman, R., Sharif, V., Carboni, I., & Rice, K. G. (2012). ating role of emotional exhaustion. Tourism Management – Left out, sluggardly, and blue: Low self-control mediates the rela- Perspectives, 29,9 17. tionship between ostracism and depression. Personality and Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling Individual Differences, 53(7), 832–837. effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy of Management Ferrari, M., Yap, K., Scott, N., Einstein, D. A., & Ciarrochi, J. (2018). – Review, 24(3), 452 471. Self-compassion moderates the perfectionism and depression link in Barnard, L. K., & Curry, J. F. (2012). The relationship of clergy burnout both adolescence and adulthood. PLoS One, 13(2). https://doi.org/ to self-compassion and other personality dimensions. Pastoral 10.1371/journal.pone.0192022. – Psychology, 61,149 163. Ferris, D. L., Brown, D. J., Berry, J. W., & Lian, H. (2008). The devel- Bastian, B., & Haslam, N. (2010). Excluded from humanity: The opment and validation of the workplace ostracism scale. Journal of dehumanizing effects of social ostracism. Journal of Experimental Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1348–1366. – Social Psychology, 46(1), 107 113. Ferris, D. L., Yan, M., Lim, V. K., Chen, Y., & Fatimah, S. (2016). An Bibi, Z., Karim, J., & ud Din, S. (2013). Workplace incivility and counter- approach–avoidance framework of workplace aggression. Academy productive work behavior: Moderating role of emotional intelligence. of Management Journal, 59(5), 1777–1800. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 28(2), 297–314. Ferris, D. L., Chen, M., & Lim, S. (2017). Comparing and contrasting work- Buckley, K. E., Winkel, R. E., & Leary, M. R. (2004). Reactions to accep- place ostracism and incivility. Annual Review of Organizational tance and rejection: Effects of level and sequence of relational evalua- Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4,315–338. tion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(1), 14–28. Fox, S., & Stallworth, L. E. (2005). Racial/ethnic bullying: Exploring Bunk, J. A., & Magley, V. J. (2013). The role of appraisals and emotions links between bullying and racism in the US workplace. Journal in understanding experiences of workplace incivility. Journal of of Vocational Behavior, 66(3), 438–456. Occupational Health Psychology, 18(1), 87–105. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data Caza, B. B., & Cortina, L. M. (2007). From insult to injury: Explaining analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. the impact of incivility. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29(4), Han, Y., Kim, Y., & Hur, W. M. (2019). The effects of perceived super- 335–350. visor incivility on child-care workers’ job performance: The medi- Chen, Y., & Li, S. (2018). Relationship between workplace ostracism and ating role of emotional exhaustion and intrinsic motivation. Current unsafe behaviors: The mediating effect of psychological detachment Psychology,1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-0133-7. and emotional exhaustion. Psychological Reports. https://doi.org/ Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and condi- 10.1177/0033294118813892. tional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Cho, M., Bonn, M. A., Han, S. J., & Lee, K. H. (2016). Workplace Publications. incivility and its effect upon restaurant frontline service employee Hershcovis, M. S. (2011). “Incivility, social undermining, bullying… oh emotions and service performance. International Journal of my!”: A call to reconcile constructs within workplace aggression Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(12), 2888–2912. research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(3), 499–519. Curr Psychol

Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new attempt at con- stress & moderating role of psychological capital. International ceptualizing stress. American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the 7(8), 398–413. nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of re- Mao, Y., Liu, Y., Jiang, C., & Zhang, I. D. (2018). Why am I ostracized sources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337–369. and how would I react? A review of workplace ostracism research. Huang, H. T., & Lin, C. P. (2019). Assessing ethical efficacy, workplace Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 35(3), 745–767. incivility, and turnover intention: A moderated-mediation model. Maslach, C. (1993). Burnout: A multidimensional perspective. In W. B. Review of Managerial Science, 13(1), 33–56. Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T. Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Hur, W. M., Kim, B. S., & Park, S. J. (2015). The relationship between Recent developments in theory and research (pp. 19–32). coworker incivility, emotional exhaustion, and organizational out- Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis. comes: The mediating role of emotional exhaustion. Human Factors Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1986). Maslach burnout inventory (2nd and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 25(6), ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. 701–712. Miner, K. N., Smittick, A. L., He, Y., & Costa, P. L. (2019). Organizations Hur, W. M., Moon, T., & Jun, J. K. (2016). The effect of workplace behaving badly: Antecedents and consequences of uncivil work- incivility on service employee creativity: The mediating role of emo- place environments. The Journal of Psychology, 153(5), 528–554. tional exhaustion and intrinsic motivation. JournalofServices Neff, K. (2003a). Self-compassion: An alternative conceptualization of a Marketing, 30(3), 302–315. healthy attitude toward oneself. Self and Identity, 2,85–101. Jahanzeb, S., & Fatima, T. (2018). How workplace ostracism influences Neff, K. D. (2003b). The development and validation of a scale to mea- interpersonal deviance: The mediating role of defensive silence and sure self-compassion. Self and Identity, 2(3), 223–250. emotional exhaustion. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(6), Neff, K. (2011). Self-compassion: The proven power of being kind to – 779 791. yourself. New York, NY: William Morrow. Jahanzeb, S., Fatima, T., & Malik, M. A. R. (2018). Supervisor ostracism Neff, K. D. (2016). The self-compassion scale is a valid and theoretically and defensive silence: A differential needs approach. European coherent measure of self-compassion. Mindfulness, 7(1), 264–274. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27(4), 430–440. Neff, K. (2019). Self-compassion guided meditations and exercises. Jahanzeb, S., Fatima, T., Javed, B., & Giles, J. P. (2019). Can mindfulness Resource document. https://self-compassion.org/category/exercises/ overcome the effects of workplace ostracism on job performance? Neff, K. D., & Germer, C. K. (2013). A pilot study and randomized The Journal of Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/ controlled trial of the mindful self-compassion program. Journal 00224545.2019.1707465. of Clinical Psychology, 69(1), 28–44. Kabat-Farr, D., Cortina, L. M., & Marchiondo, L. A. (2018). The emo- Neff, K., & Vonk, R. (2009). Self-compassion versus global self-esteem: tional aftermath of incivility: Anger, guilt, and the role of organiza- Two different ways of relating to oneself. Journal of Personality, 77, tional commitment. International Journal of Stress Management, 23–50. 25(2), 109–128. Neff, K. D., Hsieh, Y. P., & Dejitterat, K. (2005). Self-compassion, Karatepe, O. M., Kim, T. T., & Lee, G. (2019). Is political skill really an achievement goals, and coping with academic failure. Self and antidote in the workplace incivility-emotional exhaustion and out- Identity, 4(3), 263–287. come relationship in the hotel industry? Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 40,40–49. Neff, K. D., Kirkpatrick, K. L., & Rude, S. S. (2007). Self-compassion Koay, K. Y. (2018). Workplace ostracism and cyberloafing: A and adaptive psychological functioning. Journal of Research in – moderated–mediation model. Internet Research, 28(4), 1122–1141. Personality, 41(1), 139 154. Körner, A., Coroiu, A., Copeland, L., Gomez-Garibello, C., Albani, C., Neff,K.D.,Long,P.,Knox,M.C.,Davidson,O.,Kuchar,A.,Costigan,A., Zenger, M., & Brähler, E. (2015). The role of self-compassion in & Breines, J. G. (2018). The forest and the trees: Examining the asso- buffering symptoms of depression in the general population. PLoS ciation of self-compassion and its positive and negative components – One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136598. with psychological functioning. Self and Identity, 17(6), 627 645. Kyeong, L. W. (2013). Self-compassion as a moderator of the relationship Niu, G. F., Sun, X. J., Tian, Y., Fan, C. Y., & Zhou, Z. K. (2016). between academic burn-out and psychological health in Korean cy- Resilience moderates the relationship between ostracism and depres- ber university students. Personality and Individual Differences, sion among Chinese adolescents. Personality and Individual – 54(8), 899–902. Differences, 99,77 80. Leary, M. R., Tate, E. B., Adams, C. E., Allen, A. B., & Hancock, J. Park, Y., Fritz, C., & Jex, S. M. (2018). Daily cyber incivility and distress: (2007). Self-compassion and reactions to unpleasant self-relevant The moderating roles of resources at work and home. Journal of events: The implications of treating oneself kindly. Journal of Management, 44(7), 2535–2557. Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5), 887–904. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Lim, S., & Cortina, L. M. (2005). Interpersonal mistreatment in the work- Common method biases in behavioral research: Acritical review of place: The interface and impact of general incivility and sexual the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied harassment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(3), 483–496. Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. Lim, S., Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2008). Personal and workgroup Porath, C. L., & Pearson, C. M. (2012). Emotional and behavioral re- incivility: Impact on work and health outcomes. Journal of Applied sponses to workplace incivility and the impact of hierarchical status. Psychology, 93(1), 95–107. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42,326–357. López, A., Sanderman, R., Smink, A., Zhang, Y., van Sonderen, E., Ranchor, Porath, C. L., Foulk, T., & Erez, A. (2015). How incivility hijacks per- A., & Schroevers, M. J. (2015). A reconsideration of the self- formance: It robs cognitive resources, increases dysfunctional be- compassion Scale’s total score: Self-compassion versus self-criticism. havior, and infects team dynamics and functioning. Organizational PLoS One, 10(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132940. Dynamics, 44,258–265. Lustenberger, D. E., & Jagacinski, C. M. (2010). Exploring the effects of Raes, F., Pommier, E., Neff, K. D., & Van Gucht, D. (2011). Construction ostracism on performance and intrinsic motivation. Human and factorial validation of a short form of the self-compassion scale. Performance, 23(4), 283–304. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 18,250–255. Mahfooz, Z., Arshad, A., Nisar, Q. A., Ikram, M., & Azeem, M. (2017). Rafique, H., Masood, S., & Ahmad, M. (2018). Role of self-compassion in Does workplace incivility & workplace ostracism influence the em- work-family conflict and psychological well-being among working men ployees’ turnover intentions? Mediating role of burnout and job and women. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 28(2), 131–145. Curr Psychol

Reizer, A. (2019). Bringing self-kindness into the workplace: Exploring Tong, J., Chong, S., & Johnson, R. E. (2019). The indirect relations of the mediating role of self-compassion in the associations between workplace incivility with emotional exhaustion and supportive be- attachment and organizational outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, haviors via self-blame: The moderating roles of observed incivility 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01148. and trait emotional control. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Rhee, S. Y.,Hur, W. M., & Kim, M. (2017). The relationship of coworker https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2399. incivility to job performance and the moderating role of self-efficacy Wesselmann, E. D., & Williams, K. D. (2010). The potential balm of and compassion at work: The job demands-resources (JD-R) ap- religion and spirituality for recovering from ostracism. Journal of proach. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(6), 711–726. Management, Spirituality and Religion, 7(1), 31–49. Sakurai, K., & Jex, S. M. (2012). Coworker incivility and incivility tar- Westman, M., Hobfoll, S. E., Chen, S., Davidson, O. B., & Laski, S. gets’ work effort and counterproductive work behaviors: The mod- (2005). Organizational stress through the lens of conservation of erating role of supervisor social support. Journal of Occupational resources (COR) theory. In P. L. Perrewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Health Psychology, 17(2), 150–161. Research in occupational stress and well-being (Vol. 4, pp. 167– Schilpzand, P., De Pater, I. E., & Erez, A. (2016). Workplace incivility: A 220). Amsterdam: JAI Press. review of the literature and agenda for future research. Journal of Wright, T. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Emotional exhaustion as a Organizational Behavior, 37,57–88. predictor of job performance and voluntary turnover. Journal of Sedgwick, P. (2014). Cross sectional studies: Advantages and disadvan- Applied Psychology, 83,486–493. tages. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g2276. Wu, L. Z., Yim, F. H. K., Kwan, H. K., & Zhang, X. (2012). Coping with Shapira, L. B., & Mongrain, M. (2010). The benefits of self-compassion workplace ostracism: The roles of ingratiation and political skill in and optimism exercises for individuals vulnerable to depression. The employee psychological distress. Journal of Management Studies, Journal of Positive Psychology, 5(5), 377–389. 49(1), 178–199. Sliter, M., Jex, S., Wolford, K., & McInnerney, J. (2010). How rude! Xia, A., Wang, B., Song, B., Zhang, W., & Qian, J. (2019). How and Emotional labor as a mediator between customer incivility and em- when workplace ostracism influences task performance: Through ployee outcomes. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, the lens of conservation of resource theory. Human Resource 15(4), 468–481. Management Journal., 29,353–370. Stoeber, J., Lalova, A. V., & Lumley, E. J. (2020). Perfectionism,(self-) Zhou, Z. E., Yan, Y., Che, X. X., & Meier, L. L. (2015). Effect of work- compassion, and subjective well-being: A mediation model. place incivility on end-of-work negative affect: Examining individ- Personality and Individual Differences, 154. https://doi.org/10. ual and organizational moderators in a daily diary study. Journal of 1016/j.paid.2019.109708. Occupational Health Psychology, 20(1), 117–130. Terry, M. L., Leary, M. R., & Mehta, S. (2013). Self-compassion as a buffer against homesickness, depression, and dissatisfaction in the Publisher’snoteSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic- transition to college. Self and Identity, 12(3), 278–290. tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.