{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019041365725541694, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0026263952724885093, 'mean_word_length': 5.568965517241379, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
It hurts me too! (or not?): Exploring the negative implications for abusive bosses.

Although most work on abusive supervision has focused on consequences for the victim, this paper extends a small yet growing stream of research that aims to understand transgressors' reactions to their own wrongdoing. Specifically, we seek to explain behavioral responses of abusive supervisors, including whether they adjust their performance behaviors, as well as whether they halt any future abuse toward subordinates. Building on theories and research on social worth, we propose that perpetrated abuse impacts these supervisor outcomes via a diminished sense of social worth that results from harming others. We further suggest that these indirect effects are stronger for managers who possess lower levels of psychopathy, whereas supervisors with higher levels of the trait are said to be shielded from social repercussions and therefore less responsive in this process. Results from two field studies largely support our assertions, indicating that abusive bosses generally experience a reduced sense of social worth and corresponding poorer performance outcomes. These effects are stronger for less psychopathic supervisors. Findings also indicate that supervisors who are low on psychopathy might stop enacting abuse entirely, while those high on psychopathy might be more likely to continue the abusive behavior. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).