Ambivalent interpersonal relationships in organizations are known to have deleterious effects on employee health and wellbeing, work performance, counterproductive work behaviors, and more. However, little research has examined ambivalent relationships in the supervisor-subordinate dyad. In the present study, I contribute to the supervisor-subordinate literature by examining the interaction between abusive supervision and supervisor support. Furthermore, I extend past findings by investigating the mediating role of ambivalent supervisor identification, hypothesizing that support in an otherwise abusive supervisor relationship will lead to ambivalent supervisor identification and, consequently, negative health outcomes. Finally, I explore the role of dialectical thinking style, an Eastern mode of thinking which allows for the acceptance of contradiction, as a moderating factor between ambivalent supervisor behaviors and ambivalent supervisor identification. The data for this thesis came from an archival dataset in which my variables of interest were included. My findings failed to replicate past research on the direct, interactive effects of abusive supervision and supervisor support. However, there was a significant indirect effect of this interaction through ambivalent supervisor identification predicting stress but not wellbeing. I found no significant effect for the contradiction dimension of dialectical thinking style, which may be due to sampling and survey restrictions. Limitations, future directions, and practical implications are discussed.
If this is your thesis or dissertation, and want to learn how to access it or for more information about readership statistics, contact us at STARS@ucf.edu
Master of Science (M.S.)
College of Sciences
Length of Campus-only Access
Masters Thesis (Open Access)
Vermilion, Barret, "The Dialectics of Ambivalent Identification in the Supervisor-Subordinate Dyad" (2022). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2020-. 1450.