Adaptation and Validation of the Abusive Supervision Scale: A Short Version for the Indonesian Context

  • Rizky Nur Fahrezi Universitas Hasanuddin
  • Hillman Wirawan Universitas Hasanuddin
  • Findra Anugrah Putri Firdaus Universitas Hasanuddin
  • Zahra Rizqi Quraini M. Zulkifli Universitas Hasanuddin
  • Uswatun Hasanah Nurkholis Universitas Hasanuddin
  • Asma National University of Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia
Keywords: abusive supervision, power distance, reliability, scale adaptation, validity

Abstract

This study aims to adapt and examine the construct validity and internal reliability of the Abusive Supervision Scale Short Version (5-item) in the Indonesian context. The background of this research is based on the limited number of studies on abusive supervision in non-Western countries, particularly in Indonesia, which is characterized by high power distance. This study employed a quantitative approach with a cross-sectional survey design involving 252 employees who have direct supervisors in the province of South Sulawesi. The sample was selected purposively, and the scale was administered via an online platform. Data analysis was carried out using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) with the WLSMV estimation method. The results show that the unidimensional model of the scale has a very good fit based on CFI (.998), TLI (.996), and SRMR (.019), with an RMSEA value of (.099). All items had factor loading values above 0.89 and were significant (p < .001), as well as an Average Variance Extracted (AVE) value of .89. In addition, the overall Omega coefficient value of .94 indicates very high internal reliability. These findings indicate that this scale is proven to be valid and reliable in measuring perceptions of abusive supervision in the Indonesian context. Practically, this short scale is useful for researchers and organizational practitioners because it can be used efficiently without increasing respondent fatigue, while still being able to provide an accurate depiction of the dynamics of abusive supervision.

References

Ashforth, B. E. (1997). Petty tyranny in organizations: A preliminary examination of antecedents and consequences. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences de l’Administration, 14(2), 126–140.

Bah, A. J., Wurie, H. R., Samai, M., Horn, R., & Ager, A. (2025). Developing and validating the Sierra Leone perinatal psychological distress scale through an emic-etic approach. Journal of Affective Disorders Reports, 19, 100852. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadr.2024.100852

Bajaba, A., Bajaba, S., & Simmering, M. J. (2024). When resilience is not enough: Theoretical development and validation of the antifragility at work scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 231, 112818. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2024.112818

Balci, K., & Salah, A. A. (2015). Automatic analysis and identification of verbal aggression and abusive behaviors for online social games. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 517–526. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.025

Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186–3191.

Bortolon, C., Lopes, B., Capdevielle, D., Macioce, V., & Raffard, S. (2019). The roles of cognitive avoidance, rumination and negative affect in the association between abusive supervision in the workplace and non-clinical paranoia in a sample of workers working in France. Psychiatry Research, 271, 581–589. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.11.065

Brady, J. M., Hammer, L. B., & Westman, M. (2025). Supervisor resilience promotes employee well-being: The role of resource crossover. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 156, 104076. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2024.104076

Chen, H., Alfred, M., & Cohen, E. (2025). Efficient Detection of Stigmatizing Language in Electronic Health Records via In-Context Learning: Comparative Analysis and Validation Study. JMIR Medical Informatics, 13. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2196/68955

Dai, Y.-D., Zhuang, W.-L., & Huan, T.-C. (2019). Engage or quit? The moderating role of abusive supervision between resilience, intention to leave and work engagement. Tourism Management, 70, 69–77. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.07.014

Fischer, T., Tian, A. W., Lee, A., & Hughes, D. J. (2021). Abusive supervision: A systematic review and fundamental rethink. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(6), 101540.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

Gallegos, I., Guàrdia-Olmos, J., & Berger, R. (2022). Abusive supervision: a systematic review and new research approaches. Frontiers in Communication, 6, 640908.

Griep, Y., Kraak, J. M., Knol, W. M., Dolislager, J., & Beekman, E. M. (2025). The ripple effect of abusive supervision: A longitudinal examination of psychological contract breach, turnover intentions, and resilience among third parties. Journal of Business Research, 189, 115141. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.115141

Guo, D., Cheng, J., & Zaigham, G. H. K. (2024). The hidden cost of abusive supervision: rudeness, sabotage, and ethics. BMC Psychology, 12(1), 627.

Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). The Results of PLS-SEM Article information. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.

Harris, M. L., Gibson, S. G., Barber, D., Wang, C., & Orazov, S. (2011). A multi-country perspective of students’ entrepreneurial attitudes. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 12(3), 373–394. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2011.039013

Hashmi, E., Yayilgan, S. Y., Yamin, M. M., Abomhara, M., & Ullah, M. (2025). Self-supervised hate speech detection in Norwegian texts with lexical and semantic augmentations. Expert Systems with Applications, 264, 125843. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2024.125843

Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. But…. Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Sage publications.

Hoobler, J. M., & Hu, J. (2013). A model of injustice, abusive supervision, and negative affect. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(1), 256–269. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.11.005

Hussain, I., & Sia, S. K. (2017). Power distance orientation dilutes the effect of abusive supervision on workplace deviance. Management and Labour Studies, 42(4), 293–305.

Jeong, D., Aggarwal, S., Robinson, J., Kumar, N., Spearot, A., & Park, D. S. (2023). Exhaustive or exhausting? Evidence on respondent fatigue in long surveys. Journal of Development Economics, 161, 102992.

Keashly, L., & Harvey, S. (2005). Emotional Abuse in the Workplace.

Kenny, D. A., Kaniskan, B., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). The performance of RMSEA in models with small degrees of freedom. Sociological Methods & Research, 44(3), 486–507.

Khan, N. A., & Khan, A. N. (2021). Exploring the impact of abusive supervision on employee’ voice behavior in Chinese construction industry: a moderated mediation analysis. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 29(8), 3051–3071. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-10-2020-0829

Kiazad, K., Restubog, S. L. D., Zagenczyk, T. J., Kiewitz, C., & Tang, R. L. (2010). In pursuit of power: The role of authoritarian leadership in the relationship between supervisors’ Machiavellianism and subordinates’ perceptions of abusive supervisory behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(4), 512–519. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2010.06.004

Kirkman, G., Willmott, D., Boduszek, D., & Debowska, A. (2025). Introduction and validation of the Modern Adolescent Dating Violence Attitude (MADVA) scale: A contemporary tool for assessing adolescent attitudes towards dating violence in offline and online environments. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 80, 100705. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlcj.2024.100705

Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications.

Kline, W., & McDermott, K. (2019). Evolutionary stakeholder theory and public utility regulation. Business and Society Review, 124(2), 283–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/basr.12172

Li, Z., & Song, L. (2024). Understanding the impact of abusive leadership on third-party observers’ turnover intentions: Insights from organizational identification and authority orientation. Acta Psychologica, 248, 104438. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104438

López-Varela, E., Pascual, N. O., Quezada-Sánchez, J., Oreja-Guevara, C., & Barreira, N. (2025). Efficient semi-supervised hierarchical training for segmenting choroidal vessels and other structures on OCT images of multiple sclerosis patients. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control, 100, 106937. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2024.106937

Mackey, J. D., Ellen, B. P., Hochwarter, W. A., & Ferris, G. R. (2013). Subordinate social adaptability and the consequences of abusive supervision perceptions in two samples. The Leadership Quarterly, 24(5), 732–746. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.07.003

Martinko, M. J., Harvey, P., Brees, J. R., & Mackey, J. (2013). A review of abusive supervision research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(S1), S120–S137.

Mathieu, C., & Babiak, P. (2016). Corporate psychopathy and abusive supervision: Their influence on employees’ job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Personality and Individual Differences, 91, 102–106. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.12.002

Mawritz, M. B., Mayer, D. M., Hoobler, J. M., Wayne, S. J., & Marinova, S. V. (2012). A trickle‐down model of abusive supervision. Personnel Psychology, 65(2), 325–357.

McNeish, D. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 412.

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.

Oliveira, L. B., & Najnudel, P. S. (2023). The influence of abusive supervision on employee engagement, stress and turnover intention. Revista de Gestão, 30(1), 78–91.

Ozturk, E., Derin, G., & Erdogan, B. (2025). The development and preliminary validation of the cyber dissociative experiences scale: Its associations with childhood trauma, online dissociative experiences, and social media addiction. European Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 9(3), 100545. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejtd.2025.100545

Rahman, H., Li, M., Hu, X., & Yen, N. (2025). The development and validation of labor standards perceived by employers scale. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 47(5), 765–796. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-07-2024-0376

Roberge, V., & Boudrias, J.-S. (2025). What is goal blockage, really? A conceptual validation study. European Review of Applied Psychology, 75(5), 101043. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2024.101043

Sarwar, A., Muhammad, L., & Sigala, M. (2021). Unraveling the complex nexus of punitive supervision and deviant work behaviors: findings and implications from hospitality employees in Pakistan. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 33(5), 1437–1460. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-08-2020-0808

Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190.

Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261–289.

Tuarob, S., Satravisut, M., Sangtunchai, P., Nunthavanich, S., & Noraset, T. (2023). FALCoN: Detecting and classifying abusive language in social networks using context features and unlabeled data. Information Processing & Management, 60(4), 103381. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2023.103381

Turek, D. (2022). Does organisational politics always hurt employee performance? Moderating–mediating model. Baltic Journal of Management, 17(6), 19–34. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-09-2021-0338

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, 973634.

Wang, X., & Chu, S. (2025). The generation and influence of colleague-oriented deviant behavior. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 38(2), 361–377. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-05-2023-0158

Wei, Y.-C. (2022). Are satisfied employees less inclined to quit? Moderating effects of human capital and abusive supervision. Evidence-Based HRM: A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship, 10(4), 439–456. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-07-2021-0141

Ye, X., Cai, S., & Wang, Z. (2021). The effect of abusive supervision on safety behaviour of Chinese underground miners: a multi-level moderated mediation analysis. Chinese Management Studies, 16(5), 1124–1144. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-08-2020-0342

Published
2026-05-20
How to Cite
Fahrezi, R. N., Wirawan, H., Firdaus, F. A. P., Zulkifli, Z. R. Q. M., Nurkholis, U. H., & Asma. (2026). Adaptation and Validation of the Abusive Supervision Scale: A Short Version for the Indonesian Context . International Journal of Educational Administration, Management, and Leadership, 7(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.51629/ijeamal.v6i2.295
Section
Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)