How employees respond to personal offense: the effects of blame attribution, victim status, and offender status on revenge and reconciliation in the workplace.

By Karl Aquino, T. M. Tripp, R. Bies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2001

664 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2a4d6036380c613b274b3e4bbe9171bcc6e07b07

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Anger in Organizations: Review and Integration (2010, background): “Similarly, revenge has been defined as “an action in response to some perceived harm or wrongdoing by another party that is intended to inflict damage, injury, discomfort, or punishment on the party judged responsible” (Aquino et al., 2001: 53).”
Predicting workplace aggression: a meta-analysis. (2007, background): “…(e.g., Aquino, Tripp, & Bies, 2001; Douglas & Martinko, 2001; Hepworth & Towler, 2004; Homant & Kennedy, 2003), with the exception of the study by Aquino et al. (2001), these studies have tended to concentrate Table 4 Supervisor- Versus Coworker-Targeted Aggression Independent…”
Emotional and behavioral reactions to social undermining: A closer look at perceived offender motives (2009, methodology): “Participants in both studies were asked to indicate how “severe” how “hurtful” and how “wrong” the offense was on a 10 point scale anchored with (1) not at all and (10) extremely; α = .80 lab; .82 field.”
Reprisal, retribution and requital: Investigating customer retaliation (2009, background): “The final step is determining the type of action to take and who will be the target of that action (Aquino et al., 2001; Beugré, 2005).”
The Road to Reconciliation: Antecedents of Victim Willingness to Reconcile Following a Broken Promise (2004, background): “…chose forgiveness when reacting to trust violations instead of choosing blame or retribution, and other researchers have explained the correlation between blame attributions, revenge and forgiveness cognitions, and reconciliation behaviors (Aquino et al., 2001; Bradfield & Aquino, 1999).”
The relationship between trust, attachment, and antisocial work behaviors (2007, background): “Indeed, a weak sense of attachment may enable revenge responses to identity threats (Aquino et al., 2001), and the development of micro-organizational politics wherein employees prioritize their own selfish interests over the interests of other workgroup members.”
How management style moderates the relationship between abusive supervision and workplace deviance: An uncertainty management theory perspective. (2009, background): “There is ample empirical evidence to suggest that employees respond quite negatively to supervisor mistreatment by engaging in behaviors that are harmful to the organization and to its members (e.g., Ambrose et al., 2002; Aquino et al., 2001; Bies and Tripp, 1998a; Mitchell and Ambrose, 2007; Skarli”
Empowering behaviour and leader fairness and integrity: Studying perceptions of ethical leader behaviour from a levels-of-analysis perspective (2009, background): “As Gillespie and Dietz (in press) note, the loss of trust and resulting distrust may manifest in reduced cooperation and performance, withdrawal, and even acts of retaliation (eg, Aquino, Tripp, & Bies, 2001 ; Dirks & Ferrin, 2002 ).”
Moral identity and the expanding circle of moral regard toward out-groups. (2003, background): “Forgiveness has been defined as a deliberate decision by the victim of a harmful action to relinquish anger, resentment, and the desire to punish the party held responsible for inflicting harm (Aquino et al., 2001; Enright & The Human Development Study Group, 1991; North, 1987).”
The relationship between workplace aggression and target deviant behaviour: The moderating roles of power and task interdependence (2012, background): “However, consistent with other scholars (e.g., Aquino et al., 2001; Kim et al., 1998), we propose victims may be less likely to retaliate when the perpetrator has high formal power and interdependence is high.”