SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty / 2026 / Volume: 13 Issue: 1

The Effect of Abusive Supervision on Knowledge-Hiding: The Mediating Role of Machiavellianism and the Moderating Role of Moral Identity among Healthcare Workers

Mehmet Kılınç(BAYBURT ÜNİVERSİTESİ, SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ FAKÜLTESİ, SAĞLIK YÖNETİMİ BÖLÜMÜ)0000-0001-6835-9325
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-03-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Health institutions should implement a reward system for employees who demonstrate helpfulness and teamwork to decrease Machiavellian behaviors.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to reveal the mediating role of Machiavellianism in the effect of abusive supervision on knowledge-hiding behavior and the moderating role of moral identity in the relationship between Machiavellianism and knowledge-hiding behavior.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Quantitative data were obtained from 408 healthcare professionals using the survey method.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Health institutions should implement a reward system for employees who demonstrate helpfulness and teamwork to decrease Machiavellian behaviors.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Abusive Supervision · Healthcare Organizations · Knowledge-Hiding Behavior

Abstract

This study aims to reveal the mediating role of Machiavellianism in the effect of abusive supervision on knowledge-hiding behavior and the moderating role of moral identity in the relationship between Machiavellianism and knowledge-hiding behavior. The study adopts the Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory as its theoretical framework. Quantitative data were obtained from 408 healthcare professionals using the survey method. The analyses conducted via SPSS, AMOS, and Process Macro revealed that abusive supervision significantly increases knowledge-hiding behavior (β = .855) and Machiavellianism (β = .820). Furthermore, Machiavellianism acts as a mediator in the relationship between abusive supervision and knowledge-hiding. A notable finding is that moral identity acts as a moderator (β = .134), strengthening the positive effect of Machiavellianism on knowledge-hiding behavior. Considering the analysis results, some suggestions specific to healthcare institutions, healthcare workers, and future studies were presented. Theoretically, this study contributes to the Dark Triad literature by demonstrating how abusive environments trigger resource conservation through knowledge-hiding. Practically, suggestions for preventing toxic leadership and improving ethical climates in healthcare institutions are presented. Health institutions should implement a reward system for employees who demonstrate helpfulness and teamwork to decrease Machiavellian behaviors.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kılınç, M. (2026). The Effect of Abusive Supervision on Knowledge-Hiding: The Mediating Role of Machiavellianism and the Moderating Role of Moral Identity among Healthcare Workers. Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty, Volume: 13 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.1759509

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (102)

  1. Aquino, K., & Reed, A., II. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423–1440. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.6.1423
  2. Arshad, R., & Ismail, I. R. (2018). Workplace incivility and knowledge hiding behavior: Does personality matter? Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 5(3), 278–288. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-06-2018-0041
  3. Arshad, A., Sun, P. Y. T., & Desmarais, F. (2025). Impact of abusive supervision on employee engagement and job burnout via organisational identification: The moderating role of mindfulness. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 32(4), 383–399. https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518251340805
  4. Baş, M. (2023). Sağlık çalışanlarının etik liderlik algısının bilgi paylaşımı üzerindeki etkisinde örgütsel iletişimin aracılık rolü. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, 26(1), 29–48.
  5. Bereczkei, T. (2018). Machiavellianism: The psychology of manipulation. Taylor & Francis.
  6. Bereczkei, T., Birkas, B., & Kerekes, Z. (2010). The presence of others, prosocial traits, and Machiavellianism. Social Psychology, 41(4), 238–245. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000032
  7. Blasi, A. (1994). Moral identity: Its role in moral functioning. In B. Puka (Ed.), Moral development: Fundamental research in moral development (pp. 129–139). Garland Publishing.
  8. Block, M., Khvatova, T., Zhukov, D., & Lesko, S. (2015, November). Studying the structural topology of the knowledge-sharing network. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance (pp. 20–27).
  9. Bress, J., Mackey, J., Martinko, M., & Harvey, P. (2014). The mediating role of perceptions of abusive supervision in the relationship between personality and aggression. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(4), 403–413. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051813505859
  10. Byrne, B. M., & Campbell, T. L. (1999). Cross-cultural comparisons and the presumption of equivalent measurement and theoretical structure: A look beneath the surface. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, (30), 557–576. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022199030005001
  11. Černe, M., Nerstad, C. G., Dysvik, A., & Škerlavaj, M. (2014). What goes around comes around: Knowledge hiding, perceived motivational climate, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 57(1), 172–192. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.0122
  12. Chen, M., Chen, C. C., & Sheldon, O. J. (2016). Relaxing moral reasoning to win: How organizational identification relates to unethical pro-organizational behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(8), 1082– 1096.
  13. Chen, Y. J., & Tang, T. L. P. (2006). Attitude toward and propensity to engage in unethical behavior: Measurement invariance across major among university students. Journal of Business Ethics, (69), 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551–006–9069–6
  14. Choi, W., Kim, S. L., & Yun, S. (2019). A social exchange perspective of abusive supervision and knowledge sharing: Investigating the moderating effects of psychological contract fulfillment and self-enhancement motive. Journal of Business and Psychology, 34, 305–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9542-0
  15. Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Machiavellianism. Academic Press.
  16. Connelly, C. E., Zweig, D., Webster, J., & Trougakos, J. P. (2012). Knowledge hiding in organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(1), 64–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.737
  17. Coşkun, A. (2017). Ahlaki kimlik ve makyavelizmin örgüt yararına ahlaki olmayan davranış üzerinde etkisi: Ahlaki iklimin düzenleyici rolü. [Unpublished master's thesis]. İstanbul Ticaret University.
  18. Çoban, R., & Çiçek, B. (2023). İstismarcı yönetimin negatif işyeri dedikodusuna etkisinde duygusal öz yeterliliğin rolü. Hacettepe Sağlık İdaresi Dergisi, 26(2), 439–460.
  19. Deniz, S., & Çimen, M. (2019). İstismarcı yönetim davranışının işten ayrılma niyetine etkisi: Hastane çalışanlarına yönelik bir araştırma. Uluslararası Sağlık Yönetimi ve Stratejileri Araştırma Dergisi, 5(2), 155–164.
  20. DeShong, H. L., Grant, D. M., & Mullins-Sweatt, S. N. (2015). Comparing models of counterproductive workplace behaviors: The Five-Factor Model and the Dark Triad. Personality and Individual Differences, (74), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.10.001
  21. Emirze, N. (2023). Örgütsel özdeşleşme, ahlaki kimlik ve örgüt yararına etik dışı davranış arasındaki ilişkiler [Unpublished master's thesis]. Atatürk University.
  22. Eser, H. (2024). Karanlık kişilik özelliklerinin çalışan bilgi saklama davranışına etkisinde sosyal değişim türü tercihi ve sosyal kimlik odağının düzenleyici rolü [Unpublished master's thesis]. Başkent University.
  23. Fan, L., Zhou, Y., Lin, S., & Sun, B. (2025). Stay hungry for morality: The inhibitory effect of high moral identity and moral elevation on moral licensing. The Journal of Social Psychology, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2024.2439953
  24. Filiz, M. (2022). Türkiye’de sağlık çalışanlarının karanlık üçlü kişilik özelliklerinin demografik değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Eurasian Journal of Health Technology Assessment, 6(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.52148/ehta.1079174
  25. Ford, D. P., & Staples, S. (2010). Are full and partial knowledge sharing the same? Journal of Knowledge Management, 14(3), 394–409.
  26. Freeman, D., Aquino, K., & McFerran, B. (2009). Overcoming beneficiary race as an impediment to charitable donations: Social dominance orientation, the experience of moral elevation, and donation behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208325415
  27. Fuller, C. M., Simmering, M. J., Atinc, G., Atinc, Y., & Babin, B. J. (2016). Common methods variance detection in business research. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3192–3198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.008
  28. Gallegos, I., Olmos, J. G., & Berger, R. (2022). Abusive supervision: A systematic review and new research approaches. Frontiers in Communication, 6, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.640908
  29. Greenbaum, R. L., Hill, A., Mawritz, M. B., & Quade, M. J. (2017). Employee Machiavellianism to unethical behavior: The role of abusive supervision as a trait activator. Journal of Management, 43(2), 585–609. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314535434
  30. Gunnthorsdottir, A., McCabe, K., & Smith, V. (2002). Using the Machiavellianism instrument to predict trustworthiness in a bargaining game. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(1), 49–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(01)00067-8
  31. Güldü, Ö., & Aksu, E. N. (2016). Yıkıcı liderlik algısı ve mesleki tükenmişlik arasındaki ilişkide duygu durumun aracı rolü. Çalışma İlişkileri Dergisi, 7, 91–113.
  32. Gürbüz, S. (2019). AMOS ile yapısal eşitlik modellemesi. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  33. Haggard, D. L., & Park, H. M. (2018). Perceived supervisor remorse, abusive supervision, and LMX. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(10), 1252–1267. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2285
  34. Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Prentice Hall International Inc.
  35. Harris, K. J., Harvey, P., & Kacmar, K. M. (2011). Abusive supervisory reactions to coworker relationship conflict. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 1010–1023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.020
  36. Hart, D., & Matsuba, M. K. (2009). Urban neighborhoods as contexts for moral identity development. In D. Narvaez & D. K. Lapsley (Eds.), Personality, identity, and character: Explorations in moral psychology (pp. 214– 231). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627125.010
  37. Ipe, M. (2003). Knowledge sharing in organizations: A conceptual framework. Human Resource Development Review, 2(4), 337–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484303257985
  38. Jiang, Z., Hu, X., Wang, Z., & Jiang, X. (2019). Knowledge hiding as a barrier to thriving: The mediating role of psychological safety and moderating role of organizational cynicism. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40(7), 800–818. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2358
  39. Jonason, P. K., Slomski, S., & Partyka, J. (2012). The Dark Triad at work: How toxic employees get their way. Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 449–453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.11.008
  40. Jonason, P. K., & Webster, G. D. (2010). The dirty dozen: A concise measure of the dark triad. Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019265
  41. Jones, D. N., & Mueller, S. M. (2022). Is Machiavellianism dead or dormant? The perils of researching a secretive construct. Journal of Business Ethics, (176), 535–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04708-w
  42. Jones, D. N., & Paulhus, D. L. (2009). Machiavellianism. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Individual differences in social behavior (93–108). Guilford.
  43. Kaltiainen J., Virtanen A., & Hakanen J. J. (2024). Social courage promotes organisational identification via crafting social resources at work: A repeated-measures study. Human Relations, 77(1), 53–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267221125374
  44. Ke, Y., & Li, F. (2025). Moral disengagement, moral identity, and counterproductive work behavior among emergency nurses. Nursing Ethics, 32(1), 111-124. https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330241238336
  45. Kelloway, E. K., & Barling, J. (2010). Leadership development as an intervention in occupational health psychology. Work & Stress, 24(3), 260–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2010.518441
  46. Khan, A. K., Quratulain, S., & Crawshaw, J. R. (2013). The mediating role of discrete emotions in the relationship between injustice and counterproductive work behaviors: A study in Pakistan. Journal of Business Psychology, 28(1), 49–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-012-9269-2
  47. Kim, T. T., Karatepe, O. M., & Lee, G. (2018). Psychological contract breach and service innovation behavior: Psychological capital as a mediator. Service Business, 12(2), 305–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-017- 0347-4
  48. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press.
  49. Koçer, L. L., & Gülsoy, M. (2020). Makyavelist kişilik özelliklerinin tüketicilerin etik dışı davranışlarına etkisi. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, (1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.844560
  50. Kürü, S. A., & Begenirbaş, M. (2023). Örgütlerde bilgi saklama davranışı ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlama çalışması. İş ve İnsan Dergisi, 10(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.18394/iid.1114626
  51. Lapsley, D. K., & Narvaez, D. (2004). A social-cognitive approach to the moral personality. In D. K. Lapsley & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral development, self and identity (pp. 189–212). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  52. Li, H., Huang, S., & Feng, Z. (2025). The complexity of Machiavellian leaders: How and when leader Machiavellianism impacts abusive supervision. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 42(3), 1743–1773. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-024-09967-z
  53. Liu, C., Zhu, L., Yuan, Y., Chen, X., & Liu, J. (2025). A bibliometric review of abusive supervision. Human Resource Management Review, 35(3), 101091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2025.101091
  54. Machiavelli, N. (2018). Prens (K. Atakay, Trans.). Can Yayınları.
  55. Mackey, J. D., Bress, J. R., Mcallister, C. P., Zorn, M. L., Martinko, M. J., & Harvey, P. (2018). Victim or culprit? The effects of entitlement and felt accountability on perceptions of abusive supervision and perpetration of workplace bullying. Journal of Business Ethics, 153, 659–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3348-7
  56. Macrosson, W. D. K., & Hemphill, D. J. (2001). Machiavellianism in Belbin team roles. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 16(5), 355–364. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005524
  57. Martinko, M. J., Sikora, D., & Harvey, P. (2012). The relationship between attribution styles, LMX, and perceptions of abusive supervision. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 19(4), 397–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051811435791
  58. Matherne, C. F., & Litchfield, S. R. (2012). Investigating the relationship between affective commitment and unethical pro-organizational behaviors: The role of moral identity. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 9(5), 35-46.
  59. McLeod, B. A., & Genereux, R. L. (2008). Predicting the acceptability and likelihood of lying: The interaction of personality with type of lie. Personality and Individual Differences, 45(7), 591–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.06.015
  60. Meglich, P. A., & Eesley, D. T. (2011). A bully in its own China shop: Risk factors for abusive supervision in small firms. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(19), 11-22.
  61. Miao, Q., & Zhou, J. (2020). Corporate hypocrisy and counterproductive work behavior: A moderated mediation model of organizational identification and perceived importance of CSR. Sustainability, 12(5), 1847. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051847
  62. Ministry of Health. (2023). Sağlık istatistikleri yıllığı 2022 haber bülteni. Sağlık Bilgi Sistemleri Genel Müdürlüğü.
  63. Nowlin, E., & McClure, T. (2015). Saying the right thing at the right time: The moderating role of career stage on the sales manager feedback–sales performance link. In Ideas in marketing: Finding the new and polishing the old: Proceedings of the 2013 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference (p. 14). Springer International Publishing.
  64. O’Boyle, E. H., Jr., Forsyth, D. R., Banks, G. C., & McDaniel, M. A. (2012). A meta-analysis of the Dark Triad and work behavior: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 557–579. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025679
  65. Özdevecioğlu, M., Akın, M., Karaca, M., & İştahlı, B. (2014). Kötü niyetli yönetim algılamasının çalışanların performansları üzerindeki etkisinde duygusal zekânın rolü. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(1), 1–18.
  66. Özler, E. D., Atalay, C. G., & Dirican, M. (2013). Örgütlerin karanlık yüzü makyavelizm ile ilgili literatür araştırması ve çalışanların makyavelist eğilimlerini belirlemeye yönelik bir araştırma. In 21. Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı (pp. 679–685).
  67. Özsoy, E., Rauthmann, J. F., Jonason, P. K., & Ardıç, K. (2017). Reliability and validity of the Turkish versions of Dark Triad Dirty Dozen (DTDD-T), Short Dark Triad (SD3-T), and Single Item Narcissism Scale (SINS-T). Personality and Individual Differences, 117, 11–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.05.019
  68. Özsoy, S. M. (2024). Makyavelizm ve örgütsel anominin üretkenlik karşıtı iş davranışları üzerindeki etkisinde örgütsel etik iklimin düzenleyici rolü. [Unpublished master's thesis]. İstanbul University, Institute of Social Sciences, İstanbul.
  69. Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual (3rd ed.). Open University Press.
  70. Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6
  71. Pereira, V., & Mohiya, M. (2021). Share or hide? Investigating positive and negative employee intentions and organizational support in the context of knowledge sharing and hiding. Journal of Business Research, 129, 368–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.03.011
  72. Ploeger, A. N., & Bisel, S. R. (2013). The role of identification in giving sense to unethical organizational behavior: Defending the organization. Management Communication Quarterly, 27(2), 155–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318912469770
  73. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
  74. Reed, A. II, & Aquino, K. F. (2003). Moral identity and the expanding circle of moral regard toward out-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(6), 1270–1286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1270
  75. Rehman, U., & Shahnawaz, M. G. (2018). Machiavellianism, job autonomy, and counterproductive work behavior among Indian managers. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 34(2), 83–88.
  76. Robbins, S., & Judge, T. (2019). Organizational behavior, global edition. Pearson Education.
  77. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research, 8, 23– 74.
  78. Schyns, B., Wisse, B., & Sanders, S. (2019). Shady strategic behavior: Recognizing strategic followership of Dark Triad followers. Academy of Management Perspectives, 33(2), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2017.0005
  79. Shao, A. T. (2002). Marketing research: An aid to decision making. South-Western/Thomson Learning.
  80. Shao, R., Aquino, K., & Freeman, D. (2008). Beyond moral reasoning: A review of moral identity research and its implications for business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(4), 513–540. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq200818436
  81. Shen, Y., Lythreatis, S., Singh, S. K., & Cooke, F. L. (2025). A meta-analysis of knowledge hiding behavior in organizations: Antecedents, consequences, and boundary conditions. Journal of Business Research, 186, 114963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114963
  82. Shoss, M. K., Eisenberger, R., Restubog, S. L. D., & Zagenczyk, T. J. (2013). Blaming the organization for abusive supervision: The roles of perceived organizational support and supervisor's organizational embodiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(1), 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030687
  83. Shu, X. (2015). Contagion effect of unethical pro-organizational behavior among members within organization. Metallurgical and Mining Industry, 5, 235–242.
  84. Spain, S. M., Harms, P., & LeBreton, J. M. (2014). The dark side of personality at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(1), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1894
  85. Stevens, J. P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  86. Sümer, H. C., Göncü-Köse, A., Toker-Gültaş, Y., Acar, F. P., Karanfil, D., & Ok, A. B. (2024). Incivility, mobbing, and abusive supervision: A tripartite scale development study. The Journal of Psychology, 158(6), 428–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2024.2321881
  87. Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.5465/1556375
  88. Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812
  89. Ülbeği, İ. D., & Özgen, H. (2013). İstismarcı yönetim ölçeğinin Türkçe uyarlaması: Güvenirlik ve geçerlik analizi. In Ulusal Yönetim ve Organizasyon Kongresi (p. 88). Dumlupınar University.
  90. Ünver, E. (2021). Makyavelist eğilimler ve örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı ilişkisi üzerinde örgüt kültürünün ılımlaştırıcı etkisi, bir telekomünikasyon şirketinde uygulama. [Unpublished master's thesis]. Kütahya Dumlupınar University, Institute of Social Sciences, Kütahya.
  91. Vogel, R. M., Mitchell, M. S., Tepper, B. J., Restubog, S. L. D., Hu, C., Hua, W., & Huang, J. C. (2015). A cross-cultural examination of subordinates’ perceptions of reactions to abusive supervision. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, 720–745. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1984
  92. Walker, L. J., & Taylor, J. H. (1991). Family interactions and the development of moral reasoning. Child Development, 62(2), 264–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1991.tb01530.x
  93. Wang, W., Mao, J., Wu, W., & Liu, J. (2012). Abusive supervision and workplace deviance: The mediating role of interactional justice and the moderating role of power distance. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 50(1), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7941.2011.00004.x
  94. Webster, J., Brown, G., Zweig, D., Connelly, C. E., Brodt, S., & Sitkin, S. (2008). Beyond knowledge sharing: Withholding knowledge at work. In J. J. Martocchio (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 27, pp. 1–37). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  95. Wu, W. L., & Lee, Y. C. (2016). Do employees share knowledge when encountering abusive supervision? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 31(1), 154–168. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-12-2013-0410
  96. Xu, T., & Zhike, L. (2018). HPWS and unethical pro-organizational behavior: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 33(3), 265–278. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-12-2017-0457
  97. Yaşlıoğlu, D. T., & Atılgan, Ö. (2018). Karanlık Üçlü Ölçeği: Türkçe’ye uyarlama, güvenilirlik ve geçerlilik çalışması. Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty, 5(3), 725– 739. https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.435604
  98. Yazıcıoğlu, Y., & Erdoğan, S. (2004). SPSS uygulamalı bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Detay Yayıncılık.
  99. Yılmaz, A. G. F., & Yılmaz, A. G. F. (2015). Ahlaki kimlik ölçeği Türkçe formunun geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(4), 111–134. https://doi.org/10.18026/cbusos.35372
  100. Zhang, J. H., Li, Y. M., & Liu, Q. (2017). Research on influence of abusive supervision and psychological capital on team members' tacit knowledge sharing. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual 2017 International Conference on Management Science and Engineering (MSE 2017) (pp. 148–152). Atlantis Press.
  101. Zhang, Y., & Bednall, T. C. (2016). Antecedents of abusive supervision: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2657-6
  102. Zhao, H., Xia, Q., He, P., Sheard, G., & Wan, P. (2016). Workplace ostracism and knowledge hiding in service organizations. International Journal of Hospitality Management, (59), 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.09.009