This article outlines the development of a 10-item measure of workplace ostracism. Using 6 samples (including multisource and multiwave data), the authors developed a reliable scale with a unidimensional factor structure that replicated across 4 separate samples. The scale possessed both convergent and discriminant validity, and criterion-related validity was demonstrated through the scale's relation with basic needs, well-being, job attitudes, job performance, and withdrawal. Overall, the present study suggests that the Workplace Ostracism Scale is a reliable and valid measure and that the workplace ostracism construct has important implications for both individuals and organizations.

We predicted that the effects of abusive supervision are likely to be moderated by subordinate power distance orientation and that the nature of the moderating effect will depend on the outcome. Drawing upon work suggesting that high power distance orientation subordinates are more tolerant of supervisory mistreatment, we posited that high power distance orientation subordinates would be less likely to view abusive supervision as interpersonally unfair. Drawing upon social learning theory suggestions that high power distance orientation subordinates are more likely to view supervisors as role models, we posited that high power distance orientation subordinates would be more likely to pattern their own interpersonally deviant behavior after that of abusive supervisors. Across 3 samples we found support for our predicted interactions, culminating in a mediated moderation model demonstrating that social learning mediates the interaction of abusive supervision and power distance on subordinate interpersonal deviance, while ruling out alternate self-regulation impairment or displaced aggression explanations. Implications for the abusive supervision literature are discussed.

Self-esteem level has been positioned as a key mediating mechanism accounting for the effects of ostracism on behaviors, invoking the notion that individuals seek to verify their self-perceptions by behaving consistent with those self-perceptions. However, evidence supporting the relation of ostracism and self-esteem level to behavioral outcomes has been mixed. We argue that such mixed effects arise because individuals may alternately seek to verify their self-perceptions via behavioral outcomes (suggesting a relation between self-esteem level and behavioral outcomes), or selfenhance via behavioral outcomes regardless of self-esteem level (suggesting no relation between self-esteem level and behavioral outcomes); the larger question is when we self-verify and when we selfenhance. To that end, we position contingent self-esteem -or the extent to which an individual bases their self-worth on outcomes in a particular domain -as a determining factor in whether we self-verify or self-enhance and present a moderated mediation model to account for varying relations between ostracism and job performance. Our predictions regarding selfverification and self-enhancement motivation are fully supported across an experimental pilot study and two field samples using multi-wave, multisource study designs. Theoretical and practical implications for selfverification and self-enhancement motivation, as well as negative interpersonal behaviors at work, are discussed.We thank the participants of Singapore Management University's Research Seminar Series for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper, and Luke Brun-Ping and Shereen Fatimah for their assistance with data collection. ABSTRACTSelf-esteem level has been positioned as a key mediating mechanism accounting for the effects of ostracism on behaviors, invoking the notion that individuals seek to verify their selfperceptions by behaving consistent with those self-perceptions. However, evidence supporting the relation of ostracism and self-esteem level to behavioral outcomes has been mixed. We argue that such mixed effects arise because individuals may engage in behaviors alternately to verify their self-perceptions (suggesting a relation between self-esteem level and behavioral outcomes) or to self-enhance (suggesting no relation between self-esteem level and behavioral outcomes).Within this framing, the question becomes when we self-verify and when we self-enhance. To that end, we position contingent self-esteem -or the extent to which individuals base their selfworth on outcomes in a particular domain -as a determining factor in whether we self-verify or self-enhance and present a moderated mediation model to account for varying relations between ostracism and job performance. Our predictions regarding self-verification and self-enhancement motivation are fully supported across two field samples using multi-wave, multi-source study designs. Theoretical and practical implications for self-verification and self-enhancement motivation, as well as negative interpers...