We agree with Landers and Behrend's (2015) proposition that Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) may provide great opportunities for organizational research samples. However, some groups are characteristically difficult to recruit because they are stigmatized or socially disenfranchised (Birman, 2005; Miller, Forte, Wilson, & Greene, 2006; Sullivan & Cain, 2004; see Campbell, Adams, & Patterson, 2008, for a review). These groups may include individuals who have not previously been the focus of much organizational research, such as those of low socioeconomic status; individuals with disabilities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) individuals; or victims of workplace harassment. As Landers and Behrend (2015) point out, there is an overrepresentation of research using “Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic” participants. It is important to extend research beyond these samples to examine workplace phenomena that are specific to special populations. We contribute to this argument by noting the particular usefulness that MTurk can provide for sampling from hard-to-reach populations, which we characterize as groups that are in the numerical minority in terms of nationwide representation. To clarify, we focus our discussion on populations that are traditionally hard to reach in the context of contemporary organizational research within the United States.
Purpose
This paper aims to provide researchers and practitioners with an understanding of abusive supervision in the context of hospitality. It seeks to conduct a comprehensive review of the area and offer recommendations for future research by exploring the antecedents, consequences, mechanisms and designs of research on abusive supervision.
Design/methodology/approach
Content analysis was conducted to review and analyze studies on abusive supervision in the context of hospitality. Previous studies were searched in the EBSCO, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar electronic databases.
Findings
In total, 36 referred articles related to abusive supervision in hospitality were reviewed across four key areas, namely, antecedents, consequences, mechanisms and research design. After reviewing the research on abusive supervision in the context of hospitality, this paper offers future research directions with respect to research focus and research design.
Research limitations/implications
This paper only included English articles from peer-reviewed journals on abusive supervision. The number of reviewed articles was relatively small. This limitation may have arisen because abusive supervision is a new research field and is still a sensitive topic.
Practical implications
The results of this study may encourage managers to minimize or even halt abusive supervision. From an organizational perspective, formal policies may be developed to regularize supervisors’ behavior. In turn, employees could use this paper to learn further about abusive behavior and how to handle it effectively.
Social implications
The review highlighted the negative consequences of abusive supervision. Managers should urgently realize the seriousness of abusive supervision and develop effective policies to minimize its negative effect.
Originality/value
This paper contributes to the emerging literature on abusive supervision in the context of hospitality by identifying key research trends and framing the outlines of empirical studies. It identifies research gaps, and as the first review of abusive supervision in hospitality, it may encourage researchers to explore the topic on the basis of the characteristics of the sector and offer suggestions for future research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.