See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/319283062

A Time Lagged Study of Burnout as a Mediator in the Relationship Between

Workplace Bullying and Work-Family Conflict

Article in International Journal of Stress Management · August 2017

DOI: 10.1037/str0000080

CITATIONS READS

4 137

3 authors:

Usman Raja Yasir Javed

Brock University Riphah International University
58 PUBLICATIONS 869 CITATIONS 1 PUBLICATION 4 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Muhammad Abbas
National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences, Islamabad,…
25 PUBLICATIONS 192 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Paper under review View project

Occupational Health & Safety View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Muhammad Abbas on 10 July 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Stress
Management
A Time Lagged Study of Burnout as a Mediator in the
Relationship Between Workplace Bullying and Work–
Family Conflict
Usman Raja, Yasir Javed, and Muhammad Abbas
Online First Publication, August 24, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/str0000080

CITATION
Raja, U., Javed, Y., & Abbas, M. (2017, August 24). A Time Lagged Study of Burnout as a Mediator
in the Relationship Between Workplace Bullying and Work–Family Conflict. International Journal of
Stress Management. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/str0000080
 International Journal of Stress Management © 2017 American Psychological Association
2017, Vol. 25, No. 1, 000 1072-5245/17/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/str0000080

A Time Lagged Study of Burnout as a Mediator in the Relationship

Between Workplace Bullying and Work–Family Conflict

Usman Raja Yasir Javed

Brock University Riphah International University

Muhammad Abbas
National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Using 3-wave time lagged field data (N ⫽ 151) from full-time employees, we examined
how workplace bullying manifests as work–family conflict (WFC) through job burnout.
Coping with the demands of work and family requires energy-related resources that
allow one to plan and execute strategies in a manner that encourages a balance between
the two. Therefore, drawing on conservation of resources theory, we hypothesize that
workplace bullying can lead to job burnout, which in turn can drain the energy
resources of individuals and cause greater work–family conflict. The findings provide
good support for our hypotheses. WB was positively related to burnout and WFC,
burnout was positively related to WFC, and burnout mediated the bullying–WFC
relationship.

Keywords: workplace bullying, job burnout, work–family conflict, Pakistan

Workplace bullying (WB) has been identified Bjorkqvist, 2004) and deteriorated relations
as a major stressor that has deleterious effects (Rhodes, Pullen, Vickers, Clegg, & Pitsis,
on employee outcomes beyond the effect of 2010).
other acute stressors (Hauge, Skogstad, & Ein- WB refers to
arsen, 2010). WB is widely discussed because
repeated actions and practices that are directed to one
of its harmful effects on the overall wellbeing of or more workers, which are unwanted by the victim,
the victims (both on their psychological and which may be done deliberately or unconsciously,
physical health) and its negative financial im- but clearly cause humiliation, offense, and distress,
plications for organizations (Nielsen & Ein- and may interfere with job performance and / or
arsen, 2012; Samnani, Singh, & Ezzedeen, cause unpleasant working environment. (Einarsen,
1999, p. 17)
2013). It produces a combination of aggressive,
hostile, and antisocial interpersonal behaviors A few examples of bullying behaviors in-
that can lead to physical and emotional exhaus- clude social isolation, setting impossible dead-
tion (Hershcovis & Barling, 2010; Varhama & lines, spreading malicious rumors and gossip,
persistent or constant criticism, blocking appli-
cations for leave, undeserved punishments, and
removing from area of responsibility without
Usman Raja, Faculty of Business, Brock University; Ya-
sufficient cause. WB can be considered a
sir Javed, Faculty of Management Sciences, Riphah Inter- chronic (due to high frequency) as well as an
national University; Muhammad Abbas, FAST School of acute (due to high intensity) workplace stressor
Management, National University of Computer and Emerg- (Hershcovis, 2011).
ing Sciences.
We are grateful to the associate editor Cong Liu for
Past research has demonstrated that percep-
constructive feedback on earlier versions that greatly con- tions of WB result in deteriorated mental and
tributed to improving this article. physical health, enhanced job burnout, in-
Correspondence concerning this article should be ad- creased intentions to leave, and reduced job
dressed to Muhammad Abbas, FAST School of Manage-
ment, National University of Computer and Emerging Sci-
satisfaction and organizational commitment of
ences, A.K. Brohi Road, H 11/4, Islamabad, Pakistan. the victims (Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012). How-
E-mail: [email protected] ever, as far as we know, there is no or little
1
 2 RAJA, JAVED, AND ABBAS

attention paid to how WB as an interpersonal The current study addresses this gap and pro-
stressor contributes to work–family conflict vides a more comprehensive understanding of
(WFC). This investigation is important for sev- the effects of WB beyond work outcomes and
eral reasons. First, bullying is considered to be the underlying mechanism (i.e., job burnout)
a more crippling and devastating problem for through which bullying may relate to WFC.
victims than all other work-related stressors put Specifically, we draw upon conservation of re-
together (Hauge et al., 2010; Zapf et al., 1996). source (COR) theory (Hobfoll, 1989) and use a
It can be initiated by any organizational member time-lagged design to demonstrate that bullying
(e.g., supervisor, peer, or subordinate). Further, behaviors are not only bad for work-related
bullying is reported to be salient and prevalent outcomes, but also have negative spillover ef-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

in many organizations across the globe (Ein- fects on family domains. Job burnout is defined
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

arsen, 1999; Harvey, Treadway, & Heames, as a syndrome of emotional exhaustion, deper-
2006; Zapf, Einarsen, Hoel, & Vartia, 2003). In sonalization, and feelings of reduced personal
addition, the financial costs related to workplace accomplishment (Maslach, 1982). Though past
mistreatment and stress, in the form of lost research names three dimensions of burnout
productivity, absenteeism, and medical ex- referring to exhaustion, cynicism, and reduced
penses (Cartwright & Cooper, 1997; McTernan, efficacy (Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter, 1996),
Dollard, & LaMontagne, 2013; Robertson, Coo- emotional exhaustion is commonly identified as
per, Williams, & Williams, 1990) are estimated the core component of burnout (e.g., Demerouti
to be billions of dollars per year in the United & Nachreiner, 1998; Johnson & Spector, 2007).
States alone (Conti & Burton, 1994; Gardner & In the current study, we refer to burnout as
Johnson, 2001; Greenberg et al., 2003; Vardi, & emotional and physical exhaustion that stems
Weitz, 2004). from prolonged exposure to job stressors. We
Second, studies suggest that if anything argue that WB drains employees’ energy re-
negative happens in the work (family) do- sources and triggers burnout in the workplace.
main, it will have a negative spillover effect As a result, the increased job burnout is associ-
on the family (work) domain, thereby leaving ated with high WFC. Although past research
individuals drained and unable to perform suggests that burnout may occur due to family
their family/work roles (Barling, 1996; Ed- related stressors, or that WFC may cause burn-
wards & Rothbard, 2000). Workplace bully- out (see, Nohe, Meier, Sonntag, & Michel,
ing not only harms desirable job outcomes but 2015), we focus on understanding how burnout
also elicits chronic disease, headaches, higher stemming from the workplace stressors may
body mass, and sickness among victims (Ki- contribute to WFC.
vimäki, Elovainio, & Vahtera, 2000), which In addition, we test our model in an Eastern
may have negative spillover effects on family setting (i.e., Pakistan) to examine the general-
domains. Unfortunately, the majority of the izability of the theories predominantly tested
past studies examined the harmful effects of and validated in Western settings. Contrary to
WB on traditional job-related outcomes and most Western cultures, where the majority of
largely ignored its possible negative spillover the stress-related studies have been conducted,
effects on family domains. Therefore, it is Pakistan ranks high on both collectivism and
important to investigate whether or not WB power distance (Hofstede, 1983). In such soci-
goes beyond work domains and translates into eties, people have learned to give more impor-
family domains, given bullying’s significant tance, priority, and higher values to family roles
differences from other forms of workplace and responsibilities (Hofstede, 1980). As a re-
mistreatment (Hershcovis, 2011), its harmful sult, when negative work stressors inhibit mem-
effects beyond other work-related stressors bers of these societies from performing their
(Hauge et al., 2010), its financial associated highly valued family roles, interrole conflict
costs (Gardner & Johnson, 2001; McTernan et may arise in the form of WFC (Grandey &
al., 2013), and a lack of a comprehensive Cropanzano, 1999; Greenhaus & Beutell,
view of bullying’s effects beyond job out- 1985). In this context, job burnout experienced
comes. due to WB may translate into WFC.
 BULLYING, BURNOUT, AND WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT 3

Theory and Hypotheses bal and/or physical attacks by the perpetrator

(Mawritz, Folger, & Latham, 2014; Tepper,
WB and Other Forms of Workplace 2007). Therefore, we believe WB is more rele-
Mistreatment vant and likely to have a strong spillover effect
on family domains.
Previous research has delineated the major
differences between bullying and other forms of COR Theory
workplace mistreatment such as abusive super-
vision, workplace incivility, and social under- COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989) suggests that
mining. The three major characteristics of bul- individuals possess key resources that help
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

lying that distinguish it from other workplace them cope with stressful demands or events.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

mistreatment constructs are (a) the source of The basic principle of this theory is that indi-
mistreatment, (b) the persistency and frequency viduals strive to obtain, retain, protect, and fos-
of mistreatment, and (c) the superiority (power) ter things that they value (Hobfoll, 2001). COR
of the actors. The first distinguishing feature of theory further posits that resource loss is more
bullying is that it can be perpetrated by any salient than resource gain; any resource loss in
organizational member including supervisors, one domain will result in a resource loss in
peers, and even subordinates (Einarsen, 1999; another domain. Moreover, the scarcity hypoth-
Hershcovis, 2011; Vega & Comer, 2005), esis suggests that individuals have a limited set
whereas abusive supervision is perpetrated by of resources in the form of time and energy
supervisors only. In case of both abusive super- (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2001; Marks, 1977). When
vision and WB, victims are teased and insulted individuals are faced with hostile situations
over a sustained period of time (Ng, Chen, & such as bullying, they invest their energy and
Aryee, 2012); however, bullying includes hos- attention to coping with these demands, and
tile actions by all organizational members in- therefore experience a loss of energy resources.
cluding supervisors (Tepper, 2007), thus mak- Because resource losses are more salient than
ing it salient and harmful. resource gains, any loss in energy resources
Another distinguishing feature of bullying is (loss of mental and physical energies) may
the persistency and frequency of the mistreat- cause further resource loss. Therefore, individ-
ment. Workplace mistreatments that occur fre- uals whose key energy resources have been
quently and persistently are considered part of depleted (burnt out) at work, particularly due to
WB (Hershcovis, 2011). Hershcovis (2011) fur- bullying, may not be able to handle family
ther suggests that frequent mistreatments may related demands, which will trigger WFC.
have stronger negative effects on victims than
mistreatments that occur infrequently. In con- Workplace Bullying and Work–Family
trast, workplace incivility and social undermin- Conflict
ing have low or minor intensity (Hodgins, Mac-
Curtain, & Mannix-McNamara, 2014). The Kanter (1977) argued that work and family
third feature of bullying is that it “generally are not separate spheres, but rather interdepen-
occurs when there is a power imbalance be- dent fields with “permeable” boundaries. In-
tween the perpetrator and the target” (Hershco- creased globalization and competition have fur-
vis, 2011. p, 503). Although supervisors usually ther blurred the boundaries of work and family
have greater power over subordinates, peers or domains, which has led individuals into inter-
subordinates can also collectively gain power role conflicts. WFC can be defined as
against a supervisor and then try to bully him/ a form of inter-role conflict in which the role pressures
her. Perpetrators higher in power harm victims from the work and family domains are mutually in-
in different ways and perhaps more severely compatible in some respect. That is, participation in the
than those lower in power (Hershcovis & work (family) role is made more difficult by virtue of
Barling, 2010). In contrast, power imbalance is participation in the family (work) role. (Greenhaus &
Beutell, 1985, p. 77)
not necessary for workplace incivility or social
undermining to occur. WB also differs from Preliminary evidence suggests that WFC and
workplace incivility, social undermining, and various forms of workplace mistreatment are
abusive supervision in that it includes both ver- positively linked. In a recent study, Demsky,
 4 RAJA, JAVED, AND ABBAS

Ellis, and Fritz, (2014) found that workplace Both COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989) and the job
aggression had a positive effect on WFC. In the demands-resources model (Bakker & Demer-
same way, Carlson, Ferguson, Hunter, and outi, 2007) suggest that energy-related re-
Whitten (2012) found that abusive supervision sources (i.e., mental and physical energies) are
was positively related to WFC. critical in enabling individuals to manage work-
WB is a combination of many aggressive, place stressors. When faced with WB, individ-
hostile, and antisocial interpersonal behaviors uals invest their energy to cope with it. Because
that are loaded with devastating techniques that these energy resources are limited in nature (Hob-
can distort victims’ self-image, consequently foll, 2001), whereas bullying is uncontrollable and
leaving them so drained (both emotionally and persistent over time (Hershcovis, 2011; Zapf et al.,
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

physically) that they become unable to perform 1996), individuals who face bullying become ex-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

their domestic responsibilities (Einarsen & hausted while coping with it.
Raknes, 1997; LaVan & Martin, 2008). Another Previous literature also identifies WB as a
perspective that helps us to explain the effects potent social stressor (Zapf & Einarsen, 2005)
of WB on WFC is Spector and Goh’s (2001) that has harmful effects on job outcomes be-
emotion-centered model of the occupational yond the effect of other acute stressors (Hauge
stress process. Spector and Goh (2001) suggest et al., 2010). The negative consequences of WB
that acute stressors (e.g., physical assault, bul- include increased job stress (Jenkins, Winefield,
lying) elicit strong negative emotions among & Sarris, 2011), mental disorder (Finne, Knar-
the victims. Such negative emotions produce dahl, & Lau, 2011), depression, emotional ex-
physical and psychological problems (Gallo & haustion, and burnout (Hershcovis & Barling,
Matthews, 2003; Spector & Goh, 2001) and sev- 2010; Varhama & Bjorkqvist, 2004), aggression
eral chronic diseases (Begley, 1994), thereby (Vega & Comer, 2005), and workplace deviant
making the victims unable to perform both work behaviors (Litzky, Eddleston, & Kidder, 2006).
and family roles. Taken together, employees who A recent meta-analytic study finds that WB
are exposed to high levels of WB may find fewer produces burnout and mental health problems
or no resources to perform their work and family over time (Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012). Conse-
roles. As a result, these individuals may experi- quently, we hypothesize the following:
ence high WFC. Therefore, we suggest the fol- Hypothesis 2: WB will be positively re-
lowing: lated to burnout.
Hypothesis 1: WB will be positively re- Burnout and Work–Family Conflict
lated to work–family conflict.
Past research used burnout both as a predictor
Workplace Bullying and Burnout and as an outcome of WFC (Westman, Etzion,
& Gattenio, 2008). Traditionally, burnout is a
Burnout is defined as a state of physical and well-established outcome of WFC, as proposed
emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and by many researchers (Peeters, Montgomery,
reduced efficacy (Demerouti, Bakker, Varda- Bakker, & Schaufeli, 2005; Westman, Etzion,
kou, & Kantas, 2003; Maslach, Schaufeli, & & Gortler, 2004). Several researchers have used
Leiter, 2001). Though burnout has been concep- longitudinal designs to examine the chronolog-
tualized as having three dimensions, many stud- ical ordering between WFC and the strains and
ies have taken a single-dimension view of burn- have found mixed evidence (e.g., Demerouti,
out referring to emotional and physical Bakker, & Bulters, 2004; Frone, Russell, &
exhaustion (Demerouti & Nachreiner, 1998). Cooper, 1997; Matthews, Wayne, & Ford,
As mentioned earlier, we take this single dimen- 2014).
sion view of job burnout that stems from job In contrast, other studies have found burnout
stressors. We believe that this view of job burn- to be a significant predictor of WFC (Demerouti
out is most relevant and important in context of et al., 2004). Zapf, Dormann, and Frese (1996)
COR (also see, Carlson et al., 2012). reviewed 16 longitudinal studies on job stress
We argue that the victims of WB face a and strain, of which six studies found strains to
situation that depletes their energy resources be predictors of work– home interference. Re-
very quickly, which further leads to job burnout. searchers argue that strains are likely to affect
 BULLYING, BURNOUT, AND WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT 5

the perception and experience of WFC. Kello- Mediating Role of Burnout in the
way, Gottlieb, and Barham (1999) suggested WB–WFC Relationship
that individuals with high work strain will un-
dergo selective recall and attention, such that The current investigation proposes burnout as
availability of negative thoughts and informa- a mechanism that explains the effect of WB on
tion is increased. Thus, work-related strains are WFC. We draw upon COR theory (Hobfoll,
likely to affect the perceived difficulty of per- 1989) to demonstrate that WB will result in
forming work and family roles. Westman et al. burnout, causing significant depletion of energy
(2004) conducted a study on travelers and ex- resources, thereby leaving no or fewer resources
amined the relationship of strains and WFC to perform work–family roles. Recently, re-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

during various phases of a trip. These authors search has demonstrated that burnout mediates
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

found burnout in the pretrip stage to be a sig- the relationships of abusive supervision (Carl-
nificant predictor of WFC during the trip and in son et al., 2012) and customer unethical behav-
the posttrip stage. These studies suggest that ior (Greenbaum, Quade, Mawritz, Kim, &
WFC may be an outcome, rather than a predic- Crosby, 2014) with WFC. Studies also report a
tor, of strains. spillover effect between stressful work events
and family problems (Hoobler & Brass, 2006;
In addition, energy-related resources (i.e.,
Rook, Dooley, & Catalano, 1991).
mental and physical energies) are critical in
Individuals use their psychological and en-
enabling individuals to balance work and family
ergy resources to deal with stressful work de-
demands effectively. An individual’s experi- mands (Carlson et al., 2012). When faced with
ence of work-related strains, particularly due to WB, individuals initially lose their energy-
WB, can trigger WFC because individuals with related resources while coping with these stres-
high work strains are left with no energy to sors. Subsequently, this resource loss (loss of
perform their work and family roles as their mental and physical energy) causes further re-
energy resources are already drained (Westman source loss and triggers exhaustion and burnout
et al., 2008). Furthermore, the bidirectional (Hobfoll & Shirom, 2001). In other words, in-
causal mechanism between burnout and WFC dividuals’ resource depletion while coping with
may lie in the definition of burnout. Burnout is WB may be transformed into heightened emo-
considered a negative psychological state that tional exhaustion and fatigue. As a result, the
may occur due to multiple work-related or non- increased exhaustion and fatigue will lead to
work-related factors at a certain time. These high WFC.
work-related or non-work-related factors may As we focus on understanding the initial pro-
determine if burnout plays its role as a predictor cess and given that WB is the focus of this
or as an outcome. Although we acknowledge research, we believe that WB results in loss and
that over time, it is possible for burnout to depletion of energy resources (burnout), which
contribute to WFC and heightened WFC recip- in turn makes it difficult for a person to perform
rocally contributes to burnout (for a detailed his or her work–family responsibilities and en-
overview, see Nohe et al., 2015), they follow hances their perceptions of WFC. Recent meta
different mechanisms. We believe that stressors analyses suggest that occupational strains stem
in the work domain primarily affect work- from employees’ psychological investment in
related burnout, whereas stressors in the family appraising and responding to workplace stres-
domain primarily affect family related burnout. sors and their inability to cope effectively with
The current study focuses on job burnout in the these stressors (LePine, Podsakoff, & LePine,
context of WB. In this context, we argue that 2005; Podsakoff, Lepine, & Lepine, 2007).
burnout experienced due to WB may deplete the Moreover, individuals with depression and
energy resources of individuals, leaving them burnout have a negative problem orientation
with no or fewer energy resources to perform that inhibits and impairs problem-solving at-
their family responsibilities. Therefore, we de- tempts (Nezu & D’Zurilla, 1989). Individuals
velop the following hypothesis. who have negative orientation fail to deal effec-
tively with their work and family demands (El-
Hypothesis 3: Job burnout will be posi- iott, Shewchuk, Hagglund, Rybarczyk, & Har-
tively related to work–family conflict. kins, 1996).
 6 RAJA, JAVED, AND ABBAS

Furthermore, if a person’s job demands ex- banking, postal service, and revenue sectors
ceed his or her resources, it leads to emotional where bullying appears to be common.
burnout and physical fatigue (Bakker & Demer-
outi, 2007). As a result, the person finds less Method
time and energy to fulfill his or her family
responsibilities, which ultimately translates to Sample and Data Collection Procedures
WFC. Therefore, we expect that burnout may
play a role as a mediating mechanism that ex- To maximize variance in bullying, burnout,
plains how and why WB harmfully affects and WFC at the individual level (not due to
WFC. In particular, we believe that individuals organizational effects), we collected data from a
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

who become victims of WB experience high wide range of governmental organizations in

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

emotional exhaustion and fatigue which, in Pakistan. Through personal and professional
turn, creates WFC. Consequently, we suggest contacts, we were able to gain access for data
the following: collection at the offices of 10 government orga-
nizations in the civil aviation, law enforcement
Hypothesis 4: Burnout fully mediates the and security, banking, postal service, and reve-
relationship between WB and work–family nue sectors. A cover letter requesting consent to
conflict. participate explained the purpose of the study,
assured respondents of confidentiality, and ex-
Current Study plicitly mentioned that their participation was
voluntary. We collected data through personally
Because the majority of past studies in the administrated surveys. The surveys were dis-
WB and WFC domains have been conducted in tributed among the respondents during working
Western settings, evidence for the external va- hours. The surveys were placed on a shelf in
lidity and generalizability of theories developed each department. The respondents were asked
mainly in Western contexts is fairly rare in to mention their names on the forms so that their
organizational behavior literature (Johns, 2006; responses could be cross-matched with Time 2
Tsui, Nifadkar, Ou, & Ou, 2007). In this view, and Time 3 surveys. Respondents voluntarily
Pakistan provides a unique context to test these completed the surveys, sealed them in enve-
theories. Contrary to the United States, Pakistan lopes, and returned them directly to the second
ranks highly on collectivism and power distance author. Because the respondents were fluent in
(Hofstede, 1983). In such societies, people have English, the questionnaires were not translated
learned to give more importance, priority, and to any local language. English is the official
higher values to family roles and responsibili- language in all public and private sector orga-
ties (Hofstede, 1980). As a result, when nega- nizations and the medium of instruction in all
tive work stressors inhibit members of these higher education institutions in Pakistan; there-
societies from performing their highly valued fore, the surveys were distributed in English.
family roles, interrole conflict may arise in the Other studies conducted in Pakistan have also
form of WFC (Grandey & Cropanzano, 1999; used English in surveys (e.g., Abbas & Raja,
Greenhaus & Beutell, 1985). 2015; Abbas, Raja, Darr, & Bouckenooghe,
Family structures in Pakistan are patrilocal 2014; Butt, Choi, & Jaeger, 2005).
with strong family ties and kinship values The data was collected at three time intervals
(Mahmood & Ringheim, 1996). People gener- (Time 1 [T1], Time 2 [T2], and Time 3 [T3])
ally live within combined family systems with a gap of 2 weeks between T1 and T2 and
(Burki, Fasih, & Din, 1998). In this context, approximately 3 weeks between T2 and T3.
burnout experienced due to WB may create a Contrary to other disciplines where timing is
large burden on the whole family, where the determined by scientifically assessed tech-
majority (nearly two thirds) of the population niques, the time lags in social sciences are de-
are dependents (National Institute of Population termined more by convenience or tradition
Studies, 2010). Moreover, our sample consisted (Cole & Maxwell, 2003; Mitchell & James,
of full-time public-sector employees working in 2001). Studies on WB and burnout have also
a variety of government organizations including used few weeks’ time-lag between independent
civil aviation, law enforcement and security, variables and dependent variables (see Dawson,
 BULLYING, BURNOUT, AND WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT 7

O’Brien, & Beehr, 2015; Moreno-Jiménez, Ro- eight items of exhaustion refer to general feel-
dríguez-Muñoz, Pastor, Sanz-Vergel, & Gar- ings of overtaxing from work, a strong need for
rosa, 2009). In addition, Daniels and Guppy rest, emptiness and a state of physical exhaus-
(1997) suggested that change in the intensity of tion (Bakker, Demerouti, & Verbeke, 2004).
stressors (i.e., WB) is possible over a 1-month The response anchors ranged from 1 (strongly
period. Given that the study variables were re- disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Sample items
lated to feelings and emotions, we chose data included “after my work, I usually feel worn out
collection gaps that were long enough to avoid and weary” and “after my work, I regularly feel
method bias and short enough not to lose the totally fit for my leisure activities” (reversed).
variation in outcomes associated with the pre- Past studies reported that the reliability of this
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

dictors. scale was .83 (Syrek, Apostel, & Antoni, 2013),

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

We measured WB in T1, job burnout in T2, .80 (Demerouti et al., 2003), and .75 (Bakker et
and WFC in T3. At T1, a total of 337 surveys al., 2004). The reliability for this scale in the
related to WB were distributed to employees at current study was .81.
participating organizations. We received 177 WFC. We used a five-item scale developed
completed surveys back with a response rate of by Netemeyer, Boles, and McMurrian (1996) to
52% in T1. Of these 177 respondents, we re- measure WFC. The responses were taken on a
ceived 163 completed surveys for job burnout in scale with anchors ranging from 1 (strongly
T2. Finally, in T3, we distributed 163 surveys disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Sample items
regarding WFC, of which 151 completed sur- included “the demands of my work interfered
veys were returned. Therefore, the final sample with my home and family life” and “the amount
size was 151, with response rate of 45%. In of time my job takes up makes it difficult to
addition, we collected data on respondents’ age, fulfill family responsibilities.” Previous studies
job type, experience, income level, and number reported that the reliability of this scale was .93
of dependents. Eighty-one (81%) percent of re- (Breaugh & Frye, 2008) and .84 (Little, Sim-
spondents were male and the average age was mons, & Nelson, 2007). The reliability for this
between 30 and 40 years. All respondents had at scale in the current study was .90.
least a high school education, with 95% holding Control variables. We conducted a one-
a university degree. The average job experience way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to see if the
was 7.23 years (SD ⫽ 4.35). The average num- categorical demographic variables explained
ber of dependents was 3.11 (SD ⫽ 1.77). any difference in the outcomes. The results of
one-way ANOVA revealed no significant dif-
Measures ferences in work–family conflict and burnout
across age, gender, organization, and education.
WB. WB was measured using an 8-item Therefore, we decided not to control for any
Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ) developed demographic variable.1
by Einarsen and Raknes (1997). The NAQ
questions are a series of statements that measure Results
exposure to a variety of negative events of bul-
lying and victimization. Respondents were We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis
asked to indicate how frequently they experi- (CFA) to compare a three-factor structure for
enced any such behavior in the workplace. All WB, burnout, and WFC with a single-factor
items had response anchors ranging from 1 structure. The results of CFA revealed that a
(never) to 5 (daily). Sample items included “rid- three-factor structure comprising WB, burnout,
icule or insulting teasing” and “physical abuse and WFC provided a better fit, ␹2(183) ⫽
or threats of physical abuse.” Agervold and 245.29 (comparative fit index [CFI] ⫽ .95, in-
Mikkelsen (2004) reported that the reliability of cremental fit index [IFI] ⫽ .95, and root mean
this scale was above conventional standards square error of approximation [RMSEA] ⫽ .04)
(␣ ⫽ .86). The alpha reliability for this scale in as compared with a one-factor structure,
the current study was also .86.
Job Burnout. We used an eight-item scale 1
We ran a separate analysis with gender, marital status,
for job burnout developed by Demerouti and and number of dependents as control variables. The results
Nachreiner (1998) that taps exhaustion. These were similar to those reported in Table 2.
 8 RAJA, JAVED, AND ABBAS

␹2(189) ⫽ 794.61 (CFI ⫽ .59, goodness-of-fit t ⫽ 3.27, p ⬍ .001); therefore, Hypothesis 2 was
index ⫽ .55, IFI ⫽ .60, and RMSEA ⫽ .14). supported. Table 2 further shows that, as ex-
The chi-square difference test computed be- pected, burnout was positively related to WFC
tween the two models indicated a significant (B ⫽ .91, t ⫽ 8.24, p ⬍ .001) after controlling
difference (⌬␹2 ⫽ 549.32, ⌬df ⫽ 6, p ⬍ .001) for bullying; therefore, Hypothesis 3 was also
in both models. We also compared other com- supported.
binations, and the three-factor model had a su- Hypothesis 4 predicted a full mediation effect
perior fit in every case, providing evidence for model, whereby the relationship between WB
discriminant validity of the variables. and WFC is transmitted by burnout. Table 2
Table 1 reports the means, standard devia- presents that WB was not significantly related to
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

tions, correlations, and reliabilities for all study WFC when burnout was controlled (B ⫽ ⫺.10,
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

variables. The zero-order bivariate correlations t ⫽ ⫺1.12, ns). Further, the bootstrapped indi-
between WB, burnout, and WFC were in the rect effect of WB on WFC through burnout was
expected directions. WB was found to be posi- significant, as the bootstrapped 99% CI around
tively related to burnout (r ⫽ .54, p ⬍ .01) and the indirect effect did not contain zero (.38 CI
WFC (r ⫽ .26, p ⬍ .01). Similarly, burnout was [.22, .59]). This suggested that burnout fully
positively related to work–family conflict (r ⫽ mediated the relationship between WB and
.59, p ⬍ .01). WFC. Together, these findings support Hypoth-
For the analyses of both direct and indirect esis 4 and suggest that WB has a positive indi-
effects, we used the bootstrapping technique rect effect on WFC through its effect on burn-
suggested by Preacher and Hayes (2008). This out.
technique generates bootstrapped confidence in-
tervals (CIs) which tend to have higher power Discussion
and also account for the irregularity of the sam-
pling distribution of indirect effects (Hayes, The current study draws on COR theory to
2013). Particularly, we used the macro INDI- explain how WB drains an individual’s psycho-
RECT developed by Preacher and Hayes (2008) logical resources, which leads to detrimental
to test our hypotheses. Table 2 presents the outcomes, such as burnout and WFC. Consis-
regression results for Hypotheses 1 through 4. tent with previous theory, we found good sup-
Hypothesis 1 predicted a positive effect of WB port for all hypotheses. Our findings reveal that
on WFC. The results shown in Table 2 reveal WB has a positive relationship with burnout.
that WB has a positive effect on burnout (B ⫽ Individuals who reported high level of WB in
.42, t ⫽ 7.82, p ⬍ .001), thus supporting Hy- Time 1 reported high burnout in Time 2. WB
pothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 predicted a positive appears to distort or deplete victims’ important
effect of WB on burnout. As shown in Table 2, psychological and social resources (such as self-
WB was positively related to WFC (B ⫽ .29, image, self-esteem, social relations, and physi-

Table 1
Means, Standard Deviations, Correlations, and Reliabilities
M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Age 2.54 .64
2. Gender 1.19 .39 ⫺.24ⴱⴱ
3. Job experience 7.23 4.35 .74ⴱⴱ ⫺.26ⴱⴱ
4. Education level 2.4 .58 .43ⴱⴱ ⫺.03 .45ⴱⴱ
5. Dependents 3.11 1.77 .60ⴱⴱ ⫺.20ⴱ .65ⴱⴱ .29ⴱⴱ
6. Workplace bullying 2.62 .65 ⫺.42ⴱⴱ .09 ⫺.39ⴱⴱ ⫺.30ⴱⴱ ⫺.20ⴱ (.86)
7. Burnout 3.8 .46 ⫺.28ⴱⴱ .05 ⫺.25ⴱⴱ ⫺.09 ⫺.15 .54ⴱⴱ (.81)
8. Work–family conflict 3.61 .72 ⫺.06 ⫺.07 ⫺.15 ⫺.06 ⫺.07 .26ⴱⴱ .59ⴱⴱ (.90)
Note. N ⫽ 151. Alpha reliabilities are presented in parenthesis. For gender, 1 ⫽ male and 2 ⫽ female; for age, 1 ⫽ below
25 years, 2 ⫽ between 25 and 29 years, 3 ⫽ between 30 and 39 years, 4 ⫽ between 40 and 49 years, and 5 ⫽ above 50
years; for education, 1 ⫽ high school, 2 ⫽ undergraduate university degree, and 3 ⫽ graduate university education.
ⴱ
p ⬍ .05. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01.
 BULLYING, BURNOUT, AND WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT 9

Table 2
Direct and Indirect Effects: Mediation Effects of Job Burnout (Time 2) in the Relationship Between
Workplace Bullying (Time 1) and Work–Family Conflict (Time 3)
Variable B SE t p
Direct and total effects
Work–family conflict regressed on workplace bullying
(path c, total effect) .29 .08 3.27 .001
Job burnout regressed on workplace bullying (path a) .42 .05 7.82 .000
Work–family conflict regressed on job burnout controlling
for workplace bullying (path b) .91 .11 8.24 .000
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Work–family conflict regressed on workplace bullying

controlling for job burnout (path c=, direct effect
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

showing full mediation) ⫺.10 .08 ⫺1.12 .26

B SE LL 99% CI UL 99% CI
Indirect effect using bootstrap
.38 .07 .22 .59
Note. N ⫽ 151. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported. Bootstrap sample size ⫽ 5,000. LL ⫽ lower limit;
CI ⫽ confidence interval; UL ⫽ upper limit.

cal energies), consequently leaving them drained This study contributes significantly both to
both physically and emotionally. the existing body of knowledge and to manage-
Traditionally, the relationship of burnout and rial practice. With respect to its theoretical con-
WFC has remained ambiguous as it has been tribution, it expands current knowledge by ex-
used both as a predictor and as an outcome amining how WB relates to both work-related
(Westman et al., 2004). The majority of previ- and family related outcomes. Past research has
ous studies have advocated for burnout as an generally assumed that WB only relates to or-
outcome of WFC; however, a few have found it ganizationally relevant outcomes. In addition,
to be an antecedent to WFC (Demerouti et al., the majority of previous studies have consid-
2004). Consistent with COR framework and the ered burnout an outcome of WFC. This study,
scarcity hypothesis, our findings suggest that conducted in a real-time setting using a time-
individuals’ resource loss while coping with lagged design, examined an alternative path and
WB may be transmitted into heightened emo- found that WB is related to burnout and burnout
tional exhaustion and fatigue. As a result, this is associated with WFC. In addition, our find-
increased exhaustion and fatigue will lead to ings support the basic tenet of COR theory that
high WFC. In this way, WB may be detrimental posits that any resource loss in one domain will
not only for organizations, but also for the vic- result in further resource loss in other domains.
timized employees’ family domains. Further to the spillover effects of WB on WFC,
These findings are noteworthy with respect to our study adds to the knowledge that a stressor
both work and family domains. They suggest in one domain (i.e., WB) may primarily affect
that work and family are closely related in many the strain-related outcome (i.e., job burnout) in
aspects, in that if anything negative happens in a similar domain, thus supporting a matching
one domain, it will have a spillover effect on the hypothesis. A matching hypothesis suggests
other domain, thereby leaving individuals that a stressor in one domain (work or family)
drained and unable to perform their work and will primarily affect the outcomes in a similar
family roles (Barling, 1996). A loss of resources domain, whereas a cross-domain hypothesis
in the work domain can lead to WFC as indi- suggests that a stressor in one domain will pri-
viduals are juggling between two domains with marily affect the outcomes in another domain
limited resources (Witt & Carlson, 2006). In (Nohe et al., 2015).
particular, negative words and behaviors are not Furthermore, our study provides evidence
only harmful for work-related outcomes (i.e., from an Eastern setting, thereby enhancing our
increased job burnout), but they also indirectly efficacy into the generalizability of the concepts
relate to WFC. and theories mainly developed and tested in
 10 RAJA, JAVED, AND ABBAS

North America. Although Pakistan has a high ine the role of personality as a buffering agent
power-distance culture (Hofstede, 1983) where between bullying— burnout or bullying–WFC
individuals may tolerate imbalance of power relationships. Previous research suggests that
and distribution of rewards, it appears that peo- individual differences may buffer against work-
ple are adversely affected by WB. Consistent place stressors (Abbas et al., 2014; Lin, Ma,
with the previous studies’ findings, our study Wang, & Wang, 2015). Such investigations will
reveals that bullying, as a negative mistreat- help in understanding the individual differences
ment, is equally harmful in Eastern settings, that either buffer or intensify the harmful effects
particularly in Pakistan. of bullying on both work-related and nonwork-
The current study has several implications for related outcomes.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

managerial practice. First, it reinforces the Future research may also directly examine
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

standing argument that work and family do- the role of discrete cultural factors such as
mains are highly interdependent, and managers power distance (the degree to which societal
should consider this in their day-to-day activi- members tolerate power differences among
ties in order to be effective. Second, on the basis each other) to see whether the reactions to bul-
of the findings of the current study, managers lying vary from culture to culture. Another pos-
should take solid measures to prevent negative sibility is that the source of mistreatment (su-
treatments such as bullying in the workplace to pervisor, coworker, or customer) may also play
protect employees from experiencing burnout. a role as to how people in a high power-distance
WB may not only drain the victims’ mental and culture respond to workplace mistreatment for
physical energies, but may also translate into different sources of mistreatment. Because we
victims’ family domains. Therefore, managers did not explicitly measure sources of WB in this
should communicate unequivocally that hostile study, future research may examine whether
discriminatory behaviors would not be toler- employees in high power distance cultures (e.g.,
ated. Managers may deal with these negative Pakistan, China) differ in their responses to
mistreatments through their human resource mistreatments initiated from different sources.
management policies and by encouraging posi- In conclusion, the current study elucidates the
tive interpersonal relationships and culture mechanism through which WB is associated
among employees. In this vein, clear policies with WFC. Our findings support the idea that a
should be in place to address employees’ griev- negative work to nonwork spillover occurs
ances regarding WB. Given the evidence that when employees experience WB. Specifically,
WB is linked to WFC through its effect on job burnout fully mediates the relationship be-
burnout, employee assistance programs should tween WB and WFC.
be introduced to provide stress management
trainings to help employees cope with work-
place stressors. Employees who are better able References
to handle stress may not experience emotional
Abbas, M., & Raja, U. (2015). Impact of psycholog-
exhaustion, and thus would be able to manage ical capital on innovative performance and job
their work and family roles effectively. stress. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sci-
This study is not without limitations. Al- ences, 32, 128 –138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cjas
though we used time lagged data, longitudinal .1314
studies may be more helpful in drawing infer- Abbas, M., Raja, U., Darr, W., & Bouckenooghe, D.
ences about the causality of such relationships (2014). Combined effects of perceived politics and
(Antonakis, Bendahan, Jacquart, & Lalive, psychological capital on job satisfaction, turnover
2010). Contrary to what we proposed, it is pos- intentions, and performance. Journal of Manage-
sible that WFC affects burnout. Longitudinal ment, 40, 1813–1830. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01
examinations may help us understand the direc- 49206312455243
Agervold, M., & Mikkelsen, E. G. (2004). Relation-
tion of relationships between WFC and burnout. ships between bullying, psychosocial work envi-
Similarly, our sample included a wide variety of ronment and individual stress reactions. Work and
organizations; however, all of these were part of Stress, 18, 336 –351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/026
the public sector. Future research could repli- 78370412331319794
cate the study using samples from private sector Antonakis, J., Bendahan, S., Jacquart, P., & Lalive,
organizations. Future research could also exam- R. (2010). On making causal claims: A review and
 BULLYING, BURNOUT, AND WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT 11

recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, cupational Health Psychology, 2, 156 –174. http://
1086 –1120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.2.2.156
.2010.10.010 Dawson, K. M., O’Brien, K. E., & Beehr, T. A.
Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job (2015). The role of hindrance stressors in the job
demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal demand– control–support model of occupational
of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309 –328. http://dx stress: A proposed theory revision. Journal of Or-
.doi.org/10.1108/02683940710733115 ganizational Behavior, 37, 397– 415. http://dx.doi
Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). .org/10.1002/job.2049
Using the job demands-resources model to predict Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., & Bulters, A. J. (2004).
burnout and performance. Human Resource Man- The loss spiral of work pressure, work– home in-
agement, 43, 83–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ terference and exhaustion: Reciprocal relations in
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

hrm.20004 a three-wave study. Journal of Vocational Behav-

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Barling, J. (1996). The prediction, experience, and ior, 64, 131–149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0001-
consequences of workplace violence. In G. R. 8791(03)00030-7
VandenBos & E. Q. Bulatao (Eds.), Violence on Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Vardakou, I., & Kan-
the job: Identifying risks and developing solutions tas, A. (2003). The convergent validity of two
(pp. 29 – 49). Washington, DC: American Psycho- burnout instruments: A multitrait-multimethod
logical Association; http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ analysis. European Journal of Psychological As-
10215-001 sessment, 18, 296 –307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027//
Begley, T. M. (1994). Expressed and suppressed an- 1015-5759.19.1.12
ger as predictors of health care complaints. Journal Demerouti, E., & Nachreiner, F. (1998). The specificity
of Organizational Behavior, 15, 503–516. http:// of burnout in human services: Fact or artifact?
dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.4030150603 Zeitschrift fur Arbeitswissenschaft, 52, 82– 89.
Breaugh, J. A., & Frye, N. K. (2008). Work–family Demsky, C. A., Ellis, A. M., & Fritz, C. (2014).
conflict: The importance of family-friendly em- Shrugging it off: Does psychological detachment
ployment practices and family-supportive supervi-
from work mediate the relationship between work-
sors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22,
place aggression and work–family conflict? Jour-
345–353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-008-
nal of Occupational Health Psychology, 19, 195–
9081-1
205. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035448
Burki, A. A., Fasih, T., & Din, M. U. (1998). House-
Edwards, J. R., & Rothbard, N. P. (2000). Mecha-
holds’ non-leisure time allocation for children and
nisms linking work and family: Clarifying the re-
determinants of child labour in Punjab, Pakistan.
Pakistan Development Review, 37, 899 –914. lationship between work and family constructs.
Butt, A. N., Choi, J. N., & Jaeger, A. M. (2005). The Academy of Management Review, 25, 178 –199.
effects of self-emotion, counterpart emotion, and Einarsen, S. (1999). The nature and causes of bully-
counterpart behavior on negotiator behavior: A ing at work. International Journal of Manpower,
comparison of individual-level and dyad-level dy- 20, 16 –27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/0143772
namics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 9910268588
681–704. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.328 Einarsen, S., & Raknes, B. I. (1997). Harassment in
Carlson, D., Ferguson, M., Hunter, E., & Whitten, D. the workplace and the victimization of men. Vio-
(2012). Abusive supervision and work–family lence and Victims, 12, 247–263.
conflict: The path through emotional labor and Eliott, T. R., Shewchuk, R., Hagglund, K., Rybarc-
burnout. The Leadership Quarterly, 23, 849 – 859. zyk, B., & Harkins, S. (1996). Occupational burn-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.05.003 out, tolerance for stress, and coping among nurses
Cartwright, S., & Cooper, C. L. (1997). Managing in rehabilitation units. Rehabilitation Psychology,
workplace stress. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. 41, 267–284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0090-5550
Cole, D. A., & Maxwell, S. E. (2003). Testing me- .41.4.267
diational models with longitudinal data: Questions Finne, L. B., Knardahl, S., & Lau, B. (2011). Work-
and tips in the use of structural equation modeling. place bullying and mental distress - a prospective
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 558 –577. study of Norwegian employees. Scandinavian
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.558 Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 37, 276 –
Conti, D. J., & Burton, W. N. (1994). The economic 287. http://dx.doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3156
impact of depression in a workplace. Journal of Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Cooper, M. L. (1997).
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 36, Relation of work–family conflict to health out-
983–988. comes: A four-year longitudinal study of em-
Daniels, K., & Guppy, A. (1997). Stressors, locus of ployed parents. Journal of Occupational and Or-
control, and social support as consequences of ganizational Psychology, 70, 325–335. http://dx
affective psychological well-being. Journal of Oc- .doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.1997.tb00652.x
 12 RAJA, JAVED, AND ABBAS

Gallo, L. C., & Matthews, K. A. (2003). Understand- Psychologist, 44, 513–524. http://dx.doi.org/10
ing the association between socioeconomic status .1037/0003-066X.44.3.513
and physical health: Do negative emotions play a Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, com-
role? Psychological Bulletin, 129, 10 –51. http://dx munity, and the nested-self in the stress process:
.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.1.10 Advancing conservation of resources theory. Ap-
Gardner, S., & Johnson, P. R. (2001). The leaner, plied Psychology, 50, 337– 421. http://dx.doi.org/
meaner workplace: Strategies for handling bullies 10.1111/1464-0597.00062
at work. Employment Relations Today, 28, 23–36. Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2001). Conservation of
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ert.1012 resources theory: Applications to stress and man-
Grandey, A. A., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). The con- agement in the workplace. In R. T. Golembiewski
servation of resources model applied to work– (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior (pp.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

family conflict and strain. Journal of Vocational 57– 81). New York, NY: Dekker.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Behavior, 54, 350 –370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/ Hodgins, M., MacCurtain, S., & Mannix-McNamara,
jvbe.1998.1666 P. (2014). Workplace bullying and incivility: A
Greenbaum, R. L., Quade, M. J., Mawritz, M. B., systematic review of interventions. International
Kim, J., & Crosby, D. (2014). When the customer Journal of Workplace Health Management, 7, 54 –
is unethical: The explanatory role of employee 72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJWHM-08-2013-
emotional exhaustion onto work–family conflict, 0030
relationship conflict with coworkers, and job ne- Hofstede, G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and or-
glect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 1188 – ganization: Do American theories apply abroad?
1203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037221 Organizational Dynamics, 9, 42– 63. http://dx.doi
Greenberg, P. E., Kessler, R. C., Birnbaum, H. G., .org/10.1016/0090-2616(80)90013-3
Leong, S. A., Lowe, S. W., Berglund, P. A., & Hofstede, G. H. (1983). National culture in four
Corey-Lisle, P. K. (2003). The economic burden of dimensions. International Studies of Management
depression in the United States: How did it change & Organization, 13, 46 –74. http://dx.doi.org/10
.1080/00208825.1983.11656358
between 1990 and 2000? The Journal of Clinical
Hoobler, J. M., & Brass, D. J. (2006). Abusive su-
Psychiatry, 64, 1465–1475. http://dx.doi.org/10
pervision and family undermining as displaced ag-
.4088/JCP.v64n1211
gression. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91,
Greenhaus, H. J., & Beutell, J. N. (1985). Sources of
1125–1133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010
Conflict between Work and Family Roles. Acad-
.91.5.1125
emy of Management Review, 10, 76 – 88. http://dx
Jenkins, M., Winefield, H., & Sarris, A. (2011). Con-
.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1985.4277352
sequences of being accused of workplace bullying:
Harvey, M., Treadway, D., & Heames, J. T. (2006). An exploratory study. International Journal of
Bullying in global organizations: A reference point Workplace Health Management, 4, 33– 47. http://
perspective. Journal of World Business, 41, 190 – dx.doi.org/10.1108/17538351111118581
202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2006.01.002 Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on
Hauge, L. J., Skogstad, A., & Einarsen, S. (2010). organizational behavior. Academy of Management
The relative impact of workplace bullying as a Review, 31, 386 – 408. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/
social stressor at work. Scandinavian Journal of AMR.2006.20208687
Psychology, 51, 426 – 433. http://dx.doi.org/10 Johnson, H. A. M., & Spector, P. E. (2007). Service
.1111/j.1467-9450.2010.00813.x with a smile: Do emotional intelligence, gender,
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, mod- and autonomy moderate the emotional labor pro-
eration, and conditional process analysis: A re- cess? Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
gression-based approach. New York, NY: Guil- 12, 319 –333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998
ford Press. .12.4.319
Hershcovis, M. S. (2011). “Incivility, social under- Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the corpo-
mining, bullying . . . oh my!” A call to reconcile ration. New York, NY: Basic Books.
constructs within workplace aggression research. Kelloway, E. K., Gottlieb, B. H., & Barham, L. (1999).
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 499 –519. The source, nature, and direction of work and family
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.689 conflict: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Oc-
Hershcovis, M. S., & Barling, J. (2010). Towards a cupational Health Psychology, 4, 337–346. http://dx
multi foci approach to workplace aggression: A .doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.4.4.337
meta analytic review of outcomes from different Kivimäki, M., Elovainio, M., & Vahtera, J. (2000).
perpetrators. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Workplace bullying and sickness absence in hos-
31, 24 – 44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.621 pital staff. Occupational and Environmental Med-
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources. A icine, 57, 656 – 660. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/oem
new attempt at conceptualizing stress. American .57.10.656
 BULLYING, BURNOUT, AND WORK-FAMILY CONFLICT 13

LaVan, H., & Martin, W. M. (2008). Bullying in the drance stress, anger, and anxiety. Journal of Or-
US workplace: Normative and process-oriented ganizational Behavior, 35, 358 –372. http://dx.doi
ethical approaches. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, .org/10.1002/job.1879
147–165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007- McTernan, W. P., Dollard, M. F., & LaMontagne,
9608-9 A. D. (2013). Depression in the workplace: An
LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & LePine, M. A. economic cost analysis of depression-related pro-
(2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stres- ductivity loss attributable to job strain and bully-
sor– hindrance stressor framework: An explanation ing. Work and Stress, 27, 321–338. http://dx.doi
for inconsistent relationships among stressors and .org/10.1080/02678373.2013.846948
performance. Academy of Management Journal, Mikkelsen, E. G., & Einarsen, S. (2001). Bullying in
48, 764 –775. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2005 Danish work life: Prevalence and health correlates.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

.18803921 European Journal of Work and Organizational Psy-

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Lin, W., Ma, J., Wang, L., & Wang, M. (2015). A chology, 10, 393– 413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
double-edged sword: The moderating role of con- 13594320143000816
scientiousness in the relationships between work Mitchell, T. R., & James, L. R. (2001). Building
stressors, psychological strain, and job perfor- better theory: Time and the specification of when
mance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, things happen. Academy of Management Review,
94 –111. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.1949 26, 530 –547. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3560240
Little, L. M., Simmons, B. L., & Nelson, D. L. Moreno-Jiménez, B., Rodríguez-Muñoz, A., Pastor,
(2007). Health among leaders: Positive and nega- J. C., Sanz-Vergel, A. I., & Garrosa, E. (2009).
tive affect, engagement and burnout, forgiveness The moderating effects of psychological detach-
and revenge. Journal of Management Studies, 44, ment and thoughts of revenge in workplace bully-
243–260. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486 ing. Personality and Individual Differences, 46,
.2007.00687.x 359 –364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.10
Litzky, B. E., Eddleston, K. A., & Kidder, D. L. .031
(2006). The good, the bad, and the misguided: National Institute of Population Studies. (2010,
How managers inadvertently encourage deviant June). Planning & Development Division, Govt. of
behaviors. The Academy of Management Perspec- Pakistan. Retrieved from http://www.finance.gov
tives, 20, 91–103. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMP .pk/survey/chapter_11/12-Population.pdf
.2006.19873411 Netemeyer, R. G., Boles, J. S., & McMurrian, R.
Livingston, B. A. (2014). Bargaining behind the (1996). Development and validation of work–family
scenes: Spousal negotiation, labor, and work– conflict and family–work conflict scales. Journal of
family burnout. Journal of Management, 40, 949 – Applied Psychology, 81, 400 – 410. http://dx.doi.org/
977. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206311428355 10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.400
Mahmood, N., & Ringheim, K. (1996). Factors af- Nezu, A., & D’Zurilla, T. (1989). Social problem
fecting contraceptive use in Pakistan. Pakistan De- solving and negative affective conditions. In P. C.
velopment Review, 35, 1–22. Kendall & D. Watson (Eds.), Anxiety and depres-
Marks, S. R. (1977). Multiple roles and role strain: sion: Distinctive and overlapping features (pp.
Some notes on human energy, time and commit- 285–315). San Diego, CA: Academic.
ment. American Sociological Review, 42, 921– Ng, S. B. C., Chen, Z. X., & Aryee, S. (2012).
936. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2094577 Abusive supervision in Chinese work settings. In
Maslach, C. (1982). Burnout: The cost of caring. X. Huang & M. H. Bond (Eds.), Handbook of
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Chinese organizational behavior: Integrating the-
Maslach, C., Jackson, S. E., & Leiter, M. P. (1996). ory, research and practice (pp. 164 –183). Chel-
Maslach Burnout Inventory manual (3rd ed.). Palo tenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. http://dx
Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. .doi.org/10.4337/9780857933409.00017
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2012). Outcomes of
Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 397– exposure to workplace bullying: A meta-analytic
422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1 review. Work and Stress, 26, 309 –332. http://dx
.397 .doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2012.734709
Matthews, R. A., Wayne, J. H., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Nohe, C., Meier, L. L., Sonntag, K., & Michel, A.
A work–family conflict/subjective well-being pro- (2015). The chicken or the egg? A meta-analysis of
cess model: A test of competing theories of longi- panel studies of the relationship between work–
tudinal effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, family conflict and strain. Journal of Applied Psy-
1173–1187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0036674 chology, 100, 522–536. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
Mawritz, M. B., Folger, R., & Latham, G. P. (2014). a0038012
Supervisors’ exceedingly difficult goals and abu- Peeters, M. C., Montgomery, A. J., Bakker, A. B., &
sive supervision: The mediating effects of hin- Schaufeli, W. B. (2005). Balancing work and
 14 RAJA, JAVED, AND ABBAS

home: How job and home demands are related to Vardi, Y., & Weitz, E. (2004). Misbehavior in orga-
burnout. International Journal of Stress Manage- nizations: Theory, research, and management.
ment, 12, 43– 61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1072- Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5245.12.1.43 Varhama, L. M., & Björkqvist, K. (2004). Conflicts,
Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. workplace bullying and burnout problems among
(2007). Differential challenge stressor-hindrance municipal employees. Psychological Reports, 94,
stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover 1116 –1124. http://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pr0.94.3c
intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: A .1116-1124
meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, Vega, G., & Comer, D. R. (2005). Sticks and stones
438 – 454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92 may break your bones, but words can break your
.2.438 spirit: Bullying in the workplace. Journal of Business
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic Ethics, 58, 101–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

and resampling strategies for assessing and com- s10551-005-1422-7

paring indirect effects in multiple mediator mod- Westman, M., Etzion, D., & Gattenio, E. (2008). Inter-
els. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879 – 891. national business travels and the work–family inter-
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879 face: A longitudinal study. Journal of Occupational
Rhodes, C., Pullen, A., Vickers, M. H., Clegg, S. R., and Organizational Psychology, 81, 459 – 480. http://
& Pitsis, A. (2010). Violence and workplace bul- dx.doi.org/10.1348/096317908X310265
lying: What are an organization’s ethical respon- Westman, M., Etzion, D., & Gortler, E. (2004). The
sibilities? Administrative Theory & Praxis, 32, work–family interface and burnout. International
96 –115. http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/ATP1084- Journal of Stress Management, 11, 413– 428.
1806320105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1072-5245.11.4.413
Robertson, I. T., Cooper, C. L., Williams, J., & Witt, L. A., & Carlson, D. S. (2006). The work–
Williams, J. (1990). The validity of the occupa- family interface and job performance: Moderating
tional stress indicator. Work and Stress, 4, 29 –39. effects of conscientiousness and perceived organi-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02678379008256962 zational support. Journal of Occupational Health
Rook, K., Dooley, D., & Catalano, R. (1991). Stress Psychology, 11, 343–357. http://dx.doi.org/10
transmission: The effects of husbands’ job stres- .1037/1076-8998.11.4.343
sors on the emotional health of their wives. Jour- Zapf, D., Dormann, C., & Frese, M. (1996). Longi-
nal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 165–177. tudinal studies in organizational stress research: A
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/353141 review of the literature with reference to method-
Samnani, A. K., Singh, P., & Ezzedeen, S. (2013). ological issues. Journal of Occupational Health
Workplace bullying and employee performance: Psychology, 1, 145–169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
An attributional model. Organizational Psychol- 1076-8998.1.2.145
ogy Review, 1, 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/204 Zapf, D., & Einarsen, S. (2005). Mobbing at work:
1386613475370 Escalated conflicts in organizations. In S. Fox &
Spector, P. E., & Goh, A. (2001). The role of emo- P. E. Spector (Eds.), Counterproductive work be-
tions in the occupational stress process. In P. L. havior: Investigations of actors and targets (pp.
Perrewe & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Research in oc- 237–270). Washington, DC: American Psycholog-
cupational stress and well-being: Vol. 1. Exploring ical Association; http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10893-
theoretical mechanisms and perspectives (pp. 010
195–232). Greenwich, CT: JAI; http://dx.doi.org/ Zapf, D., Einarsen, S., Hoel, H., & Vartia, M. (2003).
10.1016/S1479-3555(01)01013-7 Empirical findings on bullying in the workplace. In
Syrek, C. J., Apostel, E., & Antoni, C. H. (2013). S. Einarsen, H. Hoel, D. Zapf, & C. L. Cooper
Stress in highly demanding IT jobs: Transforma- (Eds.), Bullying and emotional abuse in the work-
tional leadership moderates the impact of time place: International perspectives in research and
pressure on exhaustion and work-life balance. practice (pp. 103–126). London, England: Taylor
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 18, and Francis.
252–261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0033085 Zapf, D., Knorz, C., & Kulla, M. (1996). On the
Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work relationship between mobbing factors, and job
organizations: Review, synthesis, and research content, social work environment, and health out-
agenda. Journal of Management, 33, 261–289. comes. European Journal of Work and Organiza-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812 tional Psychology, 5, 215–237. http://dx.doi.org/
Tsui, A. S., Nifadkar, S., & Ou, Y., & Ou, A. Y. 10.1080/13594329608414856
(2007). Cross-national cross-cultural organiza-
tional behavior research: Advances, gaps, and rec- Received September 28, 2015
ommendations. Journal of Management, 33, 426 – Revision received July 1, 2017
478. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300818 Accepted July 14, 2017 䡲

View publication stats