How Peer Abusive Supervision Affects Sales Employees’ Customer Knowledge Hiding: The Roles of Rivalry and Schadenfreude

Figures & data

Figure 1 Theoretical framework.

Table 1 Demographics

Characteristics		N	%
Gender	Male	153	54.1%
	Female	130	45.9%
Age	21–30	118	41.7%
	31–35	72	25.4%
	36–40	47	16.6%
	41 above	46	16.3%
Nationality	China	150	53.0%
	South Korea	133	47.0%
Education	Associate degree or below	65	23.0%
	Bachelor’s degree	144	50.9%
	Master’s degree	74	21.9%
	Doctorate degree	12	4.2%

Note: N = 283.

Table 2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results

Model	Description	χ2	DF	χ2/DF	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	SRMR	Δχ2	ΔDF
Hypothesized model	Four-factor model	613.666	246	2.495	0.931	0.922	0.073	0.040
Model 1	Three-factor model	1060.107	249	4.257	0.847	0.831	0.107	0.100	446.441	3
Model 2	Two-factor model	1762.242	251	7.021	0.715	0.687	0.146	0.124	1148.576	5
Model 3	One-factor model	2723.608	252	10.808	0.535	0.490	0.186	0.171	2109.942	6

Notes: Four-factor model: peer abusive supervision, rivalry, schadenfreude, customer knowledge hiding. Three-factor model: peer abusive supervision, rivalry and schadenfreude combined; customer knowledge hiding. Two-factor model: peer abusive supervision, rivalry and schadenfreude combined; customer knowledge hiding. One-factor model: peer abusive supervision, rivalry, schadenfreude, and customer knowledge hiding combined.

Abbreviations: CFI, comparative fit index; TLI, Tucker-Lewis index; RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation; SRMR, standardized root mean square residual.

Table 3 Convergent Validity

Constructs	Items	STD. Factor Loadings	CR	AVE
Peer abusive supervision (PAS)	PAS1	0.81	0.92	0.69
	PAS2	0.86
	PAS3	0.84
	PAS4	0.80
	PAS5	0.84
Rivalry (RIV)	RIV1	0.86	0.93	0.83
	RIV2	0.95
	RIV3	0.92
Schadenfreude (SCH)	SCH1	0.78	0.86	0.61
	SCH2	0.79
	SCH3	0.74
	SCH4	0.82
Customer knowledge hiding (KH)	KH1	0.81	0.96	0.65
	KH2	0.82
	KH3	0.79
	KH4	0.78
	KH5	0.81
	KH6	0.81
	KH7	0.83
	KH8	0.79
	KH9	0.77
	KH10	0.82
	KH11	0.79
	KH12	0.85

Abbreviations: CR, composite reliability; AVE, average variance extraction.

Table 4 Descriptive Statistics and Correlations Among Variables

Variables	Mean	SD	Gender	Age	Nationality	Edu	PAS(T1)	RI(T1)	SCH(T1)	KH(T2)
Gender	1.46	0.50	–
Age	2.07	1.11	0.01	–
Nationality	1.47	0.50	0.10	−0.10	–
Edu	2.07	0.78	−0.03	−0.02	0.09	–
PAS(T1)	4.17	1.78	−0.12*	0.08	−0.01	−0.02	(0.92)
RI(T1)	5.25	1.54	0.04	0.04	−0.04	−0.07	0.35**	(0.93)
SCH(T1)	4.90	1.45	0.05	0.02	0.11	−0.03	0.23**	0.36**	(0.86)
KH(T2)	4.88	1.39	0.03	0.02	−0.07	0.06	0.24**	0.17**	0.31**	(0.96)

Notes: N = 283. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients are on the diagonal in parentheses. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.

Abbreviations: SD, standard deviations; PAS, peer abusive supervision; RI, rivalry; SCH, schadenfreude; KH, customer knowledge hiding.

Table 5 Regression Results

Variables	Customer Knowledge Hiding
	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5	Model 6	Model 7	Model 8
Gender	0.04	0.07	0.07	0.08	0.06	0.06	0.06	0.02
Age	0.01	−0.01	−0.01	0.00	−0.01	−0.01	−0.01	0.01
Nationality	−0.08	−0.08	−0.08	−0.08	−0.11	−0.11	−0.11	−0.09
Edu	0.07	0.08	0.09	0.07	0.09	0.08	0.09	0.10*
PAS		0.25***	0.22**	0.23***	0.19**	0.19**	0.18**	0.15**
RI			0.10	0.22**			0.01	0.07
SCH					0.28***	0.32***	0.28***	0.19**
PAS*RI				0.33***				0.40***
PAS*SCH						0.12*		0.15*
RI*SCH								−0.10
PAS*RI*SCH								0.32***
R^2	0.01	0.07	0.08	0.17	0.15	0.16	0.15	0.32
ΔR^2	0.01	0.06***	0.07***	0.09***	0.13***	0.01*	0.13***	0.18***
F	0.81	4.35**	4.05**	8.09***	7.78***	7.36***	6.65***	11.75***

Notes: *, p < 0.05; **, p < 0.01; ***, p < 0.001.

Abbreviations: PAS, peer abusive supervision; RI, rivalry; SCH, schadenfreude.

Figure 2 The moderating role of rivalry.

Figure 3 The moderating role of schadenfreude.

Figure 4 The interaction effect of schadenfreude and rivalry.