Emerging research demonstrates that female managers who mistreat their subordinates suffer more severe negative consequences than male managers. Researchers presume this is because women (but not men) are penalized for acting incongruently with communality prescriptions (i.e., being insufficiently kind). However, integrating this work with the broader literature on gender and leadership, gendered reactions to mistreatment could also—or alternatively—be explained by incongruence with high agency proscriptions (i.e., being too dominant). We model these mechanisms simultaneously in a moderated mediation model across three studies, and find that employees are less trusting of female than male managers because they interpret interpersonal justice violations from women as incongruent with low agency prescriptions. Our results challenge a prevailing assumption in the mistreatment literature by revealing that female managers suffer more severe relational consequences than male managers because their violation of interpersonal justice is construed as excessively agentic, whereas these behaviors are viewed as similarly contravening communality for both male and female managers. By directly testing and correctly specifying the mechanism through which manager gender can shape social exchange processes in the aftermath of manager mistreatment, our studies have scientific and practical implications.

中文翻译：

---

调查对管理者虐待的性别反应：测试规定性刻板印象的假定作用

新兴研究表明，虐待下属的女性管理者比男性管理者遭受更严重的负面后果。研究人员推测这是因为女性（而非男性）因行为与公共规定不一致（即不够友善）而受到惩罚。然而，将这项工作与更广泛的关于性别和领导力的文献结合起来，对虐待的性别反应也可以（或者说）用与机构的高度禁令不一致（即过于占主导地位）来解释。我们在三项研究中同时在有调节的调解模型中对这些机制进行建模，发现员工对女性管理者的信任度低于男性管理者，因为他们将女性违反人际正义的行为解释为与低机构规定不一致。我们的研究结果挑战了虐待文献中普遍存在的假设，揭示了女性管理者比男性管理者遭受更严重的关系后果，因为她们违反人际正义的行为被视为过度代理，而这些行为对于男性和女性管理者来说都被视为同样违反公共性。通过直接测试和正确指定经理性别在经理虐待后塑造社会交换过程的机制，我们的研究具有科学和实际意义。