Feeling Anger yet Not Speaking Up: The Role of Observers’ Cultural Values in Anger and Bystanderism in Response to Supervisor Incivility

While observer reactions to perceived supervisor incivility (PSI) have been substantially studied, observer silence (i.e., bystanderism) and the emotional mechanisms and contingencies that engender it have been empirically underexplored. Drawing on deontic justice theory and the “cultural regulation of emotion” perspective, our research offers theoretical arguments and empirical evidence to understand observers’ anger in response to PSI and the resulting bystanderism. Across three studies using an online scenario, an online experiment, and a survey, we test a mediation model, moderation models, and moderated mediation models, respectively. Study 1 demonstrates that observer anger negatively mediates the relationship between PSI and bystanderism. Study 2 substantiates the buffering moderation effect of observer power distance on the positive relationship between PSI and anger. In addition to replicating the findings from the first two studies, Study 3 shows that observer power distance and collectivism mitigate the negative relationship between anger and bystanderism and then the negative indirect relationship between PSI and bystanderism via anger. Taken together, our findings suggest that although observers feel anger in response to PSI, the expression of such anger can be suppressed by power distance and collectivism, ultimately leading to bystanderism. We also discuss the implication and limitations (e.g., generalizability of our online experiment) of our study and call for further research involving leaders and followers in real-world contexts.