Since perceived control was the only organizational variable that revealed a significant path to the instigated incivility latent variable in the model, and incivility from superior was the only variable with a significant path to perceived control (β = −.404, p <.001), we only tested mediation effects through this path.
Experienced incivility from supervisor had significant paths to job demands (β =.477, p <.001), control (β = −.416, p <.001), and social support from supervisor (β = −.687, p <.001).
The results emphasize the significance of studying workplace incivility as a social process, considering both experienced and witnessed workplace incivility from coworkers and supervisors in the same model.
Three variables were found to have significant paths: the largest was from witnessed incivility from coworkers (β =.433, p <.001), the second largest from experienced incivility from superior (β =.245; p <.001).
Witnessed incivility did not have any significant paths to any of the organizational variables in the model.
Experienced incivility from coworker had a significant path to social support from coworker (β = −.522, p <.001), but social support from coworkers did not have a significant path to negative outcomes.
In this model, all indirect effects from experienced incivility from supervisor to negative outcomes were significant; job demands (β = −.113, p <.001), control (β = −.113, p <.001), and social support from supervisor (β = −.172, p <.001).
Witnessing coworker incivility was the most important dimension to explain instigated incivility.
No significant effects were found on hostile emotions or the use of incivility in readers' own comments.
In the estimated model witnessed incivility from a supervisor did not have a unique significant relationship to instigated incivility which is in line with the research of Ferguson and Barry [ 12].
Witnessing coworker incivility emerged as the most important dimension to explain instigated incivility.
