Human interaction and communication are the basis for every relationship someone can enter into. Communication, especially, is extremely important in some places. One of those is the workplace. That environment requires constant communication and interaction, no matter if it is face-to-face or through a video call.
Anyone can imagine workplace interactions such as talking to a coworker about an office event, asking a manager a doubt about an incoming project, or a brainstorming session in a meeting. But, as with any place where interactions happen all the time, there can be difficult situations. One of them is the use of clapbacks. The questions that come from it are not only why someone would use a clap back in the workplace, but it needs to go deeper into what exactly a clap back is, what is behind someone who uses one and what some of the consequences of using a clap back are.
Read More: Building Community in Remote Work: Supporting Mental Health in the Digital Workplace
Workplace Conflict, What Is a Clap Back?
A “clap back”, in everyday language, is a quick and direct response to an insult, criticism or a provocation. It’s not a concept recognised in research. For example, in the work of Washington (2020), it describes a clap back as a fast and direct response to an insult or aggression. A clap back, then, can be related to a concept known as workplace incivility.
Workplace incivility can be defined as behaviour that violates the norms established in workspaces. This includes breaking norms of mutual respect in several ways, such as angry outbursts, spreading rumours, and interrupting others (Yaqoob et al., 2025). Someone losing patience when something goes wrong and screams or has a negative reaction, or a person who interrupts others during conversations and even work meetings.
It’s different from other forms of aggression due to three characteristics. First, it is not with the intention of injuring the other person. Second, there is not a pattern or constant repetition of this, like other forms of aggression such as harassment. And third, it lacks the aggressiveness of other behaviours, for example, bullying (Magley et al., 2026).
Read More: Workplace Stress and Burnout: When “Just Surviving Work” Becomes the Norm
Why Do Workers Clap Back?
One reason why employees respond sharply can be that workplace mistreatment leads to the thought that the person needs to defend themselves. An integrative model suggests that workers who interpret an event as mistreatment later determine how they should respond (Olson Buchanan & Boswell, 2008). This means that the person’s reaction is not only based on the understanding of the event but also the consequences they expect from responding.
In the research done by Cortina et al. (2022), they describe four categories that could explain a response. These categories were reciprocation, retreat, relationship repair and recruitment of support. Reciprocation is the category closest to understanding the response in clapbacks. Reciprocation means that the person responds directly to the person who initiated the negative interaction, leading to a feeling of psychological satisfaction, since the person feels contented with being able to show that the disrespect wouldn’t be accepted. In this case, a clap back can also be an attempt to establish personal boundaries.
Another trigger might be perceived injustice. Employees can believe that responding sharply is justified when there is a provocation. Osborne et al. (2026) found that retaliatory incivility, incivility directed toward someone who was previously rude, was condemned more leniently than unprovoked incivility. Like a discussion between colleagues, teased by a disrespect perceived by the other coworker. In this case, the other responds during the discussion that the situation won’t be tolerated by the other person and that they would respond if it happens again.
The Decision to Respond and Emotional Regulation
A clap back can be motivated by anger, but emotional regulation can influence the outcome of that reaction to be constructive or destructive. Someone doesn’t necessarily respond to aggression automatically. A person might reinterpret the situation, regulate their emotions and choose how to act.
One useful tool in these cases is emotional reappraisal. This means how an individual interprets an emotionally provoking situation (Niven et al., 2013). With that, a person can respond in a non-aggressive way. To move on from the situation, someone can decide to speak up, ask for clarification or set a boundary instead of acting impulsively
Why is this important? There are two routes of response in the case of a workplace incivility:
The person can retaliate and attempt to make the other person experience the same discomfort as they do. This response has the purpose of restoring a sense of fairness by giving the same treatment. On the other hand, an assertive response would be talking directly to the person so they are part of the discomfort situation and expressing how that behaviour is unacceptable. This response puts an emphasis on communicating a boundary.
Should Someone Speak Up in The Workplace?
After a difficult situation like workplace incivility, a person may consider the option to speak up. But that is not an easy decision, considering the factor that if the person who is causing the situation is from a higher position or has social influence among the rest of the coworkers. One study that illustrates that point was done by Cortina and Magley (2023), who studied 1.167 employees in the public sector. They found that employees who tried to go against interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace were likely to experience retaliation.
That can be an explanation for why the same response can have different consequences depending on who is involved in the situation. An employee who has a higher status inside a workplace can respond and challenge a situation of disrespect, while someone with less power could face professional consequences for the same action. Some consequences could be receiving a warning, any form of work punishment that could include economic damage to the person, etc.
If an employee chooses silence, that is also not a healthier alternative. Weiss and Zacher (2025) found that acquiescent employee silence was associated with later decreases in organisational identification and subsequent increases in instigated workplace incivility. The research suggests that remaining silent because one feels that speaking up will do nothing for the situation can contribute to the development of unhealthy interpersonal patterns.
Read More: Why We Become More “Demure” at Work: The Psychology of Workplace Behaviour
Can A Clap Back Help or Make It Worse?
Washington’s (2020) analysis of “clap back” language demonstrates how direct communication can function as a form of resistance and an assertion of voice in situations involving unequal power. Taking that to the workplace, a clap back could sometimes protect boundaries. For example, when communicating that disrespect is unacceptable.
Nonetheless, if someone responds to workplace incivility with more incivility, it can create a cycle of retaliation. Also, retaliatory incivility can receive more social comprehension than initiating the incivility, although retaliators were not necessarily viewed positively (Osborne et al., 2026). Nevertheless, another way to respond to incivility can be asking for relationship repair, withdrawal and seeking support for the situation (Cortina et al., 2022).
Conclusions
A clap back can be defined as a quick response to conduct perceived as aggression (insult, criticism or provocation). In the workplace, it can be understood under the concept of work incivility. That can be conceptualised as a behaviour that violates the social norms established with conduct such as angry outbursts, creating rumours, and interrupting others.
A response to that driven by anger can create a cycle of retaliation that can ultimately affect the person who responds professionally or socially. But silence or confrontation are not the best ways to respond. Being able to have an emotionally regulated reaction can be the best response that needs to have the goal of establishing boundaries in the workplace.
References +
- Cortina, L. M., & Magley, V. J. (2003). Raising voice, risking retaliation: Events following interpersonal mistreatment in the workplace. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8(4), 247–265. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.8.4.247
- Cortina, L. M., Hershcovis, M. S., & Clancy, K. B. H. (2022). The embodiment of insult: A theory of biobehavioral response to workplace incivility. Journal of Management, 48(3), 738–763. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206321989798
- Magley, V. J., Kabat-Farr, D., Malcore, M. A., & Walsh, B. M. (2026). Workplace incivility. Annual Review of Organisational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 13(1), 337-361.
- Niven, K., Sprigg, C. A., & Armitage, C. J. (2013). Does emotion regulation protect employees from the negative effects of workplace aggression? European Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 22(1), 88–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2011.626200
- Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Boswell, W. R. (2008). An integrative model of experiencing and responding to mistreatment at work. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 76–96. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2008.27745325
- Osborne, M. R., Abdurahman, S., Omrani, A., Trager, J. P., & Dehghani, M. (2026). Two wrongs are what make it more right: How retaliatory incivility receives social leniency. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 125, 104913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2026.104913
- Washington, A. R. (2020). “Reclaiming my time”: Signifying, reclamation and the activist strategies of Black women’s language. Gender and Language, 14(4), 358–381. https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.41607
- Weiss, M., & Zacher, H. (2025). Still waters run deep: How employee silence affects instigated workplace incivility over time. Journal of Business Ethics, 201(3), 587–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05903-9
- Yaqoob, S., Shahzad, K., Faisal, M., Kitchlew, N., & Abualigah, A. (2025). Why, how, and when incivility unfolds in the workplace: a 24-year systematic literature review. S. Yaqoob et al. Management Review Quarterly, 1-57.
