Cross‐cultural Examination of Applicant Reactions to Selection Methods: United States and Vietnam

The current study explored the differences in applicant reactions to various selection methods in the United States and in Vietnam, an emerging economy that has been generally ignored in the selection and assessment literatures. College students (n = 376) from the United States and Vietnam rated the favorability of 10 selection methods and indicated the bases for their reactions on eight process fairness dimensions. Results showed that interviews and work sample tests were perceived most favorably, while personal contacts and graphology were perceived least favorably in both countries. Face validity of the selection methods was found to be the strongest predictor of process favorability in both countries. In addition, the results indicated substantial differences between the two countries in terms of the perceived interpersonal warmth of selection methods and a perceived employer's right to obtain information using the selection methods. Implications of the findings for multinational corporations and future research directions are discussed.     

Applying organizational justice theory to admission into higher education: Admission from a student perspective

Applicant perceptions of methods used in admission procedures to higher education were investigated using organizational justice theory. Applicants to a psychology study program completed a questionnaire about several admission methods. General favorability, ratings on justice dimensions, relationships between general favorability and these dimensions, and differences in perceptions based on gender and on the aim of the admission procedure (selection or matching) were studied. In addition, the relationship between favorability and test performance, and the relationship between favorability and behavioral outcomes were investigated. Applicants rated interviews and trial‐studying tests most favorably. Contrary to expectations based on the existing literature, high school grades were perceived least favorably and there was no relationship between applicant perceptions and enrollment decisions. In line with previous research in the employment literature, general favorability was most strongly related to face validity, study‐relatedness, applicant differentiation, the chance to show skills, perceived scientific evidence, and perceived wide‐spread use. We found no differences in applicant perceptions based on gender and small differences based on the aim of admission procedures. These results extend the applicant perceptions literature to educational admission and the results are useful for administrators when choosing methods to admit students.     

Fairness Reactions to Personnel Selection Methods: An international comparison between the Netherlands,the United States,France, Spain,Portugal, and Singapore

This paper reports reactions to employee selection methods in the Netherlands and compares these findings internationally against six other previously published samples covering the United States, France, Spain, Portugal, and Singapore. A sample of 167 participants rated 10 popular assessment techniques using a translated version of Steiner and Gilliland's measure. In common with other country samples, we found that the most popular methods among applicants were interviews, work sample tests, and resumes. Least popular methods were graphology, personal contacts, and honesty and integrity tests. Generally, method favorability was found to be highly similar to the US and other published studies internationally. Across the six countries mean process favorability correlated at .87 and mean cross‐national procedural justice correlated .68. Process dimension ratings correlated at between .79 and .97 between the United States and the Netherlands. Only medium effect size differences (Cohen's d) were found between Dutch and US reactions to resumes and personality tests, the former being more favorably rated in the United States (d=.62) and the latter being more positively rated in the Netherlands (d=?.76). Implications for the design of selection procedures are discussed, especially implications for likely similarities and differences in applicant reactions internationally.     

Fairness Reactions to Personnel Selection Techniques in Greece: The role of core self‐evaluations

The current study examines fairness reactions to personnel selection methods and the role of core self‐evaluations (CSE) in Greece using two samples of employees (N=158) and students (N=181). Interviews, résumés, and work samples were the best‐rated and most favourably appraised methods across students and employees. Students demonstrated more positive attitudes towards psychometric (i.e., ability, personality, honesty) tests than did employees. As far as the procedural dimensions are concerned, similarly to previous studies, face validity and opportunity to perform were the strongest correlates of considering personnel selection methods favourably. Overall, the relationship between fairness reactions and CSE was weak. Our findings are compared with the results from studies of other countries using similar methodologies.     

Applicant Reactions in Saudi Arabia: Organizational attractiveness and core‐self evaluation

This paper reports findings from a survey into applicant reactions of working adults in Saudi Arabia. A sample of 193 participants from four job functions was obtained, with measures of organizational attractiveness, core‐self evaluation, and applicant reactions to four popular selection methods in the country – interviews, résumés, work sample tests, and references – being included. Findings indicate a notably similar pattern of preference reactions to previous studies in other (Western) countries, affirming arguments for so‐called reaction generalizability. Work sample tests were rated the most favorably followed by interviews, résumés, and references. For specific procedural dimensions, résumés were perceived as the most favorable, followed by work sample tests, interviews, and references. Several significant differences were found across job functions, mostly for interviews and résumés. Significant effects were found between reactions and organizational attractiveness, and between reactions and core‐self evaluation, including some interaction effects. Implications for future research and for practice in employee selection are considered in the conclusion.     

Perceptions of Justice in Employment Selection Decisions: The Role of Applicant Gender

In contrast to the vast majority of justice literature that controls for applicant gender, the present study investigated the role of applicant gender in relation to applicant procedural and distributive justice perceptions after being informed of an organization's reject/accept decision. A sample of 503 students completed a selection test, believing the results would be used to make initial selection decisions for an organization recruiting from a university. Two weeks later, participants were given selection decisions (randomly assigned), and procedural and distributive justice perceptions were assessed. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated gender moderated the relationship between selection decision favorability and organizational justice perceptions. As hypothesized, in comparison with rejected males, rejected female applicants reacted most negatively to both forms of justice. On the other hand, selected female applicants had a more positive reaction than selected male applicants to both procedural and distributive justice. Potential implications for these and other findings are discussed.     

Applicant Reactions to Selection Methods in China

This study examines applicant reactions to ten popular selection methods in China. Using a sample of 294 graduates we found that Chinese applicants’ reactions were highly favorable for work sample tests, interviews, and written ability tests, whereas Guanxi (i.e., relying on personal contacts when applying for a job) and graphology were perceived as the least favorable selection methods. Guanxi was also perceived as significantly less fair method compared with all others on all seven procedural dimensions studied. These findings suggest that Guanxi as an informal selection channel might threaten the fairness of personnel selection in China. Implications for the design of selection systems in Chinese companies are discussed, and ramifications for future research into applicant reactions are considered.     

Realpolitik versus fair process: moderating effects of group identification on acceptance of political decisions

Three studies examined the effects of perceived procedural justice and the favorability of a group-level outcome on the endorsement of a group-level decision and the evaluation of the authority responsible for the decision. Results showed that, contrary to findings usually seen with individual-level decisions, collective outcome favorability was more important than procedural justice in influencing the endorsement of the decision. Furthermore, increased identification with the group reduced the importance of procedural justice but accentuated the importance of collective outcome favorability. With regard to the evaluation of the authority, the results were similar to those obtained in individual-level decisions: Procedural fairness mattered more than collective outcome favorability.     

Fairness from the Applicant's Perspective: Reactions to Employee Selection Procedures

Applicants' reactions to selection procedures were examined in terms of the satisfaction and/or violation of 10 procedural justice rules. Critical incidents (n= 237) of fair and unfair treatment during selection were collected from 31 individuals who had recently experienced job search and hiring processes. Incidents were categorized into 10 procedural justice rules and the distribution of these incidents was examined for different hiring outcomes and different selection procedures. Dominant procedural concerns reflected selection procedure job relatedness and interpersonal treatment applicants received. Accepted applicants were primarily concerned about consistency of treatment, while rejected applicants were more concerned with timely feedback and blatant bias. Ease of faking was the primary procedural concern of applicants taking honesty and personality tests, while job relatedness was the primary concern with ability and work sample tests. Research issues were discussed and a number of practical suggestions were offered in terms of minimizing applicants' negative reactions to the selection process.     

The Role of Leader Morality in the Interaction Effect of Procedural Justice and Outcome Favorability

The present research explored the role of leader morality in the interaction effect of procedural justice and outcome favorability, and attempted to connect justice and morality construct in a new direction. Two studies in different settings and using different designs (a scenario experiment and a survey) yielded convergent results. When leader morality was high, the interaction effect of procedural justice and outcome favorability was significant, and fair procedures mitigated the negative effect of low outcome favorability. When leader morality was low, however, the interaction between procedural justice and outcome favorability was absent.     

The Influence of National Culture on the Perceived Fairness of Grading Procedures: A Comparison of the United States and China

Although the desire to be treated fairly is a fundamental human preference, perceptions of fair treatment can be influenced by cultural beliefs and values. For this article, the author used a scenario-based experimental study to examine students' fairness perceptions of grading procedures in 2 countries with distinct national cultures, China and the United States. The results suggest that culture can influence students' perceptions of the fairness of 2 aspects of procedural justice: voice and interpersonal justice. Chinese students were more likely to value interpersonal justice (i.e., being treated with dignity and respect, and being provided with explanations of grading procedures) and perceived the lack of interpersonal justice as less fair than did U.S. participants. In contrast, U.S. students were more likely to perceive voice (i.e., the opportunity to discuss and appeal a grading decision) as fair. These findings are connected to differences in the cultural values of the United States and China.     

Fairness Reactions to Personnel Selection Methods: A look at professionals in Mumbai,India

This study expands upon Steiner and Gilliland's selection fairness research. Professionals (N = 114) from Mumbai, India rated 12 employee selection methods on favorability and provided the bases for those ratings. In line with previous research, interviews and resumes were rated most favorably, while graphology and honesty tests were rated least favorably. Perceived face validity, opportunity to perform, and widespread use of selection methods were highly correlated with favorability ratings, while interpersonal warmth, scientific evidence, and respectful of privacy exhibited weak correlations with favorability ratings. Work sample tests, which have previously been rated favorably, were rated unfavorably. Exploratory analysis showed that participants viewed assessment centers favorably and online information unfavorably. Outcome favorability was highly correlated with favorability ratings.     

A Moderator of the Interaction Effect of Procedural Justice and Outcome Favorability: Importance of the Relationship

Justice literature has documented that procedural justice interacts with outcome favorability in determining people's reactions to a decision. Specifically when people perceive the outcome as negative, procedural justice has remarkably strong and positive influence on their attitudes and reactions to the decision. The present study extended past research by illustrating that the interaction effect of procedural justice and outcome favorability is dependent on the perceived importance of the relationship with the other party. Two studies yielded converging results that the interaction effect is operative only when the relationship with the other person or group is important to the person.     

Do Immigrants Have Different Procedural Justice Perceptions of Personnel Selection methods? The case of native Israelis and immigrants from the former Soviet Union

Most prior research on perceived procedural justice vis‐à‐vis human resource management selection procedures focuses on comparisons between nations and between types of employees. So far, findings indicate slight, if any, differences between nations. Predicated on a random sample of 950 respondents – native Israelis and Israelis from the former Soviet Union – we find significant differences between the two groups concerning five selection methods, which we ascribe to inherent cultural dissimilarities. We attribute these differences to Hofstede's uncertainty avoidance dimension. These results may elicit increased focus on inherent cultural differences among potential employees with the view of considering these differences in opting for selection methods in order to accommodate for existing cultural differences. This consideration appears particularly pertinent in culturally diverse workforces, given the increased proportion of immigrants.     

Applicant Reactions in Selection: Comprehensive meta‐analysis into reaction generalization versus situational specificity

This paper reports a comprehensive quantitative summary into applicant reactions to popular methods of employee selection. A detailed search of published and unpublished studies resulted in a final sample (k) of 38 independent samples covering 10 popular candidate assessment methods. Applicant reactions primary studies included samples from 17 countries internationally. Counter to previous suggestions for the situational specificity of applicant reactions, findings showed considerable similarity supporting the reaction generalizability hypothesis. Reaction favorability was structurally similar across countries and revealed a three‐tier clustering of overall favorability perceptions –most preferred (work samples, interviews), favorably evaluated (resumes, cognitive tests, references, biodata, personality inventories), and least preferred (honesty tests, personal contacts, graphology). Some differences in applicant reactions to dimension‐specific perceptions were found, however. Further analyses revealed strong positive correlations between favorability ratings and their validity and international usage. Implications for future research and ramifications for practice are considered in conclusion.     

Perceived fairness in employee selection: the role of applicant personality

The present study investigated the role of applicant personality in relation to applicant procedural and distributive justice perceptions after being informed of an organization’s reject/accept selection decision. A sample of 503 students completed a selection test, believing the results would be used to make initial selection decisions for an organization recruiting from the university. Participants were presented with selection decisions (randomly assigned) two weeks later, and procedural and distributive justice perceptions were assessed. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that agreeableness, openness to experience, and test-taking self-efficacy were positively related with perceptions of procedural and distributive justice. Neuroticism was negatively associated with distributive justice perceptions. The relationships of test-taking self-efficacy with procedural and distributive justice were moderated by the organization’s selection decision.     

When do multiple dimensions of procedural justice predict agreement to publicly endorse your employer in recruitment advertisements?

This field study linked multiple dimensions of procedural justice to working nurses' (N=198) agreement to permit their names to appear in recruiting advertisements for their employer. Using a longitudinal design, surveys were completed at two different times. After controlling for differences in gender, tenure, job involvement, and distributive justice; nurses who perceived higher procedural justice of work schedules and work assignments were more likely to permit their names to appear in recruitment advertisements. Unlike prior research that found high procedural justice offset the negative impact of low distributive justice, in this study high procedural justice interacted with high distributive justice to produce a positive organizational citizenship behaviour.     

Perceived Distributive Fairness of European Transfer Payments and EU‐Taxes in Austria,the Czech Republic,and the United Kingdom

The present research compared a distributive fairness model of EU transfer payments (Hartner, Rechberger, Kirchler, & Wenzel, 2011) between three countries: Austria, the Czech Republic, and the UK. The model postulates an interplay between EU‐tax compliance, distributive fairness, outcome favorability as well as national and European identification. Results across countries showed that EU‐tax compliance was positively related to distributive justice, which was in turn related to outcome favorability and identification. National identifiers perceived EU membership as unfavorable in financial and socio‐political terms, and thus considered the transfer payments as less fair. Dual identifiers perceived the socio‐political outcomes as more favorable, and thus evaluated the transfer payments as fairer. Although the basic structure of the model was valid across all three countries, two country‐specific results were found. First, in the UK individual tax paying behavior was influenced by outcome favorability, whereas in Austria and the Czech Republic this relationship was mediated via distributive fairness. Second, in the Austrian sample, the differentiation between patriots and nationalists proved fruitful since nationalists considered the EU transfer payments as unfair, unlike patriots. In the UK and the Czech Republic the distinction between nationalists and patriots did not add any further information.     

Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures: An Updated Model and Meta-Analysis

An updated theoretical model of applicant reactions to selection procedures is proposed and tested using meta-analysis. Results from 86 independent samples  ( N = 48,750)  indicated that applicants who hold positive perceptions about selection are more likely to view the organization favorably and report stronger intentions to accept job offers and recommend the employer to others. Applicant perceptions were positively correlated with actual and perceived performance on selection tools and with self-perceptions. The average correlation between applicant perceptions and gender, age, and ethnic background was near zero. Face validity and perceived predictive validity were strong predictors of many applicant perceptions including procedural justice, distributive justice, attitudes towards tests, and attitudes towards selection. Interviews and work samples were perceived more favorably than cognitive ability tests, which were perceived more favorably than personality inventories, honesty tests, biodata, and graphology. The discussion identifies remaining theoretical and methodological issues as well as directions for future research.     

The Role of Attributions and Fairness in Understanding Job Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures and Decisions

Purpose

Drawing mainly upon Applicant Attribution-Reaction Theory (AART), we clarify and underscore the role of attribution dimensions (personal control, external control, and stability) in forming applicant fairness perceptions, attitudes, and behavioral reactions.

Design/Methodology/Approach

Students seeking (or about to seek) jobs (N = 264) participated in an experimental study in which procedural justice rules and outcome favorability (selected or rejected) were manipulated. Participants reported their attributions, fairness perceptions, and behavioral intentions. Hypotheses were tested through SEM and bootstrapping.

Findings

Applicant attributions were predicted by outcome favorability and the extent to which the interview process satisfied/violated procedural justice rules. In line with AART, process fairness perceptions mediated relationships between applicant attribution dimensions and both organizational perceptions and behavioral intentions.

Implications

Organizations should satisfy justice rules in employee selection processes because such rules affect applicant attributions, which in turn predict perceptions and behavioral intentions. In addition to identifying antecedents and consequences of fairness perceptions, antecedents and consequences of applicant attributions should be investigated, as both relate to important organizational outcomes.

Originality/Value

This study is one of a very few to test propositions from AART. Through an experimental design of high internal validity, we show that outcome favorability and the satisfaction/violation of justice rules predict job applicant attributions (personal control, external control, and stability). We further show that applicants’ attributions explain unique variance in their perceptions of the employing organization and in their behavioral intentions (e.g., recommend organization to others; litigate) beyond that explained by selection outcome and fairness perceptions.