Gender Bias in Leader Selection? Evidence from a Hiring Simulation Study

The present research investigated factors that might affect gender discrimination in a hiring simulation context from the perspectives of social role theory and the shifting standards model. Specifically, the experimental study investigated whether gender biases are evident in the screening and hiring stage of the personnel selection process depending on the applicants?? social role and evaluators?? gender. A sample of German undergraduate business students (54 women, 53 men) was asked to make a personnel selection decision (short-listing or hiring) about a fictitious applicant (man or woman) in a specific role (leader or non-leader) for a managerial position. Consistent with social role theory??s assumption that social role information is more influential than gender information, participants selected applicants described as leaders over applicants described as non-leaders, regardless of applicant gender. In addition, in the presence of role information, female applicants portrayed as leaders were similarly short-listed and hired as male applicants with the same credentials. In the absence of role information, female applicants were similarly short-listed as male applicants; however, male applicants were hired over female applicants, albeit by male participants only. This is consistent with the shifting standards model??s assumption that group members are held to a higher standard to confirm traits on which they are perceived to be deficient: Male participants hired female applicants portrayed as non-leaders with less certainty than their male counterparts possibly due to higher confirmatory standards for leadership ability in women than men. The research and practice implications of these results are discussed.     

Applicant Reactions to Digital Selection Methods: A Signaling Perspective on Innovativeness and Procedural Justice

Research has shown that the use of digital technologies in the personnel selection process can have both positive and negative effects on applicants’ attraction to an organization. We explain this contradiction by specifying its underlying mechanisms. Drawing on signaling theory, we build a conceptual model that applies two different theoretical lenses (instrumental-symbolic framework and justice theory) to suggest that perceptions of innovativeness and procedural justice explain the relationship between an organization’s use of digital selection methods and employer attractiveness perceptions. We test our model by utilizing two studies, namely one experimental vignette study among potential applicants (N?=?475) and one retrospective field study among actual job applicants (N?=?335). With the exception of the assessment stage in Study 1, the positive indirect effects found in both studies indicated that applicants perceive digital selection methods to be more innovative. While Study 1 also revealed a negative indirect effect, with potential applicants further perceiving digital selection methods as less fair than less digitalized methods in the interview stage, this effect was not significant for actual job applicants in Study 2. We discuss theoretical implications for the applicant reactions literature and offer recommendations for human resource managers to make use of positive signaling effects while reducing potential negative signaling effects linked to the use of digital selection methods.

     

What is in Applicants' Minds When They Fill Out a Personality Test? Insights from a qualitative study

Many practitioners fear that applicants will fake if they are asked to fill out a personality test. Although this fear has inspired much research, it remains unknown what applicants think when they fill out a questionnaire. Thus, we conducted a qualitative interview study that was guided by grounded theory principles. We interviewed (a) real applicants directly after filling out a personality test; (b) real applicants who had filled out a personality test in their past job hunt; (c) hypothetical job applicants whom we asked to imagine being an applicant and to fill out a personality test; and (d) hypothetical applicants who had much experience with personality tests. Theoretical saturation was achieved after interviewing 23 people. A content analysis showed that much is going on in applicants' minds – that which is typically subsumed under the expression ‘faking’ actually consists of many facets. In particular, participants assumed that the interpretation of their responses could be based on (a) the consistency of their responses; (b) the endorsement of middle versus extreme answers; and (c) a certain profile, and these assumptions resulted in corresponding self‐presentation strategies. However, these strategies were not used by all participants. Some answered honestly, for different reasons ranging from honesty as a personality trait to the (false) belief that test administrators can catch fakers. All in all, this study questions whether measuring mean changes in classical faking studies captures all important facets.     

The Nature of Stereotypes II: A Multiple-Process Model of Evaluations1

A model integrating 3 theoretical perspectives regarding how stereotypes influence person perception was tested. The theories included evaluative extremity theories, assumed characteristics theory, and expectancy violation theory. Predictions were assessed by manipulating the ethnicity, personal appearance, and speech style of target job applicants. These applicants were rated by 109 judges. Results showed that: (a) Judges evaluated job applicants far more on the basis of their personal appearance and speech style than on the basis of their ethnicity; (b) the range of evaluations of African American applicants was larger than the range of evaluations of White applicants; and (c) overall, judges evaluated the African American applicants more favorably than the White applicants. Results strongly supported the model integrating the 3 theories. We discuss the applicability of the model to other research and naturalistic situations.     

How Interviewers Judge Job Applicants: A Qualitative Study

The aim of a job interview is to allow an interviewer to judge whether an applicant will fit into the job at stake. This study investigated how various constructs (for instance, preinterview impressions, professional competencies, and attraction to applicants) influence interviewers’ judgment of applicants. The data were obtained from 49 qualitative interviews with job interviewers about their judgment of applicants. Attraction to the applicant was considered the most important construct in interviewers’ judgment processes, despite the fact that this has little to do with an applicant's job performance. The study argues that interviewers’ judgment processes are problematic, and that this is not due to poor interviewers. Instead, the very concept of the job interview leads to interviewers’ use of problematic constructs. The qualitative approach in the study provides insight into the way in which specific job interviewers judge applicants. Such insight cannot be gained from a quantitative approach, which has traditionally been used in job interview research. Finally, the study will provide a critical discussion of the psychological reasons for job interviewers’ use of problematic constructs in their decision making process.     

Administrative Assumptions in Top‐Down Selection: A Test in Graduate School Admission Decisions

Although top‐down selection is the gold standard for making personnel decisions, several administrative assumptions must be met for it to be effective. We discuss three of these assumptions and test two of them: (1) top applicants will accept an offer, and (2) the time organisations give applicants to consider an offer will not influence the availability of next‐tier applicants. We also examine the effectiveness of top‐down selection by comparing it to an administratively simpler procedure, random selection above a threshold. Using archival admissions data from three university graduate psychology programs, we found that top applicants were less likely to accept an offer; however, waiting time did not influence applicant availability. In comparing the quality of applicants actually selected (with a top‐down procedure) with the quality of applicants selected at random (from above five progressively stringent thresholds), we found that at higher admission thresholds, random selection resulted in better or equal quality applicants as top‐down selection, depending on the criteria. We discuss implications for future research and practice.     

The impact of corrections for faking on the validity of noncognitive measures in selection settings

In selection research and practice, there have been many attempts to correct scores on noncognitive measures for applicants who may have faked their responses somehow. A related approach with more impact would be identifying and removing faking applicants from consideration for employment entirely, replacing them with high-scoring alternatives. The current study demonstrates that under typical conditions found in selection, even this latter approach has minimal impact on mean performance levels. Results indicate about .1 SD change in mean performance across a range of typical correlations between a faking measure and the criterion. Where trait scores were corrected only for suspected faking, and applicants not removed or replaced, the minimal impact the authors found on mean performance was reduced even further. By comparison, the impact of selection ratio and test validity is much larger across a range of realistic levels of selection ratios and validities. If selection researchers are interested only in maximizing predicted performance or validity, the use of faking measures to correct scores or remove applicants from further employment consideration will produce minimal effects.     

Differential Effectiveness of Applicant Impression Management Tactics on Employment Interview Decisions1

It has been a commonly held belief for some time that applicants attempt to manage impressions of interviewers in the employment interview process, but only recently have researchers begun to examine systematically the tactics applicants use, and how effective they are. The present study contrasted two sets of impression management tactics used by applicants and observed their effects on interviewer decisions in a controlled laboratory experiment. An applicant who employed self-focused-type impression management tactics was rated higher, received more recommendations for a job offer, and received fewer rejections from business students, who had just completed an interviewer training program, than when he used other-focused-type tactics. The implications of these results in terms of both theory and practice are discussed.     

How Much do Chinese Applicants Fake?

More and more organizations have applicants who come from different cultural backgrounds, and according to new research, these cultural backgrounds matter for applicants' self‐presentational behavior (i.e., faking). If applicants come from China, can organizations assume that they will present themselves modestly, as suggested by Chinese norms? Or should organizations assume that there will be much self‐presentational behavior due to the high unemployment rate, at least among Chinese graduates? To answer this question, we obtained data from 307 Chinese applicants on their self‐presentational behavior, using the randomized response technique to ensure anonymity. We compared these data with similar data sets from the United States, Switzerland, and China. Contrary to the proposed modesty hypothesis in Chinese samples, perhaps due to high unemployment, self‐presentation was as prevalent in Chinese samples as in American samples.     

THE EFFECT OF SEX SIMILARITY ON RECRUITERS' EVALUATIONS OF ACTUAL APPLICANTS: A TEST OF THE SIMILARITY-ATTRACTION PARADIGM

The present study examined the effect of sex similarity on recruiters' evaluations of actual applicants in campus interviews and tested whether perceived similarity and interpersonal attraction mediated this effect. Structural equation modeling was performed on data from 476 campus interviews. The results revealed complex effects of sex similarity on recruiters' decision processes. Perceived similarity and interpersonal attraction mediated the effect of sex similarity on female recruiters' assessments of applicants' qualifications. Unexpectedly, female recruiters saw male applicants as more similar to themselves and more qualified than female applicants. For male recruiters, interview outcomes were not affected by sex similarity. Social identity theory, which suggests that the status associated with demographic characteristics may influence the nature of demographic similarity effects, provides a possible explanation for the findings.     

A Prototype Matching Approach to Understanding the Role of Applicant Gender and Age in the Evaluation of Job Applicants1

This research uses a prototype matching approach to understand how job applicant evaluations are made and the role that applicant gender and age play in these evaluations. It is hypothesized that raters represent information about jobs and jobholders in person-in-job prototypes. Raters evaluate applicants by matching information about applicants to the person-in-job prototype associated with the job for which the applicant is applying. Person-in-job prototypes are comprised of features that are more (i.e., central) or less (i.e., peripheral) strongly associated with the prototype. Three laboratory studies examined several hypotheses derived from a prototype matching approach. Results indicated that applicants who matched on more central features were evaluated more favorably than applicants who matched on fewer central features of person-in-job prototypes. In addition, applicants who matched on age were evaluated more favorably than applicants who did not match on age when age was a central but not a peripheral feature of a person-in-job prototype. However, applicants who matched on gender were not evaluated differently from applicants who did not match on gender when gender was a central or a peripheral feature of a person-in-job prototype. Finally, there was some evidence that raters used applicant gender in a complex manner when evaluating applicants. Implications for theory and research on bias in selection are discussed.     

Development and psychometric examination of a German video‐based situational judgment test for social competencies in medical school applicants

The present study describes the development and validation of a video‐based situational judgment test (SJT) assessing social competencies in applicants to medical school. Study 1 explored the psychometric properties of the SJT based on two applicant cohorts (N₁ = 769, N₂ = 787). Study 2 compared SJT data from applicants and 90 medical students. Tests for mean differences, correlation and factor analyses were used. In Study 1, the supposed two‐factor model for the SJT must be rejected. According to the minimum average partial test a single factor solution explaining 19–21% of the variance was suggested. The SJT showed satisfactory psychometric properties and stronger correlations to personality than to cognition as well as high acceptance. In study 2, applicants reached higher SJT scores than students.     

A BEHAVIORAL CONSISTENCY APPROACH TO DECISION MAKING IN EMPLOYMENT SELECTION

Evaluations of applicants made using an assessment process which incorporates many practices and procedures advocated in the literature but often disregarded in employment were examined. Two employment interviewers and 29 line managers independently evaluated 181 applicants for manufacturing production work in terms of 5 factors of effective performance. Average interrater reliabilities ranged from .60 to .69. Results indicated reliabilities were comparable for applicants grouped by race and sex, and that interviewers were calibrated with one another in terms of level of evaluations. The assessment model described in the present study is discussed in terms of its suitability as a vehicle for further research in employment interviewing and its practical usefulness.     

Job Interview Strategies For People with a Visible Disability1

A total of 117 students participated in the present investigation, which compared wheelchair-user and able-bodied job applicants as well as two interview-taking strategies available to wheelchair users: disclosing the disability during the telephone screening or not doing so and acknowledging it only during a face-to-face interview. Results show that wheelchair-user applicants were evaluated more favorably than able-bodied applicants during the telephone interview, a finding consistent with the positivity bias and “sympathy effect” findings of others. After a face-to-face interview, wheelchair-user applicants who did not disclose their disability over the telephone were evaluated somewhat more favorably than those who did so. However, they were less likely to be selected for the job. The implications of the results for theory, research, and practice are discussed.     

Rater Correction Processes in Applicant Selection Using Videoconference Technology: The Role of Attributions1

Increasing global competition for the best employees has resulted in a significant increase in the recruiting and selection of geographically dispersed applicants. Innovative telecommunication technologies (e.g., videoconferencing) have provided a means to interview distant applicants at relatively low cost, compared to face‐to‐face interviews. However, some have suggested that interviewer ratings could be affected by the use of communication media to conduct the interview. In the present laboratory study, we tested a model of rater decision processes to help explain a mechanism for inflated ratings of videoconference‐based applicants. Participants who believed that they were making judgments for a real selection process rated simulated videoconference or face‐to‐face interviews. Raters who perceived interview media to be lower in richness were more likely to make external attributions for the applicant's performance, and consequently rated him more favorably.     

The Employment Interview: A Self-Validation Model

I relate two subjects—speech communication and employment interviewing—by applying a developmental theory of interpersonal communication to the initial job interview. Since I view an employment interview as symbolic interaction, I provide a self-validation model that is analogous to interpersonal perception theory. I suggest the usefulness of the model by describing how interviewers and job applicants can enhance their interviewing skills.     

A detection theory approach to the evaluation of assessors in assessment centres

The ratings given to job applicants in an assessment centre (AC) will be influenced both by an assessor's sensitivity to the evidence of suitability provided by the applicants, and by whether the assessor has a liberal or a conservative rating tendency. In this study we explore the usefulness of signal detection methodology for evaluating and comparing both aspects of performance. A group of eight managerial assessors in a real‐world AC rated 195 applicants for retail sales positions. The sensitivity and response bias of assessors was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses, and their performance was evaluated by means of critical operating characteristic (COC) analyses. RscorePlus software ( Harvey, 2002 ) was used for these purposes. We conclude that, in this and similar organizational contexts, such analyses are potentially useful for estimating and comparing the performances of assessors, thereby highlighting the need for, and subsequently evaluating the effectiveness of, any remedial intervention.     

Comparison of the factors influencing interviewer hiring decisions for applicants with and those without disabilities

Two studies present an examination of the factors that influence hiring decisions for applicants with, and those without, disabilities in the employment interview. In Study 1, an integrative conceptual model of interviewer hiring decisions was proposed and tested in a field sample of applicants with disabilities. Interviewers provided ratings for 70 unstructured interviews with disabled applicants. Study 2 examined the fit of the model in an independent field sample of interviews with fully-able applicants (n=165). Results supported the model among both groups of applicants. Implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.This paper has been improved greatly through the suggestions of John Binning, Michael Campion, Robert L. Dipboye, Miles Patterson, and Mark Tubbs, and Lisa Brady and Jennifer Malatesta. Study 1 was partially funded by a grant from the U.S. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services to the Wright State University Office of Disability Services (Theodore L. Hayes, co-Principal Investigator).     

Les livres de conseils : un moyen de réduire l’incertitude des candidats liée à l’entretien de sélection

The selection interview is a situation full of uncertainty for applicants. Not knowing precisely how they will be evaluated, they will thus try to gather information about interviews, mainly through media such as advice books. These books can participate in reducing applicants’ uncertainty: (1) by materializing the abstract concept that is the interview using metaphors, (2) by providing information about interview formats, and (3) by providing advices to prepare for the interview. This study investigates the presence of these three means in both French and English advice literature. It highlights that all three are used in general, that the last two means are the most frequent ones, and that several differences between the two literatures emerge. Implications for research and organizations are discussed.     

The Disadvantaged and the Aptitude Barrier

The theory and practice of aptitude testing are critically discussed within the context of current efforts to improve the status of the poor. Aptitude testing is contrasted with achievement testing with special attention directed toward underlying assumptions, validation procedures, and the interpretation of test scores. Aptitude tests are found to have profoundly bad effects for disadvantaged applicants. The tests bar them from employment and destroy their aspirations in the process. Recommendation is made for a battery of pre-employment tests more closely related to achievement test principles. It is argued that such a battery would be more relevant and hope-redeeming for underprivileged applicants while preserving the advantages of pre-employment ability testing.