面试中的AIM问题及改进对策

面试、尤其是结构化面试是企业、政府机关及一些非盈利性组织选拔人才的最常用的工具。随着应聘者的面试经验增加,面试选拔优秀人才的难度也在增加。本文借鉴国外“印象控制”（AIM）概念,就如何克服主试者的主观偏见、第一印象偏见、次序对比偏见等面试误差、提高面试的信度和效度作了探索。     

应聘者印象管理研究述评

应聘者的印象管理行为在求职面试情境中是一种普遍现象,其目的旨在赢得面试考官的良好评价。应聘者印象管理行为包括有3类策略：获得性策略、保护性策略及非言语策略;同时,对应聘者印象管理行为的测量也要从印象管理策略的测量和印象管理风格的测量两个方面入手。另外,在整合已有文献的基础上,还从面试情境与应聘者印象管理行为、应聘者个性特质与印象管理策略使用、应聘者印象管理行为与面试结果及招聘者对应聘者印象管理识别等4个方面综述了应聘者印象管理研究的发展现状,并指出了现有研究存在的问题及未来研究的方向     

Applicant reactions and faking in real-life personnel selection

Faking may affect hiring decisions in personnel selection. All the antecedents of faking are still not known. The present study investigates the association between applicants' reactions about the selection procedure and their tendency to fake. The subjects (N = 180) were real-life applicants for a fire and rescue personnel school. After completing the selection process, the applicants filled out a questionnaire about their test reactions (Chan, Schmitt, Sacco & DeSohon, 1998b) and a faking scale, the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (Paulhus, 1991). The results based on Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) indicated that the more positive reactions applicant had about the selection procedure the more impression management they had. The applicant reactions were not associated with self-deception.     

Prepared to fake? The relationship between applicants’ job interview preparation and faking

Multiple frameworks and models postulate an effect of job interview preparation on faking. Two studies were conducted to examine if applicants’ interview preparation is correlated with higher faking. Besides analyzing the general extent of preparation, we also distinguished between different preparation categories. In Study 1 (N = 237), a presented preparation video led to higher intentions on image protection but did not increase overall faking intentions. Study 2 (N = 206) focused on past preparation and impression management (IM). The total time spent on preparation was positively correlated with faking. Applicants’ preparation via online videos and professional interview preparation was correlated with higher deceptive and honest IM. Preparation via online videos was additionally correlated with a higher perceived interview difficulty.     

人事选拔中作假的内涵及测量方法

作假普遍存在于人事选拔各个阶段,并对最终选拔结果造成影响.研究者对于作假的内涵界定有较大差异,主要是由于研究者对作假结构、变异来源和作假水平有不同理解.根据不同作假定义可衍生出多种作假测量方法,常用的有基线差值法、认知模式法、嵌入量表法和行为模式法四类.从测量指标、次数和内容三个方面分析归纳这四类测量方法,其作假识别效用与选拔中作假测量的可行性各异.今后的研究应完善现有作假测量方法,开发作假动机测量工具,加强作假的过程性控制研究,并深入探索作假的个体差异.     

How do applicants fake? A response process model of faking on multidimensional forced-choice personality assessments

Faking on personality assessments remains an unsolved issue, raising major concerns regarding their validity and fairness. Although there is a large body of quantitative research investigating the response process of faking on personality assessments, for both rating scales (RS) and multidimensional forced choice (MFC), only a few studies have yet qualitatively investigated the faking cognitions when responding to MFC in a high-stakes context (e.g., Sass et al., 2020). Yet, it could be argued that only when we have a process model that adequately describes the response decisions in high stakes, can we begin to extract valid and useful information from assessments. Thus, this qualitative study investigated the faking cognitions when responding to MFC personality assessment in a high-stakes context. Through cognitive interviews with N = 32 participants, we explored and identified factors influencing the test-takers' decisions regarding specific items and blocks, and factors influencing the willingness to engage in faking in general. Based on these findings, we propose a new response process model of faking forced-choice items, the Activate-Rank-Edit-Submit (A-R-E-S) model. We also make four recommendations for practice of high-stakes assessments using MFC.     

Better explaining the benefits why AI? Analyzing the impact of explaining the benefits of AI-supported selection on applicant responses

Despite the increasing popularity of AI-supported selection tools, knowledge about the actions that can be taken by organizations to increase AI acceptance is still in its infancy, even though multiple studies point out that applicants react negatively to the implementation of AI-supported selection tools. Therefore, this study investigates ways to alter applicant reactions to AI-supported selection. Using a scenario-based between-subject design with participants from the working population (N = 200), we varied the information provided by the organization about the reasons for using an AI-supported selection process (no additional information vs. written information vs. video information) in comparison to a human selection process. Results show that the use of AI without information and with written information decreased perceived fairness, personableness perception, and increased emotional creepiness. In turn, perceived fairness, personableness perceptions, and emotional creepiness mediated the association between an AI-supported selection process, organizational attractiveness, and the intention to further proceed with the selection process. Moreover, results did not differ for applicants who were provided video explanations of the benefits of AI-supported selection tools and those who participated in an actual human selection process. Important implications for research and practice are discussed.     

医务人员的印象管理

医务人员的印象管理有两种技术:一是获得性印象管理,具体手段有:精勤不倦、深究医术,仁爱救人,真诚地称赞和表扬,适当的意见遵从,营销自我,SOLER,工作严谨慎重,角色获得等;二是保护性印象管理,具体手段有:事发前的保护性印象管理与事发后的保护性印象管理.