EFFECTS OF APPLICANT RACE, SEX, SUITABILITY, AND ANSWERS ON INTERVIEWER'S QUESTIONING STRATEGY AND RATINGS

Impression formation research (Snyder & Swann, 1978) suggests that people engage in information seeking strategies designed to confirm their impressions of others. In an extension of this work to the selection interview, Sackett (1982) found, however, that subjects did not consistently adopt a confirmatory information seeking strategy. This study is a further examination of Snyder and Swann's theory. In simulated interviews 170 subjects (1) read resumes of hypothetical applicants, (2) selected ten questions to ask each applicant, (3) received written responses to each question immediately on its selection, and (4) rated each applicant's suitability. An interaction accounting for 73% of variance indicated that applicant ratings were based primarily on the content of applicants' responses, but initial impressions also played a part. No clear-cut, confirmatory information seeking strategy was observed.     

Jealousy mediates the relationship between attractiveness comparison and females' indirect aggression

Indirect aggression is considered an evolutionarily adaptive mechanism that can improve female mating success. It has been hypothesized that indirect aggression toward romantic partners and peers is used more frequently by females who make appearance‐based comparisons and that these relationships are mediated by jealousy. Females (N = 528) currently in romantic relationships were surveyed. Results confirmed females who made more frequent appearance comparisons aggressed more often toward partners and peers. Low‐comparing females reported being more frequent targets of peer indirect aggression. Jealousy partially mediated the relationships between making frequent attractiveness comparisons and indirect aggression. Results are discussed as effort allocated toward deterring partner defection and fending off rivals, and the role of emotion as a motivational influence for aggression.     

Is she the one? Personality judgments from online personal advertisements

The authors examined the linguistic cues that inform personality judgments from online personal advertisements, and whether these judgments are accurate. Advertisers reported their personality, and 2 sets of naïve judges—including one that was seeking a romantic partner—rated advertisers' personality after reading their ads. Judges' impressions of extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability—3 traits that are strongly desired in a romantic partner—were influenced by particular lexical cues, such as word count, emotionality, and profanity. Both sets of judges formed accurate impressions for extraversion, but not other traits. These findings suggest that online daters use linguistic cues to judge the desirability of a potential romantic partner's personality, but that the impressions driven by these cues are not always accurate.     

WATCHING THE DETECTIVES: SEASONAL STUDENT EMPLOYEE REACTIONS TO ELECTRONIC MONITORING WITH AND WITHOUT ADVANCE NOTIFICATION

The present paper tested procedural justice hypotheses about seasonal high school and college student employees' reactions to electronic monitoring with video cameras. Study 1, a field study, explored (a) whether employees receiving advance notification of monitoring offered more favorable justice judgments than employees who did not, and (b) whether employees who saw monitoring procedures and/or consequences as fair returned to the organization the following summer. Results supported the hypotheses: employees viewed monitoring procedures as fairer if they received advance notice. Fairness judgments predicted reemployment Study 2, a scenario-based laboratory experiment, also found that advance notice elicited greater justice beliefs. In addition, Study 2 examined how variations in justification for the monitoring affected justice beliefs. Either strong or weak justifications produced greater procedural justice beliefs than no justification.     

THE ISSUE-EVENT DISTINCTION: A RULE OF CONVERSATION AND ITS SCOPE CONDITION

Earlier research identified a conversational rule of relevance that states, “when a conversation is seen to possess an issue-event structure the preferred type of extension is a remark that continues the issue.” This study reports an experiment that investigates the generalizability of that earlier research and tests two conditions hypothesized to limit application of the rule. The limiting conditions are posited on the basis of a cognitive principle and universal concerns for face. The first principle, discourse comprehensibility, is found to have a strong impact on the applicability of the rule. The second condition, message importance, is not; instead, the relevance rule is found to apply across levels of message importance. Possible reasons for this finding are discussed and implications of this research for further investigation of conversational rules and for training concerns are presented.     

Issue-Event Extensions and Interaction Involvement Text-Based and Meaning-Based Discourse Strategies

Prior research focusing on textual features in the talk of high and low-involved speakers has characterized the discourse strategy of low-involved speakers as text-based and that of high-involved speakers as meaning-based. This study examined the extensions of issue-event structures by high-involved and low-involved participants to determine if this characterization of discourse strategies held on a pragmatic level as well. Results indicated that low-involved communicators extended the event significantly more directly than high-involved communicators. Furthermore, the issue extensions of low-involved communicators were shown to be more sensitive to the comprehensibitity and information value of the stimulus utterance than the issue extensions of high-involved communicators. The results confirm that low-involved communicators have more difficulty than high-involved communicators in responding to the flow of conversation and that low-involved communicators compensate by relying on a text-based discourse strategy.