Search

Asynchronous video interviews (AVIs) are a form of one‐way, technology‐mediated selection interview that can help streamline and increase flexibility in the hiring process and are used to hire millions of applicants per year. Although applicant reactions to AVIs in general tend to be more negative than with traditional interview modalities, AVIs can differ widely in how they are designed. For instance, applicants can be provided with more or less preparation time, response length, rerecording options, or rely on different question formats. This study examines how AVI design features impact applicant reactions, as well as the moderating role played by applicant age and gender. Data from 27,809 real job applicant's AVI experiences were collected in 11 countries (69.3% English‐speaking) from 33 companies and relating to 72 types of positions. Data were fitted with linear mixed‐effects models to account for nesting. Results showed that allowing more preparation time and offering the opportunity to rerecord responses were related to more favorable reactions, while including more questions was related to more negative reactions. Applicants above the age of 31 reacted especially negatively to AVIs with more questions while those below the age of 30 preferred being allocated longer maximum response lengths. Women reacted more positively to increased preparation time. These findings might help both AVI vendors and hiring organizations design AVIs that facilitate a positive applicant experience. Our research also expands knowledge on applicant reactions to interviews, highlights crucial differences from traditional formats, and calls for integrating applicant characteristics into current theoretical frameworks on applicant reactions to AVIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study engaged 4848 first‐time, English‐speaking prospective Canadian Armed Forces applicants to evaluate pre‐application interventions' efficacy on the Practice Canadian Forces Aptitude Test (PCFAT). Using a five‐level between‐subjects design, participants were randomly assigned to one of the following intervention conditions: inoculation message, value‐affirmation message, a combination of both, placebo writing intervention, or a no‐intervention control group. The interventions were anchored in inoculation theory and value‐affirmation theory and aimed to reduce math anxiety and close the gender gap in test performance. Contrary to expectations, the interventions did not significantly reduce math anxiety or improve problem‐solving performance. Consistent with the literature, a negative relationship was found between levels of math anxiety and problem‐solving scores, and men outscored women in problem‐solving across all conditions. Despite these outcomes, the study lays a foundation for future research on enhancing pre‐applicant experiences in an increasingly competitive labor market. Implications and future directions are discussed. Practitioner Points: Large virtual field study innovates methods to reduce test anxiety.Examines gender disparities in test performance with robust sample size.Novel approach leveraging practice tests to improve precandidate reactions.Inoculation and value‐affirmation failed to improve precandidate reactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is increasing attention to storification of assessments (i.e., embedding a storyline into a non‐storified assessment) in research and practice and to gamified and game‐based assessment in general. However, there is a surprising lack of agreement and of recommendations regarding what level of fantasy of the storyline one should choose for the storification from the perspective of applicant reactions. A distinction is typically made between fantasy (e.g., fighting aliens) and realistic (e.g., workday simulations) storylines, with both choices having their advantages and disadvantages. In this study, a sample of 195 participants was shown either a storified realistic test, a storified fantasy test, or a non‐storified test. Afterwards, they rated various applicant reaction measures. Both storified assessments were rated equally positively on perceived modernity of the organization and enjoyment but the storified realistic test was superior to the storified fantasy test in terms of perceived job‐relatedness, procedural fairness, organizational attractiveness, and clarity of work activity. Thus, the level of fantasy of a storyline in a storified assessment plays an important role for applicant reaction variables, whereby the overall pattern of results showed that the storified realistic test was rated most favorably, followed by the non‐storified test, and the storified fantasy assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Technology‐enabled recruitment and selection technologies, such as chatbots, assessment games, and asynchronous video interviews, are becoming more widely used. However, their impact on people with disabilities is frequently ignored; this has potentially significant implications for the perceived fairness of hiring decisions. We advance eight theoretical propositions on the positive and negative implications of technology‐enabled recruitment and selection technologies for applicant reactions of people with disabilities. Our propositions are based on three key design features of these technologies: separation in time and space, automated administration, and automated evaluation. We provide recommendations for future research and discuss practical implications for the use of advanced technology in recruitment and selection. Practitioner points: Organizations are increasingly using technology‐enabled recruitment and selection tools such as chatbots, assessment games, and asynchronous video interviews to recruit and select employees, without considering how these technologies can affect people with disabilities.We consider the positive and negative impacts of these technologies on the experiences of people with disabilities, with particular attention to applicant reactions.We offer guidance to vendors and users of these technologies in terms of how they can be used to provide better and more inclusive experiences for applicants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Preliminary research has demonstrated that not all assessment center (AC) exercises are viewed as equally just or motivating. The current research builds upon this research and investigates the relationships between six AC exercises and perceptions of self-efficacy, motivation, assessor bias, and fairness. Using a 2 × 2 × 2 experimental design (two informational justice interventions and one rating timing intervention), 286 working adults completed a survey designed to investigate differences between AC exercises and to investigate interventions designed to influence AC exercise perceptions. The results show not only significant perceptual differences between assessor-rated exercises and an ability test but also differences among the rated exercises. The results suggest that an ability test can be perceived as both among the most just and motivating exercises. Lastly, even though the experimental interventions did not have their anticipated effects, the results suggest benefits to having assessors rate recorded participant behaviors versus rating "live" behaviors, benefits that to a certain extent depend on whether participants had previously attended an assessment center. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Questions about whether candidate perceptions of recruitment and selection practices "matter" have been raised for decades. This study tackles such questions by developing a new theoretical framework to understand the business unit-level emergence and consequences of the collective candidate experience, defined as " Applicants' aggregate overall cognitive and affective perceptions based on multiple interactions with a business unit over the course of the entire recruitment and selection process." A theoretical framework is introduced that integrates signaling theory with research from marketing, recruitment, and applicant reactions to propose that the collective candidate experience construct emerges from interactions in unit-specific social, structural, and physical contexts. The construct is further expected to influence new hire outcomes and business unit outcomes. We then test the theorized consequences of the collective candidate experience in a multi-unit quick service restaurant organization. The collective candidate experience is positively associated with collective new hire engagement, which in turn is associated with collective new hire turnover intentions, collective turnover, and collective customer satisfaction. Additional supporting evidence and preliminary measures are provided in online appendices. Overall, this study complements and extends prior research and directs new research by offering a theoretical framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In two studies, we examined the effects of algorithm‐based (vs. recruiter‐based) evaluations of an asynchronous video interview and a personality inventory on applicant reactions. In line with our expectations, we found several negative applicant reactions to the use of algorithms. Specifically, in Study 1 (N = 172), informing participants that an algorithm, rather than a recruiter, had analysed their interview and personality inventory increased feelings of emotional creepiness, and reduced fairness perceptions, perceived predictive validity and feedback acceptance. In Study 2 (N = 276), we were able to replicate these effects for fairness perceptions and perceived predictive validity. Furthermore, in both studies, algorithm‐based evaluations negatively affected feedback acceptance, organizational attraction and job acceptance intentions through fairness perceptions. However, in contrast with our expectations, selection decision favourability did not influence the impact of evaluation source (recruiter vs. algorithm) on applicant reactions. In Study 2, we also found some tentative evidence that applicant reactions to algorithm‐based evaluations are not affected by the type of information source (i.e. verbal vs. nonverbal cues) on which the algorithm is based. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We developed a game‐based assessment (GBA) measuring cognitive ability for use in personnel selection and examined its construct‐related validity. Moreover, applicant reactions toward this GBA were compared with a paper‐pencil‐based ability test. Both assessment tools were designed to measure verbal, numerical, and figural ability. N = 183 participants completed the GBA, the paper‐pencil test, and questions capturing applicant reactions and personality. We found a strong positive correlation of 0.51 between the overall GBA and paper‐pencil test scores, showing evidence for its construct‐related validity. Applicant reactions toward the GBA were consistently worse compared with the paper‐pencil test. Furthermore, males and individuals with more video game experience held more positive perceptions than females and individuals with less video game experience. Practitioner points: Game‐based assessment (GBA) is an innovative field of personnel selection that is increasingly used in practice, although empirical evidence on psychometric properties of GBAs and on applicant reactions is still scarce to date.The present study found a strong correlation between the GBA and a traditional intelligence test, indicating that a GBA can provide a valid measurement of cognitive ability in the context of personnel selection.Applicant reactions toward the GBA were consistently worse compared with a paper‐pencil test measuring the same cognitive abilities.Applicant reactions differed between males and females, suggesting that further research is needed to investigate relevant design elements of GBAs affecting their psychometric properties and applicant reactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a wealth of evidence justifying the use of personality assessments for selection. Nonetheless, some reluctance to use these assessments stems from their perceived vulnerability to response distortion (i.e., faking) and the somewhat negative applicant reactions they elicit, when compared to other assessments. Adopting a forced-choice personality assessment format appears to alleviate the former problem but exacerbates the latter. In this study, we introduce basic psychological needs as a theoretical foundation to develop interventions to improve reactions to forced-choice personality assessments. We propose that the forced-choice format impedes respondents' desire to respond to items in a preferred way, interfering with autonomy need satisfaction, and constrains respondents' opportunity to show their capabilities, interfering with competence need satisfaction. In this pre-registered between-subjects experiment (N = 1565), we investigated two modifications to a ranked forced-choice personality questionnaire and compared these to traditional forced-choice and single-stimulus (Likert) formatted questionnaires. One modification, where participants could write a free-text response following the assessment, did not show significant effects on reactions. The second modification allowed participants to view all items they had ranked last (first) and then identify any the participant believed in fact described them well (poorly). That modification positively affected perceived autonomy- and competence-support, and fairness perceptions, bridging approximately half of the gap between reactions to forced-choice and single-stimulus assessment formats. This study suggests that a modification to forced-choice personality questionnaires may improve applicant reactions and that basic psychological needs theory may be a fruitful lens through which to further understand reactions to assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Providing feedback to job applicants is an important part of the selection process, regardless of whether applicants are selected for the job. The goal of this study was to examine the extent to which providing post-test feedback to rejected applicants on their personality test scores using absolute (i.e., overall scores) or social-comparative techniques (i.e., scores that provide information on how you compare to others) can influence applicant feedback perceptions and their behavioral intentions. This was accomplished by studying 181 test-takers within a job application simulation. Results indicated that test-takers who received absolute feedback perceived it as fairer and were more likely to recommend the organization to others than test-takers who received social-comparative feedback. Further, feedback fairness mediated the relationship between the feedback conditions and each behavioral intention, including recommendation intentions, consumer purchase intentions, and litigation intentions. We discuss several implications for research and practice, as well as future research directions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. Practitioner Points: AI‐supported selection tools are increasingly used in HR selection.Our findings show that the usage of AI‐supported selection tools without explanations decreases the perception of fairness and personableness and increases emotional creepiness.However, research focusing on the actions that organizations can take to prevent negative applicant reactions is scarce.Video information—in comparison to written information—appears to be beneficial for explaining the advantages underlying an organization's decision to use AI in applicant selection.Transparency about the reasons why the organization uses AI in the selection process can reduce negative applicant reactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many applicants use faking in interviews to present themselves more favorably than they really are. There is widespread concern that this may affect interview validity. As previous research on countermeasures is sparse, we conducted an exploratory study to identify the most promising countermeasures. For technology‐mediated interviews, these were warnings referring to a criterion‐based content analysis and lie detection algorithms focusing on nonverbal or paraverbal cues. For face‐to‐face interviews, these were objective questions and a personable interviewer. We then investigated the effects of these countermeasures on faking intentions in two experimental vignette studies and on faking in another simulated interview study. However, none of the countermeasures could reduce faking intentions or faking. Additionally, in the vignette studies, warnings impaired applicant reactions. Practitioner points: There is the fear that faking can jeopardize the criterion‐related validity of selection interviews.Faking in interviews can hardly be detected, which is why we investigated potential countermeasures to prevent faking.In three experiments, none of the different countermeasures were effective in reducing faking intentions or faking.Warnings against faking in interviews partially led to negative applicant reactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intense competition for talent has led to increased organizational focus on improving how applicants perceive and respond to selection tools. Because of the recent increased use of technology in selection, we tested whether modifying aspects of videoconference interviews could improve applicant reactions. We tested two interventions--structured rapport building and question provision--with 205 applicants applying for a research assistant position. Applicants were randomly assigned to either an experimental condition (rapport or question provision) or the control condition and participated in a structured videoconference interview, followed by a survey. Structured rapport building had no significant effect on applicant reactions. However, question provision improved applicants' perceptions of overall fairness and chance to perform--but not their reported anxiety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How applicants’ perceptions of organizational attractiveness (OA) change over the recruitment process and whether OA, once lost, can ever be regained, has hardly been investigated. Therefore, drawing on organizational justice and signaling theories, we examined the effects of treatment (fair vs. unfair), re-evaluation (positive vs. negative), and outcome (offer vs. rejection) on OA. Results from a multiple-segment factorial vignette study (N = 193 employees) showed a reduction in OA (67%) after applicants were treated unfairly. Up to 24% of this loss was regained in subsequent stages through positive re-evaluation and by being offered a job. The results also showed a reduction in OA (52%) for applicants who were treated fairly but re-evaluated their experience negatively and received a rejection. Thus, one good experience may not be enough to attract applicants, and understanding the combined effect of experiences is even more important than understanding the effect of a single experience.

Cues regarding organizational diversity in recruitment and assessment materials can serve as signals to infer how members of a social group are treated. However, theory on identity–contingency (diversity) cues provides little guidance as to how the interaction of multiple cues impacts performance on selection tools. In an experiment, racial diversity cues in employee testimonials and situational judgment test (SJT) items were manipulated in a simulated selection process to examine implications for individuals' performance and reactions. SJT diversity cues indirectly reduced SJT performance via lower attentiveness. Individuals also evaluated an SJT with diversity cues to be less related to the job than a similar, nondiverse version, whereas perceptions of the assessment's predictive validity and opportunity to perform on it were unaffected. Effects on assessment reactions did not vary as a function of participant race or the presence of diversity cues in employee testimonials. Individuals who watched testimonials with more diverse speakers were subsequently more attracted to the organization if the testimonials were followed by the SJT with more diverse representation in items. Implications for assessment design and recruitment are discussed. Practitioner points: There has been limited research on the influence of diversity cues on applicant attraction and assessment performance during selection processes.This study shows that diversity cues can influence reactions to and performance on an assessment, as well as attraction to the organization.Practitioners should attend to diversity cues in assessment materials and can strategically include such cues to enhance attraction without negatively impacting performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Asynchronous video interviews (AVIs) are increasingly used to preselect applicants. Previous research found that interviewees are more skeptical of these interviews compared to other forms of interviews. However, comparing AVIs to other interviews is not completely appropriate because of their lack of interactivity and their use during earlier stages of the selection process. Therefore, we compared perceptions of AVIs with perceptions of other preselection tools (online cognitive ability tests and online application documents). Compared to other preselection instruments, potential applicants do not have more skeptical fairness perceptions of AVIs. However, we found differences for perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, privacy concerns, and perceptions of organizational attractiveness. Organizations can take this into account when choosing how to preselect their applicants. Practitioner points: Asynchronous video interviews (AVIs) are perceived more skeptical than other forms of interviewsHowever, AVIs are mainly used for the preselection of applicants and not to replace synchronous interviews that are used during later stages of the selection processCompared to other preselection instruments (online cognitive ability tests and online application documents), AVIs are perceived as equally fair but differ in terms of usability, privacy concerns, the potential use of impression management, and their effects on organizational attractivenessTherefore, organizations should take this into account when choosing how to preselect their applicants [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The unstructured employment interview is one of the most popular selection tools among employers and applicants alike. Although past research has shed light on some explanations for practitioners’ preferences for unstructured methods, less is known about the reasons for their popularity among applicants. One reason might be that applicants overestimate recruiters’ intuitive abilities to make judgments about applicant characteristics based on resumes and interviews. The results of this study (N = 345) suggest that recruiters are perceived as much better than laypeople at making judgments about applicants based on resume screening and interviews, and that faith in recruiters’ intuition predicts process favorability for unstructured employment interviews. Moreover, this association remained significant when accounting for attitudes to structured interviews, perceived recruiter expertise, and attitudes to holistic versus mechanic methods in general. The results suggest that overestimation of recruiters’ intuitive expertise may help explain why many people prefer unstructured selection methods.

Industrial development in recent decades has led to using information and communication technologies (ICT) to support personnel selection processes. One of the most notable examples is game-related assessments (GRA), supposedly as accurate as conventional tests but which generate better applicant reactions and reduce the likelihood of adverse impact and faking. However, such claims still lack scientific support. Given practitioners’ increasing use of GRA, this article reviews the scientific literature on gamification applied to personnel selection to determine whether the current state of the art supports their use in professional practice and identify specific aspects on which future research should focus. Following the PRISMA model, a search was carried out in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, identifying 34 valid articles, of which 85.3% are empirical studies that analyze five areas: (1) validity; (2) applicant reactions; (3) design of GRA; (4) personal characteristics and GRA; and (5) adverse impact and faking. Together, these studies show that GRA can be used in personnel selection but that the supposed advantages of GRA over conventional tests are fewer than imagined. The results also suggest several aspects on which research should focus (e.g., construct validity, differences depending on the type of game, prediction of different job performance dimensions), which could help define the situations in which the use of GRA may be recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With an archival data set from an Australian‐based asynchronous video interview (AVI) vendor, we examined how employers implemented AVI features as a step toward understanding how AVIs can be more optimally designed. The multilevel data contained information about 2,550,105 responses from 627,999 candidates to 52,623 questions, nested within 12,105 interview templates. We found that AVIs were often used for small applicant pools (Mdn = 10 candidates per AVI) and that a majority of the AVIs comprised four to five questions, with candidates typically given 30 seconds to prepare a response, and 2 minutes to record it. Only rarely were candidates permitted to preview questions or re‐record responses. Finally, we noted that the settings typically applied were highly consistent with platform's default settings. Practitioner points: An asynchronous video interview (AVI) vendor shared information about how their clients set up their AVIs and how candidates interacted with those settings, allowing us to learn about how practitioners and candidates use AVI software. AVIs were used for a wide variety of roles and candidate pool sizes; not just high‐volume recruitment. The typical AVI comprised four to five questions, with candidates being granted 30 seconds to prepare and 2 minutes to respond to each question. Candidates provided a mean total of 259 seconds of footage to recruiters across all questions. Candidates were rarely given the opportunity to re‐take their responses, but when given the chance, it was taken approximately 40% of the time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Industrial development in recent decades has led to using information and communication technologies (ICT) to support personnel selection processes. One of the most notable examples is game-related assessments (GRA), supposedly as accurate as conventional tests but which generate better applicant reactions and reduce the likelihood of adverse impact and faking. However, such claims still lack scientific support. Given practitioners’ increasing use of GRA, this article reviews the scientific literature on gamification applied to personnel selection to determine whether the current state of the art supports their use in professional practice and identify specific aspects on which future research should focus. Following the PRISMA model, a search was carried out in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, identifying 34 valid articles, of which 85.3% are empirical studies that analyze five areas: (1) validity; (2) applicant reactions; (3) design of GRA; (4) personal characteristics and GRA; and (5) adverse impact and faking. Together, these studies show that GRA can be used in personnel selection but that the supposed advantages of GRA over conventional tests are fewer than imagined. The results also suggest several aspects on which research should focus (e.g., construct validity, differences depending on the type of game, prediction of different job performance dimensions), which could help define the situations in which the use of GRA may be recommended.

How applicants' perceptions of organizational attractiveness (OA) change over the recruitment process and whether OA, once lost, can ever be regained, has hardly been investigated. Therefore, drawing on organizational justice and signaling theories, we examined the effects of treatment (fair vs. unfair), re-evaluation (positive vs. negative), and outcome (offer vs. rejection) on OA. Results from a multiple-segment factorial vignette study (N = 193 employees) showed a reduction in OA (67%) after applicants were treated unfairly. Up to 24% of this loss was regained in subsequent stages through positive re-evaluation and by being offered a job. The results also showed a reduction in OA (52%) for applicants who were treated fairly but re-evaluated their experience negatively and received a rejection. Thus, one good experience may not be enough to attract applicants, and understanding the combined effect of experiences is even more important than understanding the effect of a single experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: When applying for a job, applicant reactions are defined as the amount to which the applicants of the job regard the process of selection as impartial or unbiased. The questions for the structured interview can be future-oriented (Situational Interview) or past-oriented (Patterned Behaviour Description Interview). Past research on using SI or PBDI in selection process and their effects on applicant reactions showed that applicant reactions are highest towards PBDI. Methods: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of combining PBDI and SI (mixed SPBDI) as interview questions, and to differentiate its effect with PBDI. This study involved 46 lecturers from the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). This study used (a) mixed SPBDI, and PBDI as interview questions, and (b) Applicant Reaction Questionnaires which was based on the Organizational Justice theory. The interview was conducted in a transcript form. After the participants answered the interview transcripts, they answered the applicant reactions questionnaires. The data was then analysed and presented. Results: The results showed a significant difference between mixed SPBDI and PBDI, with the PBDI’s mean (M = 13.61; SD = 1.57) is significantly higher than the mixed SPBDI’s mean (M = 10.89; SD 1.91), t (46) = 7.22; p < 0.01. Specifically, applicants reacted more positively to PBDI interview content compared to the mixed SPBDI. Conclusion: This research had few limitations such as the interview being conducted in the form of transcript and not verbally as in real workplace context. It is also limited to studying the reactions in terms of only perceived fairness and no other elements such as organizational effectiveness or the decision making of the applicants. Nevertheless, this study has contributed to the theoretical and research development in applicant reactions, and to the practical application for organizations in Malaysia.

Asynchronous video interviews (AVIs) are increasingly used to preselect applicants. Previous research found that interviewees in AVIs receive better interview ratings compared to other forms of interviews. It has been suggested that this difference could be due to the preparation time given for each AVI question. A pilot study confirmed that preparation time in AVIs is indeed beneficial for interview performance. Furthermore, our main study replicated the significant effect of preparation time on interview performance and revealed that it was mediated by active response preparation, whereas no mediation effects were found for strain and for the use of impression management. Finally, preparation time had no direct effect on fairness perceptions but a positive indirect effect via honest impression management. Practitioner points: It was previously suggested that applicants receive better interview ratings in asynchronous video interviews (AVIs) than in synchronous interviews because of the preparation time that is provided for each question in an AVI.Our results confirmed that preparation time in AVIs indeed leads to better interview performance ratings.The positive effects of preparation time were due to active response preparation (i.e., interviewees made notes and structured their answers).Longer preparation time did not affect dishonest impression management or fairness perceptions but might affect the validity of AVIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research suggests that affirmative action policies tend to be perceived more negatively by men than by women, and by nonbeneficiaries relative to beneficiaries. However, studies focusing on men as beneficiaries are scarce. The present paper reports the results of two preregistered studies conducted in Sweden. Study 1 investigated gender differences in reactions to being selected for a position based on either a strong or weak type of affirmative action policy. The results revealed that men (relative to women) displayed more negative attitudes, but not stronger resentment, and that a procedure using explicit quotas was perceived more negatively than a softer type of preferential treatment. In Study 2, we experimentally manipulated whether participants imagined being selected or rejected due to the same preferential treatment policy. Again, men displayed more negative attitudes than women, but not stronger resentment. The results further showed that attitudes were negative regardless of whether one was selected or rejected. However, those who were rejected felt stronger resentment than those who were selected. This effect was significant for both men and women, but stronger among women. Implications for research, organizations, and policy‐makers are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Due to technological progress, videoconference interviews have become more and more common in personnel selection. Nevertheless, even in recent studies, interviewees received lower performance ratings in videoconference interviews than in face-to-face (FTF) interviews and interviewees held more negative perceptions of these interviews. However, the reasons for these differences are unclear. Therefore, we conducted an experiment with 114 participants to compare FTF and videoconference interviews regarding interview performance and fairness perceptions and we investigated the role of social presence, eye contact, and impression management for these differences. As in other studies, ratings of interviewees' performance were lower in the videoconference interview. Differences in perceived social presence, perceived eye contact, and impression management contributed to these effects. Furthermore, live ratings of interviewees' performance were higher than ratings based on recordings. Additionally, videoconference interviews induced more privacy concerns but were perceived as more flexible. Organizations should take the present results into account and should not use both types of interviews in the same selection stage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many organizations transfer parts of their recruitment process to external service providers--often referred to as recruitment process outsourcing (RPO)--to save costs and enhance the quality of their recruitment procedures. However, contrary to the expectations regarding RPO, Wehner, Giardini, and Kabst (2012) found that RPO might cause negative reactions to recruitment procedures among graduates. We extend that study by incorporating a brand equity perspective in examining whether employer image and service provider image counterbalance negative reactions among graduates. Utilizing a scenario-based, between-subject design, we obtain results that show that the extent of RPO negatively influences applicant reactions regardless of the employer's or service provider's image. Furthermore, we find negative mediating effects of RPO on job acceptance intention. However, the perceived fit between employer image and service provider image positively influences applicant reactions. Moreover, employer image positively influences employer attractiveness and service provider image positively influences applicants' satisfaction with the recruitment process. Thus, a strong employer image and service provider image partially compensate for the negative effects of RPO on applicant reactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Individuals are known to categorize others into social groups based on cues like race and gender and to experience relative discomfort when interacting with "outgroup" members. Two experimental studies were used to examine whether actor demographic cues in situational judgment assessment items completed by test takers in a simulated employee selection context may lead to differences in their performance and reactions to the hiring organization. In both studies, test takers assumed the perspective of actors shown in video-based scenarios and indicated how they would respond to interaction partners (IPs) to whom they were racially similar or dissimilar. In Study 1, a given test taker responded to IPs of a constant gender; in Study 2, IPs' gender varied across scenarios within each condition. In Study 1, Black test takers spent more time and scored better on two of the four scenarios when responding to racially similar IPs. These effects were not found in Study 2, but demographic cues showed new interactive effects on performance and reactions. We discuss the implications of different findings across the two studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ideal point measures of personality, which include moderately worded items, have gained attention from researchers and assessment practitioners due to their potential for more accurately assessing personality relative to traditional dominance measures, which contain only positive and negative items. However, no research of which we are aware has investigated applicant reactions to this new measure type. Given the well-known influence of reactions on applicant and organizational outcomes, knowledge of reactions to ideal point measures will be critical to decisions regarding their use in organizations. The present study compares test-taker reactions to ideal point and dominance personality measures when taken as part of a research study and in a simulated selection context. We hypothesize that test-takers completing the ideal point measure will perceive lower accuracy and higher difficulty relative to a dominance measure, particularly in a simulated applicant condition. We then propose a conditional indirect effect of measure type on overall affective reactions via perceived difficulty and accuracy such that the indirect effect is stronger in the simulated applicant condition. The current study uses a mixed-methods approach. First, in an experimental, factorial design, we manipulate the factors of (a) measure type (dominance vs. ideal point); and (b) instruction set (honest vs. simulated applicant). Results support the hypotheses. Then, we investigate how test-takers' qualitative explanations of reactions clarify findings. Results reveal that lower perceived accuracy and greater perceived difficulty may be driven by test-takers' perceptions that responses to ideal point items have ambiguous interpretations. Implications for assessment and personnel selection are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Applicants seem to react negatively to artificial intelligence‐based automated systems in personnel selection. This study investigates the impact of different pieces of information to alleviate applicant reactions in an automated interview setting. In a 2 (no process information vs. process information) × 2 (no process justification vs. process justification) between‐subjects design, participants (N = 124) received respective information and watched a video showing an automated interview. Testing mediation effects via different applicant reaction variables indicated that process justification is better than process information which can even impair applicant reactions. However, information did not increase organizational attractiveness compared to not receiving any information. This study sheds light on what type of information contributes to positive and negative applicant reactions to automated systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gamification is increasingly being used by organizations in hiring decisions. However, the use of gamification in assessment has advanced quicker than corresponding research. One area in need of research is how applicants' perceptions of fairness are formed when gamified assessments are used in employee selection. Therefore, two studies were conducted to explore the impact of using gamified assessments to applicants' justice perceptions and the role of providing explanations to applicants. Adopting an experimental design to explore organizational justice model in the context of gamified assessments, results indicated that individuals' perceptions of job relatedness are higher when a situational judgment tests (SJT) is used rather than a gamified version, leading to more positive perceptions of procedural fairness and organizational attractiveness (Study 1). The mediating effects of the procedural rules of ease of faking and opportunity to perform were not supported. Subsequently, a 2 × 2 design was used (Study 2) to explore the role of providing explanations. It seems that the provision of explanations on the assessment's faking difficulty generates more positive reactions towards gamified SJTs than text‐based SJTs, in relation to ease of faking and procedural justice, and a spillover effect, invoking favorable reactions to the recruiting organization as well (Study 2). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considered as one of the cornerstones of work and organizational psychology, it is not surprising that the selection and recruitment literature is vast. In this review, we synthesize and integrate the findings from around 40 meta-analyses and literature reviews from the last decade to identify the most recent meta-trends and future research directions in the selection and recruitment research and practice. We organize our key findings around three superordinate areas: a) recent developments in selection research, covering findings on validities of selection methods, expanding the criterion space, and applicant reactions and impression management; b) recent developments in recruitment research, paying attention to the evidence around recruitment methods and applicant attraction; and c) new technology in recruitment and selection. In our call for future research, we delineate a number of substantive issues and the need for more sophisticated theoretical developments in the field as well as methodological challenges that future efforts should address. We concur with the vast literature in that selection and recruitment research is a vibrant field, which we expect will address a number of ongoing political, cultural, technological, societal, and employment regulations-related issues to keep creating impact and providing meaningful findings for recruitment and selection practices in organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study describes the development and validation of the Privacy and Data Security Concerns Scale (PDSCS), designed to assess job applicants' privacy and data security concerns. Validity evidence for the PDSCS was established with four steps including: item generation and content validation, item reduction, confirmatory factor analysis, and construct and criterion validity. Our findings supported the content and proposed factor structure of the nine‐item PDSCS. Specifically, the proposed three‐factor structure (with the subdimensions: Secure connection, inappropriate use of information, and mistrust in employer security practices) as well as a second‐order factor, (termed privacy and data security concerns) were confirmed. Additionally, evidence is presented for the criterion validity of the PDSCS and its subdimensions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has demonstrated that selection decision making is improved with the use of valid pre-employment assessments, but these assessments can often engender negative reactions on the part of job candidates. Reactions to personality assessments tend to be particularly negative, and these reactions are even worse for forced-choice personality assessments. This latter issue is particularly troubling given the evidence showing that forced-choice measurement is quite effective at reducing deliberate response distortions (i.e., faking). Given the importance organizations place on candidate experience during the recruitment and selection process, improving applicants' reactions to valid selection assessments is important. Previous research has not, however, discussed the reasons or mechanisms behind why test takers have negative reactions to forced-choice assessments in particular. Here, we propose that forced-choice measurement threatens elements of the test taker's self-concept thereby engendering negative reactions to the assessment. Based on these theoretical arguments, we develop and test the efficacy of four format variations to a forced-choice assessment to improve test taker reactions. Results suggest that, compared to a traditional/standard forced-choice assessment, test takers reacted more positively to forced-choice assessment formats that (1) used a graded, as opposed to dichotomous, response scale (i.e., allowing for slightly (dis)agree responses); (2) included post-assessment performance feedback; and (3) removed the most socially undesirable items from the test. The theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explore a number of new developments in the field of employee recruitment and selection with a focus on recent technological developments. We discuss examples of technological developments across the four stages of the recruitment and selection process. In the attraction stage we discuss how on-line/internet recruitment and especially social networking websites have changed dramatically the focus of attracting candidates effectively. In the next stage of screening, we discuss how cybervetting and applicant tracking systems offer opportunities but also threats for recruiters and candidates. In the third stage of employee selection, we focus especially on two new selection methods; the asynchronous/digital interview and gamification/games-based assessment, along with the critical role and impact applicant reactions have on the selection process. Finally, we briefly discuss the main technological developments in on-boarding and socialization, and we conclude with a few suggestions for future research in this field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study is to investigate applicants’ reactions towards different personnel selection methods used in Pakistan. A sample of 149 undergraduates, graduates, and working adults rated their perceptions of the favorability and fairness of these personnel selection methods, namely: resumes, job knowledge tests, biographical information, interviews, personal references, work-sample tests, personality tests, written ability tests, personal contacts, and situational judgment tests. Our first research objective is to provide details about applicant reactions, detailed system of the same and methods on a range based on working adults, graduates, and undergraduates. The second major objective is to identify the interaction effects of favorability and system fairness based upon applicant reactions. Descriptive data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS and the data was collected from Lahore, Islamabad, and Jhelum. The results demonstrated that 112 applicants reported the most favorable rating reaction towards the interview personnel selection method, with the effectiveness of identifying qualified people for the job, while 101 applicants reported a favorable rating reaction towards job knowledge tests, noting the fairness of this procedure. In addition, implications for the current assessment of selection practices from the applicants’ viewpoints, the strengths and limitations of the study, and directions for future research are all discussed. The practices of different predictor methods are considered in the conclusion.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being utilized by organizations in selection decisions. However, research has fallen behind the practice, and one area in need of investigation is how applicants' perceptions of justice are formed in this increased involvement of AI in the hiring process. Accordingly, two studies were conducted to investigate the effects of using AI in selection on justice perceptions. Findings indicated that AI‐based interviewing was generally viewed as less procedurally and interactionally just than traditional human‐based interviewing. Additionally, the effect of interview type on different applicant reaction outcomes was mediated by justice dimensions, particularly two‐way communication. Findings may help organizations regarding how best to utilize AI in selection in order to attract and retain top talent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Job applications have long been a staple of the hiring process and online applications have rapidly become the new norm. The ability to examine applicant attrition—those who start the application but do not finish—and applicant quality are the two benefits of online applications. This study evaluates the effect of reducing application redundancy (not making applicants re‐enter information contained on their resumes) on applicant attrition and quality, with hypotheses derived from signaling theory and economics (cost/benefits). Results demonstrate that reducing redundancy leads to a reduction in applicant attrition across jobs, with the largest magnitude of change found in computer‐related jobs. This reduced attrition does not reduce applicant quality and some evidence suggests that applicant quality may even increase. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO) is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

We present a targeted review of recent developments and advances in digital selection procedures (DSPs) with particular attention to advances in internet-based techniques. By reviewing the emergence of DSPs in selection research and practice, we highlight five main categories of methods (online applications, online psychometric testing, digital interviews, gamified assessment and social media). We discuss the evidence base for each of these DSP groups, focusing on construct and criterion validity, and applicant reactions to their use in organizations. Based on the findings of our review, we present a critique of the evidence base for DSPs in industrial, work and organizational psychology and set out an agenda for advancing research. We identify pressing gaps in our understanding of DSPs, and ten key questions to be answered. Given that DSPs are likely to depart further from traditional non-digital selection procedures in the future, a theme in this agenda is the need to establish a distinct and specific literature on DSPs, and to do so at a pace that reflects the speed of the underlying technological advancement. In concluding, we, therefore, issue a call to action for selection researchers in work and organizational psychology to commence a new and rigorous multidisciplinary programme of scientific study of DSPs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]