			Home About us Contact

Applicant Reactions (applicant + reaction)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Psychology	29%

Selected Abstracts

Effects of Explanations on Applicant Reactions: A meta-analytic review

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 4 2009
Donald M. Truxillo
One cost effective way to improve applicant reactions is by giving explanations. Although a literature on this topic has accumulated, the effects of explanations on applicant reactions have not been examined meta-analytically, and several aspects of giving explanations to applicants are unclear. For example, do explanations affect applicant reactions, and which outcomes are most affected? Do findings from lab studies generalize to field settings? Under what conditions are explanations most effective? To answer these questions, we meta-analytically examined the effects of providing explanations on applicant reactions. Based on 26 distinct samples from experiments and quasi-experiments (N=3481), our results suggest that explanations do affect applicants' fairness perceptions, perceptions of the hiring organization, test-taking motivation, and performance on cognitive ability tests. The effects on fairness are larger in field contexts than in lab settings and when they are used with a personality test rather than a cognitive ability test. Test-taking motivation mediated the relationship between explanations and test performance. Our discussion focuses on when to provide explanations to applicants in employment settings and directions for future research. [source]

Distinction Bias in Applicant Reactions to Using Diversity Information in Selection

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 4 2009
Margaret E. Brooks
Two studies investigated applicant reactions to alternative methods of incorporating diversity in employee selection decisions. Of particular interest was the hypothesized interaction between specific approach to incorporating diversity in the selection policy (holistic vs mechanical) and mode of receiving information about this approach (viewing policies in isolation vs viewing policies simultaneously). Results indicate preference for holistic approaches to incorporating diversity in selection. The magnitude of the preference was much greater when participants evaluated both approaches simultaneously. Results are consistent with the distinction bias, which suggests that people differentiate between options more when they consider them simultaneously than when they view them separately. Findings have implications for applicant reactions research, human resource decision making, and policy formation. [source]

An Agenda for Future Research on Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures: A Construct-Oriented Approach

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 1-2 2004
David Chan
This article offers an agenda for future research on applicant reactions to selection procedures. Advocating a construct-oriented approach, we propose that future research focuses attention on fundamental issues subsumed under seven distinct although related areas namely: (1) dimensions of applicant reactions, (2) changes in applicant reactions over time, (3) determinants of applicant reactions, (4) applicant reactions and test constructs, (5) criterion outcomes of applicant reactions, (6) reactions to new technology in testing, and (7) methodological and data analysis issues. [source]

Modeling the Practical Effects of Applicant Reactions: Subgroup Differences in Test-Taking Motivation, Test Performance, and Selection Rates

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 4 2002
Robert E. Ployhart
Research suggests that Black,White differences in test-taking motivation may be related to subgroup test score differences, but this research has not shown the extent to which minimizing subgroup motivation differences will reduce subgroup differences in selection rates and adverse impact. This Monte Carlo study examined how enhancing Blacks' test-taking motivation for cognitive ability tests might reduce adverse impact across a range of (a) subgroup test differences, (b) selection ratios, (c) subgroup differences in test-taking motivation, and (d) relationships between motivation and test scores. The results suggest that although enhancing test-taking motivation will consistently reduce subgroup differences in test performance and adverse impact, the effect is often small and will not eliminate adverse impact for any condition we examine. However, under some conditions the reduction may be important, and the discussion considers conditions where even these minimal reductions may be practically helpful. [source]

Using Attributions to Understand the Effects of Explanations on Applicant Reactions: Are Reactions Consistent With the Covariation Principle?,

JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 2 2005
Robert E. Ployhart
Research has shown that explanations for selection decisions may influence a variety of applicant perceptions and behavior, but an understanding of how and why this occurs remains largely unknown. This study attempts to understand the effects of explanations by adopting Kelley's (1967, 1972) covariation model of the attribution process. Specifically, explanations that vary on consensus, distinctiveness, and consistency covariation information should produce predictable effects on applicant perceptions and attributions. Results from 2 studies, the first a laboratory study and the second a field study with actual applicants, support the utility of the covariation model for understanding the influence of explanations for selection decisions on locus attributions, fairness, self-perceptions, and organizational attractiveness. These results suggest that the covariation model may be a useful means to construe the explanation-attribution-perception relationship, and thus provide a number of theoretical and practical implications. [source]

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

PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 3 2004
John P. Hausknecht
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. [source]

Effect of Framing on Applicants' Reactions to Personnel Selection Methods

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 3 2009
Eyal Gamliel
This research demonstrates the effect of framing on applicants' reactions to two personnel selection methods: undergraduate grade point average and personnel interview scores. Presenting a selection situation framed positively (to accept applicants) caused applicants to rate both selection methods more favorably relative to presenting them with an identical selection situation framed negatively (to reject the remaining applicants). Framing affected reactions that emphasized distributive justice aspects of the selection situation and procedural justice aspects. The results are consistent with Prospect theory and with Fairness Heuristic theory. The paper offers a theoretical explanation for the effect of framing on applicants' reactions to personnel selection methods, discusses the implications of this effect, and suggests directions for future research. [source]

Reasons for Being Selective When Choosing Personnel Selection Procedures

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 1 2010
Cornelius J. König
The scientist,practitioner gap in personnel selection is large. Thus, it is important to gain a better understanding of the reasons that make organizations use or not use certain selection procedures. Based on institutional theory, we predicted that six variables should determine the use of selection procedures: the procedures' diffusion in the field, legal problems associated with the procedures, applicant reactions to the procedures, their usefulness for organizational self-promotion, their predictive validity, and the costs involved. To test these predictions, 506 HR professionals from the German-speaking part of Switzerland filled out an online survey on the selection procedures used in their organizations. Respondents also evaluated five procedures (semi-structured interviews, ability tests, personality tests, assessment centers, and graphology) on the six predictor variables. Multilevel logistic regression was used to analyze the data. The results revealed that the highest odd ratios belonged to the factors applicant reactions, costs, and diffusion. Lower (but significant) odds ratios belonged to the factors predictive validity, organizational self-promotion, and perceived legality. [source]

Effects of Explanations on Applicant Reactions: A meta-analytic review

Distinction Bias in Applicant Reactions to Using Diversity Information in Selection

An Agenda for Future Research on Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures: A Construct-Oriented Approach

Applicant and Recruiter Reactions to New Technology in Selection: A Critical Review and Agenda for Future Research

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT, Issue 2-3 2003
Neil AndersonArticle first published online: 30 JUL 200
This paper presents a narrative review of recent research into applicant and recruiter reactions to new technology in employee selection. Different aspects of the use of new technology are noted including computer-based testing, Internet-based recruitment and candidate assessment, telephone-based and video-based interviews, video-based situational judgment tests, and virtual reality scenarios. It is argued that an appropriate way to conceptualize these advances is as ,technical innovations' as defined in the creativity and innovation research in Industrial, Work, and Organizational (IWO) psychology. Applicant reactions research is reviewed thematically, and studies into three main themes are discussed: Applicant preferences and reactions, equivalence, and adverse impact. Following Bartram (2001), an amphibian-monarchistic analogy is employed at several stages in the review. Four major criticisms of the extant applicant reactions research base are noted: its atheoretical orientation, a short-termist concentration upon reactions level outcomes, an over-reliance on students as surrogates, and a patchiness of coverage of crucial research questions. The second part of this paper explores neglected issues of recruiter adoption of new technology for employee selection. Again drawing from advances in the innovation and creativity literatures, this section explores likely antecedent factors at the individual and organizational levels of analysis. A general model of recruiter adoption of new technology is posited as a framework for future research in this area. For both applicant and recruiter reactions further research is called for and implications for practice are noted throughout. [source]

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

Future Perspectives on Employee Selection: Key Directions for Future Research and Practice

APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 4 2004
Neil Anderson
Les recherches sur la sélection et l'évaluation sont abordées d'un point de vue tourné vers l'avenir. On recense quatre grand thèmes d'importance majeure dans le développement des futures recherches: la prédiction bimodale, l'adaptation polyvalente, les réactions et décisions pertinentes et les tensions entre la recherche et la pratique dans la sélection professionnelle. Pour chacun de ces thèmes, nous soulevons certains problèmes qui restent à traiter. On discute enfin des conséquences sur la patique et les avancées actuelles dans le domaine de la sélection, traditionnellement l'une des plus actives des disciplines centrales de la psychologie internationales du travail. A future-oriented perspective for selection and assessment research is presented. Four superordinate themes of critical import to the development of future research are identified: (i) bimodal prediction, (ii) multilevel fit, (iii) applicant reactions and decision making, and (iv) tensions between research and practice in employee selection. Under each theme we pose a number of outstanding questions for research. Implications for practice and the ongoing advancement of the sub-field of selection, traditionally one of the most robust core disciplines in international IWO psychology, are discussed. [source]

Attitudes Towards Personnel Selection Methods: A Partial Replication and Extension in a German Sample

APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 4 2003
Bernd Marcus
Cette recherche qui fait appel à un échantillon de 213 étudiants allemands porte sur les attitudes envers un ensemble de méthodes utilisées dans la sélection professionnelle. Son but premier était d'apporter un nouvel éclairage sur les différences culturelles qui marquent les réactions des candidats devant les techniques de sélection en reconstituant partiellement une étude de Steiner & Gilliland (1996) qui recueillirent des évaluations de l'acceptation du processus pour dix procédures différentes auprès d'étudiants français et américains. Des divergences significatives sont apparues au niveau des moyennes, mais aucune structure sous-jacente ne put rendre compte de ces différences. En général, les sujets des trois nations ont note les plus favorablement les méthodes répandues (l'entretien et le C.V.), ainsi que les procédures en rapport évident avec le travail (les tests d'échantillon de travail), puis les tests papier-crayon, tandis que les contacts personnels et la graphologie étaient négativement appréciés. Autre objectif important: éprouver la validité des courtes descriptions des instruments de sélection généralement utilisées dans les études comparatives portant sur ce thème. On a évalué deux fois les attitudes envers quatre types de tests imprimés, une premiére fois après la présentation de la description et une seconde fois à l'issue de la passation du test. La convergence prétest-posttest, de basse à moyenne, met en évidence de sérieux problémes en ce qui concerne ces descriptions des tests papier-crayon. On aborde aussi les leçons à en tirer quant aux jugements sur les pratiques de sélection du point de vue des candidats et pour les recherches à venir. This research examined attitudes towards a variety of personnel selection methods in a German student sample (N= 213). Its first objective was to shed further light on cultural differences in applicant reactions to selection techniques by partially replicating a study by Steiner and Gilliland (1996), who obtained ratings of process favorability for ten different procedures from two groups of French and American students. Results indicated a number of significant mean discrepancies but no systematic pattern appeared to underlie these differences. In general, subjects in all three nations rated widespread methods (e.g. interview, résumés) or obviously job-related procedures (work sample tests) most favorably, followed by paper-and-pencil tests, whereas personal contacts and graphology appeared in the negative range. A second major objective was to examine the validity of the brief descriptions of selection instruments often used in comparative studies on this topic. Attitudes towards four different types of written tests were assessed twice for this purpose, once after presenting descriptive information, and a second time after actual test administration. Low to moderate pretest,posttest convergence pointed to serious problems with these descriptions for paper-and-pencil tests. Implications for current evaluations of selection practices from the applicants' perspective and for future research are discussed. [source]