First Impressions Versus Good Impressions: The Effect of Self-Regulation on Interview Evaluations

Nordstrom, Cynthia R.; Hall, Rosalie J.; Bartels, Lynn K.

doi:10.1080/00223989809599281

Cited by 17 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Accelerated processing may have a stronger effect because it is a direct result of time pressure forcing decision biases regarding an individual's information processing capabilities. With this TPCM, individuals often fail to use additional situational information (McKinney, Sprecher and Orbuch 1987;Nordstrom et al 1998;Rabin and Schrag 1999) or use easily available information and ignore less readily available sources of significant information (Tversky and Kahneman 1974;Hogarth 1987;Dube-Rioux and Russo 1988;Roberto 2002). Compared with a risk aversion TPCM, we expect an accelerated processing TPCM to have a stronger negative influence on knowledge sharing because it decreases the amount of time available to exchange information and share knowledge with others (Durham et al 2000;De Dreu 2003).…”

Section: Tpcm and Knowledge Sharingmentioning

confidence: 97%

Coping With Time Pressure and Knowledge Sharing in Buyer-Supplier Relationships

Thomas

Fugate

Koukova

2011

Journal of Supply Chain Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasingly, suppliers are being tasked to spend large amounts of time with strategic customers in order to promote effective knowledge sharing and coordination between supply chain members. Suppliers are also expected to deal with added pressures on their time from increasing workloads, unanticipated problems and changing priorities. Psychology research suggests that individuals (e.g., supplier personnel) cope with such time pressure by either working faster or avoiding risks. Existing research, however, has largely ignored the impact of these time pressure coping mechanisms (TPCMs) in interactive contexts such as buyer-supplier relationships. This study develops the notion that TPCMs impact knowledge sharing in buyer-supplier relationships. Specifically, results from a between subjects scenario-based experiment indicate that suppliers using TPCMs decrease a buyer's willingness to share knowledge and exchange information. Such adverse effects are most evident in close collaborative buyer-supplier relationships. These findings advance theory and provide insight for managers seeking to improve knowledge sharing through buyer-supplier relationships in today's time-constrained business environment.

show abstract

Section: Tpcm and Knowledge Sharingmentioning

confidence: 97%

Coping With Time Pressure and Knowledge Sharing in Buyer-Supplier Relationships

Thomas

Fugate

Koukova

2011

Journal of Supply Chain Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, detecting deception requires more cognitive resources than detecting truthful messages (Buller & Burgoon, ) and is especially difficult when simultaneously conducting interpersonal interactions involving cognitive effort, like an interview (Buller & Burgoon, ; Nordstrom, Hall, & Bartels, ). Interviewers need to detect potential cues of deception while asking questions, taking notes, and processing and evaluating applicants’ responses.…”

Section: Interviewers’ Ability To Detect Immentioning

confidence: 99%

Honest and Deceptive Impression Management in the Employment Interview: Can It Be Detected and How Does It Impact Evaluations?

Roulin

Bangerter

Levashina

2014

Personnel Psychology

102

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Applicants use honest and deceptive impression management (IM) in employment interviews. Deceptive IM is especially problematic because it can lead organizations to hire less competent but deceptive applicants if interviewers are not able to identify the deception. We investigated interviewers’ capacity to detect IM in 5 experimental studies using real‐time video coding of IM (N = 246 professional interviewers and 270 novice interviewers). Interviewers’ attempts to detect applicants’ IM were often unsuccessful. Interviewers were better at detecting honest than deceptive IM. Interview question type affected IM detection, but interviewers’ experience did not. Finally, interviewers’ perceptions of IM use by applicants were related to their evaluations of applicants’ performance in the interview. Interviewers’ attempts to adjust their evaluations of applicants they perceive to use deceptive IM may fail because they cannot correctly identify when applicants actually engage in various IM tactics. Helping interviewers to better identify deceptive IM tactics used by applicants may increase the validity of employment interviews.

show abstract

“…When an interview is conducted by one interviewer, the interview provides more opportunity to fake. A single interviewer is more likely to have cognitive and informational overload due to demands of the situation (Nordstrom, Hall, & Bartels, 1998). A single interviewer is less likely to notice inconsistencies in interviewee's behaviors and answers or to observe the more subtle cues of faking.…”

Section: Structured Interviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Model of Faking Likelihood in the Employment Interview

Levashina

Campion

2006

Int J Selection Assessment

166

341

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been surprisingly little research on faking in the employment interview, despite the fact that professional judgment would suggest that faking might occur in the interview. Based on a review of the literature on faking in personality tests and the literature on deception, we propose a model of faking during an employment interview and develop 19 testable propositions to guide future research. We argue that faking is a function of capacity, willingness, and opportunity to fake. Structured interviews provide less opportunity for intentional distortion; however, some components of structure may actually increase faking. Finally, job candidates distort their responses in job desirable ways.

show abstract

First Impressions Versus Good Impressions: The Effect of Self-Regulation on Interview Evaluations

Cited by 17 publications

References 27 publications

Coping With Time Pressure and Knowledge Sharing in Buyer-Supplier Relationships

Coping With Time Pressure and Knowledge Sharing in Buyer-Supplier Relationships

Honest and Deceptive Impression Management in the Employment Interview: Can It Be Detected and How Does It Impact Evaluations?

A Model of Faking Likelihood in the Employment Interview

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About