Relationship between expectancy, causal attributions, and final hiring decisions in the employment interview.

Tucker, David; Rowe, Patricia M.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.64.1.27

Cited by 63 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are two possible interpretations for the present finding that the Chinese applicant was consistently given more favorable ratings: the halo effect or the ideal applicant match effect. With reference to the halo effect, Tucker and Rowe (1979) argued that the type of expectations (favorable or unfavorable) an interviewer possesses of an applicant would affect the interpretation of information given by the applicant. In particular, if the interviewer has a favorable set of expectations about the applicant, this will beneficially influence the impressions the interviewer generates from the interview.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Ethnicity, Accent, and Job Status on Selection Decisions

Singer

Eder

1989

Int J Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated the effects of ethnicity, accent, and job status in the selection interview. Two hundred and ten student subjects viewed simulated, videotaped selection interviews in which applicant ethnicity, applicant accent, and job status were manipulated in a completely crossed 3 × 2 × 2 factorial design. Two sets of ratings were obtained, selection decision ratings of the job applicant, and subjective importance ratings based on the previous selection decisions. Significant main effects were obtained for ethnicity and job status in selection decision as predicted. Contrary to predictions however, the main effect for accent was not found significant. Further analysis of the importance ratings indicated a significant main effect for accent, but not for ethnicity. These findings indicated that applicant ethnicity and job status were important in selection interview decision and accent was not. Contrary to this however, subjects considered that accent was important in their selection decision ratings, while ethnicity was not.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Ethnicity, Accent, and Job Status on Selection Decisions

Singer

Eder

1989

Int J Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most research has concentrated upon the effects for race and sex and earlier studies found that naive white interviewers displayed strikingly different patterns of behaviour towards black versus white job applications (e.g. Ward, Zanna and Cooper 1974). In contrast, later studies involving videotapes of simulated interviews with minority and non-minority candidates found that black candidates are significantly favoured by raters over white candidates (e.g.…”

Section: Unfair Discrimination In Selection Interviewsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Arvey and Campion 1982;Herriot 1981Herriot , 1989Silvester 1994;Struthers, Colwill and Perry 1992;Tucker and Rowe 1979). Most of this discussion has focused upon the interviewer rather than the candidate and it has been claimed that interviewers engage in a process of causal 'sense-making' in order to better understand candidates and predict how they will behave in future work situations (Arvey and Campion, 1982;Herriot, 1981).…”

Section: Ethnocentric Attributions and Selection Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Unfair Discrimination in the Selection Interview: An Attributional Account

Silvester

Chapman

1996

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The selection interview remains the most popular method by which organizations select employees, yet it is also widely criticized for being vulnerable to bias and unfair discrimination. This paper draws upon two specific areas of attribution research: crosscultural studies of attributional processes and studies of intergroup attributional bias in order to discuss how attributional processes can contribute to unfair discrimination in selection interviews. It is argued that unfair discrimination can arise in two ways: first, as a consequence of ethnocentric attributional biases on the part of interviewers when explaining the behaviour of candidates associated with in-group or out-group status: second, as a result of different patterns of attributions manifest by candidates from diverse cultural groups.

show abstract

“…Research on employee selection demonstrates that interviewers’ attributions regarding applicant behavior and responses influence interviewers’ hiring recommendations (Herriot, ; Tucker & Rowe, ) and expectations of future success (Pradez de Fraria & Yoder, ). Maynard et al () indicated that managers’ hiring recommendation may vary due to applicants’ reason for being underemployed, and Erdogan et al (, p. 224) suggested that volitional underemployment may influence work outcomes favorably ‘when the person makes a positive choice to take the position rather than doing so solely for reasons of extreme need or economic desperation’.…”

Section: Theoretical Foundation and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Employment Qualifications, Person–Job Fit, Underemployment Attributions, and Hiring Recommendations: A three‐study investigation

Thompson

Sikora

Perrewé

et al. 2015

Int J Selection Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using an experimental design across three studies and four samples, we investigated the effects of employment qualification level (i.e., underqualified, adequately qualified, or overqualified) on hiring recommendations, and how the relationship was influenced by person-job (P-J) fit and underemployment attributions. In Study 1, we tested and found support for the strength and effectiveness of the employment qualification level manipulation. In Study 2, the results demonstrated that overqualified applicants received higher ratings on objective P-J fit, subjective P-J fit, and hiring recommendations than underqualified applicants. Also, overqualified applicants were rated higher on objective and subjective P-J fit than adequately qualified applicants. However, the results indicated no significant differences between adequately qualified and overqualified applicants on hiring recommendations. Finally, P-J fit was found to fully mediate the employment qualification level-hiring recommendation relationship, but only subjective P-J fit (i.e., and not objective P-J fit) was a significant mediator. In Study 3, we assessed the potential effects of underemployment attribution (i.e., internal-controllable vs. external-uncontrollable) on interviewer hiring recommendation. Results demonstrated that applicants who made an external-uncontrollable attribution for their overqualification were perceived negatively and received lower ratings on hiring recommendations than applicants who made an internalcontrollable attribution for their underemployment. Furthermore, the underemployment attribution-hiring recommendation relationship was found to be fully mediated by subjective (but not objective) P-J fit. Contributions of these results to theory, research, and practice, strengths and limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Relationship between expectancy, causal attributions, and final hiring decisions in the employment interview.

Cited by 63 publications

References 21 publications

Effects of Ethnicity, Accent, and Job Status on Selection Decisions

Effects of Ethnicity, Accent, and Job Status on Selection Decisions

Unfair Discrimination in the Selection Interview: An Attributional Account

Employment Qualifications, Person–Job Fit, Underemployment Attributions, and Hiring Recommendations: A three‐study investigation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About