Unconscious Personnel Selection

Messner, Claude; Wänke, Michaela; Weibel, Christian

doi:10.1521/soco.2011.29.6.699

Cited by 15 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although providing the decision goal only after information presentation appears commendable from a theoretical perspective (see bottom-up principle), unconscious-thought participants performed similarly well in the three experiments. Interestingly, this parallels evidence obtained in earlier research, in which unconscious-thought participants did well regardless of whether the decision goal was provided before information presentation (e.g., Dijksterhuis, 2004; Messner et al, 2011) or only after the information encoding stage (e.g., Bos et al, 2008; Dijksterhuis et al, 2006). To our knowledge, these inconsistencies in procedure in particular and the encoding stage in general have not been considered in theorizing on UTT.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Presumably this occurred because conscious thinkers processed information top-down, whereas unconscious thinkers worked bottom-up. Relatedly, Messner, Wänke, and Weibel (2011) reported that personnel selection decisions after periods of unconscious thought were free of gender and attractiveness biases, whereas conscious thinkers fell prey to these misleading heuristics. Supposedly, this is because unconscious thinkers integrate the available information bottom-up, whereas conscious thinkers work top-down and are therefore misled when stereotypes do not carry truth value.…”

Section: Unconscious Processes May Increase Lie Detection Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Unconscious processes improve lie detection.

Reinhard¹,

Greifeneder²,

Scharmach³

2013

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The capacity to identify cheaters is essential for maintaining balanced social relationships, yet humans have been shown to be generally poor deception detectors. In fact, a plethora of empirical findings holds that individuals are only slightly better than chance when discerning lies from truths. Here, we report 5 experiments showing that judges' ability to detect deception greatly increases after periods of unconscious processing. Specifically, judges who were kept from consciously deliberating outperformed judges who were encouraged to do so or who made a decision immediately; moreover, unconscious thinkers' detection accuracy was significantly above chance level. The reported experiments further show that this improvement comes about because unconscious thinking processes allow for integrating the particularly rich information basis necessary for accurate lie detection. These findings suggest that the human mind is not unfit to distinguish between truth and deception but that this ability resides in previously overlooked processes.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Unconscious Processes May Increase Lie Detection Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Unconscious processes improve lie detection.

Reinhard¹,

Greifeneder²,

Scharmach³

2013

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous research has largely studied unconscious thought in the judgment of affectively laden (positive/negative) information such as the preference for cars, roommate, or apartments ( Dijksterhuis, 2004 ; Dijksterhuis et al, 2006 ; Bos et al, 2008 ; Lerouge, 2009 ; Ham and van den Bos, 2011 ; Messner et al, 2011 ). In contrast, the current experiment used materials from a logic problem.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not Merely Experiential: Unconscious Thought Can Be Rational

Garrison

Handley

2017

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals often form more reasonable judgments from complex information after a period of distraction vs. deliberation. This phenomenon has been attributed to sophisticated unconscious thought during the distraction period that integrates and organizes the information (Unconscious Thought Theory; Dijksterhuis and Nordgren, 2006). Yet, other research suggests that experiential processes are strengthened during the distraction (relative to deliberation) period, accounting for the judgment and decision benefit. We tested between these possibilities, hypothesizing that unconscious thought is distinct from experiential processes, and independently contributes to judgments and decisions during a distraction period. Using an established paradigm, Experiment 1 (N = 319) randomly induced participants into an experiential or rational mindset, after which participants received complex information describing three roommates to then consider consciously (i.e., deliberation) or unconsciously (i.e., distraction). Results revealed superior roommate judgments (but not choices) following distraction vs. deliberation, consistent with Unconscious Thought Theory. Mindset did not have an influence on roommate judgments. However, planned tests revealed a significant advantage of distraction only within the rational-mindset condition, which is contrary to the idea that experiential processing alone facilitates complex decision-making during periods of distraction. In a second experiment (N = 136), we tested whether effects of unconscious thought manifest for a complex analytical reasoning task for which experiential processing would offer no advantage. As predicted, participants in an unconscious thought condition outperformed participants in a control condition, suggesting that unconscious thought can be analytical. In sum, the current results support the existence of unconscious thinking processes that are distinct from experiential processes, and can be rational. Thus, the experiential vs. rational nature of a process might not cleanly delineate conscious and unconscious thought.

show abstract

“…Der Personalauswahl liegen hochkomplexe Entscheidungsprozesse zugrunde, die nicht selten in einer verfälschten Gewichtung von Bewerbereigenschaften und K schließlich in einer suboptimalen Auswahl münden (Messner et al 2011). Für den späteren beruflichen Erfolg eines eingestellten Bewerbers ist es aber von zentraler Bedeutung, dass mit Hilfe der Personalauswahl vor allem jene Bewerbereigenschaften erkannt, beurteilt und hoch gewichtet werden, die zur Ausübung der angestrebten Tätigkeit "notwendig oder zumindest förderlich sind" (Schuler 2008, S. 5).…”

Section: Hypothesenunclassified

Bewusstes und unbewusstes Denken von Experten und Novizen: Eine empirische Studie zur Qualität von Personalauswahlentscheidungen und Implikationen für die Beratung

Kohlmann

2020

Organisationsberat Superv Coach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zusammenfassung Die „Theorie des unbewussten Denkens“ (UTT) postuliert, dass Menschen in komplexen Situationen bessere Entscheidungen treffen, wenn sie unbewusst-intuitiv und nicht bewusst nachdenken. Inwieweit sich diese, fast ausschließlich im Bereich der Konsumgüterentscheidungen geprüfte Annahme, auch auf die Entscheidungsarbeit von Recruitern, Beratern oder Coaches übertragen lässt und welche Rolle hierbei ihrer Expertise zukommt, ist bisher weitgehend ungeklärt. In diesem Beitrag werden die UTT sowie die Relevanz der Expertise für intuitive Entscheidungen theoretisch hergeleitet und mit Hilfe eines Experiments in der Personalauswahl empirisch fundiert. Die experimentellen Ergebnisse sowie die Implikationen für die Beratung weisen darauf hin, dass unbewusstes Denken den Entscheidungsprozess eines Recruiters bzw. Beraters begünstigen kann, sofern dieser über eine hinreichend validierte Expertise verfügt.

show abstract

Unconscious Personnel Selection

Cited by 15 publications

References 48 publications

Unconscious processes improve lie detection.

Unconscious processes improve lie detection.

Not Merely Experiential: Unconscious Thought Can Be Rational

Bewusstes und unbewusstes Denken von Experten und Novizen: Eine empirische Studie zur Qualität von Personalauswahlentscheidungen und Implikationen für die Beratung

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About