When Physical Disabilities Are Not Liabilities: The Role of Applicant and Interviewer Characteristics on Employment Interview Outcomes

Abstract

An applied sample was randomly assigned to evaluate the credentials of a job candidate with or without a physical disability and whose interview responses varied in quality (positive vs. average vs. negative). In addition to making hiring decisions, participants completed a number of measures including the Marlowe‐Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Crowne & Marlowe, 1964), the Interaction with Disabled Persons Scale (Gething, 1991), an interview comfort measure, and an EEOC knowledge quiz. Results consistently indicated that participants evaluated the job candidate with a disability more favorably than the job candidate without a disability. Data also indicated a relationship between participants' level of comfort when interacting with persons with disabilities and their interview evaluations of such individuals. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for diversity management.

When your face doesn't fit: employment discrimination against people with facial disfigurements

“…Roberts & Macan, 2006). There is also direct evidence indicating a relationship between interviewer's level of comfort when interacting with persons with disabilities and their evaluations of the interview performance of such individuals (Nordstrom et al, 1998). It seems likely that the media may also have some beneficial role to play, given evidence that exposure to positive exemplars of a discriminated-against minority has the effect of reducing automatic, implicit prejudice against members of that social group (e.g.…”

“…There have been When your face doesn't fit Page 5 of 40 several reports of positive bias towards a fictional job applicant with impaired mobility from undergraduate students (Gouvier, Sytsma-Jordan & Mayville, 2003) or employees (Bell & Klein, 2001;Christman & Slaten, 1991;Nordstrom, Huffaker & Williams, 1998; but see also Colella, DeNisi & Varma, 1998). Turning to facial disfigurement, Stevenage and McKay (1999) reported a study in which recruitment consultants stated a 100% likelihood of employing an applicant with a facial disfigurement (port wine stain) for a general administrative position.…”

The Structured Interview: Reducing Biases Toward Job Applicants with Physical Disabilities

“…In a study by Drehmer and Bordieri (1985), supervisors and midlevel managers reviewing resumes rated an applicant described as having a physical handicap as more favorable than a comparable applicant without a disability. Studies using videotapes of mock employment interviews also found more positive ratings for applicants with a physical disability than for equally-qualified applicants without a physical disability (Cesare, Tannenbaum, & Dalessio, 1990;Christman & Branson, 1990;Christman & Slaten, 1991;Nordstrom, Huffaker, & Williams, 1998).…”

Employers' Attitudes Towards Hiring and Retaining People with Disabilities: A Review of the Literature

“…Millington, Reid and Leierer (1997) reported people with disabilities to be rated higher than individuals without disabilities applying for the same position in terms of satisfactoriness, job knowledge, trainability, dependability and motivation. Social desirability appeared not to be an influence on employer self-reported attitudes toward hiring people with disabilities (Nordstrom et al, 1998).…”