Social rules and attributions in the personnel selection interview

The study investigated the social rules applicable to selection interviews, and the attributions ions made by interviewers in response to rule-breaking behaviours by candidates. Sixty personnel specialists (31 males and 29 females) participated in the main study which examined their perceptions of social rules and attributions about rule breaking in their work experience. They listened to audiotapes of actual selection interviews, and made judgments about hireability communication competence, and specific social rules. Results indicated that interview rules could be categorized into two groups: specific interview presentation skills and general interpersonal competence. While situational attributions were more salient in explaining the breaking of general interpersonal competence rules, internal attributions (ability, effort) were more salient explanations for the breaking of more specific interview rules (with the exception of the preparation rule where lack of effort was the most likely explanation for rule breaking). Candidates previously judged as competent communicators were rated more favourably on both global and specific measures of rule-following competence, as well as on hireability. The theoretical and practical implications of combining social rules and attribution theory in the study of selection interviews are discussed.

Smiling in a job interview: When less is more

Two studies examined the effect of applicants' smiling on hireability. In a pre-test study, participants were asked to rate the expected behavior for four types of applicants. Newspaper reporter applicants were expected to be more serious than applicants for other jobs. In Study 1, participants were randomly assigned to be an applicant or interviewer for a newspaper reporting job. Smiling was negatively related to hiring, and smiling mediated the relation between applicants' motivation to make a good impression and hiring. Hiring was maximized when applicants smiled less in the middle of the interview relative to the start and end. In Study 2, participants watched Study 1 clips and were randomly assigned to believe the applicants were applying to one of four jobs. Participants rated more suitability when applicants smiled less, especially for jobs associated with a serious demeanor. This research shows that job type is an important moderator of the impact of smiling on hiring.

Self-Perceived Attractiveness and Its Influence on the Halo Effect and the Similar-to Me Effect

The present research examined the influences of the halo effect and the similar-tome effect on physical and sexual attractiveness for hiring decisions. It was hypothesized that the halo effect would cause applicants rated highly in physical and sexual attractiveness to receive higher ratings of hireability than unattractive applicants.However, if the similar-to-me effect is influential for levels of attractiveness in hiring situations, participants who rated themselves as less attractive should favor unattractive applicants. The results did not show an interaction between participant self-ratings and ratings of hireability, indicating the similar-to-me effect does not apply to physical or sexual attractiveness. There was a main effect of sexual attractiveness of the applicant forhireability, showing support for the halo effect. This effect was only found for White applicants, potentially due to in-group bias and out-group homogeneity.

Prima Facie: four facets of gender bias in personnel selection.

Recent findings have highlighted a ‘perfection bias’, that is women being evaluated on more criteria than men in the workplace (Moscatelli et al., 2020; Prati et al., 2019). However, these studies have not considered faces as stimuli, even if facial first impressions can affect several real-world outcomes (Todorov et al., 2015). On this basis, the present research aimed to verify the presence of a perfection bias at face perception level, employing for the first time all the four facets of the fundamental dimensions of social judgments (i.e., competence, dominance, morality, sociability; Abele et al., 2016) and attractiveness (Hosoda et al., 2003) as evaluation criteria of applicants’ hireability. Four experiments were conducted (total N = 645), employing a gender-neutral position (Study 1) as well as managerial positions (Study 2, 3, 4) and recruiting Italian and British students (Study 1, 2) as well as British workers (Study 3, 4). Results of Study 1 confirmed that male applicants were evaluated only on their facial competence, while female applicants were evaluated on all the other facial traits. However, the other three studies showed a different and unexpected pattern: besides facial attractiveness and competence considered equally important for both male and female applicants, facial dominance was considered as more important in evaluating women, while facial morality and sociability were considered as more important in evaluating men. Hence, results highlighted a sort of ‘deficit bias’, so that counter stereotypic traits in which men and women are believed weak (Fiske, 1998) were more relevant for their hireability.