This dissertation explores applicant reactions to Internet-based selection procedures in order to advance theory and practice related to the use modern employee selection tools. Previous authors have explored this topic area (e.g., Harris et al., 2003). However, this dissertation goes beyond previous research by proposing and testing a model that incorporates the measurement of multiple constructs that are highly relevant to organizations when utilizing Internet-based selection procedures. Such constructs include privacy concerns, explanations, control, fairness perceptions, litigation intentions, organizational intentions, and test-taking motivation. Current organizational justice theory, previous findings from studies on applicant reactions to selection procedures, and research on Internet privacy concerns provided the foundation on which this research is based. This dissertation also pulls from theory in the legal, information sciences, and psychology literatures. A model of applicant reactions that included privacy concerns and multiple outcomes relevant to organizations was proposed. Hypotheses examining this model were tested via a high-fidelity laboratory study with student participants. One-third of the participants in this study were seeking jobs at the time of participation. Findings indicated that privacy concerns are an important predictor of both proximal (i.e., fairness perceptions) and distal (i.e., organizational intentions, test-taking motivation) applicant reaction outcomes. Results also demonstrated support for a mediating role of fairness perceptions in the relationships between privacy concerns and organizational intentions as well as between privacy concerns and test-taking motivation. Providing applicants with control and explanations were found to have no moderating effect on the relationship between privacy concerns and fairness perceptions. However, post-hoc analyses indicated that excuse explanations moderated the effect of privacy concerns on test-taking motivation. Theoretical implications of this dissertation include support for a one-factor model of organizational justice as well as a call for more integration of research from outside of industrial-organizational psychology. Additionally, areas for future research, including opportunities for improvement of study design involving timing of measures, are presented. Finally, implications for practice are discussed in regard to the possible impact of privacy concerns to large numbers of applicants participating in Internet-based selection processes, including a discussion on the importance of applicant privacy concerns to organizations and the use of multiple, inexpensive methods that may aid organizations in increasing fairness perceptions among applicants.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Although interviews are a widely used and popular selection technique, when they lack clear structure and a predetermined set of questions, bias can permeate the interview selection process. In particular, illegal interview questions (i.e., questions that cannot legally be asked, such as marital status or children) may be particularly threatening for female applicants. Justice and social identity theory were used to explain the applicant reactions to illegal interview questions in this study. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four hypothetical interview conditions – a control of four low face-valid interview questions, four non-gender relevant illegal interview questions, or four gender-relevant illegal interview questions. There was a significant gender by condition interaction on all outcome measures. Illegal interview questions had a significant negative effect on women’s organizational reactions (job pursuit intentions, organizational attractiveness, belonging, trust & comfort) but not on men’s organizational reactions. In contrast both women and men had significantly lower procedural justice perceptions of the gender-relevant illegal interview condition compared to the two other conditions. However, women perceived the illegal interview questions (both the gender relevant and gender non-relevant questions) as lower in face validity (i.e., were less relevant to the job), whereas men perceived all the interview questions as equally face-valid. Thus, although men believed the illegal interview questions were low in procedural justice and unfair, men still perceived these questions as valid and job-relevant. Overall, an indirect effect of procedural justice perceptions on organizational reactions was significant for both men and women, indicating that lower procedural justice did have a significant negative effect on applicants’ organizational reactions. Taken together, the following study demonstrates that illegal interview questions (both those related to gender and unrelated to gender) act as a social identity threat for women and harm women’s attraction to the organization, whereas men are primarily unaffected by these illegal interview questions in their reactions.

Over the past decade, the use of asynchronous video interviews (AVIs) has increased exponentially, largely spurred by ongoing technological progress and shifts to remote work. Although prior research shows interview design can influence applicant reactions, the effect of video interview design factors on interviewee reactions remains unclear. The present study determines the influence of AVI stimulus format (text-based vs. audio-visual questions) on applicant perceptions of social presence, fairness and organisational attractiveness. To this end, a between-subjects posttest-only experimental design was used in two separate samples (South African sample, N = 58; USA sample, N = 169, Combined samples, N = 227). Participants were randomly assigned to either the control or experimental group. Participants completed a mock interview on a commercially available AVI platform and then answered a questionnaire measuring perceptions of social presence, fairness, and organisational attractiveness. Bootstrapped independent sample t-tests and serial mediation were used to test the hypotheses. Within Sample 1, applicant perceptions of social presence, fairness and organisational attractiveness were higher for the audio-visual and text-based AVIs, thereby supporting the proposition that audio-visual stimuli lead to higher perceptions of social presence, fairness and organisational attractiveness. Conversely, Sample 2's findings were non-significant (p > .05). While there were mixed results, the findings of this study provide preliminary evidence which suggests that within the South African context, audio-visual stimuli can be used in AVIs. Organisations in the American context should pay close attention to the effects of AVI stimulus format on applicant reactions as the findings from the American sample were not conclusive. Future research should investigate applicant reactions to different forms of AVI stimulus during a multi-stage selection process

No description available.

No description available.

Industrial-organizational psychologist Stephen S.W. Gilliland developed a model for studying job-seeker fairness perceptions in 1993 based on existing research in organizational justice. The model includes several rules which will result in job-seeker perceptions of fairness if satisfied and job-seeker perceptions of unfairness if violated. Given the prominence of this model in the literature as well as changes which have occurred in personnel selection (such as human resource information systems, or HRIS, and e-recruitment), scholars have called for a technological re-envisioning of the original model, especially the explanations/descriptions ascribed to each rule. The present study seeks to understand how HRIS e-recruitment technology impacts job-seeker fairness perceptions and in so doing update the Gilliland (1993) model using a qualitative methodology and website success measures from information systems success theory. It contributes to the literature on applicant fairness perceptions by accounting for technological change, and contributes to the field of Public Administration by studying a governmental e-recruitment portal thereby accounting for the particularities of public-sector HRM which is underrepresented in the organizational justice literature. Over the course of one (1) year, twelve (12) job-seekers participated in a series of focus group interviews where they reflected on their experiences applying for jobs in the Canadian federal civil service using the government’s e-recruitment portal. Participants completed profiles, sent applications, communicated with government personnel, and wrote internet tests, among other job-search activities, and reported on their experiences from the perspective of fairness. Results confirm the validity of all original procedural justice rules and offer insight into their application in a recruitment environment where applicants invest considerable time interacting with computerized systems. Two additional rules are also put forth including the ease with which candidates can deceive tests and privacy/trustworthiness using technology. The findings are limited insofar as data gathering took place during a time of reduced hiring activity by the employer and because participation was limited to one (1) specific geographic location.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Initial research on structuring the interview process investigated structure’s impact on the interview’s psychometric properties (e.g., reliability and validity). In contrast, the empirical literature has begun to consider the impact of increased interview structure on job applicant reactions to the interview and the companies that utilize them. Current research has studied the effects of interviewer characteristics on applicant reactions and the effects of different types of selection procedures on applicant fairness reactions. In addition, while studies have examined the impact of applicants’ perceived control on their reactions to selection procedures, few studies have examined this impact specifically for the employment interview. Given the widespread use of the interview in selection, this study adds to current research by focusing on applicant reactions to four elements of the interview identified as being salient to applicants (i.e., the degree to which the interviewee perceives that applicants are asked the same questions, the use of situational or behavioral type questions, controlling the use of ancillary information by the interviewer, and the degree to which questions from the applicant are controlled). In addition, this study focused on need for control as a moderator of the relationships between interview structure and fairness perceptions, recommendation intentions, and acceptance intentions. Participants consisted of 161 students voluntarily participating in three different interviewing scenarios: unstructured, semi-structured, and structured interviewing scenario. The participants completed post-interview measures asking them about their perceptions of fairness, their intention to recommend the company to others, and their intention of accepting an offer if one is made by the company. Although the hypothesized relationships between elements of structure and applicant evaluations of the interview were largely not supported, the results did indicate that student applicants perceived semi-structured and structured interviews to be fairer than unstructured interviews. In addition, the results suggest that more structured interviews may lead to lower behavioral intent to recommend the job to others or accept a job offer. Implications of the results are discussed in terms of how interview structure relates to the candidates’ perception of fairness, recommendation intentions, and acceptance intentions.