Applicant Reactions to Different Selection Technology: Face‐to‐Face, Interactive Voice Response, and Computer‐Assisted Telephone Screening Interviews
Authors:
- 1 March 2004
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in International Journal of Selection and Assessment
- Vol. 12 (1-2) , 135-148
Abstract
This research contributes to the understanding of reactions to different selection screening methods. A sample of students (n=153) experienced one of three types of screening techniques, face‐to‐face interview screenings, telephone interview screenings, and interactive voice response (IVR) screenings, with identical content in a pre‐ to post‐screening longitudinal study. We further examined the role of two important individual differences, cognitive ability and conscientiousness, in attitudes toward the screenings. IVR is a “non‐interpersonal” screening method so it was not surprising that it was rated lower in terms of procedural justice factors such as interpersonal treatment, two–way communication, and openness but what is encouraging is that there were no differences between other labor intensive and costly technologies and IVR on the other procedural justice factors. Therefore, there do not appear to be any major negatives in terms of structural fairness among alternative screening devices implying that organizations can make choices between screening methods based on other factors such as recruitment strategy or cost.Keywords
This publication has 45 references indexed in Scilit:
- The effects of videoconference, telephone, and face-to-face media on interviewer and applicant judgments in employment interviewsJournal of Management, 2001
- The Winding Road from Employee to Complainant: Situational and Psychological Determinants of Wrongful-Termination ClaimsAdministrative Science Quarterly, 2000
- Understanding procedural justice and its impact on business organizationsJournal of Management, 2000
- Applicants' perceptions of selection procedures and decisions: a critical review and agenda for the futureJournal of Management, 2000
- Applicant reactions to test scores banding in entry-level and promotional contexts.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1999
- Using personality testing to reduce adverse impact: A cautionary note.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1998
- Role of ability and prior knowledge in complex training performance.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1995
- Conscientiousness and performance of sales representatives: Test of the mediating effects of goal setting.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1993
- When your top choice turns you down: Effect of rejected offers on the utility of selection tests.Psychological Bulletin, 1986
- Long-term reliability of the Wonderlic Personnel Test.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1983