- Email: [email protected]
Subjective Applicant Qualifications and Interpersonal Attraction as Mediators within a Process Model of Interview Selection Decisions
JOURNAL OF VOCATIONAL BEHAVIOR ARTICLE NO.
50, 23–40 (1997)
VB961538
Subjective Applicant Qualifications and Interpersonal Attraction as Mediators within a Process Model of Interview Selection Decisions KIM J. WADE Washington State University AND
ANGELO J. KINICKI Arizona State University Past research comparing the relative influence of objective and subjective applicant qualifications within the interview context suggests a dominant influence of subjectively assessed applicant qualifications. However, methodological concerns cast doubt upon this conclusion. The present investigation overcomes previous methodological limitations by reanalyzing data from Kinicki and Lockwood (1985) using covariance structural modeling. Twenty-four professional recruiters interviewed 91 college seniors. Results indicate interviewers differentiate between applicant objective and subjective qualifications, but perceptions of applicant subjective qualifications and interviewing skills are indistinguishable. The interviewer’s subjective impression of the applicant completely mediates the effect of applicants’ relevant experience levels, but not academic achievement. This finding suggests the possibility that academic achievement be entered into the final hiring decision independently of interviewer judgments. The current results indicate a positive relationship between interpersonal attraction and interview outcomes, perhaps suggesting interviewers are measuring applicant fit in addition to job skills. q 1997 Academic Press
Past research on selection decisions typically examined the bivariate relationship between demographic, objective, and subjective applicant characteristics and the hiring decision. Because results accounted for relatively little variance in the interview decision, Arvey and Campion (1982) concluded that greater focus on decision-making models in the interview process was needed. Although Graves and Powell (1988; 1995) and Raza and Carpenter (1987) were notable exceptions, this suggestion has gone largely unheeded, and 12 Address reprint requests to Kim J. Wade, Department of Management and Systems, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-4736. 23 0001-8791/97 $25.00 Copyright q 1997 by Academic Press All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
24
WADE AND KINICKI
years later Dipboye (1994) still recommended that researchers focus more on the processes underlying interviewers’ final judgments. The purpose of this study was to address the neglect of process in interviewing research by examining the relative impact of objective and subjective applicant qualifications on hiring decisions and to explore the mediating role of subjective qualifications and interpersonal attraction. Objective qualifications consist of applicant qualities which are ‘‘unfiltered,’’ or garnered without the involvement of the interviewer. Subjective qualifications represent the interviewer’s personal assessments of applicant characteristics gathered during the interview session. Six previous investigations compared the relative influence of objective and subjective applicant qualifications within the interview context. Parsons and Liden (1984) found that assessments of candidates’ qualifications were influenced more by verbal and non verbal subjective evaluations than by objective factors. Kinicki and Lockwood’s (1985) results revealed that subjective interview impressions accounted for 40.4% of the variance in the interview decision, while objective measures of academic achievement accounted for only 15.9%. Raza and Carpenter (1987) examined the relative impact of objective demographic variables and subjective interviewer assessments of applicant qualities. Regression analysis revealed subjective interviewer ratings accounted for considerably more variance in hirability decisions than did objective demographic variables. Similarly, Graves and Powell (1988) discovered that subjective qualifications had a significant and direct effect on interviewers’ judgments, while the direct path from objective qualifications to interviewers’ judgments was not significant. Finally, both Kinicki, Lockwood, Hom, and Griffeth (1990) and Graves and Powell (1995) found that subjective impressions swayed hiring recommendations significantly more than did objective qualifications. A cursory review of these investigations indicates a dominant influence of subjective qualifications over objective ones in interviewers’ decisions. Nonetheless, three methodological considerations substantially weaken this conclusion. First, if one considers objective qualifications to represent a domain of ‘‘unfiltered’’ behaviors, and likewise subjective qualifications represent a domain of ‘‘filtered’’ behaviors, each of the above investigations— except Kinicki and Lockwood (1985)—provides a more thorough and thus more representative sample of the subjective qualifications domain than the objective qualifications domain. The empirical findings reviewed thus far are perhaps a function of deficient sampling from the objective qualifications domain. A more representative sample of items would allow an improved test of the relative influence of objective and subjective qualifications. Second, only two studies (Graves & Powell, 1988; 1995) used covariance structure modeling (CSM) to test a process model comparing various pathways by which objective and subjective qualifications effect interviewers’ judgments. Conceivably, past studies using path analysis (Raza & Carpenter, 1987) and multiple regression (Kinicki et al., 1990; Kinicki & Lockwood, 1985; Parsons &
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
25
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
Liden, 1984) computed biased parameter estimates or regression coefficients because they did not control measurement error (James, Mulaik, & Brett, 1982): CSM controls for measurement error. Moreover, the studies involving process models (Graves & Powell, 1988; 1995; Raza & Carpenter, 1987) did not test whether objective and subjective characteristics act as complete or partial mediators within the interview process. This can lead to biased parameter estimates and thus inaccurate conclusions (James & Brett, 1984). Finally, previous studies may have found little effect of objective data because they solely included objective information, and not the interviewer’s interpretations of that information. It may be that all job qualifications, whether derived from objective or subjective sources, are filtered through the interviewer’s perceptual barrier, thereby making all qualification assessments inherently subjective. No study has empirically assessed whether objective and subjective information represent independent constructs. The present investigation overcomes these methodological limitations by reanalyzing data from Kinicki and Lockwood (1985) to test a process model of interviewers’ judgments. Figure 1 shows the hypothesized variables in this process model and the hypothesized relationships between them. OVERVIEW OF INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
Given that Subjective Qualifications and Interpersonal Attraction are mediators within our process model, it is beneficial to first define each construct before discussing their respective antecedent variables. Because Subjective Qualifications represent the interviewer’s personal assessments regarding the applicant’s potential for successful job performance, verbal delivery and content, as well as nonverbal cues are used in this assessment process (Parsons & Liden, 1984; Graves & Powell, 1988). Assessment of the second proposed mediator, Interpersonal Attraction, is certainly a two-way street between applicant and interviewer. Although we recognize this bilateral process, this paper focuses solely on the interviewer’s perspective. We thus define Interpersonal Attraction as the interviewer’s global affect regarding the degree to which the applicant is liked, or positively perceived, by the interviewer. Let us now consider the antecedents of these proposed mediators. Antecedents of Subjective Qualifications The purpose of the interview is to select those individuals most likely to perform well on the job. Considerable evidence indicates objective indicators of cognitive ability are strong predictors of future job performance (e.g. Ree, Earles, & Teachout, 1994). However, we predict that within the interview context, this relationship is an indirect one, and that Subjective Qualifications serve a key mediating role (see Fig. 1). The interpersonal activity between the applicant and interviewer precludes an assessment of applicant potential based solely on objective performance indicators. Assessments of applicant potential are inherently bound to an interviewer’s perceptions due to the social and interactive
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
26
WADE AND KINICKI
FIG. 1.
Hypothesized five-factor structural model. Circles represent latent constructs.
nature of the interview. However, research findings strongly indicate these perceptions form before the interview and are usually based on objectively assessed information, or ‘‘paper credentials’’ (Macan & Dipboye, 1990). This objective information then serves as input in the interviewer’s ensuing cognitive processes. Thus the first antecedent variable of Subjective Qualifications, labeled Objective Qualifications, consists of applicant qualities which were garnered without the involvement of the interviewer. These attributes are typically obtained from a resume or application blank (Dipboye, 1982). The second antecedent of Subjective Qualifications, Interviewing Skills, represents the interviewer’s perception of the applicant’s ability to effectively communicate in the interview situation. Applicants are seen as more qualified when they display positive verbal and nonverbal behavior, including good eye contact, voice modulation, energy, vocal expressiveness, and personal drive or initiative (e.g., Anderson & Shackleton, 1990; Graves & Powell, 1988; Keenan, 1977; Raza & Carpenter, 1987). Presenting a positive physical appearance also is a necessary interview skill, as physically attractive people are perceived as more socially adept than unattractive people (Feingold, 1992). These behaviors exhibited by applicants, both verbal and nonverbal, can reveal meaningful job-related constructs. Within the interview process, these behaviors feed into the interviewer’s information processing system (Dipboye & Gaugler, 1993). Past research revealed verbal and nonverbal behaviors accompanying candidates’ responses influenced interviewers’ assessments (Forbes & Jackson, 1980). Thus, Interviewing Skills are predicted to have a direct positive effect on Subjective Qualifications. The third antecedent of Subjective Qualifications, Interpersonal Attraction, also leads to a positive bias in interviewer’s questioning strategy and cognitive processing (Dipboye & Macan, 1988; Motowidlo, 1986). That is, the way in which recruiters store, retrieve, and integrate information about those they like is prone to positive bias (Graves & Powell, 1995). This finding suggests that evaluations of well-liked candidates will be more positive due to selective storage, retrieval, and/or integration of favorable information. Applicants perceived as pleasant are more likely viewed as potentially good employees and
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
27
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
co-workers (Raza & Carpenter, 1987). For example, past research uncovered a positive relationship between interpersonal attraction and subjective interviewer assessments (e.g., Keenan, 1977; Kinicki & Lockwood, 1985). Antecedent of Interpersonal Attraction Additionally, Interpersonal Attraction plays a mediating role in the proposed model. Figure 1 reveals Interviewing Skills are a hypothesized antecedent of Interpersonal Attraction. This hypothesis is based on an extension of Byrne’s (1971) similarity-attraction paradigm. In and of itself, social interaction, particularly if it is cooperative and cordial in nature, leads to perceptions of interpersonal similarity (Moreland & Zajonc, 1982). Well-developed interview skills lend themselves to just such an amicable exchange. Perceived similarity in turn leads to interpersonal attraction between recruiter and applicant (Graves & Powell, 1995). In support of this prediction, Zuckerman, Hodgins, and Miyake’s (1990) findings indicated that job applicants rated as vocally attractive received more favorable personality ratings than vocally unattractive applicants. Moreover, if we assume that interviewers perceive themselves as able communicators, research supports the link between assumed similarity of communication styles and attraction (Mathison, 1988). Direct Predictors of Hiring Decision Past research demonstrated a direct link between Subjective Qualifications and Hiring Decision (Graves & Powell, 1988; 1995). Additionally, Anderson and Shackleton (1990) found a significant correlation (r Å .64) between interviewers’ personal liking and overall evaluations of the applicant. Well-liked candidates were also more likely offered a follow-up interview (Keenan, 1977), suggesting a positive and direct relationship between Interpersonal Attraction and the hiring decision. To summarize, the intent of present study is not to test an all encompassing model of the decision-making process underlying hiring decisions. Rather, we focus on the mediating effects of Subjective Qualifications and Interpersonal Attraction. Thus, we provide a more accurate assessment of the relative contributions of objective and subjective applicant qualifications on hiring decisions by using CSM. Because latent factors are simultaneously analyzed in CSM, resulting estimates are more accurate and less biased than single indicator models (James et al., 1982). METHOD
We acquired the data employed in the current research from Kinicki and Lockwood (1985). Additional information regarding demographic characteristics and scale items can be found in that source. Subjects and Procedure Twenty-four professional recruiters interviewed 91 graduating seniors majoring in business administration. This study was part of an interviewing skills
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
28
WADE AND KINICKI
workshop held at the career planning and placement center of a large university. The primary purpose of the workshop was to give students an opportunity to be interviewed by a professional recruiter. Two administrative procedures were implemented in order to increase the realism and external validity of the interviews. First, students were asked to indicate a specific entry-level job for which they wished to be interviewed, and recruiters were asked to list those entry level jobs for which they had direct interviewing experience. The jobs listed by applicants were then matched to recruiter experience. This resulted in applicants being interviewed by recruiters who were (1) thoroughly knowledgeable about the specific job under consideration and (2) experienced at actually interviewing people for the job under consideration. Applicants completed a detailed application blank consisting of information about his or her gender, work experience, job interests, educational background, and extracurricular activities. Recruiters received the application blanks and an interviewing schedule upon arriving at the career placement center. Each recruiter reviewed the relevant material prior to conducting the 30-min interview. Immediately afterward, they completed a 10-item survey covering their perceptions of the applicant’s job skills, interviewing skills, personableness, and likelihood of hire. Applicants were then provided with feedback. Recruiters conducted three or four interviews. Measures Objective qualifications. This latent construct was assessed with nine indicators commonly used in past research to represent objective qualifications (Parsons & Liden, 1984; Graves & Powell, 1988). Four indicators were similarity or congruency measures. Similarity of work experience and academic training assessed the similarity between an interviewee’s work experience and college major. The second indicator measured the similarity between an applicant’s work experience and professional objective. This indicator assessed whether an interviewee had work experience within his/her field of interest. The third comparison involved the resemblance between an applicant’s professional objective and academic training. The fourth congruency measure involved the interviewee’s background experience and the type of organization at which he or she was applying. Evaluations for these four indicators were coded 0 (dissimilar) or 1 (similar) and were made by two independent judges. Interrater agreement was .98. The remaining indicators included applicant’s self-reported cumulative GPA and GPA within his or her college major, the number of self-reported honors, and the number of organizational memberships and offices held. These nine indicators were submitted to a principal axes factor analysis with a varimax rotation. The pattern of factor loadings and a scree plot were used to determine the factor structure that best represented the data. The data yielded two orthogonal factors. Factor one contained the cumulative GPA, major GPA, and honors variables and was interpreted as a measure of academic achievement. The second factor consisted of two congruency measures
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
29
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
(similarity of work experience and academic training, and similarity of work experience and professional objective) and was labeled Experience Similarity. The Objective Qualifications latent factor thus was separated into these two factors. Each factor was represented by it’s associated indicators. Interviewing skills. This latent construct was measured with two indicators. Personal appearance influences the interview assessment (Snyder, Berscheid, & Matwychuk, 1988), thus interviewers rated the applicant’s appearance. More directly, interviewers were asked to evaluate applicants’ interviewing skills. Scale anchors for these two indicators ranged from (1) ‘‘extremely poor’’ to (7) ‘‘extremely good.’’ Subjective qualifications. All four indicators of this latent construct reflect recruiters’ perceptions of the interviewees gathered during the course of the interview and were used in past research to measure subjective qualifications (Graves & Powell, 1988; Kinicki et al., 1990). Based on their interactions with the job candidates, recruiters were asked to rate applicants’ occupational knowledge and level of personal drive from (1) ‘‘extremely low’’ to (7) ‘‘extremely high.’’ Additionally, recruiters rated applicants’ job related experience or training and ability to express ideas. Responses ranged from (1) ‘‘extremely poor’’ to (7)‘‘ extremely good.’’ Interpersonal attraction. As previously discussed, Interpersonal Attraction represents the degree to which the interviewer likes, or has positive affect toward the applicant. Two items from Byrne’s (1971) Interpersonal Attraction Scale were used as indicators of this construct. The first item assessed the recruiter’s personal feelings toward the applicant on a scale anchored from (1) ‘‘I feel that I would dislike this student very much’’ to (7) ‘‘I feel that I would probably like this student very much.’’ The second measured the extent to which the recruiter would like working together with the applicant on the job. The scale was anchored from (1) ‘‘would very much dislike working with this student on the job’’ to (7) ‘‘would very much enjoy working with this student on the job.’’ Hiring decision. Two indicators were used to assess this latent construct. First, recruiters were asked to evaluate whether the interviewee was suitable for hire, measured on a (1) ‘‘very strongly disagree’’ to (6) ‘‘very strongly agree’’ scale. Second, recruiters assessed the applicant’s probability of success within the field of interest, measured from (1) ‘‘extremely low’’ to (7) ‘‘extremely high.’’ Thus data were obtained from three independent sources in order to reduce problems associated with method dependence. The 10-item survey completed by recruiters yielded the indicators of Subjective Qualifications, Interviewing Skills, Interpersonal Attraction, and Hiring Decision. The application blank yielded indicators of Academic Achievement. Finally, the judges’ evaluations of objective information contained on application blanks provided indicators of Experience Similarity. Analytic Procedure All models were tested using CSM procedures in Bentler’s EQS program (1989). Model structural paths were evaluated for significance, and goodness
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
30
WADE AND KINICKI
of fit was assessed by two fit indices: the comparative fit index (CFI; Bentler, 1990) and the parsimonious fit index (PFI; James, Muliak, & Brett, 1982). CFI values of .90 and greater are indications of adequate model fit (Bentler, 1990). PFI values of .60 and above are suggested as an ad hoc rule for model retention (Williams & Podsakoff, 1989). In addition, the CFI difference between two nested models and the sequential chi-square difference test (SCDT; James et al., 1982) were interpreted to evaluate model fit. Following Anderson and Gerbing’s (1988) recommendation, the proposed model underwent two stages of analysis—measurement and structural. In stage 1, the baseline measurement model was fitted to the data. Alternative nested models were then contrasted with the original model. First, a measurement model specifying perfect correlation among all latent factors was assessed to evaluate overall discriminability. Next, separate tests of discriminant validity were conducted among the latent constructs. These tests consisted of comparing the fit of the six-factor model with a model that constrained the two constructs of interest to be perfectly correlated and equally correlated with other constructs (Brooke, Russell, & Price, 1988). Model structural linkages were examined in stage 2 of the analysis. First, the model depicted in Figure 1 was fitted to the data. Next, structural tests focused on the mediating properties of Subjective Qualifications and Interpersonal Attraction. First, the three conditions for mediation were assessed (cf. Baron & Kenny, 1986). However, in order to assess complete mediation, a fourth condition must hold; the independent variable must have no direct effect on the dependent variable when the mediator is held constant (Hom, Griffeth, Palich, & Bracker, 1995). Using CSM, a direct path is specified from the independent variable to the dependent variable, bypassing the hypothesized mediator. Insignificance of the added path supports the claim of complete mediation. RESULTS
Results from stage 1 are presented first. Model fit indices are presented in Table 1. The original six-factor measurement model (Model 1 in Table 1) accurately reproduced the observed covariance matrix (CFI Å .973), thus indicating the model accounted for 97% of the sample variance above that accounted for by the null model (Bentler, 1989). Results revealed that all factor loadings were significant (mean standardized loading Å .796). Standardized factor loadings of the measurement model yielded composite reliabilities of .783, .822, .875, .924, and .876 for Academic Achievement, Experience Similarity, Subjective Impression, Interpersonal Attraction, and Hiring Decision, respectively (Netemeyer, Johnston, & Burton, 1990). The singlefactor model used to assess overall discriminability (Model 2 in Table 1) poorly accounted for the sample data. Specifically, combining all the latent constructs significantly reduced model fit (x2 (91) Å 1318.38, p õ .05; CFI Å .133), supporting the need to maintain the model’s multidimensionality.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$1538
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba * p £ .05.
Measurement models 1. Six-factor model 2. Single-factor model: Model 2-1 difference 3. Equate subjective qualifications & interviewing skills Model 3-1 difference 4. Five-factor model: Model 4-2 difference 5. Equate academic achievement & experience similarity: Model 5-4 difference 6. Equate academic achievement & subjective impression: Model 6-4 difference 7. Equate academic achievement & interpersonal attraction: Model 7-4 difference 8. Equate experience similarity & subjective impression: Model 8-4 difference 9. Equate experience similarity & interpersonal attraction: Model 9-4 difference 10. Equate subjective impression & interpersonal attraction: Model 10-4 difference Structural model 1. Baseline model 2. Baseline plus direct effect of experience similarity on hiring decision: Model 2-1 difference
Model
82
119.44
85
173.21
83
85
177.42
119.88
85
166.22
85
631.58
85
85
165.75
259.28
81
81
76 91
df
119.21
119.21
114.87 1318.38
x2
.974
.974
.938
.935
.943
.877
.614
.943
.973
.973
.973 .133
CFI
.720
.728
.717
.715
.721
.672
.473
.721
.711
.711
.669 .115
PFI
TABLE 1 Fit Indices for Nested Sequence of Measurement and Structural Models
0.45
53.99*
58.20*
47.00*
140.06*
512.36*
46.53*
1199.17*
4.34
1203.51*
x2 diff
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
10
5
15
df
.000
.035
.038
.030
.096
.359
.030
.840
.711
.840
CFI diff
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
31
AP: JVB
32
WADE AND KINICKI
Nested model comparisons of the measurement model involved examining the discriminant validity of every possible pair of latent factors (excluding Hiring Decision). Results presented in Table 1 revealed that in all cases save one, both the SCDT and CFI differences indicated that equating each pair of constructs significantly reduced model fit, thus supporting the distinctiveness of the paired constructs. However, equating the Subjective Qualifications and Interviewing Skills constructs (Model 3 in Table 1) did not materially reduce model fit. The CFI remained identical to that of the baseline measurement model (.973) and the SCDT was insignificant. Additionally, the PFI increased from .669 to .711, reflecting the increased parsimony obtained by estimating fewer parameters in the restricted model. These results demonstrate that Subjective Qualifications and Interviewing Skills are not independent constructs and should not be modeled separately. Rather than being independent factors, Subjective Qualifications and Interviewing Skills appear to be subsets of a Subjective Impression factor. To test whether a Subjective Impression factor better fit the data, a fivefactor measurement model was evaluated. Results indicated the five-factor model (Model 4 in Table 1) accurately reproduced the observed covariance matrix (CFI Å .973) and all factor loadings were significant (mean standardized loading Å .789). The single-factor model used to assess overall discriminability produced results identical to those previously discussed. With the creation of a new latent factor, it was again necessary to test the discriminant validity of the constructs in the revised five-factor measurement model. These tests required the pairing of each latent factor with all others (excluding Hiring Decision), resulting in six comparison pairs (Models 5 through 10 in Table 1). The factors involved in the discriminability test were constrained such that they were perfectly correlated and equally correlated with other factors. The constrained model was then compared with the fivefactor measurement model (Model 4 in Table 1). Based on CFI differences and the SCDT, all cases equating the paired constructs resulted in a significant loss of model fit when compared to the five-factor baseline model (see Table 1). These results confirm the distinctiveness of the paired constructs and the need to maintain the multidimensionality of the model. Figure 2 depicts the revised five-factor measurement model. Results for the structural model test are shown in Table 1. The five-factor baseline model accurately explained the sample data as indicated by a CFI of .974 and PFI of .728. Standardized path coefficients for this model are depicted in Fig. 3, and results demonstrate that three of the five predicted relationships were supported. The hypothesized positive effects of Experience Similarity on Subjective Impression (.190, p õ .05) and in turn, of Subjective Impression on Hiring Decision (.796, p õ .05) were supported. Additionally, Interpersonal Attraction significantly predicted Subjective Impression (.720, p õ .05). Contrary to predictions, Academic Achievement did not serve as
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
33
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
FIG. 2. Revised five-factor measurement model. Circles represent factors; boxes represent indicators. Unidirectional arrows depict factors’ effects on indicators, and double-headed arrows signify factor correlations. Standardized factor loadings appear along unidirectional arrows. Asterisks depict significant factor loadings. Measurement errors and factor correlations are omitted for clarity.
causal input for recruiters’ Subjective Impression and Interpersonal Attraction did not predict Hiring Decision. As depicted in Fig. 3, the two exogenous variables (Academic Achievement and Experience Similarity) are predicted to influence Hiring Decision through the process of complete mediation. We now consider the direct tests of complete as opposed to partial mediation.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
34
AID
WADE AND KINICKI
JVB 1538
/
6309$$1538
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
35
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
Subjective Impression serves as the hypothesized mediator for the independent variable, Academic Achievement. Recall that four conditions must be fulfilled in order to establish complete mediation. Condition one was satisfied, as Academic Achievement was significantly correlated with the Hiring Decision (r Å .253, p õ .05). However, Academic Achievement failed to satisfy condition two. That is, the path from Academic Achievement to Subjective Impression was nonsignificant (see Fig. 3). Thus, Subjective Impression does not mediate the relationship between Academic Achievement and the Hiring Decision; further analysis of this relationship is inappropriate. Subjective Impression also serves as a mediator for Experience Similarity. Again, condition one is satisfied since Experience Similarity is positively correlated with the Hiring Decision (r Å .299, p õ .05). Additionally, significant parameter estimates between Experience Similarity and Subjective Impression and between Subjective Impression and Hiring Decision fulfill conditions two and three (see Fig. 3). Recall that condition four requires specification of a direct path from Experience Similarity to Hiring Decision. Insignificance of the new path affirms complete mediation. The SCDT indicated no significant difference in overall model fit, and the direct path did not reach significance. Taken together, the evidence supports the claim that Subjective Impression completely mediates the relationship between Experience Similarity and Hiring Decision. DISCUSSION
The present study used past research as a theoretical foundation to develop and test a model of the decision making process underlying hiring decisions. Stage 1 of the current analysis examined the operational measures used to assess the latent constructs within the model. Importantly, the use of data obtained from three distinct sources and the test of a single-factor model precluded explanation of the results by a single method factor. Our confirmatory analysis provided the first direct test of the independence between objective and subjective applicant qualifications in the research literature. Results confirmed the operationalizations of all model constructs, but indicated a lack of independence between subjective qualifications and interviewing skills. That is, there was no statistically discernable difference between the two latent factors. This finding led to the revised five-factor model in Fig. 2. Stage 2 of the analysis examined the revised structural model of hiring decisions and supported the constellation of relations underlying the baseline
FIG. 3. Five-factor structural model of the hiring decision process. Circles represent factors; boxes represent empirical indicators. Causal effects are given by arrows connecting circles; latent variables’ effects on indicators are given by arrows relating circles to boxes. Thicker arrows represent reference indicators. Asterisks depict significant standardized parameter estimates. Disturbance and measurement error effects are omitted for clarity.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
36
WADE AND KINICKI
model. Results supported three out of five individual relations derived from the model. Specifically, applicants’ Experience Similarity affected recruiters’ Subjective Impressions of applicants, which in turn positively affected Hiring Decision. Further exploration showed that Subjective Impression entirely mediated the link between Experience Similarity and Hiring Decision. Additionally, Subjective Impression was positively influenced by Interpersonal Attraction. Analysis of structural linkages failed to support the hypothesized relationships between Academic Achievement and Subjective Impression and between Interpersonal Attraction and Hiring Decision. These results were inconsistent with those of Graves and Powell (1988; 1995), who found a significant relationship between Objective Qualifications and Subjective Qualifications. Possible differences in samples or construct operationalizations may account for such differences. However, our results were consistent with those of Singer and Bruhns (1991), which indicated that managers gave work experience considerably more weight than academic qualifications in interview decisions. These interviewers put little stock in high academic performance, in spite of the fact that it is a valid predictor of managerial job performance (Howard, 1986). Rather, they used candidates’ experience levels as cognitive input when forming impressions. This finding leads to a practical suggestion to help ensure successful interview outcomes. An academic achievement measure could be entered into the final hiring decision independently of interviewer judgments. As academic and experience variables have similar validity levels, they would be assigned similar weights in the decision process (Singer & Bruhns, 1991). These results also have practical implications for applicants. If students must choose, these findings suggest they should, up to a point, sacrifice high grades for experiences similar to those of the desired job. The current results differ from those of previous research in another way as well. Graves and Powell (1988; 1995) and Kinicki and Lockwood (1985) found a significant direct relationship between Interpersonal Attraction and interviewers’ assessments. The current study indicates only an indirect relationship between Interpersonal Attraction and Hiring Decision. However, Graves and Powell (1988; 1995) did not include an interviewing skills construct in their model. Thus, possible substantive differences between the current Subjective Impression construct and Graves and Powell’s (1988; 1995) Subjective Qualifications construct may explain the discrepancy in results. Although these studies disagree as to whether the relationship is direct (Graves & Powell, 1988; 1995; Kinicki & Lockwood, 1985) or indirect (as in the current study), each investigation yielded an association between interpersonal attraction within the interview setting and the hiring decision. From the conventional interviewing perspective, such a relationship between interpersonal attraction and interview outcomes is looked upon disfavorably and taken as an indication of interviewer bias. However, from a fit perspective (Bretz, Rynes, & Gerhart, 1993), one would expect, and indeed hope for, a
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
37
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
relationship between these two factors. That is, if interviewers also are assessing the degree of fit between the applicant and the organization or the job, interpersonal attraction should play a role in the hiring decision. The current study indicates that differential sampling of the objective and subjective domains is an unlikely explanation of previous empirical findings. The present results demonstrate that, from the interviewer’s perspective, applicants’ objective and subjective qualifications constitute separate informational domains. However, interviewers are unable or unwilling to distinguish between applicants’ subjective qualifications and interviewing skills. Assessment of a candidate’s subjective qualifications is bound to his or her ability to convey those qualifications. Past research affirms the impact of impression management tactics on the hiring decision (Gilmore & Ferris, 1989), and the current results suggest even greater importance of interviewees’ social skills. Applicants need to be adept at impression management in order to convey a positive perception of their subjective qualifications. If such is the case, impression management techniques play an even greater role in the interview process than previously suspected. Applicants would be well served to strengthen their social communication skills. Moreover, the current findings call into question previous interpretations of interviewing research. Empirical conclusions based on subjective qualifications and interviewing skills as distinct factors may or may not be accurate, but must be suspect until more is known about interviewers’ cognitive categorization and integration processes. Despite contributions of the present study, it is subject to three limitations. First, the relatively small sample size reduced statistical power which may have distorted parameter estimates. In support of the current results, however, our use of the CFI corrects for the underestimation of model fit found using the normed fit index (Bentler, 1990) with smaller samples. The current findings clearly must be cross-validated in a larger sample. The second limitation is a generic problem that pertains to any study which tests structural relationships by using the general linear model: the unmeasured variables problem. This problem occurs when major or moderate causes of an endogenous variable are excluded from the prediction of this variable (in this case, Hiring Decision). Omitting such causes can result in biased parameter solutions (James, 1980), leading to inappropriate conclusions. Because our intent was not to test an all encompassing model of the decision making process underlying hiring decisions, we did not consider every possible predictor of hiring decisions. Rather, we focused on the mediating effects of Subjective Impression and Interpersonal Attraction. Although the current results supported the prediction that Subjective Impression significantly affects the criterion, we cannot rule out the existence of other significant antecedents of an interviewer’s hiring decision. Possible variables include interview structure (Motowidlo, Carter, Dunnette, Tippins, Werner, Burnett, & Vaughn, 1992), position status (Martin & Nagao, 1989), or a variety of idiosyncratic
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
38
WADE AND KINICKI
interviewer differences (Kinicki et al., 1990). These problems underscore the need to cross-validate our results. A third limitation involves the artificial nature of the interview setting. Although the primary purpose of the interviewing skills workshop was to provide students an opportunity to receive professional feedback on their interviewing skills, it should be noted that these interviews did result in job offers for four students. This suggests that both interviewers and interviewees earnestly participated in the interview exchange. The current findings have practical implications for the design of organizational interventions aimed at increasing the validity of the employment interview. A recent meta-analysis found that interview structure is a principal moderator of interview validity (Huffcutt & Arthur, 1994). That is, structured interviews had considerably greater validity than unstructured ones. Additionally, the current investigation suggests that applicants’ subjective qualifications and interviewing skills are indistinguishable. Taken together, this knowledge suggests a structured interview format may be even more vital than previously imagined. A structured interview likely facilitates gathering relevant information even from those applicants lacking interview skills. The current results underscore a unique contribution of this study, namely, the value of developing and testing process models of interviewer selection decisions. Unfortunately, the effects of a process orientation on previous investigations of the hiring decision (Parsons & Liden, 1984; Kinicki & Lockwood, 1985; Raza & Carpenter, 1987; Kinicki et al., 1990) remain unknown. We concur with previous investigators (Arvey and Campion, 1982; Dipboye, 1994) and recommend that future research move away from a bivariate orientation to one that focuses on process. Future interviewing research would greatly benefit from a guiding cognitive framework similar to those found in the performance appraisal literature (e.g. DeNisi, Cafferty, & Meglino, 1984). Additionally, the CSM methodology lends itself to tests of both discriminability and mediation. For example, previous investigations have understandably assumed the independence of objective and subjective applicant qualifications, yet the current investigation is the first we know of to test this assumption. Although objective qualifications and Subjective Qualifications proved to be distinguishable, Interviewing Skills and Subjective Qualifications did not. Researchers would do well to question other longstanding assumptions and perform more discriminant validity tests. A likely candidate includes pre- and post-interview impressions. REFERENCES Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423. Anderson, C. W., & Shackleton, V. J. (1990). Decision making in the graduate selection interview: A field study. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 63–76. Arvey, R. D., & Campion, J. E. (1982). The employment interview: A summary and review of recent research. Personnel Psychology, 35, 281–322.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
39
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
Baron, R. A. (1987b). Effects of negative air ions on cognitive performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 131–137. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Bentler, P. M. (1989). EQS: Structural equations program manual. Los Angeles, CA: BMDP Statistical Software. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. Bretz, R. D. Jr., Rynes, S. L., & Gerhart, B. (1993). Recruiter perceptions of applicant fit: Implications for individual career preparation and job search behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 43, 310–327. Brooke, P. B., Russell, D. W., & Price, J. L. (1988). Discriminant validation of measures of job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 139–145. Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press. DeNisi, A., Cafferty, T., & Meglino, B. (1984). A cognitive view of the performance appraisal process: A model and research propositions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33, 360–398. Dipboye, R. L. (1994). Structured and unstructured selection interviews: Beyond the job-fit model. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 12, pp. 79–124). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Dipboye, R. L. (1982). Self-fulfilling prophecies in the selection-recruitment interview. Academy of Management Review, 7, 579–586. Dipboye, R. L., & Gaugler, B. B. (1993). Cognitive and behavioral processes in the selection interview. In N. Schmitt and W.C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 135–170). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dipboye, R. L., & Macan, T. M. (1988). A process view of the selection/recruitment interview. In R. S. Schuler, S. A Youngblood, & V. L. Huber, (Eds.), Readings in personnel and human resource management (pp. 217–232). St. Paul, MN: West. Feingold, A. (1992). Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 304–341. Forbes, R. J., & Jackson, P. R. (1980). Nonverbal behavior and the outcome of selection interviews. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 65–72. Gilmore, D. C., & Ferris, G. R. (1989). The effects of applicant impression management tactics on interviewer judgments. Journal of Management, 15, 557–564. Graves, L. M., & Powell, G. N. (1988). An investigation of sex discrimination in recruiters’ evaluations of actual applicants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 20–29. Graves, L. M., & Powell, G. N. (1995). The effect of sex similarity on recruiters’ evaluations of actual applicants: A test of the similarity-attraction paradigm. Personnel Psychology, 48, 85–98. Harris, M. M. (1989). Reconsidering the employment interview: A review of recent literature and suggestions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 42, 691–726. Hom, P. W., Griffeth, R. W., Palich, L. E., & Bracker, J. S. (1995). Realistic job previews for new professionals: A two-occupation test of mediating processes. Unpublished manuscript. Howard, A. (1986). College experiences and managerial performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 530–552. Huffcutt, A. I., & Arthur, W. Jr. (1994). Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 184–190. James, L. R. (1980). The unmeasured variables problem in path analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 415–421.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
40
WADE AND KINICKI
James, L. R., & Brett, J. M. (1984). Mediators, moderators, and tests for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 307–321. James, L. R., Mulaik, S. S., & Brett, J. M. (1982). Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Keenan, A. (1977). Some relationships between interviewers’ personal feelings about candidates and their general evaluation of them. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 50, 275–283. Kinicki, A. J., & Lockwood, C. A. (1985). The interview process: An examination of factors recruiters use in evaluating job applicants. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 26, 117–125. Kinicki, A. J., Lockwood, C. A., Hom, P. W., & Griffeth, R. W. (1990). Interviewer predictions of applicant qualifications and interviewer validity: Aggregate and individual analyses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 477–486. Macan, T. H., & Dipboye, R. L. (1990). The relationship of interviewers’ preinterview impressions to selection and recruitment outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 43, 745–768. Martin, C. L., & Nagao, D. H. (1989). Some effects of computerized interviewing on job applicant responses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 72–80. Mathison, D. L. (1988). Assumed similarity in communication styles: Implications for personnel interviews. Group & Organization Studies, 13, 100–110. Moreland, R. L., & Zajonc, R. B. (1982). Exposure effects in person perception: Familiarity, similarity, and attraction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 395–415. Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Information processing in personnel decision. In K.M. Rowland, & G. R. Ferris, (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 4, pp. 1–44). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Motowidlo, S. J., Carter, G. W., Dunnette, M. D., Tippins, N., Werner, S., Burnett, J. R., & Vaughn, M. J. (1992). Studies of the structured behavioral interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 571–587. Netemeyer, R. G., Johnston, M. W., & Burton, S. (1990). Analysis of role conflict and role ambiguity in a structural equations framework. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 148– 157. Parsons, C. K., & Liden, R. C. (1984). Interviewer perceptions of applicant qualifications: A multivariate field study of demographic characteristics and nonverbal cues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 557–568. Raza, S. M., & Carpenter, B. N. (1987). A model of hiring decisions in real employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 596–603. Ree, M. J., Earles, J. A., & Teachout, M. S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518–524. Singer, M. S., & Bruhns, C. (1991). Relevant effect of applicant work experience and academic qualification on selection interview decisions: A study of between-sample generalizability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 550–559. Snyder, M., Berscheid, E., & Matwychuk, A. (1988). Orientations toward personnel selection: Differential reliance on appearance and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 972–979. Wayne, S. J., & Ferris, G. R. (1990). Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisorsubordinate interactions: A laboratory experiment and field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 487–499. Williams, L. L., & Podsakoff, P. M. (1989). Longitudinal field methods for studying reciprocal relationships in organizational behavior research: Toward improved causal analysis. In L. Cummings & B. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: Vol. 11 (pp. 247–292). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Zuckerman, M., Hodgins, H., & Miyake, K. (1990). The vocal attractiveness stereotype: Replication and elaboration. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 14, 97–112. Received: March 24, 1995
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
50, 23–40 (1997)
VB961538
Subjective Applicant Qualifications and Interpersonal Attraction as Mediators within a Process Model of Interview Selection Decisions KIM J. WADE Washington State University AND
ANGELO J. KINICKI Arizona State University Past research comparing the relative influence of objective and subjective applicant qualifications within the interview context suggests a dominant influence of subjectively assessed applicant qualifications. However, methodological concerns cast doubt upon this conclusion. The present investigation overcomes previous methodological limitations by reanalyzing data from Kinicki and Lockwood (1985) using covariance structural modeling. Twenty-four professional recruiters interviewed 91 college seniors. Results indicate interviewers differentiate between applicant objective and subjective qualifications, but perceptions of applicant subjective qualifications and interviewing skills are indistinguishable. The interviewer’s subjective impression of the applicant completely mediates the effect of applicants’ relevant experience levels, but not academic achievement. This finding suggests the possibility that academic achievement be entered into the final hiring decision independently of interviewer judgments. The current results indicate a positive relationship between interpersonal attraction and interview outcomes, perhaps suggesting interviewers are measuring applicant fit in addition to job skills. q 1997 Academic Press
Past research on selection decisions typically examined the bivariate relationship between demographic, objective, and subjective applicant characteristics and the hiring decision. Because results accounted for relatively little variance in the interview decision, Arvey and Campion (1982) concluded that greater focus on decision-making models in the interview process was needed. Although Graves and Powell (1988; 1995) and Raza and Carpenter (1987) were notable exceptions, this suggestion has gone largely unheeded, and 12 Address reprint requests to Kim J. Wade, Department of Management and Systems, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-4736. 23 0001-8791/97 $25.00 Copyright q 1997 by Academic Press All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
24
WADE AND KINICKI
years later Dipboye (1994) still recommended that researchers focus more on the processes underlying interviewers’ final judgments. The purpose of this study was to address the neglect of process in interviewing research by examining the relative impact of objective and subjective applicant qualifications on hiring decisions and to explore the mediating role of subjective qualifications and interpersonal attraction. Objective qualifications consist of applicant qualities which are ‘‘unfiltered,’’ or garnered without the involvement of the interviewer. Subjective qualifications represent the interviewer’s personal assessments of applicant characteristics gathered during the interview session. Six previous investigations compared the relative influence of objective and subjective applicant qualifications within the interview context. Parsons and Liden (1984) found that assessments of candidates’ qualifications were influenced more by verbal and non verbal subjective evaluations than by objective factors. Kinicki and Lockwood’s (1985) results revealed that subjective interview impressions accounted for 40.4% of the variance in the interview decision, while objective measures of academic achievement accounted for only 15.9%. Raza and Carpenter (1987) examined the relative impact of objective demographic variables and subjective interviewer assessments of applicant qualities. Regression analysis revealed subjective interviewer ratings accounted for considerably more variance in hirability decisions than did objective demographic variables. Similarly, Graves and Powell (1988) discovered that subjective qualifications had a significant and direct effect on interviewers’ judgments, while the direct path from objective qualifications to interviewers’ judgments was not significant. Finally, both Kinicki, Lockwood, Hom, and Griffeth (1990) and Graves and Powell (1995) found that subjective impressions swayed hiring recommendations significantly more than did objective qualifications. A cursory review of these investigations indicates a dominant influence of subjective qualifications over objective ones in interviewers’ decisions. Nonetheless, three methodological considerations substantially weaken this conclusion. First, if one considers objective qualifications to represent a domain of ‘‘unfiltered’’ behaviors, and likewise subjective qualifications represent a domain of ‘‘filtered’’ behaviors, each of the above investigations— except Kinicki and Lockwood (1985)—provides a more thorough and thus more representative sample of the subjective qualifications domain than the objective qualifications domain. The empirical findings reviewed thus far are perhaps a function of deficient sampling from the objective qualifications domain. A more representative sample of items would allow an improved test of the relative influence of objective and subjective qualifications. Second, only two studies (Graves & Powell, 1988; 1995) used covariance structure modeling (CSM) to test a process model comparing various pathways by which objective and subjective qualifications effect interviewers’ judgments. Conceivably, past studies using path analysis (Raza & Carpenter, 1987) and multiple regression (Kinicki et al., 1990; Kinicki & Lockwood, 1985; Parsons &
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
25
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
Liden, 1984) computed biased parameter estimates or regression coefficients because they did not control measurement error (James, Mulaik, & Brett, 1982): CSM controls for measurement error. Moreover, the studies involving process models (Graves & Powell, 1988; 1995; Raza & Carpenter, 1987) did not test whether objective and subjective characteristics act as complete or partial mediators within the interview process. This can lead to biased parameter estimates and thus inaccurate conclusions (James & Brett, 1984). Finally, previous studies may have found little effect of objective data because they solely included objective information, and not the interviewer’s interpretations of that information. It may be that all job qualifications, whether derived from objective or subjective sources, are filtered through the interviewer’s perceptual barrier, thereby making all qualification assessments inherently subjective. No study has empirically assessed whether objective and subjective information represent independent constructs. The present investigation overcomes these methodological limitations by reanalyzing data from Kinicki and Lockwood (1985) to test a process model of interviewers’ judgments. Figure 1 shows the hypothesized variables in this process model and the hypothesized relationships between them. OVERVIEW OF INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
Given that Subjective Qualifications and Interpersonal Attraction are mediators within our process model, it is beneficial to first define each construct before discussing their respective antecedent variables. Because Subjective Qualifications represent the interviewer’s personal assessments regarding the applicant’s potential for successful job performance, verbal delivery and content, as well as nonverbal cues are used in this assessment process (Parsons & Liden, 1984; Graves & Powell, 1988). Assessment of the second proposed mediator, Interpersonal Attraction, is certainly a two-way street between applicant and interviewer. Although we recognize this bilateral process, this paper focuses solely on the interviewer’s perspective. We thus define Interpersonal Attraction as the interviewer’s global affect regarding the degree to which the applicant is liked, or positively perceived, by the interviewer. Let us now consider the antecedents of these proposed mediators. Antecedents of Subjective Qualifications The purpose of the interview is to select those individuals most likely to perform well on the job. Considerable evidence indicates objective indicators of cognitive ability are strong predictors of future job performance (e.g. Ree, Earles, & Teachout, 1994). However, we predict that within the interview context, this relationship is an indirect one, and that Subjective Qualifications serve a key mediating role (see Fig. 1). The interpersonal activity between the applicant and interviewer precludes an assessment of applicant potential based solely on objective performance indicators. Assessments of applicant potential are inherently bound to an interviewer’s perceptions due to the social and interactive
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
26
WADE AND KINICKI
FIG. 1.
Hypothesized five-factor structural model. Circles represent latent constructs.
nature of the interview. However, research findings strongly indicate these perceptions form before the interview and are usually based on objectively assessed information, or ‘‘paper credentials’’ (Macan & Dipboye, 1990). This objective information then serves as input in the interviewer’s ensuing cognitive processes. Thus the first antecedent variable of Subjective Qualifications, labeled Objective Qualifications, consists of applicant qualities which were garnered without the involvement of the interviewer. These attributes are typically obtained from a resume or application blank (Dipboye, 1982). The second antecedent of Subjective Qualifications, Interviewing Skills, represents the interviewer’s perception of the applicant’s ability to effectively communicate in the interview situation. Applicants are seen as more qualified when they display positive verbal and nonverbal behavior, including good eye contact, voice modulation, energy, vocal expressiveness, and personal drive or initiative (e.g., Anderson & Shackleton, 1990; Graves & Powell, 1988; Keenan, 1977; Raza & Carpenter, 1987). Presenting a positive physical appearance also is a necessary interview skill, as physically attractive people are perceived as more socially adept than unattractive people (Feingold, 1992). These behaviors exhibited by applicants, both verbal and nonverbal, can reveal meaningful job-related constructs. Within the interview process, these behaviors feed into the interviewer’s information processing system (Dipboye & Gaugler, 1993). Past research revealed verbal and nonverbal behaviors accompanying candidates’ responses influenced interviewers’ assessments (Forbes & Jackson, 1980). Thus, Interviewing Skills are predicted to have a direct positive effect on Subjective Qualifications. The third antecedent of Subjective Qualifications, Interpersonal Attraction, also leads to a positive bias in interviewer’s questioning strategy and cognitive processing (Dipboye & Macan, 1988; Motowidlo, 1986). That is, the way in which recruiters store, retrieve, and integrate information about those they like is prone to positive bias (Graves & Powell, 1995). This finding suggests that evaluations of well-liked candidates will be more positive due to selective storage, retrieval, and/or integration of favorable information. Applicants perceived as pleasant are more likely viewed as potentially good employees and
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
27
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
co-workers (Raza & Carpenter, 1987). For example, past research uncovered a positive relationship between interpersonal attraction and subjective interviewer assessments (e.g., Keenan, 1977; Kinicki & Lockwood, 1985). Antecedent of Interpersonal Attraction Additionally, Interpersonal Attraction plays a mediating role in the proposed model. Figure 1 reveals Interviewing Skills are a hypothesized antecedent of Interpersonal Attraction. This hypothesis is based on an extension of Byrne’s (1971) similarity-attraction paradigm. In and of itself, social interaction, particularly if it is cooperative and cordial in nature, leads to perceptions of interpersonal similarity (Moreland & Zajonc, 1982). Well-developed interview skills lend themselves to just such an amicable exchange. Perceived similarity in turn leads to interpersonal attraction between recruiter and applicant (Graves & Powell, 1995). In support of this prediction, Zuckerman, Hodgins, and Miyake’s (1990) findings indicated that job applicants rated as vocally attractive received more favorable personality ratings than vocally unattractive applicants. Moreover, if we assume that interviewers perceive themselves as able communicators, research supports the link between assumed similarity of communication styles and attraction (Mathison, 1988). Direct Predictors of Hiring Decision Past research demonstrated a direct link between Subjective Qualifications and Hiring Decision (Graves & Powell, 1988; 1995). Additionally, Anderson and Shackleton (1990) found a significant correlation (r Å .64) between interviewers’ personal liking and overall evaluations of the applicant. Well-liked candidates were also more likely offered a follow-up interview (Keenan, 1977), suggesting a positive and direct relationship between Interpersonal Attraction and the hiring decision. To summarize, the intent of present study is not to test an all encompassing model of the decision-making process underlying hiring decisions. Rather, we focus on the mediating effects of Subjective Qualifications and Interpersonal Attraction. Thus, we provide a more accurate assessment of the relative contributions of objective and subjective applicant qualifications on hiring decisions by using CSM. Because latent factors are simultaneously analyzed in CSM, resulting estimates are more accurate and less biased than single indicator models (James et al., 1982). METHOD
We acquired the data employed in the current research from Kinicki and Lockwood (1985). Additional information regarding demographic characteristics and scale items can be found in that source. Subjects and Procedure Twenty-four professional recruiters interviewed 91 graduating seniors majoring in business administration. This study was part of an interviewing skills
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
28
WADE AND KINICKI
workshop held at the career planning and placement center of a large university. The primary purpose of the workshop was to give students an opportunity to be interviewed by a professional recruiter. Two administrative procedures were implemented in order to increase the realism and external validity of the interviews. First, students were asked to indicate a specific entry-level job for which they wished to be interviewed, and recruiters were asked to list those entry level jobs for which they had direct interviewing experience. The jobs listed by applicants were then matched to recruiter experience. This resulted in applicants being interviewed by recruiters who were (1) thoroughly knowledgeable about the specific job under consideration and (2) experienced at actually interviewing people for the job under consideration. Applicants completed a detailed application blank consisting of information about his or her gender, work experience, job interests, educational background, and extracurricular activities. Recruiters received the application blanks and an interviewing schedule upon arriving at the career placement center. Each recruiter reviewed the relevant material prior to conducting the 30-min interview. Immediately afterward, they completed a 10-item survey covering their perceptions of the applicant’s job skills, interviewing skills, personableness, and likelihood of hire. Applicants were then provided with feedback. Recruiters conducted three or four interviews. Measures Objective qualifications. This latent construct was assessed with nine indicators commonly used in past research to represent objective qualifications (Parsons & Liden, 1984; Graves & Powell, 1988). Four indicators were similarity or congruency measures. Similarity of work experience and academic training assessed the similarity between an interviewee’s work experience and college major. The second indicator measured the similarity between an applicant’s work experience and professional objective. This indicator assessed whether an interviewee had work experience within his/her field of interest. The third comparison involved the resemblance between an applicant’s professional objective and academic training. The fourth congruency measure involved the interviewee’s background experience and the type of organization at which he or she was applying. Evaluations for these four indicators were coded 0 (dissimilar) or 1 (similar) and were made by two independent judges. Interrater agreement was .98. The remaining indicators included applicant’s self-reported cumulative GPA and GPA within his or her college major, the number of self-reported honors, and the number of organizational memberships and offices held. These nine indicators were submitted to a principal axes factor analysis with a varimax rotation. The pattern of factor loadings and a scree plot were used to determine the factor structure that best represented the data. The data yielded two orthogonal factors. Factor one contained the cumulative GPA, major GPA, and honors variables and was interpreted as a measure of academic achievement. The second factor consisted of two congruency measures
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
29
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
(similarity of work experience and academic training, and similarity of work experience and professional objective) and was labeled Experience Similarity. The Objective Qualifications latent factor thus was separated into these two factors. Each factor was represented by it’s associated indicators. Interviewing skills. This latent construct was measured with two indicators. Personal appearance influences the interview assessment (Snyder, Berscheid, & Matwychuk, 1988), thus interviewers rated the applicant’s appearance. More directly, interviewers were asked to evaluate applicants’ interviewing skills. Scale anchors for these two indicators ranged from (1) ‘‘extremely poor’’ to (7) ‘‘extremely good.’’ Subjective qualifications. All four indicators of this latent construct reflect recruiters’ perceptions of the interviewees gathered during the course of the interview and were used in past research to measure subjective qualifications (Graves & Powell, 1988; Kinicki et al., 1990). Based on their interactions with the job candidates, recruiters were asked to rate applicants’ occupational knowledge and level of personal drive from (1) ‘‘extremely low’’ to (7) ‘‘extremely high.’’ Additionally, recruiters rated applicants’ job related experience or training and ability to express ideas. Responses ranged from (1) ‘‘extremely poor’’ to (7)‘‘ extremely good.’’ Interpersonal attraction. As previously discussed, Interpersonal Attraction represents the degree to which the interviewer likes, or has positive affect toward the applicant. Two items from Byrne’s (1971) Interpersonal Attraction Scale were used as indicators of this construct. The first item assessed the recruiter’s personal feelings toward the applicant on a scale anchored from (1) ‘‘I feel that I would dislike this student very much’’ to (7) ‘‘I feel that I would probably like this student very much.’’ The second measured the extent to which the recruiter would like working together with the applicant on the job. The scale was anchored from (1) ‘‘would very much dislike working with this student on the job’’ to (7) ‘‘would very much enjoy working with this student on the job.’’ Hiring decision. Two indicators were used to assess this latent construct. First, recruiters were asked to evaluate whether the interviewee was suitable for hire, measured on a (1) ‘‘very strongly disagree’’ to (6) ‘‘very strongly agree’’ scale. Second, recruiters assessed the applicant’s probability of success within the field of interest, measured from (1) ‘‘extremely low’’ to (7) ‘‘extremely high.’’ Thus data were obtained from three independent sources in order to reduce problems associated with method dependence. The 10-item survey completed by recruiters yielded the indicators of Subjective Qualifications, Interviewing Skills, Interpersonal Attraction, and Hiring Decision. The application blank yielded indicators of Academic Achievement. Finally, the judges’ evaluations of objective information contained on application blanks provided indicators of Experience Similarity. Analytic Procedure All models were tested using CSM procedures in Bentler’s EQS program (1989). Model structural paths were evaluated for significance, and goodness
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
30
WADE AND KINICKI
of fit was assessed by two fit indices: the comparative fit index (CFI; Bentler, 1990) and the parsimonious fit index (PFI; James, Muliak, & Brett, 1982). CFI values of .90 and greater are indications of adequate model fit (Bentler, 1990). PFI values of .60 and above are suggested as an ad hoc rule for model retention (Williams & Podsakoff, 1989). In addition, the CFI difference between two nested models and the sequential chi-square difference test (SCDT; James et al., 1982) were interpreted to evaluate model fit. Following Anderson and Gerbing’s (1988) recommendation, the proposed model underwent two stages of analysis—measurement and structural. In stage 1, the baseline measurement model was fitted to the data. Alternative nested models were then contrasted with the original model. First, a measurement model specifying perfect correlation among all latent factors was assessed to evaluate overall discriminability. Next, separate tests of discriminant validity were conducted among the latent constructs. These tests consisted of comparing the fit of the six-factor model with a model that constrained the two constructs of interest to be perfectly correlated and equally correlated with other constructs (Brooke, Russell, & Price, 1988). Model structural linkages were examined in stage 2 of the analysis. First, the model depicted in Figure 1 was fitted to the data. Next, structural tests focused on the mediating properties of Subjective Qualifications and Interpersonal Attraction. First, the three conditions for mediation were assessed (cf. Baron & Kenny, 1986). However, in order to assess complete mediation, a fourth condition must hold; the independent variable must have no direct effect on the dependent variable when the mediator is held constant (Hom, Griffeth, Palich, & Bracker, 1995). Using CSM, a direct path is specified from the independent variable to the dependent variable, bypassing the hypothesized mediator. Insignificance of the added path supports the claim of complete mediation. RESULTS
Results from stage 1 are presented first. Model fit indices are presented in Table 1. The original six-factor measurement model (Model 1 in Table 1) accurately reproduced the observed covariance matrix (CFI Å .973), thus indicating the model accounted for 97% of the sample variance above that accounted for by the null model (Bentler, 1989). Results revealed that all factor loadings were significant (mean standardized loading Å .796). Standardized factor loadings of the measurement model yielded composite reliabilities of .783, .822, .875, .924, and .876 for Academic Achievement, Experience Similarity, Subjective Impression, Interpersonal Attraction, and Hiring Decision, respectively (Netemeyer, Johnston, & Burton, 1990). The singlefactor model used to assess overall discriminability (Model 2 in Table 1) poorly accounted for the sample data. Specifically, combining all the latent constructs significantly reduced model fit (x2 (91) Å 1318.38, p õ .05; CFI Å .133), supporting the need to maintain the model’s multidimensionality.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$1538
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba * p £ .05.
Measurement models 1. Six-factor model 2. Single-factor model: Model 2-1 difference 3. Equate subjective qualifications & interviewing skills Model 3-1 difference 4. Five-factor model: Model 4-2 difference 5. Equate academic achievement & experience similarity: Model 5-4 difference 6. Equate academic achievement & subjective impression: Model 6-4 difference 7. Equate academic achievement & interpersonal attraction: Model 7-4 difference 8. Equate experience similarity & subjective impression: Model 8-4 difference 9. Equate experience similarity & interpersonal attraction: Model 9-4 difference 10. Equate subjective impression & interpersonal attraction: Model 10-4 difference Structural model 1. Baseline model 2. Baseline plus direct effect of experience similarity on hiring decision: Model 2-1 difference
Model
82
119.44
85
173.21
83
85
177.42
119.88
85
166.22
85
631.58
85
85
165.75
259.28
81
81
76 91
df
119.21
119.21
114.87 1318.38
x2
.974
.974
.938
.935
.943
.877
.614
.943
.973
.973
.973 .133
CFI
.720
.728
.717
.715
.721
.672
.473
.721
.711
.711
.669 .115
PFI
TABLE 1 Fit Indices for Nested Sequence of Measurement and Structural Models
0.45
53.99*
58.20*
47.00*
140.06*
512.36*
46.53*
1199.17*
4.34
1203.51*
x2 diff
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
10
5
15
df
.000
.035
.038
.030
.096
.359
.030
.840
.711
.840
CFI diff
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
31
AP: JVB
32
WADE AND KINICKI
Nested model comparisons of the measurement model involved examining the discriminant validity of every possible pair of latent factors (excluding Hiring Decision). Results presented in Table 1 revealed that in all cases save one, both the SCDT and CFI differences indicated that equating each pair of constructs significantly reduced model fit, thus supporting the distinctiveness of the paired constructs. However, equating the Subjective Qualifications and Interviewing Skills constructs (Model 3 in Table 1) did not materially reduce model fit. The CFI remained identical to that of the baseline measurement model (.973) and the SCDT was insignificant. Additionally, the PFI increased from .669 to .711, reflecting the increased parsimony obtained by estimating fewer parameters in the restricted model. These results demonstrate that Subjective Qualifications and Interviewing Skills are not independent constructs and should not be modeled separately. Rather than being independent factors, Subjective Qualifications and Interviewing Skills appear to be subsets of a Subjective Impression factor. To test whether a Subjective Impression factor better fit the data, a fivefactor measurement model was evaluated. Results indicated the five-factor model (Model 4 in Table 1) accurately reproduced the observed covariance matrix (CFI Å .973) and all factor loadings were significant (mean standardized loading Å .789). The single-factor model used to assess overall discriminability produced results identical to those previously discussed. With the creation of a new latent factor, it was again necessary to test the discriminant validity of the constructs in the revised five-factor measurement model. These tests required the pairing of each latent factor with all others (excluding Hiring Decision), resulting in six comparison pairs (Models 5 through 10 in Table 1). The factors involved in the discriminability test were constrained such that they were perfectly correlated and equally correlated with other factors. The constrained model was then compared with the fivefactor measurement model (Model 4 in Table 1). Based on CFI differences and the SCDT, all cases equating the paired constructs resulted in a significant loss of model fit when compared to the five-factor baseline model (see Table 1). These results confirm the distinctiveness of the paired constructs and the need to maintain the multidimensionality of the model. Figure 2 depicts the revised five-factor measurement model. Results for the structural model test are shown in Table 1. The five-factor baseline model accurately explained the sample data as indicated by a CFI of .974 and PFI of .728. Standardized path coefficients for this model are depicted in Fig. 3, and results demonstrate that three of the five predicted relationships were supported. The hypothesized positive effects of Experience Similarity on Subjective Impression (.190, p õ .05) and in turn, of Subjective Impression on Hiring Decision (.796, p õ .05) were supported. Additionally, Interpersonal Attraction significantly predicted Subjective Impression (.720, p õ .05). Contrary to predictions, Academic Achievement did not serve as
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
33
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
FIG. 2. Revised five-factor measurement model. Circles represent factors; boxes represent indicators. Unidirectional arrows depict factors’ effects on indicators, and double-headed arrows signify factor correlations. Standardized factor loadings appear along unidirectional arrows. Asterisks depict significant factor loadings. Measurement errors and factor correlations are omitted for clarity.
causal input for recruiters’ Subjective Impression and Interpersonal Attraction did not predict Hiring Decision. As depicted in Fig. 3, the two exogenous variables (Academic Achievement and Experience Similarity) are predicted to influence Hiring Decision through the process of complete mediation. We now consider the direct tests of complete as opposed to partial mediation.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
34
AID
WADE AND KINICKI
JVB 1538
/
6309$$1538
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
35
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
Subjective Impression serves as the hypothesized mediator for the independent variable, Academic Achievement. Recall that four conditions must be fulfilled in order to establish complete mediation. Condition one was satisfied, as Academic Achievement was significantly correlated with the Hiring Decision (r Å .253, p õ .05). However, Academic Achievement failed to satisfy condition two. That is, the path from Academic Achievement to Subjective Impression was nonsignificant (see Fig. 3). Thus, Subjective Impression does not mediate the relationship between Academic Achievement and the Hiring Decision; further analysis of this relationship is inappropriate. Subjective Impression also serves as a mediator for Experience Similarity. Again, condition one is satisfied since Experience Similarity is positively correlated with the Hiring Decision (r Å .299, p õ .05). Additionally, significant parameter estimates between Experience Similarity and Subjective Impression and between Subjective Impression and Hiring Decision fulfill conditions two and three (see Fig. 3). Recall that condition four requires specification of a direct path from Experience Similarity to Hiring Decision. Insignificance of the new path affirms complete mediation. The SCDT indicated no significant difference in overall model fit, and the direct path did not reach significance. Taken together, the evidence supports the claim that Subjective Impression completely mediates the relationship between Experience Similarity and Hiring Decision. DISCUSSION
The present study used past research as a theoretical foundation to develop and test a model of the decision making process underlying hiring decisions. Stage 1 of the current analysis examined the operational measures used to assess the latent constructs within the model. Importantly, the use of data obtained from three distinct sources and the test of a single-factor model precluded explanation of the results by a single method factor. Our confirmatory analysis provided the first direct test of the independence between objective and subjective applicant qualifications in the research literature. Results confirmed the operationalizations of all model constructs, but indicated a lack of independence between subjective qualifications and interviewing skills. That is, there was no statistically discernable difference between the two latent factors. This finding led to the revised five-factor model in Fig. 2. Stage 2 of the analysis examined the revised structural model of hiring decisions and supported the constellation of relations underlying the baseline
FIG. 3. Five-factor structural model of the hiring decision process. Circles represent factors; boxes represent empirical indicators. Causal effects are given by arrows connecting circles; latent variables’ effects on indicators are given by arrows relating circles to boxes. Thicker arrows represent reference indicators. Asterisks depict significant standardized parameter estimates. Disturbance and measurement error effects are omitted for clarity.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
36
WADE AND KINICKI
model. Results supported three out of five individual relations derived from the model. Specifically, applicants’ Experience Similarity affected recruiters’ Subjective Impressions of applicants, which in turn positively affected Hiring Decision. Further exploration showed that Subjective Impression entirely mediated the link between Experience Similarity and Hiring Decision. Additionally, Subjective Impression was positively influenced by Interpersonal Attraction. Analysis of structural linkages failed to support the hypothesized relationships between Academic Achievement and Subjective Impression and between Interpersonal Attraction and Hiring Decision. These results were inconsistent with those of Graves and Powell (1988; 1995), who found a significant relationship between Objective Qualifications and Subjective Qualifications. Possible differences in samples or construct operationalizations may account for such differences. However, our results were consistent with those of Singer and Bruhns (1991), which indicated that managers gave work experience considerably more weight than academic qualifications in interview decisions. These interviewers put little stock in high academic performance, in spite of the fact that it is a valid predictor of managerial job performance (Howard, 1986). Rather, they used candidates’ experience levels as cognitive input when forming impressions. This finding leads to a practical suggestion to help ensure successful interview outcomes. An academic achievement measure could be entered into the final hiring decision independently of interviewer judgments. As academic and experience variables have similar validity levels, they would be assigned similar weights in the decision process (Singer & Bruhns, 1991). These results also have practical implications for applicants. If students must choose, these findings suggest they should, up to a point, sacrifice high grades for experiences similar to those of the desired job. The current results differ from those of previous research in another way as well. Graves and Powell (1988; 1995) and Kinicki and Lockwood (1985) found a significant direct relationship between Interpersonal Attraction and interviewers’ assessments. The current study indicates only an indirect relationship between Interpersonal Attraction and Hiring Decision. However, Graves and Powell (1988; 1995) did not include an interviewing skills construct in their model. Thus, possible substantive differences between the current Subjective Impression construct and Graves and Powell’s (1988; 1995) Subjective Qualifications construct may explain the discrepancy in results. Although these studies disagree as to whether the relationship is direct (Graves & Powell, 1988; 1995; Kinicki & Lockwood, 1985) or indirect (as in the current study), each investigation yielded an association between interpersonal attraction within the interview setting and the hiring decision. From the conventional interviewing perspective, such a relationship between interpersonal attraction and interview outcomes is looked upon disfavorably and taken as an indication of interviewer bias. However, from a fit perspective (Bretz, Rynes, & Gerhart, 1993), one would expect, and indeed hope for, a
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
37
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
relationship between these two factors. That is, if interviewers also are assessing the degree of fit between the applicant and the organization or the job, interpersonal attraction should play a role in the hiring decision. The current study indicates that differential sampling of the objective and subjective domains is an unlikely explanation of previous empirical findings. The present results demonstrate that, from the interviewer’s perspective, applicants’ objective and subjective qualifications constitute separate informational domains. However, interviewers are unable or unwilling to distinguish between applicants’ subjective qualifications and interviewing skills. Assessment of a candidate’s subjective qualifications is bound to his or her ability to convey those qualifications. Past research affirms the impact of impression management tactics on the hiring decision (Gilmore & Ferris, 1989), and the current results suggest even greater importance of interviewees’ social skills. Applicants need to be adept at impression management in order to convey a positive perception of their subjective qualifications. If such is the case, impression management techniques play an even greater role in the interview process than previously suspected. Applicants would be well served to strengthen their social communication skills. Moreover, the current findings call into question previous interpretations of interviewing research. Empirical conclusions based on subjective qualifications and interviewing skills as distinct factors may or may not be accurate, but must be suspect until more is known about interviewers’ cognitive categorization and integration processes. Despite contributions of the present study, it is subject to three limitations. First, the relatively small sample size reduced statistical power which may have distorted parameter estimates. In support of the current results, however, our use of the CFI corrects for the underestimation of model fit found using the normed fit index (Bentler, 1990) with smaller samples. The current findings clearly must be cross-validated in a larger sample. The second limitation is a generic problem that pertains to any study which tests structural relationships by using the general linear model: the unmeasured variables problem. This problem occurs when major or moderate causes of an endogenous variable are excluded from the prediction of this variable (in this case, Hiring Decision). Omitting such causes can result in biased parameter solutions (James, 1980), leading to inappropriate conclusions. Because our intent was not to test an all encompassing model of the decision making process underlying hiring decisions, we did not consider every possible predictor of hiring decisions. Rather, we focused on the mediating effects of Subjective Impression and Interpersonal Attraction. Although the current results supported the prediction that Subjective Impression significantly affects the criterion, we cannot rule out the existence of other significant antecedents of an interviewer’s hiring decision. Possible variables include interview structure (Motowidlo, Carter, Dunnette, Tippins, Werner, Burnett, & Vaughn, 1992), position status (Martin & Nagao, 1989), or a variety of idiosyncratic
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
38
WADE AND KINICKI
interviewer differences (Kinicki et al., 1990). These problems underscore the need to cross-validate our results. A third limitation involves the artificial nature of the interview setting. Although the primary purpose of the interviewing skills workshop was to provide students an opportunity to receive professional feedback on their interviewing skills, it should be noted that these interviews did result in job offers for four students. This suggests that both interviewers and interviewees earnestly participated in the interview exchange. The current findings have practical implications for the design of organizational interventions aimed at increasing the validity of the employment interview. A recent meta-analysis found that interview structure is a principal moderator of interview validity (Huffcutt & Arthur, 1994). That is, structured interviews had considerably greater validity than unstructured ones. Additionally, the current investigation suggests that applicants’ subjective qualifications and interviewing skills are indistinguishable. Taken together, this knowledge suggests a structured interview format may be even more vital than previously imagined. A structured interview likely facilitates gathering relevant information even from those applicants lacking interview skills. The current results underscore a unique contribution of this study, namely, the value of developing and testing process models of interviewer selection decisions. Unfortunately, the effects of a process orientation on previous investigations of the hiring decision (Parsons & Liden, 1984; Kinicki & Lockwood, 1985; Raza & Carpenter, 1987; Kinicki et al., 1990) remain unknown. We concur with previous investigators (Arvey and Campion, 1982; Dipboye, 1994) and recommend that future research move away from a bivariate orientation to one that focuses on process. Future interviewing research would greatly benefit from a guiding cognitive framework similar to those found in the performance appraisal literature (e.g. DeNisi, Cafferty, & Meglino, 1984). Additionally, the CSM methodology lends itself to tests of both discriminability and mediation. For example, previous investigations have understandably assumed the independence of objective and subjective applicant qualifications, yet the current investigation is the first we know of to test this assumption. Although objective qualifications and Subjective Qualifications proved to be distinguishable, Interviewing Skills and Subjective Qualifications did not. Researchers would do well to question other longstanding assumptions and perform more discriminant validity tests. A likely candidate includes pre- and post-interview impressions. REFERENCES Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 411–423. Anderson, C. W., & Shackleton, V. J. (1990). Decision making in the graduate selection interview: A field study. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 63–76. Arvey, R. D., & Campion, J. E. (1982). The employment interview: A summary and review of recent research. Personnel Psychology, 35, 281–322.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
39
INTERVIEW PROCESS MODEL
Baron, R. A. (1987b). Effects of negative air ions on cognitive performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 131–137. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Bentler, P. M. (1989). EQS: Structural equations program manual. Los Angeles, CA: BMDP Statistical Software. Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246. Bretz, R. D. Jr., Rynes, S. L., & Gerhart, B. (1993). Recruiter perceptions of applicant fit: Implications for individual career preparation and job search behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 43, 310–327. Brooke, P. B., Russell, D. W., & Price, J. L. (1988). Discriminant validation of measures of job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 139–145. Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press. DeNisi, A., Cafferty, T., & Meglino, B. (1984). A cognitive view of the performance appraisal process: A model and research propositions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33, 360–398. Dipboye, R. L. (1994). Structured and unstructured selection interviews: Beyond the job-fit model. In G. R. Ferris (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 12, pp. 79–124). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Dipboye, R. L. (1982). Self-fulfilling prophecies in the selection-recruitment interview. Academy of Management Review, 7, 579–586. Dipboye, R. L., & Gaugler, B. B. (1993). Cognitive and behavioral processes in the selection interview. In N. Schmitt and W.C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 135–170). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Dipboye, R. L., & Macan, T. M. (1988). A process view of the selection/recruitment interview. In R. S. Schuler, S. A Youngblood, & V. L. Huber, (Eds.), Readings in personnel and human resource management (pp. 217–232). St. Paul, MN: West. Feingold, A. (1992). Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 304–341. Forbes, R. J., & Jackson, P. R. (1980). Nonverbal behavior and the outcome of selection interviews. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 65–72. Gilmore, D. C., & Ferris, G. R. (1989). The effects of applicant impression management tactics on interviewer judgments. Journal of Management, 15, 557–564. Graves, L. M., & Powell, G. N. (1988). An investigation of sex discrimination in recruiters’ evaluations of actual applicants. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 20–29. Graves, L. M., & Powell, G. N. (1995). The effect of sex similarity on recruiters’ evaluations of actual applicants: A test of the similarity-attraction paradigm. Personnel Psychology, 48, 85–98. Harris, M. M. (1989). Reconsidering the employment interview: A review of recent literature and suggestions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 42, 691–726. Hom, P. W., Griffeth, R. W., Palich, L. E., & Bracker, J. S. (1995). Realistic job previews for new professionals: A two-occupation test of mediating processes. Unpublished manuscript. Howard, A. (1986). College experiences and managerial performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 530–552. Huffcutt, A. I., & Arthur, W. Jr. (1994). Hunter and Hunter (1984) revisited: Interview validity for entry-level jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 184–190. James, L. R. (1980). The unmeasured variables problem in path analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 415–421.
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB
40
WADE AND KINICKI
James, L. R., & Brett, J. M. (1984). Mediators, moderators, and tests for mediation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 307–321. James, L. R., Mulaik, S. S., & Brett, J. M. (1982). Causal analysis: Assumptions, models, and data. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Keenan, A. (1977). Some relationships between interviewers’ personal feelings about candidates and their general evaluation of them. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 50, 275–283. Kinicki, A. J., & Lockwood, C. A. (1985). The interview process: An examination of factors recruiters use in evaluating job applicants. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 26, 117–125. Kinicki, A. J., Lockwood, C. A., Hom, P. W., & Griffeth, R. W. (1990). Interviewer predictions of applicant qualifications and interviewer validity: Aggregate and individual analyses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 477–486. Macan, T. H., & Dipboye, R. L. (1990). The relationship of interviewers’ preinterview impressions to selection and recruitment outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 43, 745–768. Martin, C. L., & Nagao, D. H. (1989). Some effects of computerized interviewing on job applicant responses. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 72–80. Mathison, D. L. (1988). Assumed similarity in communication styles: Implications for personnel interviews. Group & Organization Studies, 13, 100–110. Moreland, R. L., & Zajonc, R. B. (1982). Exposure effects in person perception: Familiarity, similarity, and attraction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 395–415. Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Information processing in personnel decision. In K.M. Rowland, & G. R. Ferris, (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management (Vol. 4, pp. 1–44). Greenwich, CT: JAI. Motowidlo, S. J., Carter, G. W., Dunnette, M. D., Tippins, N., Werner, S., Burnett, J. R., & Vaughn, M. J. (1992). Studies of the structured behavioral interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 571–587. Netemeyer, R. G., Johnston, M. W., & Burton, S. (1990). Analysis of role conflict and role ambiguity in a structural equations framework. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 148– 157. Parsons, C. K., & Liden, R. C. (1984). Interviewer perceptions of applicant qualifications: A multivariate field study of demographic characteristics and nonverbal cues. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 557–568. Raza, S. M., & Carpenter, B. N. (1987). A model of hiring decisions in real employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 596–603. Ree, M. J., Earles, J. A., & Teachout, M. S. (1994). Predicting job performance: Not much more than g. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 518–524. Singer, M. S., & Bruhns, C. (1991). Relevant effect of applicant work experience and academic qualification on selection interview decisions: A study of between-sample generalizability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 550–559. Snyder, M., Berscheid, E., & Matwychuk, A. (1988). Orientations toward personnel selection: Differential reliance on appearance and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 972–979. Wayne, S. J., & Ferris, G. R. (1990). Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisorsubordinate interactions: A laboratory experiment and field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 487–499. Williams, L. L., & Podsakoff, P. M. (1989). Longitudinal field methods for studying reciprocal relationships in organizational behavior research: Toward improved causal analysis. In L. Cummings & B. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: Vol. 11 (pp. 247–292). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Zuckerman, M., Hodgins, H., & Miyake, K. (1990). The vocal attractiveness stereotype: Replication and elaboration. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 14, 97–112. Received: March 24, 1995
AID
JVB 1538
/
6309$$$101
12-30-96 14:25:14
jvba
AP: JVB