Master thesis, Msc Human Resource Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business
June 2012 G.G.J. Droste Student Number: 2050137 Prunusstraat 49 9741 LB Groningen tel.: +31 (0)6-42421117 e-mail: g.g.j.droste@student.rug.nl Supervisor Dr. J. Jordan Second Assessor Dr. F. Rink
DO FACEBOOK PROFILES AFFECT HIRING DECISIONS?
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
1. INTRODUCTION 4
1.1 Recruitment and selection in the year 2012 5
1.2 Relevance 5
2. THEORY 6
2.1 Social Media (SM) in organizations 6
2.2 Facebook as part of the recruitment process 6
2.3 Making hiring decisions 7
2.4 The search for personal information 8
3. METHODS 11 3.1 Participants 11 3.2 Design 12 3.3 Measures 13 4. RESULTS 16 4.1 Manipulation check 16
4.2 Hypothesis 1a: main effects for applicant evaluation 16
4.3 Hypothesis 1b 18
4.4 Additional Relevant Results 19
4.5 Hypothesis 2: search for personal information 22 4.6 Hypothesis 3: the actual influence of SM on the hiring process 23
1. INTRODUCTION
“While the decision to post videos, pictures, thoughts, experiences, and observations to social networking sites is personal, a single act can create far-reaching ethical consequences
for individuals as well as organizations”
(Sharon L. Allen, Chairman of the Board, Deloitte LLP)
Imagine posting a picture of yourself on Facebook, partying in a Halloween costume, at the risk of killing the chance being hired for your dream job. Or having your employment hinge on a HR manager’s opinion about the religious- or political views you posted on a social media website. Social media (SM) is defined as “a connective technology that assists communication and information sharing in a mediated public setting, resulting in the voluntary sharing of massive amounts of personal information with the online public” (Cain, Scott and Smith,
2010:1635). Even though for legal or ethical reasons managers should perhaps refrain from using information about job candidates found on social media websites, the reality is that 45% of employers use Facebook or Twitter to screen job candidates (CareerBuilder survey 2009). At 50%, Kluemper and Rosen (2009) put this number slightly higher. Leonard (2011) substantiates these numbers by stating that 30% of the employers in his research actually used social
networking information to eliminate applicants from consideration.
The biggest part of those who conduct online searches/background checks of job candidates do so through Facebook (29%), second comes the most popular professional network site, LinkedIn (26%). According to another SM website (Wikipedia), Facebook counted over 845 million active users in February 2012. To put this in perspective, the entire population of the European Union was ‘slightly’ smaller in 2011 (502 million).
1.1. Recruitment and selection in the year 2012
With the rapid growth of new web technologies and SM the past decades, a grey area of ethical responsibility exists regarding the use of the technology within the workplace (Engler & Tanoury, 2007). Evaluating all these new possibilities I conclude that, for example, screening options in selection and recruitment have changed immensely the past years. The numbers of resumes received for open positions and the possibility to easily acquire extensive information from applicants are among the reasons why employers use Facebook to inspect future employees (Lory, 2010). Even though Facebook is an excellent example, the focus of this research lies on the choice of HRM to access and use Internet sites that contain personal information of
applicants, not on one specific social networking website.
1.2. Relevance
Though I found various papers on the use of SM during the recruiting process (Brennan, 2010; Crone, 2009; Hof, 2011; Joos, 2008; Kluemper & Rosen, 2009), only a few (Bohnert and Ross, 2010; Lory, 2010) investigated how the content of social networking websites influenced others’ evaluation of job candidates. Lory (2010) focused on how employers can optimize the benefits of using Facebook as a tool for pre-employment screening of applicants while managing the ethical, legal, and privacy implications, concluding that employers may gain some benefits by using Facebook in the screening process, but that challenges arise when information is legally-protected, private and/or used to discriminate. Furthermore Bohnert and Ross (2010) specifically focused on the use of SM websites for personnel screening (e.g. reference and background checks), they concluded that applicants with a family- or professional oriented SM page were evaluated more positively for the job than applicants with alcohol-oriented SM pages.
In sum, after reviewing available literature on this subject, I agree with Davison, Maraist and Bing (2011) that the use of SM for recruiting, hiring or terminating individuals is clearly
2. THEORY 2.1 Social Media (SM) in organizations
The most crucial development in communication the past decades is the Internet and the endless possibilities that come along with it (Stingl, 2009), with SM being one of the most recent and fastest growing Internet innovations (Cable & Yu, 2007, Trusov et al., 2009). Diverse types of people in different age groups are exploring the possibilities and the ‘fun side’ of SM (Barnes, 2009). Currently, SM is most commonly used in public relations, branding, marketing,
information sharing and recruiting (HRfocus, 2010; Hunt, 2010). Dutta (2010) explains that there are three reasons why organizations should implement SM in their businesses. Firstly, SM is a low cost platform that allows organizations to communicate their brand and identity. Secondly, SM delivers several options to engage with customers, peers, employers and the broader public. Lastly, SM provides organizations the chance to learn and gather information. As mentioned, especially the third point is applicable during the HR screening and hiring process.
2.2.Facebook as part of the recruitment process
Facebook is a social networking service and website launched in February 2004, operated and privately owned by Facebook Inc. until May 18, 2012, the first day that trading in Facebook stocks was possible. As stated in the introduction, in February 2012, Facebook had more than 845 million active users. Facebook's mission is to give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected (Facebook.com). Facebook can be used to communicate the corporate culture (Hunt, 2010); furthermore it can be a platform to connect with many stakeholders such as employees and customers, but also potential candidates (Bretz, 2010).
view your information. We cannot ensure that information you share on Facebook will not become publicly available. If users set up appropriate privacy settings, employer surfing is less worrisome”. This means that all information posted on Facebook can become available to the public, including the group focused on in this paper, the applicant’s (future) employer(s). Rules, rights and responsibility statements for employers will be discussed later in this paper, in the ‘legal implications’ section.
2.2.1 Self-presentation and -disclosure on Facebook
Kaplan & Haenlein (2010) categorize Facebook under the social networking sites with a high self presentation/-disclosure and medium social presence/media richness. Self-presentation refers to the self-image people prefer to give to others and whether it is consistent with one’s personal identity. Self-disclosure closely relates to self-presentation, being the (un)conscious revelation of personal information. Social presence is described as the acoustic, visual and physical contact that can be achieved; a medium social presence means that Facebook has a medium social influence on the behavior of the participants. In addition, Dutta (2010) mentions Facebook as a sample SM tool in the personal and private presence. In this research I deliberately chose to disregard the fact that it can be hard to access Facebook pages of users who have set severe privacy settings because the focus lays on the self-presentation and disclosure of information on the internet. A Facebook page can represent personal information found on the internet or on SM in particular, in the most effective and clear manner.
2.3 Making hiring decisions
Hiring decisions are frequently complicated, involving multivariate and multidimensional comparisons. It is not a surprise then that hiring decisions are often suboptimal and that less qualified applicants sometimes are preferred over more qualified ones (Hitt & Barr, 1989; Ones, Viswesvaran & Reiss, 1996; Schmidt & Hunter, 1998; Schmidt, Ones & Hunter, 1992).
(Drydakis, 2009; Weichselbaumer, 2003), obesity (Klesges et al., 1990; Roehling, 1999; Swami, Chan, Wong, Furnham & Tovée, 2008) and facial attractiveness (Luxen & van de Vijver, 2005; Tews, Stafford & Zhu, 2009). They thus sometimes are unable to discard information that they have been exposed to, even if this information is irrelevant or inappropriate. Literature shows that most of the variance in recruiters’ evaluations of applicants is explained by an applicant’s qualifications (Parsons & Liden, 1984). On the contrary, non-verbal cues (Rasmussen, 1984) and photographs (Carlson, 1969), where for example applicant clothing (Forsythe, 1990) varies, influence the perceived attractiveness of the applicant as a potential employee and can result in a significant amount of variance in the recruiter evaluation of applicants. For example, Henderson, Grappendorf & Burton (2009) used a simulated employment evaluation to find that female athletes perceived to be unattractive were more harshly evaluated for entry-level managerial positions. In addition the most cited example (53%) among 35% of the employers who stated that they found content on social media that caused them not to hire an applicant was that “the candidate posted provocative or inappropriate photographs or information” (CareerBuilder survey, 2009). Taking into account these results I find it reasonable to anticipate similar effects for applicant images found on Facebook: party-oriented pictures are more likely to be
disapproved. This leads to the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1a. A suitable applicant with a party-oriented FB page will be less likely to be hired than an equally-qualified applicant without a party-oriented FB page.
Hypothesis 1b. A suitable applicant with a neutral FB page will be equally likely to be hired compared to an equally-qualified applicant without a FB page.
2.4 The search for personal information
When it comes to recruitment and selection, choosing between alternatives is a difficult process. The decision-making process of consumers, for example, is often described as a process of steps progressing from problem recognition, to information search, to evaluation of
(Bettman & Park, 1980; Schmidt & Spreng, 1996). In this case, motivations of HR decision-makers can be related to the benefits they derive from their decisions, i.e. the outcomes that increases the HR manager’s utility or provide value by facilitating achievement of higher level values or goals (Gutman 1982; Olshavsky & Wymer, 1995), but also the need they feel to justify their decision to others, such as their superiors (Simonson, 1989).
Personal information, including photographs, videos, political or religious affiliations, criminal records, credit reports and other information are now potentially available online. Although using this information is considered to be unacceptable, Dilillo & Gale (2011) found that 94.4% of their student therapist respondents admitted that they had been searching for client information on social network websites. In addition, also Clinton and colleagues (2010) mention anecdotal reports about mental health providers routinely turning to the internet as a source of information about clients. Despite the fact that legal precedents concerning fairness in the employee-selection process have been determined, researchers still find that fairness is not always ensured (Arvey & Campion, 1982; Avolio & Barret, 1987; Gatewood & Feild, 1994).
From a different perspective, many (younger) HR decision-makers, for whom internet and social media are ordinary in everyday life, may see no harm in performing searches. This view sees information on the internet as publicly shared, which represents an appropriate and useful source of information about applicants. This is consistent with the view of Behnke (2008), who stated that “social media and the internet have contributed to an erosion of interpersonal
boundaries and decreased expectations of privacy between individuals”. Consistent with these findings, I expect HR decision-makers to deliberately choose to search the internet and view an applicant’s Facebook page when they have the opportunity, leading to the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2. In their search for more information on candidates, HR decision-makers deliberately choose to view an applicant’s Facebook profile.
2.4.1 Legal implications for accessing personal information
In the case of recruitment and selection there are legal issues that come in to play. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 and the guidelines of Title VII of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission draw specific applicant characteristics that cannot be anticipated when employee-selection decisions are made (Gatewood & Feild, 1994). In the Netherlands, the
rules in the hiring process. The NVP states that it is unacceptable to ask an applicant to provide personal information, and that it is unacceptable for HR decision makers to make use of certain methods and techniques to penetrate in the personal privacy (Loonstra & Zondag, 2010).
When it comes to the use of social networking sites for recruitment and selections the rules and regulations are still foggy. In addition to the NVP, the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) has not set up specific language for employers about the use of Facebook in recruitment and selection either (Lory, 2010). Employers using Facebook to screen candidates do run the risk of violating laws, including those of the NVP, NACE, Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and discriminations laws. The FCRA states that online searches can only be performed after the applicant has been offered a position and only with the permission of that person (Lory, 2010).
When applying Facebook’s own privacy policy to this issue, employers that use Facebook to screen applicants could be violating a list of criteria (Facebook.com). Four main examples are that employers cannot: (1) ask (future) employees for access to their Facebook profiles (“you will not solicit login information or access an account belonging to someone else”), (2) ask for access to Facebook profiles, it could intimidate (future) employees (“you will not bully, intimidate or harass any user”), (3) discriminate and/or access personal information (“you will not use Facebook to do anything unlawful…discriminatory”) and (4) put an applicant in an unfair and unethical position by requesting access to the account (“you will not… let anyone else access your account, or do anything that might jeopardize the security of your account”).
2.4.2 Ability to disregard (personal) information
Various other studies have shown, as well, that information that is forbidden by law to be taken into consideration in job applications still has an adverse outcome on hiring decisions. For example, Johnson and Heal (1976) had 72 supervisors and midlevel managers reviewing résumés of 3 applicants and 2 different job descriptions for a position being sought. Results demonstrated that the nature of an applicant’s disability played a role in the recommendation for hiring
applicants, even though they had the same qualifications as an older applicants. Hitt & Barr (1989) had a sample of line- and staff managers to evaluate applicants, and give
recommendations for starting salaries, for middle- and upper-level managerial positions. They found that job-irrelevant variables were used heavily in selection decisions, subject demographic characteristics were the strongest predictors of starting salary recommendations.
We often receive information of which we know that we have to disregard in certain
situations. Despite our efforts to do so, the implications of this information may have impact on our judgment of the employee to which it refers. A commonly mentioned example of this phenomenon takes place in the courtroom, where evidence regularly has been found to affect jury decisions despite having been declared inadmissible (Carretta & Moreland, 1983; Sue, Smith, & Caldwell, 1973; Thomspon, Fong, & Rosenhan, 1981; Wolf & Montgomery, 1977). In a different setting Isbell, Smith, and Wyer (1998) also stated that in their view, after semantic concepts have been activated they can potentially influence judgments, even if people have been told to disregard them. When matching the legal implications with the arguments above, I expect HR decision-makers to be unwilling to acknowledge the influence that candidate information (that should be disregarded) found on SM sites has on their hiring decisions.
Hypothesis 3. HR decision-makers are unwilling to acknowledge the influence that candidate information found on FB has on their hiring decisions. That is, their decisions will be different from decision-makers who don’t see the profile, but they will not report being influenced by this information.
3. METHODS 3.1 Participants
3.2 Design
I used a 2 (exposure: choice or forced) x 2 (Facebook: neutral, party-oriented) design, and, in addition, included a control group. Within this scenario there were five experimental conditions (as shown in Table 1): (1) the participants were required to see a Facebook page, showing a neutral personal image of the potential employee, in relation to the job, (2) the participants were required to see a Facebook page, showing a party-oriented personal image of the potential employee, in relation to the job, (3) the participants had the choice to see a
Facebook page, which turned out to show a neutral personal image of the potential employee, in relation to the job, (4) the participants had the choice to see a Facebook page, which turned out to show a party-oriented personal image of the potential employee, in relation to the job and (5) the control group, in which participants did not have the choice, and were not exposed to a Facebook page. Where applicable, the participants were confronted with a screenshot of the specific Facebook page.
TABLE 1. Study Design
Party-oriented Facebook image
Neutral Facebook image
Required to see Facebook page
1. The participants are required to see a Facebook page, showing a party-oriented personal image of the
potential employee, in relation to the job
2. The participants are required to see a Facebook page, showing a neutral personal image of the potential employee, in relation to the job
Choice to see Facebook page
3. The participants have the choice to see a Facebook page, which turns out to show a party-oriented personal image of the potential employee, in relation to the job
4. The participants have the choice to see a Facebook page, which turns out to show a neutral personal image of the potential employee, in relation to the job
5. Control group, participants are not exposed to Facebook pages Procedure
The experiment started by presenting a scenario in which the participants were told that they were “participating in a study that will attempt to judge your Human Resources (HR) managerial qualities as an HR director” (the company was fictively named ‘Isoxan’) and that “you are in charge of the HR department and responsible for making final decisions in the hiring process of new employees”. Specifically, I explained the following:
“You are aware of the rules & regulations that are applicable when it comes to hiring new employees. In the Netherlands, the ‘NVP-sollicitatiecode’ (a code written by the Dutch
Association for Personnel policies) sets specific rules in the hiring process. The NVP states that it is unacceptable to ask an applicant to provide personal information, and that it is unacceptable for HR decision makers to make use of certain methods and techniques to penetrate in the personal privacy.
This means that you are not allowed to include personal information found on applicant’s social media (e.g., Facebook) in your hiring decisions.”
Dependent variables
To conclude the procedure, all participants were asked to rate the applicant on different aspects. Because participants might be unwilling to hire a candidate without seeing him, I provided participants with two options. The participants were asked to rate the likelihood to invite the applicant for a final job interview, and the likelihood to directly hire the applicant.
In addition, I chose two dimensions to be able to show differences in the perception of applicants’ qualities: participants were asked how qualified they think the applicant would be for the job and what salary they would offer the applicant, if hired.
Because the applicant’s qualities can consist of many different elements, I added items to capture these elements. Specifically, I measured perceptions of the candidate’s ability to
complete tasks, knowledge, general work-related abilities, skills, attitudes and decision-making.
3.3 Measures
3.3.1 Manipulation check
page(s). These items are: I experienced the Facebook page as; (1) Professionally oriented; (2) Family oriented; (3) Party oriented; (4) Neutral. I accompanied the items with 7-point Likert scales ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). These were presented only to those participants who saw the Facebook pages.
3.3.2 Overall rating scales
Participants rated their applicant on the following rating scales: “How likely would you be to invite the applicant for a final job interview?” (1 = very unlikely; 7 = very likely); “How likely would you be to directly hire the applicant?” (1 = very unlikely; 7 = very likely). Participants were also asked “How qualified is the applicant for this job” (1 = very unqualified; 7 = very qualified) and “If hired, what salary (before tax, per month) would you offer the applicant?” (ranging from 1 = 0 - 1,500 €; 9 = 8,001+ €).
3.3.3 Tasks
To measure the participant’s perception of the applicant’s ability to fulfill tasks, I used a four-item scale. Participants answered the items on 7-point Likert scales ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). I calculated the average of the four items to compute a total identification score. The scale’s internal reliability was good (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.78).
3.3.4 Knowledge
To assess the participant’s perception of the applicant’s possession of knowledge to perform well at the job, I used a four-item scale. All items are presented in Appendix 1. Participants answered the items on 7-point Likert scales, ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). I averaged these items to compute a total skills assessment score. The internal reliability of the scale was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.68).
3.3.5 Abilities
3.3.6 Skills
To assess the participant’s perception of the applicant’s skills I used a four-item scale. Participants answered the items on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree). I averaged these items to compute a total skills assessment score. The internal reliability of the scale was good (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.76).
3.3.7 Attitudes
To assess the participant’s perception of the applicant’s attitude, two items were used. I examined each of these items individually. Participants answered the items on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree).
3.3.8 Decision-making
To assess the participant’s perception of the applicant’s decision making skills I used two items. I examined each of these items individually. Participants answered the items on a 7-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree).
3.3.9 Facebook evaluation questions
Participants that were exposed to Facebook pages were required to answer an extra set of
4. RESULTS
4.1 Manipulation Checks
The experimental conditions had effects on participants’ experience of the Facebook page(s). A one-way ANOVA showed that all results between the two groups were significant Fs > 41.1, ps < .001. Those who saw the party oriented page experienced them as more party oriented than those who saw the neutral page. See Table 2. Inversely, those who saw the neutral oriented page experienced the page more neutral oriented than those who saw the party oriented page. The ways participants evaluated the Facebook page being family-like and professional are also consistent with these results.
TABLE 2: Descriptive Statistics
I experienced the applicant's Facebook Profile as…
Saw
Party Saw Neutral
Party Oriented 6.37 (0.98) 3.54 (1.49) Neutral Oriented 3.03 (1.47) 5.13 (1.23) Family Oriented 2.94 (1.53) 4.14 (1.28) Professionally Oriented 2.17 (1.41) 4.98 (1.31) Note: N=227. Excluding Control Group and No-sees.
For all analyses that follow, I removed participants with standardized residuals above 2 or below -2, resulting in an N of between 367 and 403 for all of my analyses.
4.2 Hypothesis 1a: main effects for applicant evaluation
4.2.1 Likelihood to invite applicant for final job interview
The interaction effect for the likelihood to invite the applicant for a final job interview was significant, F(1,388) = 4.01, p = .05, however, main effects of page and choice were non-significant, Fs < 2.11, ps > .12 (see Table 3). H1a was confirmed. Specifically, planned
comparisons showed a significant difference between the forced – saw neutral and the forced – saw party conditions, t(387) = -3.71, p <.001, and between all party-see conditions and the control group, t(387) = 2.20, p = .03, such that people who were forced to see the neutral page and those in the control group were more likely to invite the candidate for an interview in comparison to those forced to see the party page. In addition, planned comparisons showed marginally significant differences between all party and all neutral pages, t(387) = 1.91, p = .06, with neutral pages more likely to lead to the participant being invited for an interview.
TABLE 3
How likely would you be to invite the applicant for a
final job interview?
Choice Forced Party 6.14 (0.58) 5.86 (0.78) Neutral 6.13 (0.67) 6.26 (0.68) No-see 6.22 (0.60) 6.23 (0.66) Note: N=388 4.2.2 Salary
The interaction effect for salary was marginally significant, F(1,389) = 3.42, p = .07. The main effect of page was significant, F(2,389) = 5.63, p = .001; however, the main effect of choice was non-significant, F(2,389) = 1.00, p = .62. Participants reported significant differences in the average offered starting salary for the applicant. See Table 4. Planned comparisons showed a significant difference, t(388) = -2.95, p = .01, between the choice – saw neutral and choice – saw party condition, with those who saw the party page offering the candidate a lower salary. The contrasts also showed significant differences, t(388) = 3.22, p = .001, between all neutral
TABLE 4
What starting salary would you offer the applicant?
and all party pages, with again, party pages eliciting lower salary recommendations. Lastly, ratings for applicants with the party-oriented FB page were significantly lower, t(388) = 4.42, p = .001, than the ratings of the control group.
In sum, consistent with H1a, I can thus conclude that suitable applicants with a well-qualified resume but a party-oriented Facebook page will be less likely to be invited for a final job
interview, and if potentially hired they would have been offered a lower starting salary, than equally-qualified applicants without a party-oriented Facebook page. The sometimes non significant main effect of choice and page are explained by the possibility that these effects contain a mix of party- and neutral Facebook pages, and thus not relate to the difference between these two.
4.3 Hypothesis 1b
H1b predicted that suitable applicants with a well-qualified resume but a neutral Facebook page would be equally likely to be hired compared to an equally-qualified applicant without a Facebook page. Supporting H1b, planned comparisons showed no significant difference for salary, t(388) = 1.24 p = .21 (see Table 4) and likelihood to invite applicant for final job interview, t(387) = 0.25 p = .73 (see Table 3), between all neutral page sees and the control group, meaning that people who saw the neutral page did not differ in their evaluations of salary and likelihood to invite the candidate for an interview compared to those who did not see a page at all.
Additionally, the interaction effects for likelihood to directly hire the applicant (see Table 5) and qualifications of the applicant (see Table 6) were non-significant, F(1,403) = 1.01, p = .32, moreover main effects of page and choice were also non-significant, Fs < 1.40, ps > .024. That is, participants were not more likely to directly hire or not hire participants in any of the
4.4 Additional Relevant Results
Although these results are outside of the purview of H1a, I test comparison for the following measures in a similar way – that is, between the party-orientated and the neutral pages and between the party oriented and the control conditions.
4.4.1 Tasks
Table 7 shows participant ratings regarding task evaluation. The 2 x 2 interaction, including a control group, effect for skill evaluation was significant, F(1,381) = 7.04, p = .01, however, the main effects of page and choice were non-significant, Fs < 2.10, ps > .62. Planned comparisons showed a significant difference for task evaluation between those who were required to see the party-oriented page and those who were required to see the neutral page, t(380) = -3.46, p = .001, explaining that people who were forced to see the party-oriented page evaluated the candidate lower on tasks in comparison to those forced to see the neutral page. However, there were no differences in those with a choice to see the party- and neutral-pages.
Skills, Ability and Knowledge
Using a 2 x 2 ANOVA, there were no significant differences when evaluating candidates’ perceived skills of the applicant, all Fs < 0.08, ps > .33. See Table 8.
TABLE 5
How likely would you be to directly hire the applicant?
Choice Forced Party 4.32 (1.64) 4.36 (1.42) Neutral 4.23 (1.50) 4.23 (1.59) No-see 4.07 (1.58) 4.20 (1.60) Note: N=403 TABLE 6
However, the main effect of choice for ability evaluation was significant, F(1,386) = 3.71, p = .05, meaning that participants who had a choice to see the page rated the participants’ ability as higher than those who were forced to see the page. However, the interaction effect and the main effects of page were non-significant, Fs < 0.07, ps > .50. See Table 9.
A two-way ANOVA showed two significant main effects of choice, F(1,389) = 3.06, p = .08, and page, F(2,389) = 3.14, p = .04, for knowledge evaluation, meaning that those who were given the choice to see the page and those who saw the party-oriented pages rated the candidate’s knowledge as higher than those who did not have a choice and who saw the neutral-oriented page. This latter effect seems to be in contrast to H1a. I discuss this finding in more detail in the General Discussion. No significant interaction effect was found, F(1,389) = 0.11, p = .74.
TABLE 8 TABLE 9 TABLE 10
Evaluation of Skills
Evaluation of Ability
Evaluation of Knowledge
Choice Forced Choice Forced Choice Forced Party 5.55 (0.74) 5.43 (0.66) Party 5.66 (0.70) 5.43 (0.75) Party 6.13 (0.57) 5.96 (0.61) Neutral 5.46 (0.69) 5.40 (0.69) Neutral 5.52 (0.70) 5.34 (0.69) Neutral 6.01 (0.45) 5.89 (0.55) No-see 5.35 (0.64) 5.41 (0.67) No-see 5.53 (0.68) 5.55 (0.69) No-see 5.87 (0.50) 5.82 (0.58) Note: N = 367 Note: N = 387 Note: N = 389
4.4.2 Attitude
There was a significant interaction effect for preference for more substantial over frequent actions, F(1,388) = 6.08, p = .01. The main effect of page was also significant, F(2,388) = 3.94, p = .02; however, main effect of choice was non-significant, F(1,388) = 2.31, p = .013. Again, in seeming contrast to H1a, planned comparisons, t(387) = -3.04, p = .00, show that those in the choice – saw party condition rated the applicant higher than those in the choice – saw neutral condition. In addition, a significant effect, t(387) = -2.72, p = .001, between all party sees (M = 4.44, SD = 1.15) and all neutral sees (M = 4.18, SD = 0.99) was found, such that candidates with a party-oriented page were evaluated higher on seeking more breadth than depth of knowledge and preferring more substantial over frequent interactions in comparison with those who had a neutral page. Again, these findings are in seeming contrast to H1a. I discuss possible reasons for this in the General Discussion.
4.4.3 Decision-making
Table 13 and Table 14 present results for the participant evaluations concerning the applicant’s decision-making abilities. The interaction effect for coming to decisions by
associating or empathizing with the situation was marginally significant, F(1,385) = 3.24, p = .07, moreover main effects of page and choice were significant, with respectively F(1,385) = 5.54, p = .00 and F(1,385) = 5.40, p = .02. See Table 13. Planned comparisons showed a
significant difference, t(384) = 1.98, p < .05, between the choice – saw neutral and the choice – saw party conditions.
Table 12 Prefer more substantial interactions over frequent
interactions Choice Forced Party 4.93 (1.21) 4.27 (1.08) Neutral 4.07 (1.01) 4.21 (0.99) No-see 4.36 (1.00) 4.37 (1.22) Note: N=388 Table 11
Seek more breadth than depth of knowledge and
When it comes to focusing on balance, the greatest harmony, consensus and fit, the interaction effect was significant, F(1,387) = 6.76, p = .001. See Table 14. However, the main effects of page and choice were non-significant, Fs < 0.12, ps > .19. Planned comparisons showed a significant difference, t(386) = 2.09, p < .04, between the choice – saw neutral and the choice – saw party conditions.
In sum, these results demonstrate that people with a party-oriented page were evaluated higher on coming to decisions by associating or empathizing with the situation and focusing on balance, the greatest harmony, consensus and fit in comparison with those who have a neutral page. This finding is again in seeming contrast to H1a. I discuss possible reasons for this finding in the General Discussion.
4.5 Hypothesis 2: Search for Personal Information
H2 predicted that, in their search for more information on candidates, HR decision-makers would deliberately choose to view an applicant’s Facebook profile. The results showed that, even after explicitly warning the participants that they were not allowed to use the Facebook profile, 37.9% (n = 155) still chose to do so. With t(408) = 8.52, p = .001, this is significantly greater than 0, showing confirmation that people do choose to look at the information.
Table 13
Come to decisions by associating or empathizing
with the situation
Choice Forced Party 5.43 (0.97) 4.86 (0.92) Neutral 4.97 (0.87) 4.89 (0.94) No-see 4.76 (0.86) 4.60 (0.98) Note: N=385 Table 14
Focus on balance, the greatest harmony,
consensus and fit
4.6 Hypothesis 3: The Actual Influence of SM on the Hiring Process
As hypothesized in H3, I predicted that HR decision-makers would be unwilling to acknowledge the influence that candidate information found on Facebook had on their hiring decisions. I already showed decision-making of those who saw the (party-oriented) profile differed from decision-making of those who did not see that profile. Table 15 presents results for impression of the applicant related to the job before and after seeing the Facebook page. The mean shows the (positive or negative) difference when the impression before is deducted from the impression after seeing the Facebook page. For example, when the impression after was lower than the impression before, a negative difference results, demonstrating that the
participant’s impression of the candidate became more negative after seeing the Facebook page.
The interaction effect was non-significant, F(1,227) = 0.01, p = .94, however main effects of page, F(1,227) = 54.76, p = .001, and choice, F(1,227) = 4.25, p = .04, were significant. The results in Table 15 partly support H3, showing that participants report a greater negative change in their impression after seeing the party-oriented page in comparison to the neutral page. In addition, it shows that people who are forced to see the page, have a more negative impression than people who are given the choice to see the page.
TABLE 15 Impression after viewing the Facebook page vs. Impression
before viewing the Facebook page Choice Forced Party -1.23 (1.41) -1.60 (1.48) Neutral .16 (.78) - 0.23 (1.04) No-see - -
Note: n=227. Excluding Control Group and No-sees.
seeing neutral page (M = 4.47, SD = 1.00) than after seeing the required party-oriented page (M = 3.40, SD = 1.17), F(1,223) = 29.1, p = .001. TABLE 16 Facebook... Saw Party Saw Neutral
Changed my view of the applicant's personality
5.14 (1.50)
3.24 (1.68)
Changed my view of the applicant's knowledge and skills
2.94 (1.50)
2.58 (1.43)
Changed my view of the applicant's capabilities
3.76 (1.66)
2.74 (1.44)
Helped me in making the hiring decision
3.81 (1.66)
3.44 (1.57) Note: N=223. Excluding Control Group and No-sees.
Participants indicated to what extent seeing the Facebook page changed their view of certain applicant qualifications (see Table 16). In support of H3, I found a significant difference for change in personality, F(1,223) = 65.20, p = .001, and change in capability, F(1,223) = 18.0 p = .001, in the page condition. The changes in view of the applicant’s personality were much higher in the saw party than in the saw neutral condition, the same changes were found in the view of applicant’s capabilities, with saw party rated higher than saw neutral.
5. DISCUSSION 5.1 Reflection of Results
This study sought to understand whether personal information and other content found on social media sites had an effect on hiring decisions. In particular, I studied the effect of seeing party-oriented and neutral Facebook pages on hiring an applicant.
In their search for more information on candidates, 37.9% of the HR decision-makers deliberately chose to view an applicant’s Facebook profile (H2). I found that when two candidates had identical resumes, an applicant with a party-oriented Facebook page was less likely to be hired than an equally-qualified applicant without a party-oriented Facebook page (i.e., with a neutral page) (H1a). In specific, suitable applicants with a well-qualified resume but a party-oriented Facebook page were less likely to be invited for a final job interview, and if potentially hired they would have been offered a lower starting salary, than equally-qualified applicants without a party-oriented Facebook page. On the other hand, suitable applicants with a well-qualified resume but a neutral Facebook page were equally likely to be hired compared to applicants without a Facebook page (H1b).
There were no differences in directly hiring an applicant and the general assessment of qualifications. When reviewing the assessment of the applicant’s qualifications in specific, they add more depth to the conclusion on H1a and H1b. The evaluated qualification results
demonstrate that people with a party-oriented page were evaluated higher on certain aspects in comparison with those who have a neutral page. This finding is again in seeming contrast to H1a.
the situation and (4) focusing on balance, the greatest harmony, consensus and fit. Here as well, I relate the results to the possibility that participants apparently match a party-oriented profile more with on the job actions, rather than with qualifications. Perhaps party-oriented people are perceived to have some positive job-related characteristics like extraversion, a certain sense of empathy, action-orientation and risk-taking. If true, this offers an interesting paradox for the job candidate: people perceived as being party-oriented receive lower salaries and are less likely to be invited for an interview; however, they are seen as having more positive traits on dimensions related to knowledge-seeking, empathy, and consensus within groups. Greater research is needed on this topic in order to form more definitive conclusions.
Another finding was that HR decision-makers were just partially willing to acknowledge the influence that candidate information found on Facebook has on their hiring decisions (H3). I already concluded that decision-making of those who saw the (party-oriented) profile differed from decision-making of those who did not see that profile. Even though in both (saw party and saw neutral) situations the majority of participants did not agree that Facebook helped them in making hiring decisions, additional results showed that participants did report a large negative change in their impression of the applicant after seeing the party-oriented page, but only a small change in impression after seeing the neutral page. Subsequently participants rated the
applicant’s suitability to be higher after seeing neutral page compared to their ratings after seeing the required party-oriented page.
Additionally, HR-decision makers did report to be influenced by candidate information found on Facebook when this information was party-oriented. The changes in the participants’ view of the applicant’s personality and capabilities were much higher after seeing the party Facebook page, compared to the neutral Facebook page. Those in the party condition evaluated that they perceived seeing the page as a greater help in making hiring decisions, than those in the neutral condition.
Strangely, but consistent with the prediction that people seek to hide their use of Facebook-derived information, results showed a higher rating for the choice–saw party condition,
difference, t(387) = -1.90, p = .06, between the choice–saw party (M = 6.14, SD = 0.58) and the forced–saw party (M = 5.86, SD = 0.78) conditions when it came to hiring the applicant for a final job interview, with those with a choice to see the party page more likely to invite the candidate for an interview. A same significant difference, t(380) = -2.17, p = .03, was found for the evaluation of tasks the between the choice–saw party (M = 5.77, SD = 0.57) and the forced– saw party (M = 5.49, SD = 0.68) conditions, with those with a choice to see the page evaluating the applicant higher on task related aspects compared to those who were forced to see the page . This pattern recurs for other variables, such as both attitude measures and both decision-making measures, as well.
5.2 Theoretical Implications
Joos (2008) states that the way in which SM tools and techniques are currently used in HRM means that they cannot be a direct substitute for traditional hiring processes. Instead, Joos suggests that they should be considered a supplement to them. SM can be used for a wide range of activities, such as bolstering customer connections, replacing press releases, monitoring competitors, and recruiting potential employees (Brennan, 2010; Crone, 2009; Kluemper & Rosen, 2009; Lory, 2010). Taking into account the results of this paper, I can state that they do affect HR activities; online job postings and testing have become quite common in HR, and as Brennan (2010) found; SM definitely enables companies to investigate prospective hires, such as by expanding background checks.
Davison et al. (2011) concluded that the legality of using SM websites for screening requires more study. They found that many employers assume that it is acceptable as long as specific laws (e.g. civil rights laws) are not violated (see Genova 2009; Peluchette and Karl 2009; Roberts and Roach 2009). Firstly, the current study provides additional knowledge to earlier studies (e.g. Lieber, 2011; Davison et al, 2011; Joos, 2008; Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010; Bohnert and Ross, 2010) on the relationship between SM and HRM because it shows that SM can influence decision-making by HR managers in selection and hiring processes.
Thirdly, I provided new knowledge on the study of law violation during hiring processes where SM is used as a screening tool, that is, violation of national and international law, but also of Facebook’s own privacy policies. Specifically, my research found that people do integrate the information about candidates that they find on SM websites – even when explicitly told that this is in violation of the law.
Following these results, the urge for (global) legal systems to come up with universal rules and regulations regarding the use of Facebook and other SM in the hiring process has been underlined. As Zeidner (2007) stated: “Ethics and legality have become an important factor for HR practitioners when it comes to electronic screening, using social network websites.” Rules and regulations regarding this topic need to be made more transparent for both employers and employees.
On the employee side, the importance of controlling self-exposure and disclosure on the internet and SM is suggested popular in press (Bohnert & Ross, 2010), the current study provides additional evidence to this topic. As long as rules regarding these issues are unclear, future employees should be extremely careful in using SM (e.g., in having and maintaining their SM profiles) because these pages are checked used by their (future) employers, who are influenced by this information. Additional education in how to deal with SM, what is appropriate to post and not to post and how to apply the right privacy settings are just few examples of what is necessary.
The partial willingness of HR decision-makers to acknowledge the influence that
candidate information found on Facebook has on their hiring decisions (H3) probably raises the most questions. As Engler and Tanoury (2007) stated “employers do not care if they invade your privacy during their hiring searches as long as it is serving the ‘greater good’ by hiring superior employees” (p.9). The results in this paper suggest that when the candidate information is unprofessional (e.g., party-oriented) decision-makers are willing to acknowledge that they are influenced by this information. Strikingly though, when explicitly asked if they thought
5.2 Limitations
There are several limitations to this study. First, the research was all scenario-based: no one actually hired a new employee. These findings should be replicated with field research. It is possible that people might behave differently if actually hiring a real candidate. For example, participants in the scenario were explicitly informed about the legal complications and warned for consequences. Though, when conducting this experiment in the field, the percentage that chooses to view a Facebook page is expected to be higher because they are less aware of the legal complications. Second, the participants were students participating in an HR course, rather than professional HR managers. It is possible that actual HR managers might act differently. In addition, it is most likely that these results may generalize best to young, less experienced managers. It is also likely that HR managers from older generations may be less likely to view Facebook pages because of their (un)familiarity with SM and Facebook. On the contrary, if exposed to such a page, they might show even less sympathy to applicants with party-oriented profiles because they themselves cannot relate to such a profile. Third, the participants only evaluated one possible applicant to provide maximum experimental control. It is possible that if participants had to view many candidates, Facebook pages might become less memorable or important in their decision-making. Or on the contrary, maybe a party-oriented page would stand out more when compared with other candidates who had more appropriate pages. Fourth, it was assumed that the actual interviews were already conducted; the participants only evaluated the “paper” résumé and job description. It is possible that if participants were viewing these pages before the interview, any interpersonal impressions from the interview would supplant their impressions from the Facebook profile. However, as I examined, participants were reportedly less likely to be invited for an interview if they had a party-oriented page.
5.3 Future Research
future research is needed to answer this question. In addition, one might want to study other effects of this compensation and why it is occurring (e.g., is it because of guilt on the part of the manager?).
Additionally, future research on this topic is advised to differentiate between the effects of different content (gender, picture, text, likes, etc.) on Facebook pages. It could also
differentiate in the choice of social media, for example between LinkedIn and Facebook. It can be imagined that information seen on a Facebook page might be perceived differently than that seen on a page like LinkedIn. Future research might as well replicate this research in the field and conduct it under actual HR managers. As I mentioned above, it is possible that actual HR
managers would act differently than the students in the current study. In addition, future research could measure other forms of online content that can be found on SM (e.g. Facebook). For example, travel-oriented or professionally-oriented pages are expected to provide different applicant evaluations than the party-oriented scenario in this paper. Reversely, a party-oriented profile might actually be relevant and supportive when applying to other types of job than the job description used in this paper (e.g., an events organizer or public relations intern). To conclude, to be able to generalize this research over different cultures, cross-cultural research is
recommended.
5.4 Practical Implications
employees by evaluating SM (Facebook) pages does influence the HR manager’s decision to hire a new employee. Combining these two points, these results can have serious effects for employers (e.g. concerning legal issues, moral issues and HR-processes). For managers, I suggest that they make sure to be aware of the actual influence personal information on SM websites has on their decision-making and that to be aware that they are potentially unable to disregard this information.
Besides all this, we need to remember that there exist instances where using SM
information may be appropriate. For instance when an employer discovers a potential employee has posted despising comments about the employer, the employer is usually allowed to use this information in the selection process (Pixler & Holtzman, 2011).
The message for job applicants is clear: disclosure of (unprofessional) personal
information on the Internet, and SM specifically, must be carefully managed (Christofides et al., 2009). A party-oriented Facebook page can be costly in terms of both opportunity and salary. On the contrary, also according to the current research, those who are able to manage their SM appropriately might, increase their chances in finding a job.
Overall, the present study offers some interesting insights toward understanding this aggrandizing widespread social phenomenon, urging not only employers and employees to be cautious, but also reaffirming what has been hot topic in society the past years: the world needs to deal with SM carefully.
5.5 Conclusions
In summary, while applicant’s qualifications and résumé remain an important factor in deciding whether he or she will be hired, SM also influences the evaluation of applicant’s for a job. As Google’s Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt stated at the keynote speech for graduates at the University of Berkeley (2012):
“I believe fully in the power of technology to change the world for the better. And I believe even more fully in the ability of your generation to use that power to great effect — to
REFERENCES
Arvey, R. D., & Campion, J. E. 1982. The Employment Interview: A summary and Review of recent Research. Personnel Psychology, 35, 281–322.
Avolio, B. J., & Barrett, G. V. 1987. Effects of age stereotyping in a simulated interview.
Psychology and Aging, 2, 56–63.
Bax, E. 2006. Kansrijk kiezen: een raamwerk voor strategisch human resource management. The Hague: Academic Service.
Barber, A. 1998. Recruiting employees. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.
Behnke, S. 2008. Ethics in the age of the Internet. Monitor on Psychology, 39(7), 74.
Bettman, J.R., & Park, W. 1980. Effects of Prior Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analysis. Journal of
consumer research, 7:234-248
Black, D. A., Makar, H. R., Sanders, S. G., & Taylor, L. J. 2003. The Earnings Effects of Sexual Orientation on Earning. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 56, 3, 449-469.
Blandford, J. M. 2003. The Nexus of Sexual Orientation and Gender in the Determination of Earnings. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 54, 4, 622-642.
Bohnert, B.S.D., & Ross, W.H. 2010. The influence of Social Networking Web Sites on the Evaluation of Job Candidates. Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking, Vol. 13 (3), 2010, pp. 341- 347
Bretz, C., 2010. How to use social media to acquire staff. Baseline. 4-6.
Cable, D.M., & Yu, K.Y.T. 2007. How Selection AND Recruitment Practices Develop Beliefs Used to Assess Fit. Ostroff, C. and Judge, T.A. (eds), Perspective on Organizational
Fit, New York: LEA, pp. 155-182
Cain, J., Scott, D., & Smith, K. 2010. Use of Social Media by Residency Program Directors for Resident Selection. American journal of health-system pharmacy, 67: 1635:1639
Careerbuilder Survey. 2009. Available at: http://oregonbusinessreport.com/2009/08/45-employers-use-facebook-twitter-to-screen-job-candidates/
Carretta, T. R., & Moreland, R. L. 1983. The Direct and Indirect Effects of Inadmissible Evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13, 291-309.
Carlson, R.E. 1969. Relative Influence of a Photograph vs. Factual Written Information in an Interviewer’s Employment Decision. Personnel Psychology, 22:45–56.
Christofides, E., Muise A., & Desmarias S. 2009. Information disclosure and control on Facebook: Are they two sides of the same coin or two different
processes?Cyberpsychology & Behavior 2009; 12341-5.
Clinton, B. K., Silverman, B. C., & Brendel, D. H. 2010. Patient-targeted Googling: The ethics of searching online for patient information. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 18, 103– 112.
Crone, S. 2009. Employers using social networking sites to check out potential employees. Mlive.com Everything Michigan. Available at:
Davison, K.H., Maraist, C., & Bing, M.N. 2011. Friend of Foe? The promise and pitfalls of using social networking sites for HR decisions. Journal of business psychology, 2011, 26:153-159
Deloitte LLP. 2009. Social Networking and Reputational Risk in the Workplace: 2009 Deloitte LLP Ethics & Workplace Survey. Available at: http://www.deloitte.com.
DiLillo, D., Gale, E.B. 2011. To Google or Not To Google: Graduate Students’ Use of the Internet To Access Personal Information About Clients. Training and Education in
Professional Psychology, American Psychological Association 2011, Vol. 5, No. 3, 160–
166
Drydakis, N. 2009. Sexual Orientation Discrimination in the Labour Market. Labour
Economics, 16,364-372.
Dutta, S. 2010. What‟s your personal social media strategy? Harvard Business Review. 127-130.
Engler P., and Tanoury P., 2007. Employers’ Use of Facebook in Recruiting. Available at: http://www.ethicapublishing.com/ethical/3CH5.pdf. 2007, p. 9
Facebook Privacy Policy. Available at: Facebook.com
https://www.facebook.com/facebook?sk=info accessed on 19th of March 2012.
Forsythe S., 1990. Effect of applicant’s clothing on interviewer’s decision to hire. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology 1990, 20:1579–95.
Gatewood, R. D., & Feild, H. S. 1994. Human resource selection. Orlando, FL: The Dryden
Google’s Eric Schmidt to graduates: ‘Find a way to say YES to things’ By Public Affairs, UC
Berkeley, May 14, 2012. Available at:
http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2012/05/14/google-ceo-to-graduates-the-future-doesnt-just-happen/ accessed on June 7th, 2012.
Gutman, J. 1982. A means-end chain model based on consumer categorization processes.
Journal of Marketing, 46: 60-72.
Harvie, K., Marshall-McCaskey, J., & Johnston, L. 1998. Gender-based Biases in Occupational Hiring Decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1698-1711.
Henderson A.C., Grappendorf H., Burton L.J. 2009. Investigating Attractiveness in the Hiring Process of Female Athletes (for Managerial Positions). Gender in Management, 24: 156–77. 20.
Hitt, M. A., & Barr, S. H. 1989. Managerial Selection Decision Models: Examination of Configural Cue Processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 53–61.
HRFocus. 2010. Special report on social media: recruiting and marketing are top benefits of
social media. January: 1-4.
Isbell, L. M., Smith, H. L., & Wyer, R. S. 1998. Consequences of Attempts to Disregard Social Information. In J. M. Golding & M. MacLeod (Eds.), Intentional forgetting:
Interdisciplinary approaches, 289–320. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Johnson, R., & Heal, L. W. 1976. Private Employment Agency Responds to the Physically Handicapped Applicant in a Wheelchair. Journal of Applied Rehabilitation
Counseling,7, 12–21.
Joos, J.G. 2008. Social Media: New frontiers in Hiring and Recruiting. Employment relations
Kaplan, A.M., & Haenlein, M. 2010. Users of the World, Unite! The Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media. Business horizons, Elsevier, 2010, pp. 59-68
Kawakami, K., Dion, K. L., & Dovidio, J. F., 1998. Racial Prejudice and Stereotype Activation.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 407-416.
Klesges, R. C., Klem, M. L., Hanson, C. L., Eck, L. H., Ernst, J., O’Laughlin, D., & … Rife, R. 1990. The Effects of Applicant’s Health Status and Qualifications on Simulated Hiring Decisions. Journal of Obesity, 14,527-535.
Kluemper, D.H., & Rosen P.A. 2009. Future Employment Selection Methods: Evaluating Social Networking Web Sites. Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 24(6), 2009, pp. 567-580
Lahey, J. 2008. Age, Women, and Hiring: An Experimental Study. Journal of Human
Resources, 43, 30-56.
Leonard, B. 2011. Few Employers use Social Media Networks to Screen Candidates. HR
magazine, Oct, 2011, pp.16
Loonstra, C.J., & Zondag, W.A. 2010. Arbeidsrechtelijke themata. Boom Juridische
Studieboeken,Vierde druk, 2010, pp. 84
Lory, B.E.H. 2010. Using Facebook to Assess Candidates During the Recruiting Process: Ethical implications. NACE Journal, Sept, 2010
Luxen, M. F., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. 2005. Facial Attractiveness, Sexual Selection and Personnel Selection: when Evolved Preferences Matter. Journal of Organizational
Maurer, T., & Rafuse, N. 2001. Learning not Litigating: Managing Employee Development and Avoiding Claims of Age Discrimination. Academy of Management Executive, 15, 110-121.
Noe, R., Hollenbeck, J., Gerhart, B., & Wright, P. 2006. Human Resource Management;
gaining a competitive advantage. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Oldshavsky, R.W. & Wymer W. 1995. The Desire for New Information from External Sources.
Proceedings of the society for consumer psychology, Eds. S. Mackenzie and R.
Stayman. Bloomington, IN: Printmaster, 17-27.
Pager, D., 2003. The Mark of a Criminal Record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937-975.
Parsons C.K., Liden R.C., 1984. 1 Interviewer Perceptions of Applicant Qualifications: a Multivariate Field study of Demographic Characteristics and Nonverbal Cues.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984; 69:557–68.
Pingitore, R., Dugoni, B. L., Tindale, R. S., & Spring, B., 1994. Bias Against Overweight Job Applicants in a Simulated Employment Interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 909-917.
Rasmussen K.G. 1984. Jr. Nonverbal Behavior, Verbal Behavior, Résumé´ Credentials, and Selection Interview Outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1984; 69:551–6.
Riach, P. A., & Rich, R. J. 2002. Field Experiments of Discrimination in the Market Place.
Economic Journal, 112, 480-518.
Schmidt, J.B., & Spreng, R.A. 1996. A Proposed Model of External Consumer Information Search. Journal of the academy of marketing science, volume 24, No.3, pp. 246-256.
Simonson, I. 1989. Choice Based on Reasons: the Case of Attraction and Compromise. Journal
of consumer research, 16 (September):208-216
Stingl, A. 2009. The Internet & Society. Research Starters Sociology, 1-6
Sue. S., Smith, R. E., & Caldwell, C. 1973. Effects of Inadmissible Evidence on the Decisions of Simulated Jurors: A Moral Dilemma. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 3, 345-353.
Swami, V., Chan, F., Wong, V., Furnham, A., & Tove´e, M. J., 2008. Weight-based
Discrimination in Occupational hiring and Helping Behavior. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 38, 968-981.
Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. 1995. Sexism and Racism: Old-fashioned and Modern Prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 199-214.
Tews, M. J., Stafford, K., &Zhu, J. 2009. Beauty Revisited: The Impact of Attractiveness, Ability any Personality in the Assessment of Employment Suitability. International
Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 92-100.
Thompson, W. C.. Fong, G. T, & Rosenhan, D. L. 1981. Inadmissible Evidence and Juror Verdicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 453-463.
Trusov, M., Buskling, R.E., & Pauwels, K., 2009. Effects of Word-of-Mouth Versus Traditional Marketing: Findings from an International Social Networking Site, Journal of
Weichselbaumer, D., 2003. Sexual Orientation Discrimination in Hiring. Labour Economics, 10, 629-642.
Weiner B. 1993. On Sin versus Sickness. A theory of Perceived Responsibility and Social Motivation. American Psychologist 1993; 48:957–65.
Weiss, E. M., & Maurer, T. J. 2004. Age Discrimination in Personnel Decisions: A Reexamination. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 1551-1562.
Wikipedia.com http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook accessed on 19th of March 2012.
Wolf, S., & Montgomery, D. A. 1977. Effects of Inadmissible Evidence and Level of Judicial Admonishment to Disregard on the Judgments of Mock Jurors. Journal of Applied
APPENDIX I
Appendix I TASKS
Below we ask you to rate the applicant on the basis of the capability the HR-manager possesses to fulfill his TASKS at Isoxan.
I expect that the applicant, Koen de Vries, is…
Able to fulfill the most important tasks to perform the job Perfect for the job
Motivated to fulfill his tasks Consistent in fulfilling his tasks
KNOWLEDGE
Below we ask you to rate the applicant on the basis of the KNOWLEDGE the HR-manager must possess to perform well at Isoxan.
I expect the applicant, Koen de Vries, to possess knowledge of… Principles and procedures for effective HR management
Business and management principles
Human behavior and performance, individual differences in ability, personality and interests Technologies to use in HR
ABILITIES
Below we ask you to rate the applicant on the basis of the ABILITIES the HR-manager must possess to perform well at Isoxan.
I expect the applicant, Koen de Vries, to… Be able to use his knowledge to perform well Be able to motivate other employees
Be able to gain respect from other employees
Possess knowledge that exceeds the knowledge required in the job application
SKILLS
Below we ask you to rate the applicant on the basis of the SKILLS the HR-manager must possess to perform well at Isoxan.
Deal with incidents and unforeseen occurrences
Appendix 1 continued ATTITUDES
On the next pages we will ask you questions about the ATTITUDES of the HR-manager
I expect the applicant, Koen de Vries, to…
Prefer more substantial interactions over frequent interactions Seek more breadth than depth of knowledge and influence
DECISION MAKING FUNCTIONS
On the next pages we will ask you questions about the DECISION MAKING FUNCTIONS of the HR-manager
I expect the applicant, Koen de Vries, to…
APPENDIX II
