The goal of this research was to study display rules and emotional suppression in an employment interview. Participants, 74 graduating university students, were told that their videotaped performance in a simulated job interview would be evaluated by personnel experts. In a post-interview questionnaire, participants were asked about the display rules influencing their behavior in the interview. They were also asked whether they had tried to suppress or hide (negative) emotions during the interview. More men than women stated that they had tried to hide or suppress their feelings; these participants were classified as (emotion) suppressors. Participants who stated that they had not tried to hide or suppress their feelings during the interview were classified as nonsuppressors. The validity of self-reported suppression was supported by the external evaluations of two judges, who observed less nonverbal expressiveness (hand to head movements) in suppressors of both sexes and less anxiety in female suppressors. Suppressors were evaluated as more competent than nonsuppressors. In women, but not in men, emotional suppression was associated with increased self-reports of depressed state in the post-interview questionnaire.
Sourced from: Latest Issue of International Journal of Selection and Assessment
There has been much research conducted examining the relationship between Conscientiousness as defined as one of the dimensions in the “Big Five” Model of personality and job performance. Much of the research has indicated that Conscientiousness is a positive predictor for job performance across a range of job positions. Simply put and what many advocate, is that it appears that people who have been assessed to be higher on Conscientiousness tend to perform better at work. Nevertheless, an article by Tett (1998) highlights some considerations regarding accepting this conclusion and cautions against accepting this at face value.
In this article, a number of examples suggest that Conscientiousness and job performance may not be irrevocably linked as previous research has suggested. It provides two examples of work situations where Conscientiousness may actually hinder the job performance. Firstly, the author highlights situations where being conscientious may result in lower productivity where either tasks require more time to complete or where fewer tasks can be completed. This is illustrated by the example of managers who at times are required to make decisions even when they do not have all the relevant information (Tett, 1998). In such a situation, being high on conscientious may affect the speed at which decisions can be made.
The second example refers to rules and procedures; conscientious individuals tend to adhere to rules and procedures. Tett (1998) highlights that in certain professions, strictly following rules and procedures may affect creativity and innovation. It is proposed that such adherence to rules and procedures can affect productivity as such individuals would be unlikely to develop novel ideas and solutions.
Although Conscientiousness appears to remain as a significant predictor of job performance, it is important to note that there are situations where other factors can play a part.
Tett, R. P. (1998). Is Conscientiousness ALWAYS positively related to job performance? The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 36(1)
Despite its scientific and practical importance, relatively few studies have been conducted to investigate the relationship between job applicant mental abilities and faking. Some studies suggest that more intelligent people fake less because they do not have to. Other studies suggest that more intelligent people fake more because they have increased capacity to fake. Based on a model of faking likelihood, we predicted that job candidates with a high level of mental abilities would be less likely to fake a biodata measure. However, for candidates who did exhibit faking on the biodata measure, we expected there would be a strong positive relationship between mental abilities and faking, because mental abilities increase their capacity to fake. We found considerable support for hypotheses on a large sample of job candidates (N=17,368), using the bogus item technique to detect faking.
Sourced from: Latest Issue of International Journal of Selection and Assessment
This research demonstrates the effect of framing on applicants’ reactions to two personnel selection methods: undergraduate grade point average and personnel interview scores. Presenting a selection situation framed positively (to accept applicants) caused applicants to rate both selection methods more favorably relative to presenting them with an identical selection situation framed negatively (to reject the remaining applicants). Framing affected reactions that emphasized distributive justice aspects of the selection situation and procedural justice aspects. The results are consistent with Prospect theory and with Fairness Heuristic theory. The paper offers a theoretical explanation for the effect of framing on applicants’ reactions to personnel selection methods, discusses the implications of this effect, and suggests directions for future research.
Sourced from: Latest Issue of International Journal of Selection and Assessment
« Previous Page
