Banding together to avoid exploitation:Dominant (but not prestige-based) leaders motivate collective moral opposition from followers

Although dominance is a common strategy for attaining high social rank, it often entails exploitative behavior, bringing leaders into conflict with followers. Anthropological work suggests that a long evolutionary history of such conflict has set the stage for moral systems designed to reduce exploitation from powerful people. Here we establish links between dominance (and prestige) and moral leadership, reporting three studies (total n = 1246) demonstrating that, in response to dominant leaders, followers band together in collective opposition aimed at resisting, and even toppling, incumbent leaders. These studies also identify specific social psychological pathways through which dominant leaders elicit moral opposition-low levels of trust and gossip both mediated effects of leader dominance on collective opposition by followers. While dominance may allow people to rise through the ranks of a social hierarchy, the long-term durability of dominance as a leadership strategy may be undermined by collective moral opposition from followers

A New Scoring Procedure in Assessment Centers: Insights from Interaction Analysis

This paper proposes interaction analysis as an alternative scoring procedure in assessment centers (ACs). Interaction analysis allows for a more fine-grained scoring approach by which candidate behaviors are captured as they actually happen, thus avoiding judgment errors typically associated with traditional scoring procedures. We describe interaction analysis and explain how this procedure can improve the validity of ACs. In a short research example, we showcase how interaction analysis can be implemented in AC settings. Finally, we integrate our arguments in terms of three key propositions which we hope will inspire future research on more dynamic scoring procedures

Development and validation of a HEXACO situational judgment test

The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a construct-based situational judgment test of the HEXACO personality dimensions. In four studies, among applicants, employees, and Amazon Mechanical Turk participants (Ns = 72–305), we showed that it is possible to assess the six personality dimensions with a situational judgment test and that the criterion-related validity of the situational judgment test is comparable to the criterion-related validity of traditional self-reports but lower than the criterion-related validity of other-reports of personality. Test–retest coefficients (with a time interval of 2 weeks) varied between.55 and.74. Considering personality is the most commonly assessed construct in employee selection contexts (Ryan et al., 2015), this situational judgment test may provide human resources professionals with an alternative assessment tool

Applicant reactions to algorithm- versus recruiter-based evaluations of an asynchronous video interview and a personality inventory

In two studies, we examined the effects of algorithm based (vs. recruiter-based) evaluations of an asynchronous video interview and a personality inventory on applicant reactions. In line with our expectations, we found several negative applicant reactions to the use of algorithms. Specifically, in Study 1 (N = 172), informing participants that an algorithm, rather than a recruiter, had analysed their interview and personality inventory increased feelings of emotional creepiness, and reduced fairness perceptions, perceived predictive validity and feedback acceptance. In Study 2 (N = 276), we were able to replicate these effects for fairness perceptions and perceived predictive validity. Furthermore, in both studies, algorithm based evaluations negatively affected feedback acceptance, organizational attraction and job acceptance intentions through fairness perceptions. However, in contrast with our expectations, selection decision favour ability did not influence the impact of evaluation source (recruiter vs. algorithm) on applicant reactions. In Study 2, we also found some tentative evidence that applicant reactions to algorithm based evaluations are not affected by the type of information source (i.e. verbal vs. nonverbal cues) on which the algorithm is based

Exploring the application of a text-to-personality technique in job interviews

This research’s purpose was to develop a valid and transparent text-to-personality technique to fit the requirements for personnel selection assessments. In this research we developed an advanced word-counting technique, the HEXACO text-to-personality (HTTP) technique, based on prior lexical personality research to assess personality from job interviews. To evaluate the technique’s construct and criterion-related validity we conducted three studies and analysed the transcripts of asynchronous (n = 102 and 72) and face-to-face (n = 155) interviews. These studies provided four key insights. First, the HTTP technique showed small to medium correlations with self-reported and interviewer-rated personality. Second, the technique showed mixed, but generally favourable, evidence for criterion-related validity. Third, the technique produced a more construct valid personality score when the interview questions activated the predicted personality trait. Fourth, the technique’s additional features (i.e., having weighted keywords and adjusting the keywords’ weight for adjacent quantifiers) did not improve its validity; unit-weighing was approximately equally effective. Altogether, the results show that a word-count text-analysis technique can discover traces of personality in interview transcripts. Still, significant improvements are needed before these types of automatically computed text-to-personality ratings can be used to replace or supplement interviewer ratings

Why Do Situational Interviews Predict Performance? Is it Saying How You Would Behave or Knowing How You Should Behave?

Purpose: The present study examined two theoretical explanations for why situational interviews predict work-related performance, namely (a) that they are measures of interviewees’ behavioral intentions or (b) that they are measures of interviewees’ ability to correctly decipher situational demands. Design/Methodology/Approach: We tested these explanations with 101 students, who participated in a 2-day selection simulation. Findings: In line with the first explanation, there was considerable similarity between what participants said they would do and their actual behavior in corresponding work-related situations. However, the underlying postulated mechanism was not supported by the data. In line with the second explanation, participants’ ability to correctly decipher situational demands was related to performance in both the interview and work-related situations. Furthermore, the relationship between the interview and performance in the work-related situations was partially explained by this ability to decipher situational demands. Implications: Assessing interviewees’ ability to identify criteria might be of additional value for making selection decisions, particularly for jobs where it is essential to assess situational demands. Originality/Value: The present study made an effort to open the ‘black box’ of situational interview validity by examining two explanations for their validity. The results provided only moderate support for the first explanation. However, the second explanation was fully supported by these results

The signalling effects of nonconforming dress style in personnel selection contexts:do applicants’ qualifications matter?

For job applicants to achieve their goal of making a favourable impression on recruiters, they need to be responsive to the social norms that a personnel selection setting prescribes. One clear social norm in selection contexts is professional dress. Here we explore the consequences that follow from failing to conform to this normative dress code. Specifically, in two studies, we test three contrasting theoretical accounts concerning the effects of nonconformity in dress style on hirability perceptions. We found evidence that the exact impact of dress style depends on the applicant’s qualifications. Whereas low-qualified applicants were punished for dressing in a nonconforming way, high-qualified applicants were granted leeway when violating norms of attire. In Study 2 we replicated and explored three possible mediators of this effect – perceptions of warmth, competence, and power – and found some (very weak) evidence that the observed interaction effect was mediated by perceptions of power. Consistent with the notion of idiosyncrasy credits, our results indicate that highly qualified applicants enjoy greater leeway to flout social norms without facing negative consequences