Kelle Moracz. A Thesis

Transcription

1 THE IMPACT OF SELECTION PROCEDURES ON APPLICANT PERCEPTIONS OF WARMTH AND COMPETENCE Kelle Moracz A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS May 2015 Committee: Margaret Brooks, Advisor Scott Highhouse William O'Brien

2 2015 Kelle Moracz All Rights Reserved

3 ABSTRACT iii Margaret Brooks, Advisor Social psychology literature identifies dimensions that individuals form immediate judgment on: warmth and competence. This paper aims to examine how various selection procedures elicit perceptions of warmth and competence from potential employees by signaling organizational traits. Using theory and past research on applicant reactions and selection systems, this study demonstrates the relationship between organizational selection procedures and individual perceptions of organizational warmth and competence. Factorial multivariate analysis of variance testing using data collected from working adults show mixed findings suggesting that certain selection practices, such as contextualization, impact individual perceptions of an organization. Exploratory analyses indicate that individual difference variables, such as the five-factor personality model, may play a role in individual perceptions of organizations. Implications for organizational recruitment and selection systems are discussed.

4 To my mom, for always being my biggest fan, and to my dad turns out you are the world s coolest dad after all. iv

5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v I would first like to thank my advisor Maggie Brooks for her direction in this work as well as her guidance and endless support throughout my graduate career. I would also like to thank Scott Highhouse and William O Brien for their participation and instruction in this project, their contributions added greatly to the quality of the final manuscript. Finally, I would like to thank my fellow graduate students for their mentorship and encouragement throughout this project.

6 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION Applicant Perceptions 2 Employee Selection and Perceptions of Warmth and Competence... 5 Employee selection methods.. 6 Content of employee selection... 7 Context of employee selection... 8 METHOD Participants. 10 Procedure 10 Measures 11 Perceptions of warmth and competence 12 Organizational-image consciousness Need for affiliation Need cognition Five factor model of personality RESULTS Hypothesis Tests Exploratory Analyses. 16 DISCUSSION Limitations and Future Directions REFERENCES 24

7 vii APPENDIX A. MEASURES APPENDIX B. PARTICIPANT CONDITIONS.. 41

8 viii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1a Contextualized Conditions b Non-Contextualized Conditions Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrelations Summary of Exploratory Factor Analysis Results for Warmth and Competence Using Principal Components Analysis Summary of Exploratory Factor Analysis Results for Warmth and Competence After Removing Split-Loading Items Warmth and Competence Means... 35

9 1 INTRODUCTION Potential applicants are typically first exposed to an organization during the organizational recruitment and applicant attraction phase. They begin forming judgments and opinions early on, through the signals and cues they encounter in recruiting materials such as job postings, websites, and advertisements. Once potential applicants become actual applicants and enter the organizational hiring system, they encounter even more indicators of organizational values, culture, and atmosphere and continue to gather cues and signals throughout the selection process. As applicants are exposed to the organization through its employee selection policies and procedures, they have the chance to solidify judgments and come to conclusions regarding the organization. While there is a large body of literature that examines potential applicants first exposure to an organization (organizational recruitment) and connects recruitment and attraction strategies to organizational image and reputation, this is largely missing for the next step the selection process. The extant literature on applicant reactions studies individual reactions to the selection procedures, largely examining applicant reactions to contained issues, such as perceived organizational support, justice perceptions, and organizational diversity (Hausknecht, Day, & Thomas, 2004; Wayne & Casper, 2012). However most of this literature falls short of making the connection between reaction to the selection system and subsequent judgments about the organization. Before anticipating these specifics, people must form a general reaction to the organization. Therefore, the goal of the current study is to examine the relationship between the features of an organization s selection system and perceptions of the organization itself. This research has meaningful practical implications for organizations. Choosing a proper selection system has major implications, from the overall quality of employees to protecting the organization from legal suits. Further, aspects of the selection interview have been reviewed as a

10 2 recruitment device, and said to influence the outcomes and applicant attraction to the organization (Rynes, 1988). Finally, after spending time and money recruiting and evaluating potential applicants it is crucial to prevent withdrawal from the selection process. It is important to understand what type of message a selection procedure is sending and the perceptions that people are forming of an organization due to those selection procedures so that organizations can thoughtfully design or choose an employee selection system that can recruit high quality applicants and prevent withdrawal from the selection process. Taking such effects into consideration provides the opportunity to improve the effectiveness and outcomes of one of the most essential organizational systems, the employee selection system. The remainder of the manuscript is organized as follows. First, I review the extant literature on individual perceptions of organizations and then discuss applicant reactions to selection systems. Next, I outline the main aspects of selection methods and form hypotheses. The method and analyses used in the study are then described, and finally the results, implications, and limitations are discussed. Applicant Perceptions Social psychology has found extensive support (Asch, 1946; Rosenberg, Nelson, & Vivekananthan, 1968; Wojciszke, Bazinska, & Jaworksi, 1998) for forming judgment along two traits: continuums of warmth and competence. Warmth is often composed of honesty, empathy, and trustworthiness while competence includes efficacy, skill, and intelligence. These constructs have a long history of support in psychological findings as traits on which people evaluate others and have been used as the central dimensions of stereotyping groups of people in Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, and Xu s (2002) Stereotype Content Model (SCM). This social perception model uses perceived levels of warmth and competence to describe stereotypical judgment formations of

11 3 different groups and predict the emotional results of these judgments. The model predicts that being perceived as high on both warmth and competence will elicit admiration while being low on both will elicit contempt. However, most interest and research falls on the other axis of the quadrant the combination of being high on one dimension and low on the other. Research supports the SCM predictions that being perceived as high on competence and low on warmth will elicit envy while the opposite, low on competence and high on warmth, elicits paternalism or pity (Eckes, 2002). For example, Caprariello, Cuddy, and Fiske (2009) showed overall support for the SCM and its predictions by asking participants to review vignettes describing groups of unknown ethnicity who would soon be immigrating to the United States. The participants rated the groups on perceptions of warmth and competence and then the likelihood that they and others would feel the predicted emotions (admiration, envy, pity, and contempt) toward the group. As found in a multitude of research, people form judgments of others using warmth and competence warmth being a proxy for another persons intentions towards the self and competence being the capability to enact those intentions (Cuddy, Fiske, & Glick, 2008). At the root of these two dimensions are judgments of someone s intent and ability (Cuddy, Glick, & Benginger, 2011) and how this person is likely to impact the self. Peeters (2002) distinguishes between people perceived by others as other-profitable (warm) and self-profitable (competent). Those who are perceived as other-profitable are more likely to have good intentions towards those around them, where as those perceived as self-profitable are more likely to advance themselves at any cost and more likely to (intentionally or unintentionally) harm those around them. Thus, perceptions on these two dimensions highly impact interaction between people on an individual basis.

12 4 Beyond individual social interactions, the literature has shown that these traits apply to larger groups such as gender, nation, and even organizational brand (Cuddy et. al, 2011; Cuddy et al, 2009; Kervyn, Fiske, & Malone, 2012). Beginning with roots in philosophy, there is theoretical evidence for the personification of brands by consumers. The field of philosophy studies the attribution of mental states to nonhuman objects and advertisers use anthropomorphism of objects to draw in consumers (Arico, 2010; Delbaere, McQuarrie, & Phillips, 2011). Fournier (1998) also provides evidence that consumers build relationships with specific brands that look similar to the relationships they have with other people. In modern psychology, Kervyn and colleagues (2012) proposed that people perceive brands the same way that they perceive other people and therefore the same Stereotype Content Model used to organize social perception may be extended to organize brand perception. The authors developed and describe the Brands as Intentional Agents Framework, or BIAF, as an adaptation of the SCM that is specific to brands. The BIAF is based on two dimensions consistent with warmth and competence but adapted for companies rather than personalities intentions (warmth) and abilities (competence). Consistent with the SCM, the BIAF predicts that judgments of intentions and abilities will elicit four specific emotions (pity, admiration, contempt, and envy, based on the four quadrants of high and low warmth/intentions and competence/ability) and will also predict behaviors towards the corresponding brands. The framework depicts not only the dimensions and the emotions, but also labels the clusters by location on the dimensions: popular brands (high intentions, high ability), envied brands (low intentions, high ability), paternalized brands (high intention, low ability), and troubled brands (low intentions, low ability). With both individuals and organizations, higher perceptions of both

13 5 dimensions (warmth/intentions and competence/ability) are associated with more positive judgments and reactions. The reviewed research and theory provide support for the prediction that the features of an organization will impact peoples perception of the warmth and competence of that organization. Similar to the use of the Stereotype Content Model to explain the formation of judgments and opinions about brands, people should form judgments of the perceived levels of the warmth and the competence of an organization. Employee Selection and Perceptions of Warmth and Competence Organizations use selection procedures to assess and screen out applicants, and most research on interviews and other selection methods revolves around this purpose. However, Rynes (1988) argues that selection policies and procedures also serve as a means for applicants to assess the organization and, by attracting applicants and influencing their job choice, thus impacts recruitment. Keeping in mind that the selection process is two sided and that applicants are also evaluating organizations as a potential place to work, the selection procedures and interactions are critical because they act as cues that the applicants can use to form an impression of the organization. Cable and Turban (2003) examined the relationship between organization reputation and organizational outcomes such as job pursuit intentions. The authors found that this relationship was supported, whereby organization reputation positively predicted the perceptions of people looking for work (job seekers). Subsequently, job seeker perceptions of the organization were positively related to evaluations of job attributes, which predicted job pursuit intentions. As this research has shown, job seekers use organizational reputation as signals about job attributes during the early stages of recruitment. Therefore it is reasonable to predict that applicants will continue in this fashion and use characteristics of the selection

14 6 process to form judgments about the organization. One theoretical perspective that can consistently explain the influence of certain selection procedures on potential employee or applicant perceptions of the organization is signaling theory. Signaling theory is primarily concerned with the exchange of information in the case where each member of the exchange holds different information (Connelly, Certo, Ireland, & Reutzel, 2011). Each member of the exchange can decide what information they want to share and then how to communicate (or signal) it. When used in organizational psychology signaling theory refers to the idea that, because they do not have complete information about it, people outside the organization use whatever information they do have as signals. To potential members of the organization, these signals serve as information about working conditions and important cues about what it would be like to work in that organization (Greening & Turban, 2000). While there are numerous aspects of the selection process that can act as signals to applicants, two that are particularly salient are the selection method (e.g., interview, test) that is used and the content (e.g., knowledge, skills or traits) that selection method is evaluating. Employee selection methods. Method of selection refers to the means by which an employer gathers further information from an applicant (such as using a pre-employment interview or by administering a written questionnaire) and utilizes such information as a decision aid in the hiring process. Consistently and to date, pre-employment interviews are one of the most frequently used selection methods to assess applicants or job candidates (Ryan, McFarland, & Baron, 1999). Research has shown that interviews are also one of the most preferred selection methods by applicants and are perceived as more fair and favorable than other methods (Anderson, Salgado, & Hülsheger, 2010; Hausknecht et. al, 2004). These perceptions of interviews tie in with the descriptions of the dimension of perceived warmth, i.e. honest, fair

15 (Cuddy, et. al, 2008). Research has shown that people, even clinical experts, have an aversion to mechanical prediction, or the use of formulas, equations, or other objective criteria to make predictions about individual people (Grove & Meehl, 1996) Personal interviews and holistic integration of information are seen as more personal and less cold than mechanical prediction, also suggesting that interviews may signal the warmth dimension (Grove & Meehl, 1996). Alternatively, using objective measures such as formal tests or questionnaires measuring applicant cognitive ability or knowledge significantly impacts applicant response to the selection process, the job, and the organization regardless of score on such tests. Research has shown that the increased face validity and perceived fairness of cognitive ability testing is related to applicant satisfaction with the selection process (Macon, Avedon, Paese, & Smith, 1994). Thus, although there is slightly less theoretical basis for predictions regarding perceptions of employment testing than interviews, an organization that uses this method in employee selection may be evaluated as more competent than an organization that does not. In evaluating perceptions of warmth and competence selection methods like personal interviews are hypothesized to be perceived as more warm, whereas alternative methods like applicant testing are hypothesized to be perceived as more competent. Hypothesis 1. Employment interviews will be positively related to perceptions of the organization s warmth. Hypothesis 2. Applicant testing will be positively related to perceptions of the organization s competence. 7 Content of employee selection. The content of selection refers to the topics by which an employer assesses an applicant, e.g. technical skills or job experience. While employers may evaluate applicants on many types of content during the selection process, cognitive abilities (IQ) and personality are the most widely used today both in practice and research (Behling, 1998;

16 8 Rosse, Miller, & Barnes, 1991; Ree, & Earles, 1994). Most research in the area of applicant reactions to selection methods investigates which selection method or what content appears most favorable, face valid, job related, or accurate to applicants; there exists a gap in the research concerning the mechanisms that cause such perceptions in applicants (Smither, Reilly, Millsap, Pearlman, & Stoffey, 1993; Kluger, & Rothstein, 1993; Macan et. al, 1994). This study can also contribute to the existing literature by using applicant perceptions to begin to research the mechanisms that may lead applicants to rate one method as more favorable or valid than another. Similar to method of selection, the content of the selection procedure should also relate to perceptions of warmth and competence. Specifically, due to the theoretical overlap between the aspects of warmth (honesty, trustworthiness, empathy) and attributes of personality, evaluations based on personality should be perceived as warm. Equivalently, due to the pervasive similarity between competency (levels of efficacy, skill, intelligence, ability) and cognitive ability, evaluations based on cognitive ability should be perceived as competent. Cognitive ability and job performance/job skill have been highly researched and repeatedly shown to be highly related (Hunter, 1986; Schmidt, 2002; Murphy, 1989). Given the close relationship between the two constructs, this study will look at job knowledge rather than cognitive ability, for ease of translation into the interview format and face validity of the selection process. Hypothesis 3. Employee selection based on personality assessment will be positively related to perceptions of the organization s warmth. Hypothesis 4. Employee selection based on job knowledge assessment will be positively related to perceptions of the organization s competence. Context of employee selection. The context of selection refers to the specificity of the selection measures, and whether the selection procedures intend to gauge general measures of the applicant (such as general knowledge) or job-specific (such as job knowledge). Previous research

17 9 has shown that participants view job-specific selection methods such as concrete cognitive ability tests to be more predictive and face valid than selection methods that are more abstract, such as biodata (Smither et. al, 1993). Assessing personality also is highly influenced by the context of the measure. Research has shown that contextualized measures of personality, that is, measures that are framed in the context of the outcome of interest, are more valid and stronger predictors of workplace outcomes (Robie, Schmit, Ryan, & Zickar, 2000). Bing, Whanger, Davison, and VanHook (2004) show that using situation specific personality measures reduce error and increase validity by providing respondents with a frame of reference for the items. Thus, by providing a frame of reference for personality and for knowledge questions included in a selection tool, job-specific measures are predicted to be perceived as more competent. Hypothesis 5. Employee selection based on job-specific measures will be positively related to perceptions of the organization s competence. The extant literature on applicant reactions looks at reactions to a particular selection method (face validity, predictive validity, usefulness, etc.) as well as how experiences with these selection tests might influence peoples attitude toward an organization (attraction, intention to apply, test performance) (Hausknecth et. al, 2004, Ryan & Ployhart, 2000). However, the missing link here is explaining why applicants may be attracted to an organization after experiences such as the selection process. What does the selection process indicate to a person? This study is unique in examining the immediate reaction to the organization as a whole, and specifically looking at how people see an organization that may lead them to be more or less attracted to it or attracted to working there. By communicating that they value warmth (via the use of personal interviews or personality testing) or competence (applicant questionnaires or job knowledge testing) organizations should be seen as possessing those traits.

18 10 METHOD Participants Participants for this study were obtained using the Amazon service of Mechanical Turk (MTurk), in which members of the website choose to participate in research in exchange for a small monetary compensation. Research has shown that participants of research using MTurk are at least as diverse and are more representative than other samples (Buhrmester, Kwang, & Gosling, 2011). Participants were at least eighteen years of age and citizens of the U. S. Data were removed based on quality checks and manipulation checks. Fourteen participants were excluded from the analyses because they failed at least one of the four quality check items. Thirty-nine participants were excluded from the analyses because they failed the method manipulation check. Data were removed based on this manipulation check and not the other two because of problems with the manipulation check questions. The final sample size was 238 participants, after cleaning the data for missing data and the described quality and manipulation checks. The sample was mostly White (83%), over half male (59.2%), and had an average age of The majority reported being employed full-time (66%). Procedure Participants were recruited by posting an offer on Amazon s MTurk service to respond to a hypothetical scenario and answer several questionnaires in exchange for monetary compensation ($0.75 each). Respondents were members of the MTurk service and were paid through their worker account. A hyperlink led those who responded to the online offer to the survey (located on Qualtrics.com) where they found the informed consent. After providing consent, participants responded to questionnaires assessing individual differences (desire for approval, desire for status, need for cognition, need for affiliation, social

19 11 adjustment, value expression, and the big five). Within this section, the measures were assessed in random order. Participants were randomly assigned to one of eight conditions in a 2 (method; interview or testing) by 2 (content; personality or job knowledge) by 2 (context; job-specific or general) between subjects design. Next, participants were given instructions and received a hypothetical scenario based on their condition assignment. A full example of one condition is provided in Appendix B. Participants were shown a sample document from a selection procedure and subsequently asked to respond to several measures regarding their perceptions of the organization. Example items from each condition are included in Tables 1a and 1b. Quality checks were used throughout the survey, in which participants were instructed to respond with a particular response (e.g. Please respond Strongly Disagree to this item. ). Comprehension checks were used toward the end of the study in order to ascertain whether participants recognized which type of selection methods were being used in the scenario. Comprehension check items asked participants what type of selection methods the company uses (e.g. interviewing or applicant testing), what the company tries to measure (personality or job knowledge), and what topic the company asked about (job-specific or general). After completing the survey, participants were provided with a code to confirm the completion of the survey and obtained their payment. Measures Participants in this study were asked to complete items regarding perceptions of warmth and competence, self-presentation measures, organizational image consciousness, need for affiliation, need for cognition, and the five factor model of personality traits (The Big Five). Participants were also asked to provide basic demographic data, such as age, sex, race, and work hours.

20 12 Perceptions of warmth and competence. Participant perceptions of warmth and competence were measured using Cuddy, Fiske, and Glick s (2004) method of using a number of filler traits within which indicators of the traits of interest will be embedded. Cuddy and colleagues used twelve filler traits along with four indicators of warmth and four indicators of competence to assess twenty traits. Aaker, Vohs, & Mogliner (2010) used a very similar method for measuring warmth and competence, and the additional indicators used by Aaker and colleagues will be used to supplement the measure by Cuddy and colleagues. The measure administered to participants included twelve indicators of the traits of interest; warmth (warm, kind, generous, good-natured, sincere, trustworthy; analysis revealed Cronbach s α =.93) and competence (competent, effective, efficient, capable, organized, skillful; analysis revealed Cronbach s α =.95), and eight fillers; totaling twenty items. Refer to Appendix A for all measures. Organizational-image consciousness. Highhouse, Thornbury, and Little (2007) proposed the construct of social-identity consciousness, now referred to as organizational-image consciousness. This construct was measured using the ten-item scale developed by Highhouse and colleagues, which assesses an interest in working for an impressive company (value expression) and the interest in working for a respectable company (social adjustment). Reliability analysis on the data collected in this study showed Cronbach s α =.84 and.7, respectively. Need for affiliation. Need for affiliation was measured using Tsai and Yang s (2010) modified version of the five-item scale by Steer and Braunstein (1976). Tsai and Yang (2010) extended the original scale by adding two items and creating a seven-item scale. Reliability analysis on the data collected in this study showed Cronbach s α =.53.

21 13 Need for cognition. Need for cognition was assessed using the abbreviated eighteenitem measure developed by Cacioppo, Petty, and Kao (1984). This scale contains eighteen items that are designed to capture the extent to which a respondent prefers activities that require effortful cognitive processes as a measure of individual differences. Reliability analysis on the data collected in this study showed Cronbach s α =.94. Five factor model of personality. The MiniIPIP was included in the survey, a twenty item short form of the fifty-item International Personality Item Pool Five Factor Model (Goldberg, 1999). This measure provides reliability almost as good as the fifty-item measure (the five Cronbach s Alphas range from.75 to.88), and, in this case, the brevity of the measure outweighs the sacrifice in reliability due to the number of items already included in the study.

22 14 RESULTS A principal components analysis (PCA) was used to examine the warmth and competence scales and verify that the data loaded on two factors. The factor analysis confirmed two factors with eigenvalues over 1. The two factors explained 77.8% of the variance, and the scree plot began an elbow at the second factor, again indicating two factors (Cattell, 1966). These results correspond with the findings of Cuddy et. al (2004), who applied a PCA to their measure of warmth and competence and also found two trait factors. Reliability analysis showed that the original warmth scale was highly reliable (α=.93) and did not improve with any item removed (α=.91 to α=.93). Reliability analysis showed that the original competence scale was also highly reliable (α=.95) and did not improve with any item removed (α=.93 to α=.95). Two variables were removed from the warmth scale (trustworthy and sincere) due to split loadings (loading above.4 on the second factor). Reliability of the final warmth scale changed very little (α=.92). Table 2 provides information on the means, standard deviations, and inter-correlations of all variables collected in the study. Table 3 provides the factor analysis results using the original scales and Table 4 provides the factor analysis results with the reduced scales. Hypotheses Tests It was proposed that the type of selection method used, employment interview versus employment testing, would predict perceptions of organizational warmth and competence. Specifically, hypotheses 1 and 2 stated that using an employment interview would be positively related to perceptions of organizational warmth, while using employment testing would be positively related to perceptions of organizational competence. However, multivariate tests show that there was not a statistically significant difference in warmth or competence based on method of selection, F (2, 224) =1.99, p=.14; Wilk s λ=.985, partial η 2 =.018. The results failed to

23 15 provide support for a relationship between method of selection and perceptions of warmth and competence; thus, hypotheses 1 and 2 were not supported. The mean levels of warmth and the mean levels of competence from each condition are provided in Table 5. Hypotheses 3 and 4 proposed that the content of the selection system would be related to perceptions of organizational warmth and competence. Participants who viewed a selection system that evaluated personality were hypothesized to perceive the organization as higher in warmth than were participants who viewed a selection system assessing knowledge. Participants who viewed a selection system that evaluated knowledge were hypothesized to perceive the organization as higher in competence than were participants who viewed a selection system assessing personality. Multivariate tests showed there was a statistically significant difference in overall organizational perceptions based on selection content (personality or knowledge), F(2, 224) =3.62, p=.03; Wilk s λ=.969, partial η 2 =.031. However, tests of between subject effects fail to show a significant effect of selection content on warmth (F(1, 225) = 3.30; p=.07; partial η 2 =.014) or on competence (F(1,225) =.241; p=.62; partial η 2 =.001). This indicates that perceptions of organizational warmth and competence were not significantly related to selection content and hypotheses 3 and 4 were not supported. Hypotheses 5 proposed that the context of the selection method, general versus jobspecific, would predict perceptions of organizational competence. Specifically, job-specific measures of either personality or knowledge were hypothesized to predict perceptions of organizational competence. Multivariate tests showed there was a statistically significant difference in overall organizational perceptions based on selection topic (general or job-specific) (F(2, 224) =4.32, p=.01; Wilk s λ=.963, partial η 2 =.014); indicating that perceptions of the organization were dependent on the specificity level that was assessed in the selection process.

24 16 Tests of between-subjects effects indicate that perception of competence was significantly related to topic of selection method (F(1, 225) = 7.56; p=.01; partial η 2 =.033), such that selection measures that were job-specific elicited significantly higher reported perceptions of competence than selection measures that were general. Thus, Hypothesis 5 was supported. There were no statistically significant interaction effects between the predictor variables. Analyses were conducted to further investigate the relationship between contextualization and perceptions of competence. Two independent samples T-test were conducted to examine perceptions of competence in relation to content of organizational selection (assessment of personality or assessment of knowledge). Results show that perceptions of competence were not significantly different between general (M=5.1, SD = 1.4) and job-specific (M=5.3, SD=1.1) selection tools for participants in the personality conditions (t=-1.0, p=.32, d=-.18). Perceptions of competence were only significantly different between general (M=4.8, SD=1.4) and job-specific (M=5.5, SD=1.2) selection tools for participants in the knowledge conditions (t=-2.9, p=.005, d=-.5). These results indicate that contextualized knowledge selection tools (e.g. job knowledge questions), and not contextualized personality selection tools, were the driving force behind the finding that contextualization elicited perceptions of competence. Exploratory Analyses Post hoc tests were performed to explore possible relationships between individual differences (need for affiliation, need for cognition, and organizational image consciousness) and the outcome variables, perceptions of organizational warmth and competence. Simple linear regression was used to test predictions of perceptions of warmth and competence based on individual difference variables. Regression analysis showed that organizational image consciousness (social adjustment (R 2 =.06, F(1,231)=13.89, P<.05) and value expression (R 2 =.12,

25 17 F(1,233)=31.10, p<.05)), need for affiliation (R 2 =.04, F(1,231)=9.34, P<.05), and the personality factors extraversion (R 2 =.06, F(1,231)=15.38, P<.05), agreeableness (R 2 =.07, F(1,230)=18.31, P<.05), and neuroticism (R 2 =.04, F(1,233)=10.17, P<.05) all predicted perceptions of organizational warmth. Need for cognition was not related to perceptions of organizational warmth. Organizational image consciousness (social adjustment (R 2 =.02, F(1,233)=5.7, P<.05) and value expression (R 2 =.11, F(1,235)=29.25, P<.05)), need for affiliation (R 2 =.07, F(1,233)=17.28, P<.05), and the personality factors agreeableness (R 2 =.07, F(1,232)=16.04, P<.05), and neuroticism (R 2 =.04, F(1,235)=8.56, P<.05) all predicted perceptions of organizational competence. Extraversion and need for cognition were not related to perceptions of organizational competence.

26 18 DISCUSSION The primary purpose of the current study was to examine the impact of particular selection procedures on peoples perceptions of organizational warmth and competence. Based on findings from the applicant reaction and social psychology literature, it was expected that different features of a selection system would elicit different perceptions of organizations. This idea was tested using a web-based sample of working adults in the current study. Mixed results suggest that certain features of a selection system may affect an individual s perceptions of an organization and more research is needed. Consistent with research differentiating contextualized measures (vs. non-contextualized) as more valid and stronger predictors (Robie et. al, 2000; Bing et. al, 2004) contextualized measures ( e.g. job knowledge as opposed to general knowledge) resulted in significantly higher perceptions of the organization as competent (H5). These results demonstrate that using knowledge questions specific to the job in an organization s selection process are associated with higher perceived organizational competence at the individual level. Further analysis revealed that job-knowledge measures were the driving force behind increased perceptions of organizational competence, over and above job-specific personality measures. This finding has implications for the employee selection process. General cognitive ability has been largely accepted as a primary measure of employee performance and thus employee selection for a significant time (Ree et. al, 1994). However, using more specialized measures of job knowledge over non-contextualized measures of general cognitive ability elicits significantly higher perceptions of organizational competence. As the selection system plays a role in employee recruitment (Rynes, 1988), utilizing selection processes that most accurately convey organizational characteristics is crucial to attracting high quality applicants who are less

27 19 likely to leave the organization. Future research should focus on the contextualization of job knowledge, and perhaps cognitive ability, selection assessments in regards to application perceptions of the organization. Based on findings from the applicant reactions literature, it was expected that selection interviews would be related to individual perceptions of organizational warmth (H1) and selection tests would be related to perceptions of competence (H2). This relationship was not found in the sample tested here. Of the possible explanations for this lack of a relationship, the method used in the current study is a likely reason. Participants were recruited and completed all of the steps in an online format and within a hypothetical scenario. This isolation may not have lent itself to conveying the warmth of a personal interview. Attempts were made to communicate the unique aspects of an interview as much as possible by using the online communication tool Skype to help indicate personal interaction in the interview scenario. However, the questions that were to be asked in the interview also needed to be provided. Providing the list of questions, by nature, looks very similar to the testing scenario and may have made it difficult to differentiate between an interview scenario and a testing scenario. If a more complex method that included interpersonal contact or actual Skype interaction were to be used in future, a relationship between selection interviews and perceptions of organizational warmth is more likely to be found. The content of the selection process was expected to be related to individual perceptions of warmth and competence; that is, selecting based on personality was hypothesized to lead to perceptions of warmth while selecting based on job knowledge was hypothesized to lead to perceptions of competence (H3 and H4). Results showed that there was a difference in overall organizational perceptions based on selection content (personality or job knowledge). Predictions

28 20 of warmth and competence were both in the expected directions and selection procedures assessing personality were close to predicting warmth; however hypotheses three and four were not supported. A possible explanation for this is that the scenario involved a hypothetical job that was described in little detail to participants. Therefore, none of the participants were highly familiar with the requirements of the job. However, future studies should use more detailed methods to investigate the impact that the content of a selection tool has on application perceptions of the organization. Exploratory relationships were examined between organizational image consciousness, need for affiliation, need for cognition, the big five personality factors and perceptions of organizational warmth and competence. Due to want of theoretical justification, no specific hypotheses were made for these relationships; analyses were run to see if different individual differences predicted organizational warmth and competence. A number of individual differences were significantly related to perceptions of warmth and perceptions of competence though many of the same individual differences were related to both perceptions of warmth and perceptions of competence (organizational image consciousness, need for affiliation, and several personality factors), perhaps due to the correlation between warmth and competence (r=.59). However, the R-squared values indicate quite low levels of explained variance in the outcomes (perceptions of warmth and competence) the highest being 12% and others as low as 2%. So, while the predictive values reached statistical significance, the meaningfulness of these overlapping predictors is questionable. The measures of warmth and competence used in this study were based on limited past research. Creating different measures of the dimensions is likely to tease apart unique predictors in future research. These exploratory findings suggest that

29 21 better understanding individual differences in the applicant pool can help researchers and organizations better predict how individuals will perceive an organization. On a larger scale, one final consideration for the unsupported hypotheses in this study is the choice to measure the warmth and competence of an organization. Due to these dimensions typically being applied on an individual basis (as opposed to an organization), as well as the above-mentioned issues with the measures themselves, participants may have had difficulty scoring the organization on these qualities. Despite the theoretical support that exists for those two dimensions, other individual level reactions or opinions could be assessed. Specifically, one option would be to adapt the Brands as Intentional Agents Framework (BIAF, Kervyn et. al, 2012) from the advertising field and measure the dimensions included in that model: intentions and abilities. The BIAF model grew from the Stereotype Content Model (SCM, reviewed earlier), which predicts that specific combinations of judgments of warmth and competence will elicit certain emotions in the individual forming a judgment. For instance, someone perceived as high on warmth but low on competence is predicted to elicit pity or paternalism (Fiske, Cuddy, & Glick, 2007). The BIAF model uses this basis in social-perception psychology to predict brand perception and consumer behavior (Kervyn et. al, 2012). The authors describe intentions and abilities as warmth and competence for corporate entities; such that they measure perceived intentions (just like warmth) and ability to enact those intentions (just like competence). The BIAF model also predict emotions elicited based on these perceptions, which map on to the predicted emotions in the SCM, such that a brand that is perceived as high on intentions but low on ability is predicted to elicit pity. The BIAF model predicts not only emotions elicited by judgments of intentions (warmth) and abilities (competence) but also behavior toward the organizational or brand. The authors use the model to predict consumers purchase intent and

30 22 brand loyalty. The constructs in the BIAF model may be used as an alternative to warmth and competence in future research. Intentions and ability, with their emphasis on corporate entities, may be more intuitive to participants when responding to questions regarding perceptions of an organization. Although previous research has examined applicant reactions to selection procedures in and of themselves, to the best of the author s knowledge there is currently no research examining how selection procedures impact applicant perceptions of organizational characteristics. This study begins to address that gap in the literature by manipulating key features of a selection procedure and measuring subsequent individual perceptions of warmth and competence. Limitations and Future Directions As every study design has advantages and disadvantages, the current study has several potential limitations. As mentioned, a large number of participants had difficulty identifying the type of selection system they had seen, based on the manipulation checks included in the study. This may be addressed with alternative designs, such as in depth laboratory research, in which the selection process could be more completely simulated. Future research might also use a sample of actual applicants to one organization, where the participants are all interacting with the same organization and share a knowledge base. This will allow for more detailed manipulations of the selection scenarios and participant conditions. Another important future direction is to examine warmth and competence amongst other constructs to identify the most appropriate types of outcome measure. For example, it might add value to include intentions and abilities from advertising research. These constructs were developed specific to organizations and may be more easily identified by participants.

31 23 The current study provides a new look into an unexamined area in which a person s experience with an organization s selection system influences their subsequent perceptions of that organization. This research should be applied to other types of organizational systems besides the selection system. Future research may examine what type of signals various recruitment strategies, such as recruitment sources (internet, newspaper, job fairs) and type of applicant being recruited (entry-level, semi-professional, professional), send to people and whether they elicit perceptions of warmth and competence (or intentions and abilities). Similarly, various types of onboarding techniques may be examined. For instance, it may be that formal and structured onboarding tactics communicate more competence while collective and investiture style onboarding communicates more warmth (described by Van Maan and Schein, 1979). Although selection systems offer some of the earliest pieces of information from which to form organizational perceptions, human resource and other organizational policies are also signals applicants might use to form organizational perceptions.

32 24 REFERENCES Aaker, J., Vohs, K. D., & Mogilner, C. (2010). Nonprofits are seen as warm and for profits as competent: Firm stereotypes matter. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), Anderson, N., Salgado, J. F., & Hülsheger, U. R. (2010). Applicant Reactions in Selection: Comprehensive meta analysis into reaction generalization versus situational specificity. International Journal of Selection and Assessment,18(3), Arico, A. (2010). Folk psychology, consciousness, and context effects. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 1(3), Asch, S.E. (1946) Forming impressions of personality. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 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(6), Behling, O. (1998). Employee selection: Will intelligence and conscientiousness do the job? The Academy of Management Executive, 12(1), Bing, M.N., Whanger, J.C., Davison, H.K., & VanHook, J.B. (2004). Incremental validity of the frame-of-reference effect in personality scale scores: A replication and extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon's Mechanical Turk A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data?. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3-5.

33 25 Cable, D., Turban, D., (2003). The value of organizational reputation in the recruitment context: A brand-equity perspective. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33 (11), Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 197. Caprariello, P. A., Cuddy, A. J., & Fiske, S. T. (2009). Social structure shapes cultural stereotypes and emotions: A causal test of the stereotype content model. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12(2), Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), Cattell, R. B., & Eber, H. W. (1972). The sixteen personality factor questionnaire (16PF). Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Champaign, Illinois, USA. Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), Cuddy, A.J., Fiske, S.T., & Glick, P. (2004). When professionals become mothers, warmth doesn t cut the ice. Journal of Social Issues, 60(4), Cuddy, A. J., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Advances in experimental social psychology, 40, Cuddy, A. J., Fiske, S. T., Kwan, V. S., Glick, P., Demoulin, S., Leyens, J. P.,... & Ziegler, R. (2009). Stereotype content model across cultures: Towards universal similarities and some differences. British Journal of Social Psychology, 48(1), 1-33.

34 26 Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Beninger, A. (2011). The dynamics of warmth and competence judgments, and their outcomes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, Delbaere, M., McQuarrie, E., Phillips, B., (2011). Personification in advertising: Using a visual metaphor to trigger anthropomorphism. Journal of Advertising, 40 (1), Eckes, T. (2002). Paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes: Testing predictions from the stereotype content model. Sex Roles, 47(3-4), Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., & Glick, P. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in cognitive sciences, 11(2), Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of personality and soci al psychology, 82(6), 878. Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of consumer research, 24(4), Goldberg, L.R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality Psychology in Europe, 7, Greening, D. W., & Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business & Society,39(3), Grove, W.M., & Meehl, P.E., (1996). Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2,