Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2328294398> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 68 of
68
with 100 items per page.
- W2328294398 abstract "A number of factors have been shown to influence the perceptions of interviewers in both laboratory and field research. Recently Dipboye, Frornkin, and Wiback (1975) found that scholastic record, the applicant's sex, and the applicant's physical attractiveness were important determinants of interviewers' evaluations when both students and interviewers served as subjects. The fact that physical attractiveness was important suggests that results may depend on whether the applicant is seen. Also, both the applicant's and the interviewer's sex may confound the effects of the applicant's physical attractiveness on the interviewer's evaluation. This research sought to determine if a resume is sufficient to simulate an interview and what effect sex differences have on the evaluation of an applicant. Subjects were 120 students enrolled in psychology courses and each was given one of the following: resume, videotaped interview, or audiotaped interview. Tapes and resumes were developed for rwo applicants (one male and one female). Pretesting indicated that the stimuli were equivalent. Ten males and ten females were randomly assigned to the three conditions. The dependent variable was an over-all favorability rating of the applicant. Analysis of variance indicated that mode of presentation produced no significant differences in the perceptions of the applicants. The applicant's sex (M,.I. = 5.5221.16; Mf.,.,. = 5.88-c.90) and the subject's sex seemed to influence the favorability ratings (F = 3.80, p < .lo; F = 3.14, p < .lo, respectively). Generally males (5.86&.79)' rated more leniently than female subjects (5.5321.24). Generalizing from results of a laboratory experiment is ofren difficult even though Bernstein, Hakel, and Harlan (1975) suggest chat students generally behave In the same fashion as interviewers in employment settings. Even though pilot testing su~gested that the two applicants were comparable stimuli, further research should deterrn~ne whether like effects would be observed for different applicants. The implications of this approach for equal opportunity for employment are obvious if sex differences do operate in the perception of applicants for employment." @default.
- W2328294398 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W2328294398 creator A5010339302 @default.
- W2328294398 creator A5087817515 @default.
- W2328294398 date "1977-04-01" @default.
- W2328294398 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
- W2328294398 title "Effects of Mode of Information Presentation, Sex of Applicant, and Sex of Interviewer on Simulated Interview Decisions" @default.
- W2328294398 cites W2003247590 @default.
- W2328294398 cites W2005347750 @default.
- W2328294398 doi "https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1977.40.2.566" @default.
- W2328294398 hasPublicationYear "1977" @default.
- W2328294398 type Work @default.
- W2328294398 sameAs 2328294398 @default.
- W2328294398 citedByCount "19" @default.
- W2328294398 countsByYear W23282943982014 @default.
- W2328294398 countsByYear W23282943982022 @default.
- W2328294398 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W2328294398 hasAuthorship W2328294398A5010339302 @default.
- W2328294398 hasAuthorship W2328294398A5087817515 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C11171543 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C24845683 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C26760741 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C2776086947 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C2993202890 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C31173074 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C11171543 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C15744967 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C169760540 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C17744445 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C199539241 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C24845683 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C26760741 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C2776086947 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C2993202890 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C31173074 @default.
- W2328294398 hasConceptScore W2328294398C77805123 @default.
- W2328294398 hasLocation W23282943981 @default.
- W2328294398 hasOpenAccess W2328294398 @default.
- W2328294398 hasPrimaryLocation W23282943981 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W1964425054 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W1968060723 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W1970133551 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W1991728966 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2003247590 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2005347750 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2010309383 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2016560916 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2018084860 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2031731656 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2031976303 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2052164826 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2056688311 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2059421334 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2097225590 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2097656590 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2142760948 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2146271001 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W2150318661 @default.
- W2328294398 hasRelatedWork W99716116 @default.
- W2328294398 isParatext "false" @default.
- W2328294398 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W2328294398 magId "2328294398" @default.
- W2328294398 workType "article" @default.