Purpose Videoconference interviews and asynchronous interviews are increasingly used to select applicants. However, recent research has found that technology-mediated interviews are less accepted by applicants compared to face-to-face (FTF) interviews. The reasons for these differences have not yet been clarified. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to take a closer look at potential reasons that have been suggested in previous research. Design/methodology/approach The present study surveyed 154 working individuals who answered questions concerning their perceptions of FTF, videoconference and asynchronous interviews in terms of perceived fairness, social presence and the potential use of impression management (IM) tactics. Furthermore, potential attitudinal and personality correlates were also measured. Findings Technology-mediated interviews were perceived as less fair than FTF interviews and this difference was stronger for asynchronous interviews than for videoconference interviews. The perceived social presence and the possible use of IM followed the same pattern. Furthermore, differences in fairness perceptions were mediated by perceived social presence and the possible use of IM tactics. Additionally, affinity for technology and core self-evaluations correlated positively with perceptions of videoconference interviews but not with those of FTF and asynchronous interviews. Originality/value This is the first study to compare fairness perceptions of FTF, videoconference and asynchronous interviews and to confirm previous assumptions that potential applicants perceive technology-mediated interviews as less favorable because of impairments in social presence and the potential use of IM.

Due to technological progress, videoconference interviews have become more and more common in personnel selection. Nevertheless, even in recent studies, interviewees received lower performance ratings in videoconference interviews than in face-to-face (FTF) interviews and interviewees held more negative perceptions of these interviews. However, the reasons for these differences are unclear. Therefore, we conducted an experiment with 114 participants to compare FTF and videoconference interviews regarding interview performance and fairness perceptions and we investigated the role of social presence, eye contact, and impression management for these differences. As in other studies, ratings of interviewees’ performance were lower in the videoconference interview. Differences in perceived social presence, perceived eye contact, and impression management contributed to these effects. Furthermore, live ratings of interviewees’ performance were higher than ratings based on recordings. Additionally, videoconference interviews induced more privacy concerns but were perceived as more flexible. Organizations should take the present results into account and should not use both types of interviews in the same selection stage.

Asynchronous video interviews are used more and more for the preselection of potential job candidates. However, recent research has shown that they are less accepted by applicants than face-to-face interviews. Our study aimed to identify ways to improve perceptions of video interviews by using explanations that emphasize standardization and flexibility. Our results showed that an explanation stressing the higher level of standardization improved fairness perceptions, whereas an explanation stressing the flexibility concerning interview scheduling improved perceptions of usability. Additionally, the improvement of fairness perceptions eventually influenced perceived organizational attractiveness. Furthermore, older participants accepted video interviews less. Practical implications and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Organizations increasingly use technology-mediated interviews. However, only limited research is available concerning the comparability of different interview media and most of the available studies stem from a time when technology-mediated interviews were less common than in the present time. In an experiment using simulated selection interviews, we compared traditional face-to-face (FTF) interviews with telephone and videoconference interviews to determine whether ratings of interviewees’ performance, their perceptions of the interview, or their strain and anxiety are affected by the type of interview. Before participating in the actual interview, participants had a more positive view of FTF interviews compared to technology-mediated interviews. However, fairness perceptions did not differ anymore after the interview. Furthermore, there were no differences between the three interview media concerning psychological and physiological indicators of strain or interview anxiety. Nevertheless, ratings of interviewees’ performance were lower in the technology-mediated interviews than in FTF interviews. Thus, differences between different interview media can still be found nowadays even though most applicants are much more familiar with technology-mediated communication than in the past. The results show that organizations should take this into account and therefore avoid using different interview media when they interview different applicants for the same job opening.

Asynchronous video interviews (AVIs) are increasingly used to preselect applicants.Previous research found that interviewees in AVIs receive better interview ratings compared to other forms of interviews. It has been suggested that this difference could be due to the preparation time given for each AVI question. A pilot study confirmed that preparation time in AVIs is indeed beneficial for interview performance. Furthermore, our main study replicated the significant effect of preparation time on interview performance and revealed that it was mediated by active response preparation, whereas no mediation effects were found for strain and for the use of impression management. Finally, preparation time had no direct effect on fairness perceptions but a positive indirect effect via honest impression management.