Disclose or not? Effect of impression management tactics on hireability of persons with epilepsy

Abstract

SUMMARYObjective: The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of assertive impression management (IM) tactics, such as personal storytelling and self-promotion, on job interview outcomes of people with epilepsy. Specifically, the effect of IM on interviewers' subjective impressions and evaluation of hireability of job candidates with epilepsy were examined. Methods: Ninety-nine master's level graduate students majoring in business or human resources were randomly assigned to three experimental conditions to view one of three 15-min video clips of a job applicant interviewing for a technical computer sales position. The three experimental conditions were (1) job applicant who did not disclose any disability, (2) job applicant with epilepsy who did not use IM tactics, and (3) job applicant with epilepsy who used IM tactics. After watching the job interview video portraying the experimental conditions, participants were asked to rate the job applicant in terms of general impression and hireability for the described position. Results: The use of IM was found to have a significant effect on job interview outcomes (p < 0.01). Post hoc comparisons indicated that the average rating of business/human resources students on both general impression and hireability for the job applicant with epilepsy and IM condition were significantly higher than for the job applicant with epilepsy who did not use IM condition. Furthermore, mediation analysis revealed that general impression is a mediator for the relationship between IM and interview outcomes. Significance: This study demonstrates that IM has a significant and positive effect on job interview outcomes for persons with epilepsy. IM can be used as a powerful strategy for empowering people with epilepsy to combat disability stigma, and offset negative perceptions of employers about the potential of this population to be productive workers.

Impression management within the recruitment interview: Narratives of employees at a South African higher education institution

“…This aim is actuated and influenced by three main observations from the extant literature. Firstly, there is a growing body of international literature calling for focus on understanding impression management within organisational studies (Howle et al, 2014;Kacmar & Carlson, 1999;Patel et al, 2011;Schlenker, 1980;Sung et al, 2017). Secondly, calls exist with the South African IOP context to be expansive in understanding the concept of impression management (Mtshelwane et al, 2016).…”

“…The AT posits that individuals make attributions a basis of interaction and that may often result in bias (Spitzberg & Manusov, 2014). Interviews by nature can provide an opportunity through which this bias can happen (Sung et al, 2017), as they form a basis through which interviewees can express themselves to interview panels (Caruth, Caruth & Pane, 2009). Thus, the AT seeks to provide a plausible explanation of events from the lens of the individual (Merkl-Davies, Brennan & Mcleay, 2011).…”

“…However, the concern is that there are few or no processes to validate interviewees' accounts. This potentially gives rise to impression management as a concept that has been researched and debated internationally (Howle, Jackson, Conroy, & Dimmock, 2015;Kacmar & Carlson, 1999;Patel, Gali, Patel, & Parmer, 2011;Schlenker, 1980;Sung, Lin, Connor, & Chan, 2017) and recently within a South African Industrial Organisational Psychology (IOP) context (Mtshelwane et al, 2016). This study seeks to expand understanding into impression management within an IOP discipline by specifically focusing on the recruitment interview setting.…”

The moderating role of interviewer's regulatory focus in the effectiveness of impression management tactics: Regulatory fit as a source of subjective value

“…The relationship between IM tactics and interview outcomes has been a focal topic in IM research. However, previous studies have yielded inconsistent results regarding the effectiveness of assertive and defensive tactics (e.g., Chen, Huang, Huang, & Liu, ; Peeters & Lievens, ; Sung et al ., ; Van Iddekinge, McFarland, & Raymark, ), highlighting the importance of addressing the boundary conditions under which the association between IM tactics and interview outcomes is investigated. Existing research has supported the moderating role of various factors, including the applicants’ gender (Wosinska, Dabul, Whetstone‐Dion, & Cialdini, ), the interview structure and length, and the job type (Ruben, Hall, & Schmid Mast, ; Tsai, Chen, & Chiu, ).…”

“…During interviews, nearly all job applicants engage in impression management (IM) to impress recruiters and obtain their goal of employment (Bye et al, 2011;Levashina & Campion, 2007). Although many studies have demonstrated a positive association between IM tactics and interview ratings (e.g., Peck & Levashina, 2017;Proost, Schreurs, De Witte, & Derous, 2010;Sung, Lin, Connor, & Chan, 2017), the findings on the effects of IM tactics are not consistent (Chen, Yang, & Lin, 2010). To address these inconsistencies, the boundary conditions of the effects of IM tactics have been highlighted.…”