Distinction Bias in Applicant Reactions to Using Diversity Information in Selection

Abstract

Two studies investigated applicant reactions to alternative methods of incorporating diversity in employee selection decisions. Of particular interest was the hypothesized interaction between specific approach to incorporating diversity in the selection policy (holistic vs mechanical) and mode of receiving information about this approach (viewing policies in isolation vs viewing policies simultaneously). Results indicate preference for holistic approaches to incorporating diversity in selection. The magnitude of the preference was much greater when participants evaluated both approaches simultaneously. Results are consistent with the distinction bias, which suggests that people differentiate between options more when they consider them simultaneously than when they view them separately. Findings have implications for applicant reactions research, human resource decision making, and policy formation.

Applicant Perspectives in Selection: Going beyond preference reactions

“…Applicant reactions research might predominantly be associated with studies investigating applicants' attitudes, affective reactions, and cognitions toward traditional selection procedures. The research field does, however, cover a far wider area of research, including reactions to recruitment activities and HR policies (Carless & Wintle, 2007;McNab & Johnston, 2002), perceptions of selection procedures involving new technology (Bauer et al, , 2004, reactions to diversity practices (Williamson, Slay, Shapiro, & Shivers-Blackwell, 2008;Brooks, Guidroz, & Chakrabarti, 2009) and affirmative action plans (Cropanzano et al, 2005;Slaughter, Bulger, & Bachiochi, 2005;Slaughter, Sinar, & Bachiochi, 2002), and reactions to practices meant to reduce faking behavior (McFarland, 2003).…”

Reacting to Applicant Perspectives Research: What's next?

“…The six articles that comprise the International Journal of Selection and Assessment special issue are a diverse lot, focusing on different aspects of applicant perspectives in selection. Truxillo, Bodner, Bertolino, Bauer, and Yonce (2009) offer a meta-analysis of explanations on applicant reactions; Anseel andLievens (2009), Brooks, Guidroz, andChakrabarti (2009), and Sieverding (2009) report the results of original empirical investigations; and Ford, Truxillo, and Bauer (2009) and Marcus (2009) offer two different theoretical models.…”

“…The next set of articles (Anseel & Lievens, 2009;Brooks et al, 2009;Truxillo et al, 2009) focus on the broad theme of the kinds of information applicants get, how they get it, and how they react to it. The research need here is for greater attention to the characteristics of the information (e.g., specificity, source, timing).…”

“…The final theme concerns how context might shape applicant reactions. This is addressed directly by Ford and colleagues and indirectly in some of the other articles (Brooks et al, 2009;Marcus, 2009). We agree with Ford and colleagues that it is important to consider how internal vs external contexts differ and the implications of these differences.…”

Employers' recruitment of disadvantaged groups: exploring the effect of active labour market programme agencies as labour market intermediaries

“…Indeed there is an overt inconsistency between employers' claims to be positively disposed to employing disabled people and low employment rates for this group (Burke et al, 2013). Additionally, disadvantaged candidates who meet employers' suitability criteria may still be disproportionately affected by subjective acceptability criteria, which can amplify minor differences and signals (Brooks et al, 2009).…”