Resumes vs. application forms: Why the stubborn reliance on resumes?

Risavy, Stephen D.; Robie, Chet; Fisher, Peter A.; Rasheed, Sabah

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.884205

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(2) Anonymous screening: implement blind recruitment practices, particularly in the initial stages of the hiring process (Risavy et al, 2022). This involves removing personal information such as names from resumes to minimize unconscious bias, more specifically name bias.…”

Section: Application Of Four-mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The article examines the phenomenon of name bias in the workplace, particularly within organizational dynamics, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts. Name bias refers to the phenomenon where individuals are either unconsciously, deliberately favored, or discriminated against merely based on their names (Risavy et al, 2022). The phenomenon of associating specific traits, behaviours, or stereotypes with certain names is a cultural dynamic that reflects societal perceptions and biases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Name Bias: Application Through the 4-Step Process Using Foundations of Critical Theory in Organizational Settings

L. Morin

2024

BEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The phenomenon of name bias in the workplace has received scholarly attention, particularly within organizational dynamics, diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts. The article aims to identify the ramifications of name bias within organizational structures and how to mitigate it using the foundations of critical theory. The article provides a comprehensive overview of name perception within organizational settings, mainly focusing on the potential biases leading to unintentional or deliberate favoring of individuals in hiring decisions or discrimination based solely on their names. This research highlights the detrimental impact of name bias on organizational dynamics, proving that it hinders progress toward a more diverse, inclusive, and equitable workplace culture. The article conducts a literature review of articles in peer-reviewed journals selected from such academic resources as ABI/INFORM Collection, Business Source Complete (EBSCO Host), Google Scholar, JSTOR and ProQuest Research Library using the keywords “critical theory”, “diversity”, “equity”, “inclusivity” and “name bias”. Application of critical theory in the hiring process empowers organizations to deconstruct systemic biases, fostering a fairer, more inclusive environment for all candidates. This approach enables scrutiny of neutrality of hiring practices, exposing how seemingly objective criteria can obscure underlying biases rooted in race. Moreover, it unveils the social and cultural significance embedded in names, often intertwined with stereotypes and power dynamics. Organizations are advised to implement a four-step process: 1) raising awareness among staff involved in the hiring process about unconscious bias, including name bias, and its impact on decision-making, and the historical and social context of bias; 2) anonymous screening which is the blind recruitment practice, particularly in the initial stages of the hiring process, which involves removing personal information such as names from resumes to minimize unconscious name bias; 3) diverse hiring panels that include individuals from various racial backgrounds and give voices to marginalized groups. This can help reduce the impact of individual biases and promote a more inclusive decision-making process; 4) clear and standardized criteria for evaluating candidates to ensure that assessments are based on relevant skills, qualifications, and experience rather than subjective judgements influenced by names. The use of inclusive language in job descriptions and communications is needed to avoid terms that may be associated with certain demographic groups. The research findings can serve as a valuable resource for organizations looking for solutions to mitigate the phenomenon of name bias.

show abstract

Section: Application Of Four-mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Name Bias: Application Through the 4-Step Process Using Foundations of Critical Theory in Organizational Settings

L. Morin

2024

BEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Disappointingly, these achievements are not sufficiently translated into practice(Highhouse, 2008). Traditional, unstructured interviews and analyses of resumes and cover letters are still very popular, while more valid instruments such as cognitive ability tests remain underutilized (P. A Fisher et al, 2021;Risavy et al, 2019Risavy et al, , 2022…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Overcoming algorithm aversion in personnel selection and admissions decisions

Linde¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As psychologists we often make consequential decisions ourselves, and we help other professionals, such as HR managers and admissions officers, to make decisions. To this end, we construct instruments and provide guidelines. Take the following examples: An admissions officer uses standardized tests, interview impressions, and letters of recommendation to admit students. An organizational psychologist uses cognitive ability tests, resumes, self-report questionnaires, and assessment centers to hire new senior managers. A clinical psychologist uses standardized assessments and behavioral observations to advise whether to release prisoners on parole. In each of these situations, decision makers collect, in line with recommendations by, for example, the International Test Commission (2001, p. 104), multiple pieces of information that they combine to make predictions and decisions. In most situations, the primary goal of collecting and combining multiple pieces of information is to optimize the prediction of future human performance or behavior, resulting in the best possible decisions. For example, universities want to select students who will show the best academic performance (Kuncel & Hezlett, 2007;Zwick, 2007), and organizations want to select applicants who will perform the best on the job (Lievens et al., 2021;Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). To optimize those predictions and decisions, two important questions are:1) What information should be collected, and how?2) How should that information be combined?Many studies have been conducted to provide answers to these questions, and their results mostly provide coherent and robust conclusions (Kuncel et al., 2013;Lievens et al., 2021;Milkman et al., 2009;Sackett et al., 2022). Yet, decision makers often do not follow the recommendations from these studies and, instead, use suboptimal instruments and procedures to collect and combine information. Thus, there is a substantial science-practice gap (Highhouse, 2008). To reduce this gap, the primary aim of this thesis was to investigate how decision makers can be encouraged to use evidence-based assessment and decision-making procedures, and how that affects predictive validity.The research presented in this thesis is relevant in many contexts where information is collected and combined to make decisions. Such decisions include, among others, medical diagnoses and treatment decisions, child custody and asylum decisions, bail decisions, investment decisions, and decisions to grant patents (Grove et al., 2000;Kahneman et al., 2021). I focused on human performance prediction in hiring and admissions decisions because they represent two societally important decisions. Furthermore, archival applicant data containing various predictors and criteria were Human performance predictions are moderately valid when decision makers combine information holistically in their head (Morris et al., 2015). Yet, substantial evidence shows that much more valid performance predictions are made when information is combined algorithmically rather than h...

show abstract