Abstract
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.
Highlights
Over the past decades, technological progress has considerably changed how organizations recruit and select applicants (Tippins and Adler, 2011; Ryan et al, 2015; Ployhart et al, 2017)
Participants were recruited via an email that was sent to all final year students and that invited them to take part in a simulated selection interview, allowing them to gain experience regarding selection procedures and to receive feedback on their performance
Concerning the comparability of the experimental conditions, the preliminary analyses revealed that participants in the three experimental groups did not differ with regard to age, sex, experience with technology-mediated interviews, body size, or weight, but that they differed with regard to their previous experience of selection interviews in general, F(2,85) = 4.60, p < 0.05, η2 = 0.10, (M = 3.20, SD = 1.88, for the FTF condition, M = 4.42, SD = 1.94, for the telephone condition, and M = 3.19, SD = 1.38, for the videoconference condition)
Summary
Technological progress has considerably changed how organizations recruit and select applicants (Tippins and Adler, 2011; Ryan et al, 2015; Ployhart et al, 2017). There is an increase in the number of interviews that are administered via the internet, but even before the COVID-19 pandemic the number of interviews that are conducted via telephone has risen compared to earlier levels from the last millennium (Amoneit et al, 2020) This increased use of technology-mediated selection interviews in addition to, or instead of, the traditional faceto-face (FTF) interviews, raises important questions concerning the comparability of the different ways in which interviews can be conducted. As a consequence of the advancement of telecommunication technology – and recently of the COVID-19 pandemic – a growing number of organizations do rely on traditional FTF interviews and make use of technology-mediated interviews These interviews can be administered via telephone or videoconference systems (Chapman et al, 2003) or they might even be conducted without an actual interviewer when organizations use asynchronous video interviewing technology. In these asynchronous video interviews, interviewees are shown the interview questions on the computer screen, record their answers with their webcam, and submit them via an online platform, so that the videotaped answers can be evaluated later (e.g., Brenner et al, 2016; Langer et al, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
