Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fletcher, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Relationships Between Candidate Personality, Self-Presentation Strategies, and Interviewer Assessments in Selection Interviews: An Empirical Study

Clive Fletcher

Goldsmiths' College, University of London

Evidence suggests that selection interviewers make judgments about candidates' personalities on the basis of how they behave in interviews. The study reported here examined the relationship between the intended interview strategies of 110 students applying for university places and their scores on personality measures. Data were also collected on the impact of these self-presentation strategies on interviewers' ratings. The results indicate that interview experience is a factor in shaping candidates' behavior, and that although interviewers are influenced by self-presentation strategies, the latter do not necessarily reflect personality in a consistent way. The implications of these findings for how the selection interview should be conceptualized are discussed.

Human Relations, Vol. 43, No. 8, 739-749 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/001872679004300803
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Business CommunicationHome page
J. W. Turner and N. L. Reinsch Jr.
The Business Communicator as Presence Allocator: Multicommunicating, Equivocality, and Status at Work
Journal of Business Communication, January 1, 2007; 44(1): 36 - 58.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of ManagementHome page
L. A. McFarland, A. M. Ryan, and S. D. Kriska
Impression Management Use and Effectiveness Across Assessment Methods
Journal of Management, October 1, 2003; 29(5): 641 - 661.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of ManagementHome page
A. Kristof-Brown, M. R. Barrick, and M. Franke
Applicant Impression Management: Dispositional Influences and Consequences for Recruiter Perceptions of Fit and Similarity
Journal of Management, February 1, 2002; 28(1): 27 - 46.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
N. Anderson, J. Silvester, N. Cunningham-Snell, and E. Haddleton
Relationships Between Candidate Self-Monitoring, Perceived Personality, and Selection Interview Outcomes
Human Relations, September 1, 1999; 52(9): 1115 - 1131.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Business and Technical CommunicationHome page
S. M. RALSTON and W. G. KIRKWOOD
The Trouble with Applicant Impression Management
Journal of Business and Technical Communication, April 1, 1999; 13(2): 190 - 207.
[PDF]