Management Research News

Attractiveness and outcomes of job interviews

James Poon Teng Fat
Article information:
To cite this document:
James Poon Teng Fat, (2000),"Attractiveness and outcomes of job interviews", Management Research News, Vol. 23 Iss 1 pp.
11 - 18
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01409170010781948
Downloaded on: 23 June 2016, At: 15:00 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1983 times since 2006*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)

(2014),"Interviewers' perceptions of impression management in employment interviews", Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol.
29 Iss 2 pp. 141-163 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMP-10-2012-0295
(2001),"Improving selection interviews with structure: organisations’ use of “behavioural” interviews", Personnel Review, Vol. 30
Iss 1 pp. 81-101 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00483480110380154
(2013),"A comparative assessment of videoconference and face-to-face employment interviews", Management Decision, Vol. 51
Iss 8 pp. 1733-1752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MD-09-2012-0642

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:235719 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics
(COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 Volume 23 Number 12 2000

Biographical Note
James Poon Teng Fatt

Lecturer, Nanyang
is Attractiveness and Outcomes of
Business School, Nanyang
Technological University,
Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798.
Job Interviews
by James Poon Teng Fatt

Introduction

The attribute of attractiveness has gained considerable controversy. Numerous re-

searchers have contended that the attractiveness of an individual means that he or
she is attributed with several positive attributes such as likable, friendly, intelli-
gent, successful, and competent. Aamodt (1991) reports on a variety of studies
concerning the influence of attractiveness of job applicants on the outcome of job
interviews. This article summarises the studies on this influence and outlines a
method of investigating its effect on the outcome of job interviews.
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)

Evidences from the Literature

As early as the 1970s, researchers have discovered that the attractiveness of the in-
terviewees could result in positive outcomes of the interview process. There have
been several studies conducted that solely focused on interviewee appearance.
Dipboye, et al (1975) found that physically attractive job applicants generally
have better outcomes during the entire job application process than do their less-
attractive counterparts. Furthermore, physically attractive job applicants are
likely to have shorter interview time-frames in contrast to less-attractive counter-
parts who are more likely to be asked more questions, some of which can be more
probing and critical. They concluded that physical attractiveness can indeed posi-
tively influence the outcome of job interviews.

The influence of attractiveness alone, however, was insufficient to produce

positive job interview outcomes. This is because the job applicant who was per-
ceived as attractive by the job interviewer had a better opportunity of having a
positive interview outcome when both the interviewer and interviewee were simi-
lar. This similarity included both attractiveness and personality, with the personal-
ity factor being sometimes more influential than the attractiveness factor.
Furthermore, race and gender similarity could greatly affect the ratings by inter-
viewees. Golightly, Huffman, and Byrne (1986) discovered that interviewer-
interviewee similarity also affects other types of interviews. They discovered that
physically attractive loan applicants were more likely to be given the requested
amounts for loans. In addition, those loan applicants who were similar to their loan
officers in attitude were more likely to receive the amounts they had requested.

Dipboye, et al (1984) investigated the influence of the application on recall

information from the interview. They found that physical attractiveness, the per-
ceived level of intelligence, and the perceived positiveness of the personality of
the job applicant were more likely to influence better recall of interview informa-
tion by the interviewee. Furthermore, the recall information on the above-noted
job applicants was more detailed and recalled in shorter time, than when compared
to those job applicants who did not possess physical attractiveness, perceived high
intelligence, and perceived positive personalities.

11
 Management Research News

Gilmore, et al (1986) investigated the outcomes of job applicant processes

relative to sex, physical attractiveness, type of rater, and type of job to determine
whether or not these variables influenced job outcome decisions. They found that
physically attractive job applicants were more likely to receive more favourable
interview outcomes. There were, however, several qualifications to these find-
ings. Physically attractive female job applicants typically gained superior ratings
as compared to their less-attractive counterparts. However, for managerial posi-
tions, physically attractive females tended to receive less favourable interview rat-
ings. The researchers concluded that the appearance of the interviewee is
important to the outcome of the job interview as well as the entire employment
process unless the applicant is female, attractive, and seeking a management posi-
tion.

Cash, Gillen, and Burns (1977) investigated the physical attractiveness of

male job applicants relative to the decision making of personnel consultants. They
revealed that physically attractive male and female job applicants were more
likely to receive favourable outcomes than did their less physically attractive
counterparts during the interview process. When physically attractive male job
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)

applicants applied for those positions that were perceived by interviewers as being
traditionally masculine in nature, the applicants received more favourable out-
comes. Similarly, when physically attractive female job applicants applied for
those positions that were perceived by interviewers as being traditionally femi-
nine in nature, the applicants received more favourable outcomes.

In addition to these findings, the researchers discovered that, when the posi-
tion was gender neutral, physically attractive job applicants continue to receive
more favourable outcomes during the interview process than did their less physi-
cally attractive counterparts.

Forsythe, et al (1985) investigated physically attractiveness, style of dress,

sex of the applicant, and interview outcomes. They revealed the following trends
for the sexes:
1. Physical attractiveness gives female applicants positive outcomes dur-
ing the interview process, when compared to their less physically at-
tractive female counterparts.
2. Trendily dressed and physically attractive females tended to earn lower
interview scores than that of their physically attractive counterparts
who were more traditionally dressed.
3. Poorly dressed and physically attractive females tended to earn lower
interview scores than that of their physically attractive counterparts
who are trendily dressed.
4. Casually dressed and physically attractive males tended to earn lower
interview scores than that of their physically attractive counterparts
who were more traditionally dressed.
5. Poorly dressed and physically attractive males tended to earn lower in-
terview scores than that of their physically attractive counterparts who
were casually dressed. The researchers concluded that physical attrac-
tiveness indeed can positively influence the outcomes of the interview

12
 Volume 23 Number 12 2000

process. However, job applicants who are both physically attractive and
appropriately dressed have even better opportunity to have favourable
outcomes for the interview process.
The Halo Effect

Schuler, et al (1989) report that interviewers, particularly those who are managers,
tend to have difficulty in remaining objective and distant from the interviewee
during the interview process. This is particularly the case when the job applicant is
physically attractive, has a personality that is similar to that of the interviewer, or
is perceived as being highly intellectual. Specifically, when the interviewee is
physically attractive, the interviewer is more likely to give a favourable rating.
The interviewer who selects physical attractiveness, perceived similar personal-
ity, or perceived high intelligence in the job applicant as the reason for giving a fa-
vourable outcome is said to be applying the “Halo Effect.” When the Halo Effect
is in practice, the interviewer fails to use a comprehensive impression of the job
applicant based on knowledge, skills, abilities, and other presentations. Thus, it is
quite possible that the interviewer will select a job applicant as a future employee
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)

who may not be as qualified as was an applicant who did not possess that attribute
that was found to be desirous by the interviewer.

Baron and Byrne (1981) state that when an employer or his or her representa-
tive applies the Halo Effect, there is a strong likelihood that it affects social per-
ception. This is because, once the individual at focus has formed an overall
impression of the job applicant, he or she may interpret all of his or her traits in a
manner that is consistent with this impression. This unconscious form of bias dur-
ing the interview process can greatly influence all elements of the hiring process.
In support of this contention, Baron and Byrne (1981) note:
“For example, imagine that you are an employer considering two applicants
for a job. Your first impression of one of these persons is vary favourable,
while your impression of the other is quite neutral. Will these overall
reactions colour your judgement of the ability of the two applicants to
perform the job? There is a very good chance that they might” (p.80).
Baron and Byrne (1981) continue that the interviewer may tend to perceive
the applicant he or she likes as possessing more of the skills and abilities that are
being sought than is the case for that job applicant about whom the interviewer is
neutral - whether or not this assumption is true. The Halo Effect helps to explain
why some job applicants are given special treatment. Such an action on the part of
the interviewer arises from a simple fact: positive impressions of job applicants
lead interviewers to evaluate their individual traits and abilities in a favourable
manner. This type of bias may occur even in those situations where interviewers
are certain they are being fair and impartial.

Schuler (1984) reports that when employers or their representatives engage

in the Halo Effect, using the Contrast Effect, and Order Effect (to be discussed in
the next paragraph), or any other form of behaviour that is subjectively based to in-
fluence hiring decisions of any type, they are liable for legal action by the job ap-
plicant. This is because these behaviours do not produce hiring decisions that are
job related. As such, these decisions are not supported by any labour law or the
Civil Rights Act, a legislation determining which hiring decisions and the instru-
ments used in hiring decisions are legally correct.

13
 Management Research News

The Contrast Effect and Order Effects

The Contrast Effect is defined by Schuler (1984) as: “First, a good person looks
better in contrast to a group of average or below-average people (Contrast Effect).
An average person looks below average or poor in contrast to a group of good or
excellent people” (Schuler, 1984, p.185). Thus, when the Contrast Effect is used
by the interviewer, a job applicant who is average or less physically attractive fol-
lows another who is physically attractive, subjective decision making may ensue.
That is, the second job applicant may not fare as well as the first job applicant dur-
ing the interview process. The reverse could be true; that is, when a physically at-
tractive job applicant is interviewed before another less physically attractive job
applicant, the former may receive favourable interview outcomes.

Order Effect, as defined by Schuler (1984), occurs when job applicants are
being perceived by their respective interviewers based upon the order in which
they were interviewed. That is:

“Second, there are two important order effects - first impression and last
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)

impression. At times a first impression (Primacy Effect) is important and

lasting; the first person may become the standard used to evaluate the quality
of all the other people. But an interviewer, especially at the end of a long day
of interviewing, may be more likely to remember the last person better than
many of the other people (Recency Effect)” (Schuler, 1984, p.185).

Thus, when the Order Effect is used by the interviewer, when a job applicant
who is average or less physically attractive follows another who is physically at-
tractive, subjective decision making may ensue. Here, the second job applicant
may not fare as well as the first job applicant during the interview process. Or, the
reverse could be true.

A Model for Guiding the Interviewer

Raza and Carpenter (1987) investigated those variables that are present during hir-
ing decisions (e.g. Halo Effect, Order Effect, etc.) and provided a model for guid-
ing the interviewer and other personnel staff during actual employment
interviews. The primary rationale for this model was that interviewers generally
experience a variety of thoughts and feelings that tend to bias the interview pro-
cess. The secondary rationale is that such interview biases manifested from the
noted thought and behaviours can make the employer liable for legal action by the
job applicant. These thoughts included the job applicant’s being physically attrac-
tive and, therefore, qualified for the position; the job applicant’s being intelligent
and, therefore, qualified for the position; and the applicant’s having a positive per-
sonality and, thus, qualified for the position. These feelings include the job appli-
cant’s being “right” for the position, being “attuned to the organisational culture,”
and being “appropriately savvy.” The model that these workers provided enables
interviewers to objectively and comprehensively assess the qualifications of job
applicants. These researchers concluded that, while this model may help inter-
viewers curb some of their favourability toward the physically attractive job appli-
cant, it is impossible to totally control this behaviour. According to Schuler
(1984), there are several reasons for this, the interference of various variables (e.g.
Recency Effect, Primacy Effect, the lack of perceived personality similarity; the
lack of perceived sufficient intellectual functioning; difference in gender; differ-

14
 Volume 23 Number 12 2000

ence in age; difference in race; difference in socioeconomic class, etc.); the inter-
viewer’s disagreement with the guidelines; and the employer’s not stressing,
making known, and/or establishing policies and procedures that enforce his or her
position as regards avoiding the practice of interviewer bias.

Method for Investigating Attractiveness and Outcome of Job Interviews

In order to investigate attractiveness and outcome of job interviews, the term

physically attractive must first be defined as existing when an individual pos-
sesses the standards of beauty of the majority group, or of the interview in question
(Aamodt, 1991; Baron & Byrne, 1981; Cash1 Gillen, & Burns, 1977).

Hypothesis

The hypothesis is that the presence of physical attractiveness among job appli-
cants will result in their having more favourable outcomes, when opposed to job
applicants who are less physically attractive.
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)

Research Design

The research design will involve some female subjects classified into two catego-
ries and who then undergo job interviews for, say, the position of part-time recep-
tionist to determine whether or not interviewers will allot favourability to either
category at a differing rate.

Sample Selection

The sample will consist of some females, with half of them being classified as
physically attractive and the other half less physically attractive. To ensure that the
subjects can be classified as such, the latter subjects will all be overweight by at
least 30 pounds. The subjects will be aged 18 years and above and will be students
attending the university.

In order to screen the potential subjects for classification, initially some fe-
male students will be approached by the researcher to participate in the study. The
potential subjects will be told, for example, that the researcher is collecting weight
and height data for the University Health Centre Student Health Survey. Then,
each potential subject will be asked to provide her weight and height. The weight
and height of each potential subject will then be checked against the Standard Life
Insurance Weight and Height Guide (Baron & Byrne, 1981). Those potential sub-
jects who fail to meet the classification requirements will not be selected for the
study but they will be thanked for their time and effort. The selected subjects will
then be classified into the two equal categories. Each category will then be divided
into two groups, so that the groups will be Physically Attractive 1, Physically At-
tractive 2, Less Physically Attractive 1, and Less Physically Attractive 2.

Instrumentation

Given the absence of an available instrument that will allow the researcher to test
for job applicant favourability during the interview process, the researcher will
construct the needed instrument. The instrumentation will consist of a question-
naire having seven questions. These questions are:

15
 Management Research News

1. Are you interested in obtaining part-time employment on the university

campus as a receptionist?
2. Do you have any experience as a receptionist?
3. Have you ever answered telephones that ring at least 50 times per hour?
4. Have you ever had to route telephone calls occurring at least 50 times
per hour?
5. Have you ever had to receive customers, patients, etc. at a rate of at least
20 per hour?
6. Have you ever had to receive and route customers, patients, etc. at a rate
of at least 20 per hour?
7. How well do you feel you could perform receptionist duties?
Data Collection
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)

The subjects in each category will then be questioned by a panel of “job interview-
ers.” The categories will be run in reverse, that is, the Physically Attractive 1 and
Less Physically Attractive 1 groups will be run using the panel members. The next
day, the Physically Attractive 2 and Less Physically Attractive 2 groups will be
run against the same panel members. This reverse running of the groups is to pro-
tect against Primacy and Recency Effects.

The subjects in each category will be questioned by a panel of job interview-

ers. The members of the panel will be female students attending the university. In
the attempt to minimise against panel-member bias, the panel members will not be
told about the true purpose of the study. They will be told, as an example, that they
are performing a service for the Department of Human Resource Management at
the university, given the long-standing reductions in staff due to budgetary con-
straints. The panel members will interview the job applicants in empty class-
rooms, so as to prevent being influenced by unnecessary noise or the questions of
other students not participating in the study. The doors of the classroom will be
closed during the job interviews.

Data Analysis

The panel members will award one point for each “Yes” answer or for each answer
that is indicative of the job applicant’s being able to perform the noted duty. The
points will be totalled for each job applicant. Then each job applicant will be as-
signed a score. The total points will then be tallied for all job applicants in each
classification for the first run of the experiment. The panel members will follow
the same data collection procedures the next day with the second run of the experi-
ment.

The data will be analysed using several statistical measures, including abso-
lute frequencies, total raw scores, group total scores, group means, and group
modes. Furthermore, the total group scores, group means, and group modes will
be recorded for all groups. In addition, the data will be analysed using ANOVA to
compare intragroup and intergroup scores. Furthermore, the F test will be applied
to determine whether or not there is significant difference between the scores of

16
 Volume 23 Number 12 2000

the Physically Attractive subjects, and those of the Less Physically Attractive sub-
jects.

Expected Results and Conclusion

The expected results are difficult to conceptualise, considering the human element
and the difficulty with which human behaviour can be consistently and correctly
predicted. The findings of this study may, however, be reflective of the literature
review in several ways. First, the panel of job interviewers will be expected to be
swayed by the physical attractiveness of the job applicants. Second, since both
panel members and subjects are female, this favourability may be more intense
than if the job applicants were male students. Third, the panel of job interviewers
are expected to provide lower scores for those job applicants who are less physi-
cally attractive. Fourth, some of those subjects who are physically attractive may
not be given high scores, if panel members perceive them as not having similar
personalities or of having sufficient levels of intelligence. Fifth, some of those
subjects who are physically attractive may not receive high scores if they are not
dressed appropriately. Sixth, since the panel members may take their jobs very se-
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)

riously due to reductions in staff, they may be stricter in assigning scores to those
physically attractive applicants. Now, are not the outcomes of job interviews
highly predictable?

17
 Management Research News

References

Aamodt, Michael G. (1991). Applied Industrial/Organisational Psychology. Bel-

mont, Calif.: Wadsworth.

Baron, Robert A., & Byrne, D. (1981). Social Psychology: Understanding Human
Interaction. 3rd ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Cash, T., Gillen, B. & Burns, D. (1977). “Sexism and `Beautyism’ in Personnel
Consultants’ Decisions Making.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, pp.361-
370.

Dipboye, Robert L., Fromkin, H. & Wilback, K. (1975). “Relative Importance of

Applicant Sex, Attractiveness and Scholastic Standing in Evaluation of Job Ap-
plicant Resumes.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, pp.39-43.

Dipboye, R., Stramler, C. & Fontenell, G. (1984). “The Effects of the Application
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)

on Recall Information from the Interview.” Academy of Management Journal, 27,

pp.561-575.

Forsythe, S., Drake, M. & Cox, C. (1985). “Influence of Applicant’s Dress on In-
terviewers’ Selection Decisions.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, pp.374-
378.

Gilmore, D., Beehr, T. & Love, K. (1986). “Effects of Applicant Sex, Applicant
Physical Attractiveness, Type of Rater and Type of Job on Interview Decisions.”
Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59, pp.103-109.

Golightly, C., Huffman, D. & Byrne, D. (1986). “Liking and Loaning.” Journal of
Applied Psychology, 71, pp.421-425.

Raza, S. & Carpenter, B. (1987). “A Model of Hiring Decisions in Real Employ-

ment Interviews.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, pp.596-603.

Schuler, Randell S. (1984). Personnel and Human Resource Management. 2nd

ed. St. Paul, MN: West.

Schuler, Randell S., Beutell, N. & Youngblood, S. (1989). Effective Personnel

Management. 3rd ed. St. Paul, MN: West.

18
 This article has been cited by:

1. Rebecca Nash, George Fieldman, Trevor Hussey, Jean-Luc Lévêque, Patricia Pineau. 2006. Cosmetics: They Influence More
Than Caucasian Female Facial Attractiveness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 36:2, 493-504. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by Wilfrid Laurier University At 15:00 23 June 2016 (PT)