Stubborn Reliance on Intuition and Subjectivity in Employee Selection
By Scott Highhouse. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2008
456 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: General Decision Sciences, Management Science and Operations Research, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4527517d808a4f03fa5a9ce59b9621093918a9a3
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In General Decision Sciences
- Chiara Longoni
- Jason Burton
- Mari-Klara Stein
- Tina Blegind Jensen
- Luca Cian
- Alexander Buijsrogge
- Luca Mossink
- Cade Massey
In Management Science and Operations Research
- Chiara Longoni
- Jason Burton
- Mari-Klara Stein
- Tina Blegind Jensen
- Suzette Caleo
- Luca Cian
- Alexander Buijsrogge
- Neil Anderson
In Safety Research
- Nicolas Roulin
- Luca Cian
- Alexander Buijsrogge
- Neil Anderson
- Luca Mossink
- Cade Massey
- Joseph P. Simmons
- Wouter Duyck
Citations in the corpus
- Artificial intelligence versus Maya Angelou: Experimental evidence that people cannot differentiate AI-generated from human-written poetry (2020, background): “In part driven by the belief that human errors are random, whereas algorithmic errors are systematic (Highhouse, 2008), people have shown resistance to algorithms in various domains (for a systematic literature review, see Burton et al.”
- The Construction and Contributions of "Implications for Practice": What's in Them and What Might They Offer? (2010, background): “On the one hand, mentioning contingencies might be positively regarded by practitioners, given their sensitivity to context and the “uniqueness” with which they regard their own situation (e.g., Gephart, 2004; Highhouse, 2008; Johns, 2001).”
- Artificial Intelligence in Utilitarian vs. Hedonic Contexts: The “Word-of-Machine” Effect (2020, background): “Corporate settings show similar patterns, with recruiters (Highhouse 2008) and auditors (Boatsman, Moeckel, and Pei 1997) trusting their judgment and predictions more than algorithms.”
- Algorithm aversion: people erroneously avoid algorithms after seeing them err. (2015, background): “…1986; Highhouse, 2008), the inability of algorithms to learn (Dawes, 1979), the presumed ability of human forecasters to improve through experience (Highhouse, 2008), the notion that algorithms are dehumanizing (Dawes, 1979; Grove & Meehl, 1996), the notion that algorithms cannot properly…”
- A systematic review of algorithm aversion in augmented decision making (2019, background): “…that human error is random and repairable whereas algorithmic error is systematic (Dietvorst et al., 2015; Dietvorst, Simmons, & Massey, 2016; Highhouse, 2008b), experts' domain confidence leading to underutilization of seemingly unnecessary algorithmic aids (Arkes, Dawes, & Christensen,…”
- A Dialectic Perspective on Innovation: Conflicting Demands, Multiple Pathways, and Ambidexterity (2009, background): “…there are those individuals, teams, and business units that focus more on exploring new possibilities, while others focus more on adapting and exploiting, research has not yet provided decision aids (Highhouse, 2008) to indicate the appropriate level and degree of separation for a given system.”
- Reasons for Being Selective When Choosing Personnel Selection Procedures (2010, unknown): “One way of reacting to the scientist-practitioner gap is to lament about the state of affairs and maybe even to call practitioners “stubborn” (Highhouse, 2008, p. 333).”
- Why your stigma isn't hired : a dual-process framework of interview bias (2016, background): “It has further been argued that interviewers often rely on intuitive judgments and that such a tendency is especially present with experienced interviewers (Highhouse, 2008).”
- Combatting gender discrimination: A lack of fit framework (2018, background): “Yet, decision makers in organizations still seem eager to rely on intuition when making screening decisions, rating unstructured interview techniques more favorably than their less ambiguous counterpart—the structured interview (Dana et al., 2013; Highhouse, 2008).”
- Interviewers' perceptions of impression management in employment interviews (2014, background): “This overconfidence may lead interviewers to rely on their intuition and make poor judgments (Highhouse, 2008; Highhouse, 2002; Lodato et al., 2011).”
- Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Imperfect Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them (2018, background): “…regularity, supported by decades of research, has been observed in many different domains, including forecasts of employee performance (see Highhouse, 2008), academic performance (Dawes, 1971; Dawes, 1979), prisoners’ likelihood of recidivism (Thompson, 1952; Wormith & Goldstone, 1984),…”
- Resistance to Medical Artificial Intelligence (2019, unknown): “Recruiters trust their own judgment more than the recommendations of algorithms (Highhouse 2008), and auditors tend to ignore fraud predictions made by computerized decision aids (Boatsman, Moeckel, and Pei 1997).”
- Honest and deceptive impression management in the employment interview: : Can it be detected and how does it impact evaluations? (2015, background): “This overconfidence may lead interviewers to rely on their intuition (Highhouse, 2002, 2008) because they are convinced that they can easily evaluate applicants.”