The Structured Employment Interview: Narrative and Quantitative Review of the Research Literature

By J. Levashina, Christopher J. Hartwell, F. Morgeson, M. Campion. 2014

446 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/eed153719fc875168ed3dd47a3c34bc334d517f6

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Combatting gender discrimination: A lack of fit framework (2018, background): “Not only are interviewers prone to see what they want to see; they also can guide the interview in a direction that allows them to continue seeing the interviewee in line with initial expectations (Levashina et al., 2014).”
New Talent Signals: Shiny New Objects or a Brave New World? (2016, background): “Technology can make interviews more efficient, standardized, and cost effective by enhancing both structure and validity (Levashina et al., 2014).”
LinkedIn as a new selection method: Psychometric properties and assessment approach (2018, background): “Our findings confirm the positive impact of standardization observed with other selection methods, like interviews (Levashina et al., 2014) or”
A survey on sentiment analysis methods, applications, and challenges (2022, background): “For example, unstructured reviews offer more opinion information than their formal counterparts (Levashina et al. 2014).”
The Principles and Limits of Algorithm-in-the-Loop Decision Making (2019, background): “This treatment adds structure to the prediction process (by prompting people to focus on the narrative pro le before considering the risk assessment’s prediction), which prior research has found improves decision making [44, 54].”
Mixed Signals: The Unintended Effects of Diversity Initiatives (2019, background): “Standardizing application and interview processes can also help eliminate disparities that arise from interviewers naturally being more comfortable with members of their own group and unintentionally asking different questions to applicants depending on their group membership (Huffcutt & Roth, 1998;”
Why your stigma isn't hired : a dual-process framework of interview bias (2016, background): “The main objective of the interview phase is to collect job-related information about the applicant (Levashina et al., 2014), which may help the interviewermore accurately answering the question “is this applicant the optimal choice to fill the vacancy?””
Honest and deceptive impression management in the employment interview: : Can it be detected and how does it impact evaluations? (2015, background): “Thus, the extent to which applicant IM represents a problem for the employment interview remains unclear, and empirical research examining this issue has been scarce, despite numerous calls (Levashina & Campion, 2006, 2007; Levashina et al., 2014; Macan, 2009; Posthuma, Morgeson, & Campion, 2002).”