Effect of camera placement and interviewer's gender on a candidate's perceived employment suitability
Asynchronous video interviewing is increasingly used in personnel selection, but research on it is lagging. McColl and Michelotti (2019) found that candidates who placed their camera below eye level caused recruiters to feel “looked down” upon. Additionally, research shows that gestures are es...
Saved in:
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Other Authors: | |
Format: | Final Year Project |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Nanyang Technological University
2022
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10356/156435 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Nanyang Technological University |
Language: | English |
Summary: | Asynchronous video interviewing is increasingly used in personnel selection, but research on
it is lagging. McColl and Michelotti (2019) found that candidates who placed their camera
below eye level caused recruiters to feel “looked down” upon. Additionally, research shows
that gestures are essential for making personality attributions, which may not be seen when
the camera is near to the candidate. This paper investigates the effect of camera placement on
interview ratings, hypothesising that (1) ratings will be poorer when the camera is below eye
level than when at eye level, (2) ratings will differ depending on whether the camera is far or
near, and (3) ratings will be even poorer when the camera is below eye level and near, than
when at eye level and far. The media richness theory (MRT) (Daft & Lengel, 1986) and
signalling theory (ST) (Rynes, 1991; Rynes et al., 1991) are used to support these hypothesis.
This paper also explores the effect of the interviewer's gender. Results revealed that a camera
below eye level and far from the candidate leads to poorer ratings towards the male candidate
when the interviewer was a male. Additionally, male interviewers rated the male candidate
more harshly than females when the camera was below eye level. Lastly, our findings
contradict our last hypothesis, showing that a camera below eye level and far from the
candidate results in poorer ratings when the interviewer was male. The implications for
theories brought in to explain our findings and future research were discussed. |
---|