Applicant Reactions in Selection: Comprehensive meta-analysis into reaction generalization versus situational specificity

International Journal of Selection and Assessment

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 291-304

  Anderson, Neil ^a   Salgado, Jesús F ^b   Hülsheger, Ute R ^c  

^a BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SANTIAGO DE COMPOSTELA   (Spain)

^c MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955754877     PISSN: 0965075X     EISSN: 14682389     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00512.x     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Anderson N. Editorial - the dark side of the moon: Applicant perspectives, negative psychological effects (NPEs), and candidate decision making in selection. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2004, 12:1-8.
2. Anderson N. Perceived job discrimination (PJD): Toward a model of applicant propensity to case initiation in selection. International Journal of Selection and Assessment (in press)
3. Anderson N, Born M, Cunningham-Snell N. Recruitment and selection: Applicant perspectives and outcomes. Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology 2001, Vol. 1:200-218. Anderson N, Ones DS, Sinangil HKViswesvaran C. In, (Eds.), pp, London, UK, Sage Publications Ltd
4. *
5. Bauer TN, Maertz CP, Dolen MR, Campion MA. Longitudinal assessment of applicant reactions to employment testing and test outcome feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology 1998, 83:892-903. *.
6. Bauer TN, Truxillo DM, Sanchez RJ, Craig JM, Ferrarra P, Compion MA. Applicant reactions to selection: Development of the Selection Procedural Justice Scale (SPJS). Personnel Psychology 2001, 54:387-419.
7. *
8. *, Fairness perceptions of selection instruments used in Turkey. Paper presented at the XII Congress of Turkish Psychological Association, Istanbul, Turkey
9. Chan D, Schmitt N. An agenda for future research on applicant reactions to selection procedures: A construct-oriented approach. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2004, 12:9-23.
10. *
11. *
12. De Jong AVD, Visser D. 1999, Black and white employees' fairness perceptions of personnel selection techniques. Unpublished manuscript
13. Furnham A. HR professionals beliefs about, and knowledge of, assessment techniques and psychometric tests. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2008, 16:300-305.
14. *
15. Gilliland SW. The perceived fairness of selection systems - an organizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review 1993, 18:694-734.
16. Gilliland SW. Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to a selection system. Journal of Applied Psychology 1994, 79:691-701.
17. Greenberg J. Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Journal of Management 1990, 16:399-432.
18. Hausknecht JP, Day DV, Thomas SC. Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology 2004, 57:639-683.
19. *
20. Hülsheger UR, Anderson N. Applicant perspectives in selection: Going beyond preference reactions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2009, 17:335-345.
21. Hunter JE, Schmidt FL. Methods of meta-analysis. Correcting error and bias in research findings 2004, 2nd ed, Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications
22. Imus AL, Ryan AM. Relevance and rigor in research on the applicant's perspective: In pursuit of pragmatic science. The Blackwell handbook of selection 2005, 291-230. Evers A, Anderson NVoskuijl O. In, (Eds.), pp, Oxford, UK, Blackwell
23. *
24. *
25. *
26. *
27. *
28. Marcus B. 1999, Attitudes toward selection methods: A partial replication and extension in a German sample. Unpublished manuscript
29. *
30. *
31. *
32. *
33. *
34. Ployhart RE, Ryan AM. Toward an explanation of applicant reactions: An examination of organizational justice and attribution frameworks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1997, 72:308-335.
35. Ployhart RE, Ryan AM. 'Applicants' reactions to the fairness of selection procedures: The effects of positive rule violations and time of measurement. Journal of Applied Psychology 1998, 83:3-16.
36. Ployhart RE, Ryan AM, Bennett M. Explanations for selection decisions: Applicants' reactions to informational and sensitivity features of explanations. Journal of Applied Psychology 1999, 84:87-106.
37. *
38. Ryan AM, McFarland L, Baron H, Page R. An international look at selection practices: Nation and culture as explanations for variability in practice. Personnel Psychology 1999, 52:359-391.
39. Ryan AM, Ployhart RE. 'Applicants' perceptions of selection procedures and decisions: A critical review and agenda for the future. Journal of Management 2000, 26:565-606.
40. Rynes SL, Connerly ML. Applicants' reactions to alternative selection procedures. Journal of Business and Psychology 1993, 7:261-272. *.
41. Salgado JF, Anderson N, Moscoso S, Bertua C, De Fruyt F. International validity generalization of GMA & cognitive abilities: A European Community meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology 2003a, 56:573-605.
42. Salgado JF, Anderson N, Moscoso S, Bertua C, De Fruyt F. A meta analytic study of general mental ability validity for different occupations in the European community. Journal of Applied Psychology 2003b, 88:1068-1081.
43. Schmidt FL, Hunter JE. The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin 1998, 124:262-274.
44. Schmitt N, Chan D. The status of research on applicant reactions to selection tests and its implications for managers. International Journal of Management Reviews 1999, 1:45-61.
45. Schmitt N, Gilliland SW. Beyond differential prediction: Fairness in selection. New approaches to employee management: Fairness in employee selection 1992, Vol. 1:21-46. Saunders DM, In, (Ed.), pp, Greenwich, CT, JAI Press
46. Schuler H. Social validity of selection situations: A concept and some empirical results. Personnel selection and assessment: Individual and organizational perspectives 1993, 11-26. Schuler HFarr JLSmith M. In, (Eds.), pp, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum
47. Schuler H, Frier D, Kauffmann M. Personalauswahl im europäischen Vergleich [Personnel selection in European comparison] 1993, Göttingen, Germany, Hogrefe-Verlag für Angewandte Psychologie
48. Schuler H, Hell B, Trapmann S, Schaar H, Boramir I. Die Nutzung psychologischer Verfahren der externen Personalauswahl in deutschen Unternehmen: Ein Vergleich über 20 Jahre [Utilization of psychological tests for personnel selection in German organizations: A twenty-year comparison]. Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie 2007, 2:60-70.
49. *
50. Shackleton V, Newell S. European management selection methods: A comparison of five countries. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 1994, 2:91-102.
51. *
52. *
53. Steiner DD, Gilliland SW. Procedural justice in personnel selection: International and cross-cultural perspectives. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2001, 9:124-137.
54. *
55. *
56. *
57. Truxillo DM, Bauer TN. Applicant reactions to test score banding in entry-level and promotional contexts. Journal of Applied Psychology 1999, 84:322-339.
58. Truxillo DM, Bauer TN, Sanchez RJ. Multiple dimensions of procedural justice: Longitudinal effects on selection system fairness and test-taking self-efficacy. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2001, 9:336-349.
59. Truxillo DM, Bodner TE, Bertolino M, Bauer TN, Yonce CA. Effects of explanations on applicant meta-analysis review. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2009, 17:346-361.
60. Viswesvaran C, Ones DS. Importance of perceived personnel selection system fairness determinants: Relations with demographic, personality, and job characteristics. International Journal of Selection and Assessment 2004, 12:172-186.