IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v137y2016icp27-44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Overconfidence in personnel selection: When and why unstructured interview information can hurt hiring decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Kausel, Edgar E.
  • Culbertson, Satoris S.
  • Madrid, Hector P.

Abstract

Overconfidence is an important bias related to the ability to recognize the limits of one’s knowledge. The present study examines overconfidence in predictions of job performance for participants presented with information about candidates based solely on standardized tests versus those who also were presented with unstructured interview information. We conducted two studies with individuals responsible for hiring decisions. Results showed that individuals presented with interview information exhibited more overconfidence than individuals presented with test scores only. In a third study, consisting of a betting competition for undergraduate students, larger overconfidence was related to fewer payoffs. These combined results emphasize the importance of studying confidence and decision-related variables in selection decisions. Furthermore, while previous research has shown that the predictive validity of unstructured interviews is low, this study provides compelling evidence that they not only fail to help personnel selection decisions, but can actually hurt them.

Suggested Citation

  • Kausel, Edgar E. & Culbertson, Satoris S. & Madrid, Hector P., 2016. "Overconfidence in personnel selection: When and why unstructured interview information can hurt hiring decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 27-44.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:137:y:2016:i:c:p:27-44
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.07.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597816304629
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ronis, David L. & Yates, J. Frank, 1987. "Components of probability judgment accuracy: Individual consistency and effects of subject matter and assessment method," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 193-218, October.
    2. Tsai, Claire I. & Klayman, Joshua & Hastie, Reid, 2008. "Effects of amount of information on judgment accuracy and confidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 97-105, November.
    3. Klayman, Joshua & Soll, Jack B. & Gonzalez-Vallejo, Claudia & Barlas, Sema, 1999. "Overconfidence: It Depends on How, What, and Whom You Ask, , , , , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 216-247, September.
    4. Kuncel, Nathan R., 2008. "Some New (and Old) Suggestions for Improving Personnel Selection," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(03), pages 343-346, September.
    5. Highhouse, Scott, 2008. "Stubborn Reliance on Intuition and Subjectivity in Employee Selection," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(03), pages 333-342, September.
    6. Siegel-Jacobs, Karen & Yates, J. Frank, 1996. "Effects of Procedural and Outcome Accountability on Judgment Quality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 1-17, January.
    7. Ulrike Malmendier & Geoffrey Tate, 2015. "Behavioral CEOs: The Role of Managerial Overconfidence," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(4), pages 37-60, Fall.
    8. Whitecotton, Stacey M., 1996. "The Effects of Experience and a Decision Aid on the Slope, Scatter, and Bias of Earnings Forecasts," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 111-121, April.
    9. Brenner, Lyle & Griffin, Dale & Koehler, Derek J., 2005. "Modeling patterns of probability calibration with random support theory: Diagnosing case-based judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 64-81, May.
    10. Kuncel, Nathan R. & Highhouse, Scott, 2011. "Complex Predictions and Assessor Mystique," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(03), pages 302-306, September.
    11. anonymous, 2010. "Interview with Gary Gorton," The Region, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue Dec, pages 26-39.
    12. Robin Hogarth, 2005. "The challenge of representative design in psychology and economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 253-263.
    13. Sharp, Glen L. & Cutler, Brian L. & Penrod, Steven D., 1988. "Performance feedback improves the resolution of confidence judgments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 271-283, December.
    14. Yates, J. Frank & Price, Paul C. & Lee, Ju-Whei & Ramirez, James, 1996. "Good probabilistic forecasters: The 'consumer's' perspective," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 41-56, March.
    15. Hall, Crystal C. & Ariss, Lynn & Todorov, Alexander, 2007. "The illusion of knowledge: When more information reduces accuracy and increases confidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 277-290, July.
    16. Jason Dana & Robyn Dawes & Nathanial Peterson, 2013. "Belief in the unstructured interview: The persistence of an illusion," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(5), pages 512-520, September.
    17. Sah, Sunita & Moore, Don A. & MacCoun, Robert J., 2013. "Cheap talk and credibility: The consequences of confidence and accuracy on advisor credibility and persuasiveness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 246-255.
    18. Hough, Leaetta M. & Oswald, Frederick L., 2008. "Personality Testing and Industrial–Organizational Psychology: Reflections, Progress, and Prospects," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(03), pages 272-290, September.
    19. Klimoski, Richard & Jones, Robert G., 2008. "Intuiting the Selection Context," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(03), pages 352-354, September.
    20. Yates, J. Frank & Lee, Ju-Whei & Shinotsuka, Hiromi & Patalano, Andrea L. & Sieck, Winston R., 1998. "Cross-Cultural Variations in Probability Judgment Accuracy: Beyond General Knowledge Overconfidence?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 89-117, May.
    21. Seale, Darryl A. & Rapoport, Amnon, 1997. "Sequential Decision Making with Relative Ranks: An Experimental Investigation of the "Secretary Problem">," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 221-236, March.
    22. Onkal, Dilek & Yates, J. Frank & Simga-Mugan, Can & Oztin, Sule, 2003. "Professional vs. amateur judgment accuracy: The case of foreign exchange rates," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 169-185, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:137:y:2016:i:c:p:27-44. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.