IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulb/ulbeco/2013-289008.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

No Expectation, No Disappointment: How Does Meta-Accuracy Affect Hireability?

Author

Listed:
  • Laetitia Renier
  • Emmanuelle P. Kleinlogel
  • Claudia Toma
  • Marianne Schmid Mast
  • Nora A. Murphy

Abstract

People may or not know the impression they convey to others (meta- accuracy). However, little research has addressed to what extent meta- accuracy affects social outcomes such as hireability (recruiter’s intention to hire). Three studies were conducted to test whether people who knew the impression they conveyed are the ones who are more likely to get hired. Results of polynomial regression and responses surface analyses showed that meta-accuracy was related to hireability, whether meta-accuracy concerns skills during an interview (Study 1, N = 49, and Study 2, N = 127) or traits and skills on a résumé (Study 3, N = 135). The pattern of results takes three forms. First, the lack of meta-accuracy, as the simple gap between metaperception and other’s perception, reduces hireability. Second, hireability is higher when meta- and other’s perception are favorable rather than unfavorable, while staying in agreement. Third, hireability is higher for applicants underestimating the extent to which a recruiter would perceive favorably their traits and/or skills than for overestimators. These results suggest that the best chance to get hired does not rely only on good impressions but also on knowing, or at least on underestimating, the impressions made upon others.

Suggested Citation

  • Laetitia Renier & Emmanuelle P. Kleinlogel & Claudia Toma & Marianne Schmid Mast & Nora A. Murphy, 2018. "No Expectation, No Disappointment: How Does Meta-Accuracy Affect Hireability?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/289008, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  • Handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/289008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ulb:ulbeco:2013/289008. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Benoit Pauwels (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsulbe.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.