Group & Organization Management-2005-Goldberg-597-624 PDF

http://gom.sagepub.
com/
Group & Organization Management
http://gom.sagepub.com/content/30/6/597
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/1059601104267661
2005 30: 597 Group & Organization Management
Caren B. Goldberg
Decisions: Are we Missing Something?
Relational Demography and Similarity-Attraction in Interview Assessments and Subsequent Offer
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at: Group & Organization Management Additional services and information for
http://gom.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:
http://gom.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:
http://gom.sagepub.com/content/30/6/597.refs.html Citations:
What is This?
- Oct 20, 2005 Version of Record >>

at Universiti Malaysia Sabah on October 9, 2014 gom.sagepub.com Downloaded from at Universiti Malaysia Sabah on October 9, 2014 gom.sagepub.com Downloaded from
10.1177/1059601104267661 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT Goldberg / RELATIONAL DEMOGRAPHY
Relational Demography and
Similarity-Attraction in
Interview Assessments and
Subsequent Offer Decisions
ARE WE MISSING SOMETHING?
CAREN B. GOLDBERG
George Washington University
This study examines whether recruiter-applicant demographic similarity affects selection deci-
sions. In addition, the mediators proposed by the similarity-attraction paradigm were tested.
However, consistent with Graves and Powells (1995) findings and with the propositions of
social identity theory, I also proposed that female recruiters would prefer male applicants. Sig-
nificant race similarity effects were observed for White recruiters on overall interview assess-
ments and offer decisions, sex dissimilarity had a significant direct effect on overall interview
assessments, and age similarity was not related to either criterion. In addition, there was some
evidence that the significant direct effects were mediated by perceived similarity and interper-
sonal attraction. The sex dissimilarity effect appeared to be the result of male recruiters prefer-
ence for female applicants. Post hoc analyses revealed that this relationship was mediated by
applicant appearance.
Keywords: relational demography; applicant assessments; similarity-attraction; demographic
similarity; recruiter-applicant similarity; recruiter assessments
Organizational researchers have studied the impact of demographic vari-
ables on work outcomes for decades. During the past several years, however,
interest in demography has shifted away from simple effects toward more
complex relational demography models (cf. OReilly, Caldwell, & Barnett,
The author gratefully acknowledges the methodological assistance provided by Fran
Yammarino and Philip Wirtz and the constructive comments provided by Patrick McHugh and
Anne Tsui. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Caren B.
Goldberg, Department of Management Science, George WashingtonUniversity, School of Busi-
ness and Public Management, Washington, DC 20052; phone: (202) 994-1590; fax: (202) 994-
4930; e-mail: careng@gwu.edu.
Group & Organization Management, Vol. 30 No. 6, December 2005 597-624
DOI: 10.1177/1059601104267661
2005 Sage Publications
597
at Universiti Malaysia Sabah on October 9, 2014 gom.sagepub.com Downloaded from
1989; Tsui, Egan, &OReilly, 1992; Zenger &Lawrence, 1989). The central
idea of relational demography is that it is not an individuals demographic
characteristics, per se, that affect work attitudes and behaviors; rather, it is an
individuals demographic characteristics relative to a referent other or group
that explain these criteria. Specifically, relational demography predicts that
individuals who are similar to referent others will experience more positive
outcomes than will those who are dissimilar to referent others.
Despite the abundance of research that has linked demographic similarity
to work outcomes (Jackson et al., 1991; OReilly et al., 1989; Riordan &
Shore, 1997; Tsui et al., 1992; Tsui & OReilly, 1989; Zenger & Lawrence,
1989), only a handful of studies have examined the impact of demographic
similarity on applicant assessments in applied settings (Graves & Powell,
1995, 1996; Lin, Dobbins, & Farh, 1992; Prewett-Livingston, Field, Veres,
&Lewis, 1996). The present study builds on this research and addresses two
limitations of prior research: It includes several indices of recruiter-applicant
demographic similarity in the same model, and it includes recruiters imme-
diate, postinterview impressions as well as actual subsequent hiring deci-
sions. The current investigation makes an important theoretical contribution
as well. In response to Lawrences (1997) lament that organizational demog-
raphy researchers usually leave the concepts unmeasured and hypotheses
untested (p. 2), this study considers one of the intervening processes that
may explain why organizational demography affects selection.
DEMOGRAPHIC SIMILARITY AS A PREDICTOR
OF SELECTION OUTCOMES
A number of relational demography studies have suggested that demo-
graphic similarity in dyads results in favorable outcomes (Judge & Ferris,
1993; Lagace, 1990; Tsui & OReilly, 1989; Tsui, Xin, & Egan, 1995). The
conceptual rationale underlying this stream of research stems from social
identity theory. Social identity theory posits that individuals determine their
social identityby categorizing themselves, categorizing others, and attaching
value to different social categories (Gaertner &Dovidio, 2000; Tajfel, 1982;
Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Turner & Oakes, 1986). As individuals strive to
maintain consistent identities (Steele, 1988), evaluating similar others more
favorably than dissimilar others is one means by which an individual
maintains a positive identity (self-continuity drive).
Researchers have examined the impact of relational demographic charac-
teristics on employees work-related attitudes, intentions, and behaviors and
on supervisors assessments of employees (cf. Jackson et al., 1991; Riordan
& Shore, 1997; Tsui & OReilly, 1989). However, relatively little applied
598 GROUP & ORGANIZATION MANAGEMENT
research has examined the impact of recruiter-applicant similarity on organi-
zational entry outcomes (for exceptions, see Graves & Powell, 1995, 1996;
Lin et al., 1992; and Prewett-Livingston et al., 1996). The literature linking
person-organization fit to selection outcomes (Schneider, 1987) would sug-
gest that as recruiters presumably view themselves as successful organiza-
tional members, they will seek applicants who are demographically similar
to themselves, with the expectation that the applicants, too, will fit in the
organization (Judge &Ferris, 1991). Indeed, several laboratory studies have
provided evidence that recruiter-applicant race similarity (Rand & Wexley,
1975) and sex similarity (Heilman, Martell, & Simon, 1988; Wiley &
Eskilson, 1985) are positively related to selection decisions.
Despite the lack of applied research examining the impact of relational
demography on selection, there is reason to believe that relational demogra-
phys impact on selectionoutcomes should be at least as great as its impact on
other work criteria. Specifically, Pelled (1997) and Harrison, Price, and Bell
(1998) contend that initial categorizations are accompanied by perceptions
of similarity that are based on surface-level demographic data. Moreover,
Milliken and Martins (1996) suggest that diversity on observable attributes
creates more serious negative affective reactions than diversity on underly-
ing attributes (p. 415). For this reason, the present study focuses on those
demographic similarity variables that are easily observed (age, race, and
sex). Moreover, Ravensons (1989) and Gordon, Rozelle, and Baxters
(1988) findings that stereotyping is more apt to occur when minimal other
data about the target are available suggest that similarity biases may be more
pronounced in the context of an employment interviewthan in the context of
intact manager-employee dyads. Therefore, I predict that recruiter-applicant
demographic similarity will be positively related to selection outcomes.
Hypothesis 1a: Recruiter-applicant demographic similarity will have a direct pos-
itive effect on overall interview assessments.
Hypothesis 1b: Recruiter-applicant demographic similarity will have a direct pos-
itive effect on subsequent offer decisions.
SIMILARITY-ATTRACTION
The similarity-attraction paradigm (Byrne, 1971) is closely related to social
identity theory; however, the former elaborates on the intervening processes
that occur between recognition of a referent other as similar and the ensuing
favorable assessments of the referent other. In particular, the similarity-
attraction paradigm posits that individuals who are similar will be interper-
sonally attracted. Because of this attraction (liking), they will experience
positive outcomes. Although the early work on similarity-attraction focused
Goldberg / RELATIONAL DEMOGRAPHY 599
on attitudinal similarity (Byrne, 1971; Byrne & Clore, 1970), subsequent
research suggests that observable attributes, such as demographic character-
istics, likely affect interpersonal attraction as well. Specifically, Ferris,
Judge, Rowland, and Fitzgibbons (1994) and Tsui and OReilly (1989)
found that supervisor-subordinate demographic similarity was positively
related to supervisors liking of subordinates.
Although a number of researchers have examined whether demographic
similarity results in positive work attitudes and behaviors (Jackson et al., 1991;
OReilly et al., 1989; Riordan &Shore, 1997; Tsui et al., 1992; Tsui &OReilly,
1989; Zenger &Lawrence, 1989), they have relied on the similarity-attraction
paradigm as an assumption and have not tested it explicitly. That is, direct
links between demographic similarity and work criteria provide support for
the notion that demographics relative to others are important; however, these
links do not necessarily provide support for the underlying similarity-attrac-
tion framework. Such studies treat demographic similarity variables as indi-
cators of subjective concepts that explain the outcomes. An alternative per-
spective is that a subjective concept intervenes between the demographic
similarity variables and the outcomes (Lawrence, 1997). Graves and Powell
(1995) provide a comprehensive explanation of this intervening process in
the context of selection:
Demographic similarity between the recruiter and applicant on characteristics
such as sex leads to perceived similarity in attitudes and values which in turn
leads to interpersonal attraction between the recruiter and the applicant. Inter-
personal attraction then leads to positive bias in the recruiters interview
conduct. (p. 86)
Thus, the impact of demographic similarity on selection outcomes may be
viewed as a mediated process with multiple steps, with each step a little more
removed from the starting point. In the initial encounter, the recruiter
observes the applicants demographic characteristics and makes a determi-
nation as to whether these characteristics are similar or dissimilar to the
recruiters own demographics. If the recruiter is demographically similar to
the applicant, he or she is apt to presume that the applicant has attitudes and
beliefs that are similar to his or her attitudes and beliefs. The link between
perceived attitudinal similarity and interpersonal attraction can be traced
back to Byrne and Clore (1970) who proposed that agreement with another
person validates ones own beliefs and satisfies a drive to interpret the envi-
ronment correctly, and to function effectively in understanding and predict-
ing events (p. 118). When this drive is satisfied, an individual attaches posi-
tive affect to the source, as evidenced by their attraction to the source. The
similarity-attraction paradigm further posits that when we are attracted to a
referent other, we tend to make more favorable overall assessments of the
other. Indeed, both laboratory (Howard &Ferris, 1996) and field (Kinicki &
Lockwood, 1985; Wade & Kinicki, 1997) studies of the employment inter-
view have found significant relationships between affect and attraction
toward applicants and recruiters evaluations of them. Finally, consistent
with the notion that intentions lead to behaviors (Fishbein & Azjen, 1975),
there is some evidence in the selection literature that interviewers impres-
sions of applicants are linked to final offer decisions (Cable & Judge, 1997).
Thus, it is reasonable to expect overall interviewassessments to be positively
related to subsequent offer decisions. However, because several factors out-
side of the recruiter influence final offer decisions (e.g.., whether the appli-
cant is invited for an on-site interview), the direct effect of demographic sim-
ilarity on this outcome is likely smaller than is the direct effect of
demographic similarity on recruiters postinterview assessments. The fore-
going suggests that the relationship between demographic similarity and
final offer decision is mediated by several intervening variables, which are
depicted in Figure 1.
Hypothesis 2a: Recruiter-applicant demographic similarity will have an indirect
effect on overall interview assessments through perceived attitudinal similar-
ity and interpersonal attraction, such that recruiters will evaluate demographi-
cally similar applicants higher than demographically dissimilar applicants on
perceived attitudinal similarity and interpersonal attraction.
Hypothesis 2b: Recruiter-applicant demographic similarity will have an indirect
effect on offer decisions through perceived attitudinal similarity, interpersonal
attraction, and overall interviewassessments, such that recruiters will evaluate
demographically similar applicants higher than demographically dissimilar
applicants on perceived attitudinal similarity, interpersonal attraction, and
overall interview assessments.
AN ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVE OF RELATIONAL SEX
Although there has been a good deal of support for the relationships
proposed in the previous section, other studies suggest that the similarity-
attraction paradigm may be an inadequate explanation for the impact of sex
similarity on applicant assessments. In particular, Graves and Powell (1995)
found that sex similarity was unrelated to interpersonal attraction and inter-
view outcomes, but that it was negatively related to perceived similarity.
Specifically, whereas male recruiters saw male and female applicants as
nonsignificantly different with respect to perceived attitudinal similarity,
female recruiters perceptions of attitudinal similarity were greater for male
applicants than for female applicants. They argued that because women are
generally afforded lower status than are men, the female recruiters sought to
identify with the higher-status male applicants. Indeed, the social identity
theory (SIT) literature suggests that a second means by which individuals
maintain positive identity is by identifying with groups that are status-
enhancing (self-enhancement drive). This research suggests that individuals
may favor outgroup members over ingroup members if the outgroup enjoys
higher status than the ingroup does (Gaertner &Dovidio, 2000). Indeed, sev-
eral laboratory studies have demonstrated that membership in a low status
group is negatively related to identification with ones own group and posi-
tively related to favoritism toward outgroup members (Ellemers, Wilke, &
van Knippenberg, 1993; Sachdev & Bourhis, 1991). Likewise, applied
research suggests that females tend to identify with males to maintain a posi-
tive social identity (Ely, 1994, 1995; Gutek, 1985) and that the drive for self-
enhancement moderates the relationship between sex similarity and work
outcomes (Goldberg, Riordan, & Schaffer, 2003).
Further evidence to support the contention that women may identify more
with men than with other women comes from research on gender roles. In
particular, Konrad, Corrigall, Lieb, and Ritchie (2000) found that womens
preferences for male-typed job attributes are greater for female managers
than for female students. Moreover, Konrad, Ritchie, Lieb, and Corrigall
(2000) found that whereas in the general population women and men dif-
fered significantly in their preferences for various job attributes, women who
were in masculine-typed occupations had very similar job attribute prefer-
ences to men. Likewise, Kirchmeyer (2002) examined the stability of mascu-
linity and femininity longitudinally and found that female managers femi-
ninity decreased significantly during a 4-year period, suggesting that
femininity is negatively related to career success for women. Together, these
findings suggest that women with more masculine-typed attitudes toward
work are more likely to select and remain in masculine-typed occupations.
Observable
Demographic
Similarity
Age
Race
Sex
Perceived
Similarity
Interpersonal
Attraction
Overall Interview
Assessments
Offer
Decision
Figure 1: Proposed Similarity-Attraction Model
Thus, female recruiters may see male candidates as more similar to them-
selves (in terms of femininity) than female candidates. Consequently,
women in successful jobs (such as recruiters) are likely to identify more with
men than with other women. Moreover, the great majority of the jobs for
which applicants were interviewing are stereotypically masculine jobs
(Goldberg, Finkelstein, Perry, & Konrad, in press), strengthening the suit-
ability of male applicants. Consequently, I propose that sex similarity will be
negatively related to the outcomes for women.
Hypothesis 3a: Recruiter-applicant sex similarity will have an indirect effect on
overall interview assessments through perceived attitudinal similarity and
interpersonal attraction, such that female recruiters will evaluate female appli-
cants lower than male applicants on perceived attitudinal similarity and inter-
personal attraction, whereas male recruiters will not distinguish between male
and female applicants.
Hypothesis 3b: Recruiter-applicant sex similarity will have an indirect effect on
offer decisions through perceived attitudinal similarity, interpersonal attrac-
tion, and overall interviewassessments, such that female recruiters will evalu-
ate female applicants lower than male applicants on perceived attitudinal simi-
larity, interpersonal attraction, and overall interview assessments, whereas
male recruiters will not distinguish between male and female applicants.
METHOD
SAMPLE
Participants included applicants and recruiters utilizing the career ser-
vices offices of three colleges in the southeastern United States between
March and June, 1996. Recruiting organizations represented a wide variety
of industries. A breakdown by industry category is presented in Table 1.
A similar process was used at all three schools: Companies provided the
career services office with a list of minimum qualifications, then the career
services office sent resumes of applicants who met those qualifications. In
some cases, the organizations prescreened resumes, asking that only a subset
of highly qualified applicants be scheduled for campus interviews. In other
cases, any applicants who met the minimum qualifications was permitted to
schedule an interview. As I was physically present to personally hand the sur-
veys to the recruiters at nearly all of the interviews, the response rate was very
high (90%). Each observation was composed of an applicant-recruiter dyad.
As every recruiter interviewed between 1 and 14 applicants (M = 7.7), there
was a total of 311 pairs, representing the matching of 45 recruiters with 210
applicants. All 311 dyads were used for the analyses involving perceived
similarity, interpersonal attraction, and overall interview assessments; how-
ever, because of the drop-off rate of recruiters responding to the follow-up
survey, there were only 273 pairs for the analyses involving subsequent offer
decisions.
The recruiters included 23 human resource professionals and 22 manag-
ers in the departments for which the organizations were recruiting. Their
average age was 37.5 years (SD = 8.19), and their average company tenure
was 6.73 years (SD= 6.82). Nearly 66%were male, and 88.6% had at least a
college degree. All recruiters were either Caucasian (81.7%) or African
American (18.3%).
The average age of applicants was 27.5 years (SD = 6.04). Most (65.7%)
were male, and 78.1% were completing (or had recently completed) their
bachelors degrees. Approximately 62% were Caucasian, 18.6% were Afri-
can American, 11.4% were Asian, and 5.2% were Hispanic. The most popu-
lar majors of applicants were information systems (13.8%), finance (12.4%),
marketing (8.6%), and management (7.2%).
PROCEDURE
College A provided a list of the names and telephone numbers of recruit-
ers who would be participating in campus interviews. Prior to the interview
date, I contacted the recruiters by telephone to discuss their participation. On
the day of the interviews, I met with the recruiters when they arrived to
remind them about the study and to provide them with their surveys. Two
TABLE 1
Industrial Classifications of Recruiting Organizations
Industry Category Percentage of Organizations
Banking 11.1
Consulting services 2.2
Financial services 2.2
Government 4.4
Hospitality 4.4
Manufacturing, consumer products 13.3
Manufacturing, high technology products 15.6
Manufacturing, industrial products 11.1
Retail 8.9
Services, other 15.6
Telecommunications 11.1
separate types of surveys were provided. The first survey was completed
prior to conducting any interviews. It asked respondents to provide demo-
graphic information about themselves and to evaluate applicants solely on
the basis of their resumes. Recruiters were given one copy of the second sur-
vey for each applicant they would be interviewing. To eliminate memory
biases, they were asked to complete these surveys immediately following
each interview. In almost all cases, the recruiters handed the completed sur-
veys back to me prior to leaving. In a few instances, however, they mailed
them in a preaddressed envelope.
At Colleges B and C, the process was similar, with some minor excep-
tions. First, the directors of the career services offices telephoned the recruit-
ers to discuss their participation. Second, on occasion, the director of the
career services office at College B handed the packets to the recruiters and
requested their participation on my behalf. Last, at College A, applicant
demographic data were provided by the career services office. At Colleges B
and C, this information was provided on a survey administered to applicants
for other purposes.
I contacted the recruiters by telephone between 2 and 4 months after the
campus interviews. At that time, they indicated which applicants had been
offered jobs with their organization.
MEASURES
Control variables. Recruiters assessments are primarily driven by their
assessments of applicants scholastic standing and work experience
(Dipboye, 1992). Thus, an itemthat asked respondents to evaluate the appli-
cant relative to other applicants they would be interviewing, solely on the
basis of his or her resume, was used as a control variable. Responses ranged
from 1 (very unqualified) to 5 (very qualified). Although Dipboye (1992)
notes that resumes may be contaminated with demographic information, the
correlations between the resume variable and each of the applicant demo-
graphic characteristics were nonsignificant, suggesting that recruiters did not
consider demographic information in their assessments of applicants
resumes. The age, race, and sex of applicants and recruiters were also
included as control variables. Age was continuous; sex was coded as 1 for
males and 1 for females. Race was coded as 1 for Caucasians and 1 for Afri-
can Americans (race-similarity analyses were limited to dyads comprising
applicants of these two groups because all recruiters were either Caucasian or
African American).
Demographic similarity. Edwards (1994) notes that similarityon continu-
ous variables is best captured by polynomial expressions, as this approach
avoids many of the limitations of difference scores. For example, difference
scores would treat a dyad in which the recruiter was 30 and the applicant was
25 identically to a dyad in which the recruiter was 50 and the applicant was
45. Likewise, as differences scores are typically calculated as absolute val-
ues, they fail to distinguish between dyads in which the magnitude of age dif-
ference is the same but the direction of the relationship is different (i.e., a 30-
year-old applicant with a 25-year-old recruiter would be treated the same as a
25-year-old applicant with a 30-year-old recruiter). Thus, to measure age
similarity, I used polynomial terms. As polynomial terms comprise the sim-
ple effects for applicant age and recruiter age, their interaction, and the
squares of these terms, a significant effect is evidenced only when all
components are significant.
Because applicant and recruiter sex were effects coded (1/1), sex simi-
larity was computed as the interaction of these two variables. The effects
coding (1/1) of recruiter and applicant sex created interaction terms, such
that same-sex pairs were always positive and opposite sex pairs were always
negative. Male recruitermale applicant dyads represented 38% of the sam-
ple, male recruiterfemale applicant dyads represented 23.4%, female
recruitermale applicant dyads represented 21.3%, and female recruiter
female applicant dyads represented 17.3%. Race similarity was computed as
the interaction of the effects coded applicant race and recruiter race variables.
Of the dyads included in the race analyses, 56.6% comprised Caucasian
recruiterCaucasian applicant pairs, 20% comprised Caucasian recruiter
African American applicant pairs, 17.7% comprised African American
recruiterCaucasian applicant pairs, and 5.7% comprised African American
recruiterAfrican American pairs.
Mediators and outcomes. Byrnes (1971) 4-itemsimilarity scale was used
to measure perceived similarity. The alpha coefficient of the scale was .94.
Interpersonal attraction was assessed using Byrnes 2-item interpersonal
attraction scale (alpha = .93). Although Byrne used a 7-point scale, a 5-point
scale was used in the present study, with responses ranging fromstrongly dis-
agree (1) to strongly agree (5). The overall interview assessment measure
was composed of 3 items measuring the likelihood that the applicant would
be offered the job, the likelihood that the organization would consider the
applicant, and the likelihood that the applicant would be invited for an on-site
interview (alpha = .92). Responses ranged from strongly disagree (1) to
strongly agree (5). Between 2 and 4 months after the interviews, recruiters
indicated whether the applicant had been offered the job. Responses were
coded as 0 (not offered) and 1 (offered).
DATA ANALYSIS
Because each recruiter evaluated multiple applicants, the issue of
nonindependence of observations needed to be addressed prior to testing the
hypotheses. To address this issue, a dummy variable was created for each
recruiter. These dummy variables were used as controls.
Hierarchical linear regression was used to test the hypotheses regarding
overall interview assessments, interpersonal attraction, and perceived simi-
larity. However, for the dichotomous offer-decision criterion, logistic
regression was used. The incremental step test for this variable was the
2
improvement test, which is analogous to an F test (Menard, 1995).
As described in the next section, where significant direct effects were
found, these were followed-up with tests for mediation using the procedure
detailed by Baron and Kenny (1986) and by Kenny (1998).
As the recruiters role in the selection process may affect the results, I ran
the analyses with recruiter job type (1 =human resources, 2 =manager in the
department for which the organization was recruiting) as a control. Presum-
ably, those in the latter category play a larger role in the selection process.
However, this variable was not significant; therefore, I did not retain it.
RESULTS
Means, standard deviations, and intercorrelations are presented in Table
2. The results presented here provide some initial support for the proposed
similarity-attraction model.
To assess the independence of the constructs, a confirmatory factor analy-
sis was performed on the overall interviewassessment, perceived similarity,
and interpersonal attraction measures. Several fit indices were used to deter-
mine the suitability of the proposed three-factor model as compared to a
model in which all items were specified to load on a single factor. The one-
factor model did not fit the data:
2
= 1551.84, 27 df (p < .01); GFI = .50;
AGFI =.16; NFI =.65; CFI =.65; and RMR=.14. In contrast, although the
2
(190.48, 24 df) for the three-factor model was significant at p < .01, all of the
other measures indicated acceptable fit: GFI = .90; AGFI = .81; NFI = .96;
CFI =.96; and RMR=.04. Thus, the three-factor solution fit the data well.
The first hypothesis predicted that demographic similarity would affect
overall interview assessments and final offer decisions. The regression
608
T
A
B
L
E

2
M
e
a
n
s
,

S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

D
e
v
i
a
t
i
o
n
s
,

a
n
d

I
n
t
e
r
c
o
r
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
M
S
D
1
.
2
.
3
.
4
.
5
.
6
.
7
.
8
.
9
.
1
0
.
1
1
.
1
2
.
1
3
.
1
4
.
1
5
.
1
6
.
1
.

A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t

a
g
e
2
7
.
5
0
5
.
9
3
1
.
0
0
2
.

A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t

r
a
c
e
.
1
7
.
9
8
1
2
*
1
.
0
0
3
.

A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t

s
e
x
.
1
8
.
9
9
.
1
0
.
2
1
*
*
1
.
0
0
4
.

R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r

a
g
e
3
6
.
6
8
7
.
9
4
.
0
6
.
1
3
*
.
0
4
1
.
0
0
5
.

R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r

r
a
c
e
.
4
1
.
9
1
.
0
3
.
0
1
.
0
6
.
1
7
*
*
1
.
0
0
6
.

R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r

s
e
x
.
1
2
.
9
9
.
0
3
.
0
9
.
0
7
.
1
9
*
*
.
4
5
*
*
1
.
0
0
7
.

A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
r
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r

a
g
e
.
7
1
*
*
.
0
1
.
1
3
.
7
3
*
*
.
0
6
.
1
4
*
*
1
.
0
0
8
.

A
p
p
l
i
c
a
n
t

a
g
e
2
.
9
9
*
*
.
1
3
*
.
0
9
.
0
5
.
0
2
.
0
3
.
7
0
1
.
0
0
9
.

R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r

a
g
e
2
.
0
7
.
1
4
*
.
0
3
.
9
9
*
*
.
1
7
*
*
.
1
8
*
*
.
7
4
*
*
.
0
6
1
.
0
0
1
0
.

R
a
c
e

s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
.
0
2
.
4
1
*
*
.
0
9
.
0
7
.
1
5
*
*
.
1
8
*
*
.
0
5
.
0
2
.
0
8
1
.
0
0
1
1
.

S
e
x

s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
.
0
8
.
0
2
.
1
1
*
.
0
9
.
1
3
*
.
1
7
*
*
.
0
8
.
0
8
.
0
8
.
0
1
1
.
0
0
1
2
.

R
e
s
u
m
e

q
u
a
l
i
t
y
3
.
4
9
.
8
8
.
0
6
.
0
4
.
0
2
.
1
3
*
.
0
9
.
1
4
*
.
1
4
*
*
.
0
7
.
1
3
*
.
0
5
.
0
0
1
.
0
0
1
3
.

P
e
r
c
e
i
v
e
d

s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
3
.
1
6
.
6
9
.
0
0
.
0
8
.
1
0
.
0
0
.
0
4
.
0
8
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
0
1
.
1
2
*
.
0
9
.
2
9
*
*
1
.
0
0
1
4
.

I
n
t
e
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
3
.
5
0
.
7
6
.
0
7
.
0
4
.
1
1
.
1
5
*
*
.
0
8
.
0
4
.
0
5
.
0
7
.
1
6
*
*
.
0
8
.
0
6
.
4
6
*
*
.
6
2
*
*
1
.
0
0
1
5
.

O
v
e
r
a
l
l

i
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
3
.
0
7
.
8
8
.
0
6
.
1
8
.
0
3
.
0
5
.
0
5
.
0
6
.
0
2
.
0
3
.
0
5
.
1
6
*
*
.
0
7
.
4
7
*
*
.
5
6
*
*
.
6
6
*
*
1
.
0
0
1
6
.

O
f
f
e
r

d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
.
1
2
.
3
3
.
0
2
.
0
8
.
0
3
.
0
4
.
1
3
*
.
2
1
*
*
.
0
1
.
0
3
.
0
4
.
1
1
.
0
8
.
1
9
*
*
.
0
9
.
2
5
*
*
.
2
6
*
*
1
.
0
0
N
O
T
E
:
R
a
c
e
w
a
s
c
o
d
e
d
s
u
c
h
t
h
a
t
1
=
W
h
i
t
e
a
n
d
1
=
A
f
r
i
c
a
n
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n
.
S
e
x
w
a
s
c
o
d
e
d
s
u
c
h
t
h
a
t
1
=
m
a
l
e
a
n
d
1
=
f
e
m
a
l
e
.
R
a
c
e
a
n
d
s
e
x
w
e
r
e
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
c
o
d
e
d
s
u
c
h

t
h
a
t

1

=

d
i
s
s
i
m
i
l
a
r

p
a
i
r
s
a
n
d

1

=

s
i
m
i
l
a
r

p
a
i
r
s
.

O
f
f
e
r

d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n

w
a
s

c
o
d
e
d

s
u
c
h

t
h
a
t

0

=

n
o
t

o
f
f
e
r
e
d
a
n
d

1

=

o
f
f
e
r
e
d
.
*
p
.
0
5
.

*
*
p
.
0
1
.
analyses for age, sex, and race similarity are presented in Tables 3, 4, and 5,
respectively. Contrary to expectations, age similarity was unrelated to either
of these criteria. Sex similarity had a significant impact on overall interview
assessments but was not significantly related to offer decisions. The nature of
this effect is displayed in the third panel of Figure 2. This plot shows that both
male and female recruiters gave more favorable overall interview assess-
ments to applicants of the opposite sex; however, this effect was far more
pronounced for male recruiters than for female recruiters. Although this pat-
tern was consistent with Hypothesis 3a, a post hoc comparison of means indi-
cated that female recruiters did not rate male applicants significantly more
favorably than female applicants.
Race similarity affected both overall interview assessments and offer
decisions, although the latter relationship was only of marginal significance.
The plots in Figure 3 showthat Caucasian recruiters showed a strong favorit-
ism for Caucasian applicants, whereas African American recruiters did not
distinguish between Caucasian and African American applicants. In short,
there was no support for Hypothesis 1 with regard to age or sex, but there was
support with regard to race for Caucasian recruiters.
As the offer decision criterion was dichotomous and the applicant assess-
ments were nested within recruiters, structural equations modeling was inap-
propriate for this data set (L. Williams, personal communication, November
8, 2002). Therefore, tests for mediation were performed following the proce-
dure presented by Baron and Kenny (1986) and by Kenny (1998). Specifi-
cally, four steps are needed to establish mediation. Step 1: Show that the ini-
tial variable is related to the outcome. Step 2: Showthat the initial variable is
related to the mediator. Step 3: Show that the mediator affects the outcome
variable, after controlling for the initial variables. Step 4: Determine whether
the relationship between the initial variable and the outcome variable
becomes nonsignificant (full mediation) or just smaller but still statistically
significant (partial mediation) after controlling for the mediator. Because
establishing mediation requires that all four steps be met, mediational tests
were only performed in those cases where Tables 3, 4, and 5 indicated signif-
icant demographic similarity effects on both an outcome and on at least one
proposed mediator. Consequently, no further tests were performed for age
similarity as Table 3 failed to provide support for the proposed direct effects.
For sex similarity, no mediational tests relating to offer decisions were per-
formed as Table 4 showed no significant direct effect between sex similarity
and this outcome. Finally, for race similarity, I did not perform mediational
tests for the effects of perceived similarityor interpersonal attractionas Table
5 showed that race similarity was not significantly related to either of these
criteria.
The second and third set of hypotheses proposed that the impact of demo-
graphic similarity on overall interview assessments and offer decisions was
mediated by perceived similarity and interpersonal attraction. In addition,
overall interview assessment was expected to mediate the relationship
between demographic similarity and offer decisions. Table 6 shows that the
relationship between race similarityand offer decision was completely medi-
ated by overall interviewassessments. Specifically, the relationship between
TABLE 3
Age Similarity Regressions
Overall
Perceived Interpersonal Interview Offer
Similarity Attraction Assessment Decision
R
2
F R
2
F R
2
F
2
Step 1: Recruiter dummy variables .44 4.03** .33 2.51** .29 2.04** 61.02*
Step 2: Resume quality .08 44.49** .09 39.62** .18 85.17** 8.46**
Step 3: Applicant age
Step 3: Recruiter age .00 .54 .01 1.33 .01 1.42 1.32
Step 4: Applicant age*
Step 4: Recruiter age .00 1.16 .00 .00 .00 .06 .90
Step 5: Applicant age squared
Step 5: Recruiter age squared .01 4.77* .00 .88 .01 2.30 .78
NOTE: The no. of dummy variables ranged from 47 to 49.
*p .05. **p .01. p .10.
TABLE 4
Sex Similarity Regressions
Overall
R
2
F R
2
F R
2
F
2
Step 1: Recruiter dummy variables .44 4.03** .33 2.51** .29 2.04** 60.99*
Step 2: Resume quality .08 44.49** .09 39.61** .18 85.17** 8.46**
Step 3: Applicant sex
Step 3: Recruiter sex .00 .29 .01 1.60 .00 .35 1.95
Step 4: Applicant sex*
Step 4: Recruiter sex .01 3.46 .01 4.87* .01 5.62** .09
NOTE: Sex was effects coded (1/1) such that 1 = interactions with similar pairs and 1 = inter-
actions with dissimilar pairs. The no. of dummy variables ranged from 47 to 49.
*p .05. **p .01. p .10.
race similarity and offer decision was significant (p < .05), the relationships
between race similarity and perceived attitudinal similarity and between
perceived attitudinal similarity and offer decision were marginally signifi-
cant (p < .10), and, after controlling for interview assessment, the relation-
ship between race similarity and offer decision became nonsignificant. This
lent some limited support to Hypothesis 2b. As none of the other proposed
mediators between race similarity and the outcomes were significant, there
was no support for Hypothesis 2a with regard to race.
Table 6 also demonstrates that the relationship between recruiter-applicant
sex similarity and overall interview assessment was fully mediated by both
perceived similarity and interpersonal attraction and that the relationship
between sex similarity and interpersonal attraction was fully mediated by
perceived similarity. Specifically, sex similarity ( p < .05 in both cases) and
perceived attitudinal similarity ( p < .01 in both cases) were significantly
related to both interpersonal attraction and interview assessments, sex simi-
larity was marginally ( p <.10) related to perceived attitudinal similarity, and,
after controlling for perceived attitudinal similarity, the relationships
between sex similarity and both interpersonal attraction and overall inter-
view assessments became nonsignificant. In addition, the results of the sex
similarity mediational tests showthat interpersonal attraction partially medi-
ated the relationship between perceived similarity and overall interview
assessments, as evidenced by the fact that the relationships between per-
ceived attitudinal similarity and overall interviewassessments ( p < .05), per-
perceived similarity and interpersonal attraction ( p < .01), and interpersonal
TABLE 5
Race Similarity Regressions
Overall
R
2
F R
2
F R
2
F
2
Step 1: Recruiter dummy variables .46 3.54** .37 2.41** .36 2.22** 51.96
Step 2: Resume quality .07 30.67** .09 30.60** .15 60.31** 3.99
Step 3: Applicant race
Step 3: Recruiter race .00 .90 .00 .11 .03 6.15** 8.32**
Step 4: Applicant race*
Step 4: Recruiter race .00 .38 .00 .48 .01 2.74 4.58*
NOTE: Only pairs with Caucasian or African American applicants are included in these analy-
ses. Race was effects coded (1/1) such that 1 = interactions with similar pairs and 1 = interac-
tions with dissimilar pairs. The no. of dummy variables ranged from 42 to 47.
*p .05. **p .01. p .10.
attraction and overall interview assessments ( p < .01) were all significant,
and the relationship between perceived similarity and overall interview
assessments remained significant ( p < .01) after controlling for the effects of
interpersonal attraction.
The negative coefficients in the first two columns of Table 6 and the pat-
terns depicted in Figure 2 suggest that the significant effects on the outcome
Sex Interactions for Perceived Similarity
3
3.05
3.1
3.15
3.2
3.25
3.3
3.35
3.4
Male Candidate Female Candidate
P
e
r
c
e
i
v
e
d
S
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
Male Recruiter
Female Recruiter
Sex Interactions for Attraction
3.3
3.35
3.4
3.45
3.5
3.55
3.6
3.65
Male Candidate Female Candidate
I
n
t
e
r
p
e
r
s
o
n
a
l
A
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
Male Recruiter
Female Recruiter
Sex Interactions for Overall Interview
Assessments
2.8
2.9
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
Male Candidate Female Candidate O
v
e
r
a
l
l
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
s
Male Recruiter
Female Recruiter
Figure 2: Plots of Sex Interactions
were the result of sex dissimilarity (Hypothesis 3) rather than sex similarity
(Hypothesis 2). An examination of Figure 2 and the separate coefficients for
male and female recruiters in Table 6 indicates that female recruiters made no
distinction between male and female applicants with regards to any of the
outcomes or mediators, whereas male recruiters perceived female applicants
more favorably than male applicants on overall interview assessments and
interpersonal attraction. These findings were inconsistent with the third
hypothesis, which proposed that female recruiters would show a preference
toward male applicants.
Race Interaction for Overall Interview
Assessments
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
Caucasian
Candidate
African-Amercian
Candidate
O
v
e
r
a
l
l

I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w

A
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
s
Caucasian
Recruiter
African-American
Recruiter
Race Interaction for Offer Decision
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.18
Caucasian
Candidate
African-Amercian
Candidate
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

o
f

O
f
f
e
r
Caucasian
Recruiter
African-American
Recruiter
Figure 3: Plots of Race Interactions
614
T
A
B
L
E

6
M
e
d
i
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

T
e
s
t
s
a
R
e
g
r
e
s
s
i
o
n

C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
s
O
u
t
c
o
m
e
O
u
t
c
o
m
e
R
e
g
r
e
s
s
e
d
R
e
g
r
e
s
s
e
d
O
u
t
c
o
m
e
M
e
d
i
a
t
o
r
o
n

M
e
d
i
a
t
o
r
,
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
l
R
e
g
r
e
s
s
e
d
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
s
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
s
R
e
g
r
e
s
s
e
d
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
s
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
s
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
i
n
g
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
s
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
V
a
r
i
a
b
l
e
,
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
s
C
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
s
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
l
f
o
r

M
a
l
e
f
o
r

F
e
m
a
l
e
o
n

I
n
i
t
i
a
l
f
o
r

M
a
l
e
f
o
r

F
e
m
a
l
e
f
o
r

I
n
i
t
i
a
l
f
o
r

M
a
l
e
f
o
r

F
e
m
a
l
e
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
i
n
g
F
o
r

M
a
l
e
F
o
r

F
e
m
a
l
e
R
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p

T
e
s
t
e
d
V
a
r
i
a
b
l
e
c
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r
s
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r
s
V
a
r
i
a
b
l
e
c
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r
s
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r
s
V
a
r
i
a
b
l
e
c
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r
s
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r
s
f
o
r

M
e
d
i
a
t
o
r
c
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r
s
R
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r
s
R
a
c
e

S
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y

M
o
d
e
l
R
a
c
e

s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
i
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
o
f
f
e
r

d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n
b
4
.
0
5
*
.
1
1
1
.
1
4
4
.
2
6
S
e
x

S
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y

M
o
d
e
l
S
e
x

s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
p
e
r
c
e
i
v
e
d
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
.
1
2
*
.
1
6
*
.
0
5
.
0
9
.
1
0
.
0
8
.
7
7
*
*
.
7
7
*
*
.
7
6
*
*
.
0
5
.
0
9
.
0
2
S
e
x

s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
p
e
r
c
e
i
v
e
d
s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
i
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
.
1
3
*
.
1
4
*
.
1
1
.
0
9
.
1
0
.
0
8
.
6
7
*
*
.
6
1
*
*
.
7
1
*
*
.
0
6
.
0
8
.
0
5
S
e
x

s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
1
3
*
.
1
6
.
0
5
1
2
*
.
1
4
.
1
1
.
6
5
*
*
.
5
6
*
*
.
7
9
*
*
.
0
5
.
0
4
.
0
8
P
e
r
c
e
i
v
e
d

s
i
m
i
l
a
r
i
t
y
a
t
t
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w

a
s
s
e
s
s
m
e
n
t
.
6
8
*
.
7
8
*
*
.
4
3
*
*
.
3
4
*
*
a
.

T
h
e

c
o
n
t
r
o
l

v
a
r
i
a
b
l
e
s

w
e
r
e

i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d

i
n

t
h
e
s
e

a
n
a
l
y
s
e
s
;

h
o
w
e
v
e
r
,

f
o
r

e
a
s
e

o
f

p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
,

o
n
l
y

r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
s

o
f

t
h
e
o
r
e
t
i
c
a
l

i
n
t
e
r
e
s
t

a
r
e

d
i
s
p
l
a
y
e
d
.
b
.

B
e
c
a
u
s
e

l
o
g
i
s
t
i
c

r
e
g
r
e
s
s
i
o
n

w
a
s

u
s
e
d

f
o
r

t
h
e

o
f
f
e
r

d
e
c
i
s
i
o
n

v
a
r
i
a
b
l
e
,

a
l
l

o
f

t
h
e

c
o
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
t
s

p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d

i
n

t
h
i
s

r
o
w

a
r
e

u
n
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
i
z
e
d
.
c
.

M
a
l
e

a
n
d

f
e
m
a
l
e

r
e
c
r
u
i
t
e
r
s
*
p
.
0
5
.

*
*
p
.
0
1
.

.
1
0
.
DISCUSSION
To summarize the results of this study, recruiter-applicant race similarity
had significant direct effects on overall interviewassessments and final offer
decisions, and recruiter-applicant sex dissimilarity had a significant direct
effect on overall interview assessments. Conversely, age similarity was not
related to either criterion. In addition, there was some evidence that the pro-
posed mediators intervened in these relationships. The relationship between
race similarity and offer decision was completely mediated by overall inter-
view assessments; the relationship between sex dissimilarity and overall
interview assessments was fully mediated by perceived similarity and inter-
personal attraction; the relationship between sex dissimilarity and interper-
sonal attraction was fully mediated by perceived attitudinal similarity; and
the relationship between perceived similarity and overall interview assess-
ments was partially mediated by interpersonal attraction. However, these
findings do not lend support to the notion that similarity-attraction underlies
the relationship between demographic similarity and selection outcomes.
CONTRIBUTIONS
This study addressed a number of limitations of prior research on rela-
tional demography. As very fewapplied studies have examined the impact of
relational demography on applicant selection, this study filled an empirical
gap in the literature. Although some prior selection studies have considered
either one or two measures of demographic similarity, the current study
included indices of relational age, race, and sex. Some authors (Graves &
Powell, 1996) have questioned whether findings relating to interview out-
comes apply to job-offer decisions. Because the present study included both
overall interview assessments and subsequent offer decisions, it addressed
this concern.
A number of researchers have suggested that the relationship between
demographic similarity and work outcomes is the result of the similarity-
attraction process and the self-continuity drive proposed by SIT (Jackson
et al., 1991; Lawrence, 1997; Tsui &OReilly, 1989). This study contributed
to the literature by testing whether the linkages proposed in Byrnes (1971)
similarity-attraction model mediated the impact of demographic similarity
on selection outcomes. However, the findings suggest that similarity-
attraction does not explain the relationship between demographic similarity
and selection outcomes.
EXPLANATION OF FINDINGS
Harrison et al.s (1998) findings suggested that in the context of inter-
views, where the recruiter has had little opportunity to assess similarity to the
applicant on deep-level traits, categorizations based on surface-level traits
are more meaningful. This study provides evidence that applicants who are
racially similar to recruiters receive more favorable interview assessments
and are more likely to receive subsequent offers than are applicants who are
racially dissimilar. That recruiter-applicant race similarity yielded results
that were more congruent with the first hypothesis than did age or sex simi-
larity and is consistent with the evidence that our preference for similar oth-
ers may be the result of having had limited exposure to dissimilar others
(Ravenson, 1989). Through family and other social experiences, recruiters
have presumably had greater exposure to others from different sex and age
categories. In contrast, their interactions with others of different races may
have been more limited, making race similaritya more salient social category
with which to identify (Ashforth &Mael, 1989; Tajfel &Turner, 1986). Fur-
thermore, that Caucasians demonstrated a stronger homophily bias than did
African Americans is consistent with the literature on the self-enhancement
drive. For example, Gaertner and Dovidio (2000) note that as high status
group members seek to maintain their status, members of these groups show
a greater tendency to overvalue the in-group than do members of low status
groups.
Another possible explanation for the small or nonsignificant age and sex
effects may reflect the types of jobs for which the applicants were interview-
ing. That is, several researchers (Goldberg et al., 2001; Heilman, 1983; Perry
& Finkelstein, 1999) have suggested that jobs are age-typed and gender-
typed and that these age- and gender-types dictate the extent to which an indi-
vidual may be seen as a good match for a particular job. Thus, fit with the job
type may have overshadowed fit with the recruiters characteristics. To test
the effect of job type, I created a five-category variable (information or com-
puter systems, finance or accounting, sales or marketing, management, and
engineering) based on the jobs that the recruiters indicated they were seeking
to fill, and I reran the analyses with job category as a control variable. How-
ever, the beta for this variable was 0 in all cases. Therefore, job type did not
appear to impact the findings of this study.
It is also worth noting that overall interview impressions fully mediated
the relationship between race similarity and offer decision. Despite the abun-
dance of support for Fishbein and Azjens (1975) theory of reasoned action
in other contexts, empirical evidence linking recruiters impressions (e.g.,
intentions) and offer decisions (e.g., behaviors) has been mixed. As with the
current study, Cable and Judge (1997) found a significant relationship
between recruiters postinterview impressions and subsequent offer deci-
sions. In contrast, Powell and Goulet (1996) found no evidence of such a
relationship. Perhaps labor market factors play a role in the relationship
between recruiters assessments and job offers. That is, it would be much
more difficult to find an effect during periods of high unemployment because
the base rate of offer decisions is lower. That the data in the Powell and
Goulet study were collected between 1990 and 1991 (G. Powell, personal
communication, December, 2000), during the height of a recession, whereas
data for the current study and that of Cable and Judge (1997; D. M. Cable,
personal communication, December, 2000) were collected in the mid-1990s,
when the economy was considerably stronger, lends some support to the idea
that labor market conditions may affect the nature of the relationship
between recruiters impressions and final offer decisions.
This study heeded Lawrences (1997) call to open the black box of organi-
zational demography to explore howand why demography affects work out-
comes. Although several researchers have suggested that the similarity-
attraction paradigm underlies the importance of demographic similarity on
organizational criteria (Jackson et al., 1991; Tsui et al., 1992; Tsui &
OReilly, 1989), I did not find evidence of such relationships. For race, none
of the proposed similarity-attraction mediational effects was significant.
That neither attitudinal similarity nor interpersonal attraction explained the
race similarity effects suggests that other processes may have been operat-
ing. Given the ample research suggesting that people have negative reactions
to African American applicants seeking white-collar jobs (cf. Stewart &
Perlow, 2001), racial prejudice may be a reasonable explanation.
I also failed to find gender similarity effects. Based on the abundance of
theoretical and empirical research (Ellemers et al., 1993; Ely, 1994, 1995;
Graves & Powell, 1995; Gutek, 1985; Sachdev & Bourhis, 1991) that sug-
gests that females seek to identify with males to maintain a positive identity, I
posited that female recruiters would favor male applicants but that male
recruiters would show no preference. In contrast, in the current study,
whereas female recruiters exhibited no preference toward applicants of
either sex, male recruiters evaluated female applicants higher than male
applicants on interpersonal attraction and overall interview assessments.
This contradicts the research on self-enhancement, which strongly suggests
that men would likely distance themselves from women to maintain their
higher status (Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000). Note, however, that male recruit-
ers did not perceive either sex as more attitudinally similar to themselves. If
perceived attitudinal similarity does not explain male recruiters favorable
assessments of female applicants interpersonal attractiveness and overall
interviewing effectiveness, then what does?
Although there is ample literature linking target similarity to oneself to
attraction (Byrne & Blalock, 1963; Byrne & Clore, 1970; Griffitt, 1969;
Newcomb, 1961), other researchers (Dalessio & Imada, 1984; LaPrelle,
Insko, Cooksey, & Graetz, 1993) contend that support for the similarity-
attraction paradigmmay be confounded with an ideal-attraction relationship
because for most people, their ideals are reasonably similar to their percep-
tions of themselves (Wetzel & Insko, 1984, p. 254). Furthermore, there is
evidence that the prototype of an ideal male target is different than that of an
ideal female target. Specifically, Freeman (1987) and Konrad and Cannings
(1997) note that males are idealized as success objects, whereas females are
idealized as sex objects. Consistent with this view, Sprecher (1989) found
that male participants considered physical attractiveness when assessing
their initial attraction to a female target, but female participants focused on
earnings potential when assessing their initial attraction to a male target. His
findings suggest that sex may signal which target attributes to emphasize in
evaluating another individual. To examine this possibility, using a 5-point,
single-item measure (the applicant had a pleasant physical appearance), I
performed post hoc analyses for the male recruiter subsample to determine
whether applicants appearance mediated the relationships between
applicant sex and interpersonal attractionand overall interviewassessments.
These results, which are presented in Table 7, provide support for partial
mediation. Consistent with Dalessio and Imadas (1984) findings, the analy-
ses reported here suggest that applicant-ideal matches may be more impor-
tant to recruiters than are applicant-self matches. Moreover, these findings
indicate that applicant sex may direct recruiters to attend to those characteris-
tics that are central to the ideal gender prototype for that applicant. This inter-
vening effect bridges the research that has shown that female stimuli are
more apt to invoke assessments of attractiveness than are male stimuli
(Larose, Tracy, & McKelvie, 1994) with the ample evidence that physical
attractiveness results in favorable outcomes (Drogosz & Levy, 1996;
Marlowe, Schneider, & Nelson, 1996).
LIMITATIONS AND DIRECTIONS
FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
This study addressed some of the gaps in the literature; however, it is not
without limitations. The demographic variables considered in the present
study were not evenly distributed. Although applicants were of a variety of
racial backgrounds, all recruiters (the respondents for this investigation)
were either White or African American. Riordan and Shore (1997) found that
race-ethnic similarity to work group members had a stronger impact for His-
panics than for Caucasians or African Americans. Likewise, Wiersema and
Birds (1993) results suggest that demographic similarity may be more
meaningful to Asians than it is to other race-ethnic groups that are more com-
monly studied in U.S. samples. In a similar vein, although this sample
included applicants in their 40s and 50s, in general, applicants were rela-
tively young. The lack of significant direct age similarity effects and medi-
ated race similarity effects may have been the result of range restriction.
Future researchers may want to replicate the present study with groups that
have wider demographic distributions.
One of the most interesting results of this study had to do with the im-
pact of sex similarity. Of the two competing hypotheses proposed for the
impact of sex similarity, the results appear to provide better support for the
dissimilarity-attraction perspective. However, whereas female recruiters
were expected to show favoritism toward male applicants, I found that male
recruiters showed preference toward female applicants and found no evi-
dence of an applicant sex effect for female recruiters. Further, the unexpected
mediating effect of appearance on the sex dissimilarity-attraction relation-
ship suggests that for male recruiters, applicant sex may be a precursor to
defining the ideal applicant. Future researchers should consider examining
whether the factors associated with the ideal male prototype, such as earnings
TABLE 7
Post Hoc Mediational Tests for Male Recruiters
a
Regression Coefficients
Outcome Outcome
Outcome Regressed Regressed
Regressed Mediator on Mediator, on Initial
on Initial Regressed on Controlling for Variable, Controlling
Relationship Tested Variable Initial Variable Initial Variable for Mediator
Sex Similarity Model
Sex similarity
physical appearance
attraction .16* .12 .45** .11
Sex similarity
physical appearance
interview assessment .13* .12 .20** .11
a. The control variables were included in these analyses; however, for ease of presentation, only
relationships of theoretical interest are displayed.
*p .05. **p .01. p .10.
potential, mediate the relationship between applicant sex and work outcomes
in the same manner that ideal female prototypic characteristics did in the
present study.
Further research is needed to determine whether individual differences in
recruiters may affect the findings. Although I did not observe differences
based on the recruiters functional background (human resources vs. the
department for which applicants were being interviewed), more research is
needed to determine whether other recruiter difference variables, such as
training to avoid biases, might affect the relationships tested in this study.
Likewise, although inclusion of the final offer outcome was one of the impor-
tant contributions of this study, further work is needed to determine whether
recruiters role in the hiring process affects the relationship between similar-
ity and final offer decisions.
Although race similarity predicted selection outcomes, the other demo-
graphic similarity measures did not. Future researchers should continue to
search for other processes that may further open Lawrences (1997) black
box of organizational demography. However, given that demographic simi-
larity effect sizes are generally of small to moderate magnitude, exploring
moderating effects may prove more fruitful than exploring mediating effects.
For example, Goldberg et al.s (2003) recent work on the moderating effects
of self-continuity and self-enhancement drives suggests some conditions
under which similarity may be more or less important in predicting work
group outcomes. Further study is warranted to determine whether these
motives may operate in a similar fashion in the context of selection. Like-
wise, whereas Schneiders (1987) attraction-selection-attrition framework
suggests that most recruiters will seek applicants who are similar to other
members (including the recruiter) of the organization, affirmative action
employers may be looking to hire applicants who are demographically dis-
similar to other members of the organization. Assessing the extent to which
recruiters may be seeking employees with particular demographic character-
istics and how this bias affects the relationship between demography and
selection would be an important contribution to the literature.
REFERENCES
Ashforth, B. E., &Mael, F. (1989). Social identitytheoryandthe organization. Academy of Man-
agement Review, 14, 20-39.
Baron, R. M., &Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator distinction in social psychologi-
cal research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
Byrne, D. E. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
Byrne, D. E., & Blalock, B. (1963). Similarity and assumed similarity of attitudes between hus-
bands and wives. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 636-640.
Byrne, D. E., & Clore, G. L. (1970). A reinforcement model of evaluative responses. Personal-
ity: An International Journal, 1, 103-128.
Cable, D. M., &Judge, T. (1997). Interviewers perceptions of person-organizationfit and orga-
nizational selection decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 546-561.
Dalessio, A., & Imada, A. S. (1984). Relationships between interview selection decisions and
perceptions of applicant similarity to an ideal employee and self: Afield study. Human Rela-
tions, 37, 67-80.
Dipboye, R. (1992). Selection interviews: Process perspectives. Cincinnati, OH: South-
Western.
Drogosz, L. M., &Levy, P. E. (1996). Another look at the effects of appearance, gender, and job
type on performance-based decisions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 20, 437-445.
Edwards, J. (1994). The study of congruence in organizational behavior research: Critique and a
proposedalternative. Organizational Behavior andHumanDecisionProcesses, 58, 51-100.
Ellemers, N., Wilke, H., &vanKnippenberg, A. (1993). Effects of the legitimacyof lowgroupor
individual status on individual and collective status-enhancement strategies. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 64, 766-778.
Ely, R. J. (1994). Organizational demographics and the dynamics of relationships amongprofes-
sional women. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 203-238.
Ely, R. J. (1995). The power of demography: Womens social constructions of gender identity
at work. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 589-604.
Ferris, G. R., Judge, T. A., Rowlands, K. M., &Fitzgibbons, D. E. (1994). Subordinate influence
and the performance evaluation process. Test of a model. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 58, 101-135.
Fishbein, M., & Azjen, I. (1975). Beliefs, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to
theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Freeman, H. R. (1987). Structure and content of gender stereotypes: Effects of somatic appear-
ance and trait information. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11, 59-68.
Gaertner, S. L., &Dovidio, J. F. (2000). Reducingintergroupbias: The commonIngroupIdentity
Model. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
Goldberg, C., Finkelstein, L., Perry, E., &Konrad, A. (in press). Job and industry fit: The effects
of age and gender on career progress outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior.
Goldberg, C., Riordan, C., &Schaffer, B. (2003, August). Missing pieces in Social Identity The-
ory: Continuity and status as moderators of similarity. Paper presented at the Academy of
Management Best Paper Proceedings, Seattle, WA.
Gordon, R. A., Rozelle, R. M., &Baxter, J. C. (1988). The effect of applicant age, job level, and
accountability on the evaluation of job applicants. Organizational Behavior and Decision
Processes, 41, 20-33.
Graves, L. M., & Powell, G. N. (1995). The effect of sex similarity on recruiters evaluations of
actual applicants: Atest of the similarity-attractionparadigm. Personnel Psychology, 48, 85-
98.
Graves, L. M., &Powell, G. N. (1996). Sex similarity, quality of the employment interviewand
recruiters evaluationof actual applicants. Journal of Occupational andOrganizational Psy-
chology, 69, 243-261.
Griffitt, W. (1969). Personality similarity and self-concept as determinants of interpersonal
attraction. Journal of Social Psychology, 78, 137-146.
Gutek, B. A. (1985). Sex and the workplace. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Harrison, D., Price, K., &Bell, M. (1998). Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects
of surface and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Jour-
nal, 41, 96-107.
Heilman, M. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. Research in Organiza-
tional Behavior, 5, 269-298.
Heilman, M. E., Martell, R. F., &Simon, M. C. (1988). The vagaries of sex bias: Conditions reg-
ulating the undervaluation, equivaluation, and overvaluationof female job applicants. Orga-
nizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 41, 98-110.
Howard, J. L., &Ferris, G. R. (1996). The employment interviewcontext: Social and situational
influences on interview decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26, 112-136.
Jackson, S. E., Brett, J. F., Sessa, V. I., Cooper, D. M., Julin, J. A., &Peyronnin, K. (1991). Some
differences make a difference: Individual dissimilarity and group heterogeneityas correlates
of recruitment, promotions, and turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 675-789.
Judge, T. A., &Ferris, G. R. (1991). The elusive criterion of fit in human resources staffing deci-
sions. Human Resource Planning, 15, 47-67.
Judge, T. A., & Ferris, G. R. (1993). Social context of performance evaluation decisions. Acad-
emy of Management Journal, 36, 80-105.
Kenny, D. A. (1998). Mediation. Retrieved August 7, 1998, from http://nw3.nai.net/~dakenny/
kenny/html
Kinicki, A. J., & Lockwood, C. A. (1985). The interview process: An examination of factors
recruiters use in evaluating job applicants. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 26, 117-125.
Kirchmeyer, C. (2002). Change and stability in managers gender roles. Journal of Applied Psy-
chology, 87, 929-940.
Konrad, A. M., &Cannings, K. (1997). The effects of gender role congruence and statistical dis-
crimination in managerial advancement. Human Relations, 50, 1305-1328.
Konrad, A. M., Corrigall, E., Lieb, P., & Ritchie, J. E. (2000). Sex differences in job attribute
preferences among managers and business students. Group and Organization Management,
25, 108-132.
Konrad, A. M., Ritchie, J. E., Jr., Lieb, P., &Corrigall, E. (2000). Sex differences andsimilarities
in job attribute preferences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 593-641.
Lagace, R. R. (1990). Leader-member exchange: Antecedents and consequences of the cadre
and hired hand. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 10, 11-19.
LaPrelle, J., Insko, C. A., Cooksey, L., &Graetz, K. (1993). Self similarity, ideal similarity, and
undesired self similarity as indicators of attraction. Representative Research in Social Psy-
chology, 19, 65-74.
Larose, H., Tracy, J., &McKelvie, S. (1994). Effects of gender on the physical attractiveness ste-
reotype. Journal of Psychology, 127, 677-691.
Lawrence, B. S. (1997). The black box of organizational demography. Organization Science, 8,
1-22.
Lin, T. R., Dobbins, G. H., &Farh, J. L. (1992). Afield study of race and age similarity effects on
interviewratings in conventional and situational interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology,
77, 363-371.
Marlowe, C. M., Schneider, S. L., & Nelson, C. E. (1996). Gender and attractiveness biases in
hiring decisions: Are more experienced managers less biased? Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy, 81, 11-21.
Menard, S. (1995). Applied logistic regression analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Milliken, F., &Martins, L. (1996). Searching for common threads: Understanding the effects of
diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21, 402-433.
Newcomb, T. M. (1961). The acquaintance process. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
OReilly, C. A., Caldwell, D., & Barnett, W. (1989). Work group demography, social integra-
tion, and turnover. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 21-37.
Pelled, L. (1997). Demographic diversity, conflict, and work group outcomes: An intervening
process theory. Organization Science, 7, 615-631.
Perry, E. L., & Finkelstein, L. M. (1999). Toward a broader view of age discrimination in
employment-related decisions: Ajoint consideration of organizational factors and cognitive
processes. Human Resource Management Review, 9, 21-49.
Powell, G. N., & Goulet, L. R. (1996). Recruiters and applicants reactions to campus inter-
views and employment decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1619-1640.
Prewett-Livingston, A., Field, H., Veres, J., &Lewis, P. (1996). Effects of race on interviewrat-
ings in a situational panel interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 178-186.
Rand, T. M., &Wexley, K. N. (1975). Demonstration of the effect, similar to me, in simulated
employment interviews. Psychological Reports, 36, 535-544.
Ravenson, T. A. (1989). Compassionate stereotypingof elderly patients by physicians: Revising
the social contact hypothesis. Psychology and Aging, 4, 230-234.
Riordan, C. M., & Shore, L. M. (1997). Demographic diversity and employee attitudes: An
empirical examination of relational demography within work units. Journal of Applied Psy-
chology, 82, 342-358.
Sachdev, I., &Bourhis, R. (1991). Power and status differentials in minority and majority group
relations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 1-24.
Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437-453.
Sprecher, S. (1989). The importance to males and females of physical attractiveness, earning
potential, and expressiveness in initial attraction. Sex Roles, 21, 591-607.
Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 261-302.
Stewart, L. D., &Perlow, R. (2001). Applicant race, job status, andracial attitude as predictors of
employment discrimination. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16, 259-275.
Tajfel, H. (1982). Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel
&W. G. Austin (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago: Nelson-
Hall.
Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & OReilly, C. A. (1992). Being different: Relational demography and
organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 549-579.
Tsui, A. S., & OReilly, C. A. (1989). Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of
relational demographyin superior-subordinatedyads. Academy of Management Journal, 32,
402-423.
Tsui, A. S., Xin, K. R., &Egan, T. D. (1995). Relational demography: The missing link in verti-
cal dyad linkage. In S. E. Jackson & M. N. Ruderman (Eds.), Diversity in work teams:
Research paradigms for a changing workplace (pp. 97-129). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Turner, J. C., &Oakes, P. J. (1986). The significance of the social identity concept for social psy-
chology with reference to individualism, interactionism, and social influence. British Jour-
nal of Social Psychology, 25, 237-252.
Wade, K. J., &Kinicki, A. J. (1997). Subjective applicant qualifications and interpersonal attrac-
tion as mediators within a process model of interview selection decisions. Journal of Voca-
tional Behavior, 50, 23-40.
Wetzel, C. G., &Insko, C. A. (1984). The similarity-attractionrelationship: Is there an ideal one?
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 18, 253-276.
Wiersema, M. F., & Bird, A. (1993). Organizational demography in Japanese firms: Group het-
erogeneity, individual dissimilarity, and top management team turnover. Academy of Man-
agement Journal, 36, 996-1025.
Wiley, M. G., & Eskilson, A. (1985). Speech style, gender stereotypes, and corporate success:
What if women talked more like men? Sex Roles, 12, 993-1007.
Zenger, T. R., &Lawrence, B. S. (1989). Organizational demography: The differential effects of
age and tenure distributions on technical communication. Academy of Management Journal,
32, 353-376.
Caren B. Goldberg, Ph.D., is an associate professor of human resources at George
Washington University. Her research interests include diversity and sexual harassment.
She is anassociate editor at GroupandOrganizationManagement, andis onthe editorial
boards of the Journal of Management, and Human Resource Management Journal.

Group & Organization Management-2005-Goldberg-597-624 PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Group & Organization Management-2005-Goldberg-597-624 PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

http://gom.sagepub.

http://gom.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

- Oct 20, 2005 Version of Record >>

S-ar putea să vă placă și