._- A4 A JIllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll L mam was 3 ‘293 01°" 884° . Michigan State University This is to certify that the thesis entitled The Effects of a Candidate's Physical Attractiveness and Display of immediacy on Interviewer's Hiring Decisions presented by Chrystella Mary Farrior Atwater has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Mvo degree in comunication Dan: June 27, 1984 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution MSU LIBRARIES “ RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES wiII be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. v3.53 0 81801: THE EFFECTS OF A CANDIDATE'S PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS AND DISBLAY OF IMMEDIACY ON INTERVIEWER'S HIRING DECISIONS By Chrystella Mary Farrior Atwater A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Communication 1984 Accepted by the faculty of the Department of Communication, College of Communication Arts and Sciences, Michigan State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts Degree. Director of Thesis. MM ’1 / /I Guidance Committee, g/L‘“"JI,A\-" “(I 7 __x/’1»; ' ABSTRACT THE EFFECTS OF A CANDIDATE'S PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS AND DISPLAY OF IMMEDIACY ON INTERVIEWER'S HIRING DECISIONS By Chrystella Mary Farrior Atwater This study examined the impact of interviewee at- tractiveness and verbal and nonverbal immediacy on hiring decisions in the context of the employment interview. Results suggest a main effect for immediacy with immediate behaviors evaluated more favorably than non-immediate be- haviors. This finding must be interpreted in light of an interaction of immediacy with attractiveness. In the in- terviewing context, the attractive interviewee was less likely to be hired than the unattractive interviewee when both communicated non-immediately. This may suggest that the attractive candidate was penalized more severely be- cause her distant communication tactics were interpreted as being "snobbish". Conversely, the unattractive ap- plicant received more sympathy on the part of the raters because her cold communication behavior was possibly rationalized as being the product of her unfortunate ap- pearnace (i.e., self-consciousness or lack of confidence when communication with others). To my parents and Frankie. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many individuals that I would like to acknowledge for helping me produce this thesis. First and foremost, I would like to thank my parents for their love and reinforcement. They have been terrific parents and role models. Likewise, sincere thanks are extended to my-graduate committee: Dr.'s William Donohue, Sally Jackson and Scott Jacobs. Dr. Donohue was a caring and helpful chairman. His interest in my work motivated me to do my best work up to this point in my scholastic career. Dr.'s Sally Jackson and Scott Jacobs gave me excellent advice and guidance throughout the project. My friends/colleagues provided me with a supportive environment and therefore deserve many thanks. Mr. David D'Alessio did an excellent job in videotaping the stimulus tapes. Ms. Pamela Kalfbleisch, Ms. Wanda Del Toro and Ms. Theresa Allen all helped me get the job done. Moreover, a warm thank-you goes to Mr. Shane Lennis Byers, an under- standing and wonderful person who takes up a big space in my heart. - Finally, a gig thank you is extended to Ms. Cindy Shinabery for her excellent typing job. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER I - INTRODUCTION . Literature Review . Physical Attractiveness Immediacy . . . . . . Nonverbal Immediacy . Verbal Immediacy Hypotheses CHAPTER II - METHODOLOGY . Preparation of Stimulus Materials Procedure Manipulations CHAPTER III - RESULTS Analysis of Employment Evaluations CHAPTER IV - DISCUSSION Suggestions for Further Research REFERENCES . APPENDICES Appendix A - Interviewing Questions and Non-Immediate Answers Appendix B - Interviewing Questions and Immediate Answers Appendix C - Attractiveness Scale . Appendix D — Revised Attractiveness Scale . . . . . . Appendix E - Non-Verbal Immediacy Scale iv Page vi vii H 50 53 SS 58 60 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) APPENDICES (Continued) Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix NQHIQ'TJ Verbal Immediacy Scale Hiring Scale 1 Hiring Scale 2 . Revised Hiring Scale Job Description Sample Resume 62 64 66 68 71 73 Table LIST OF TABLES Group Means . . . . . . . . . AttractiVeness by Immediacy by Message Type (as a random factor) Analysis of Variance . . . . Analysis of Means and Standard Deviations . . . . Attractiveness by Immediacy by Message Type Analysis of Variance Summary Table (Fixed Effects) Attractiveness by Immediacy Analysis of Variance (Message One) . . . . . . . . . . . . . Attractiveness by Immediacy Analysis of Variance (Message Two) . . . . . . . . . . . Attractiveness by Immediacy Analysis of Variance (Message Three) . . . . . . vi Page 26 28 29 34 35 36 37 Figure LIST OF FIGURES Collapsed Means Across Messages Graphic Illustration of the Attractiveness of Immediacy Interaction vii Page 27 32 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Typically, organizations place a tremendous emphasis on training their interviewers to select from numerous ap- plicants only those who will serve as assets to the organi- zation. Much research on the hiring process has shown that interviewers use subjective rather than objective criteria in assessing the capabilities of applicants (Hollingsworth, 1923; Anstey and Mercer, 1956; Bassett, 1965; Peshkin, 1971). Specifically, interviewers have been found to make their employment decisions based on their "intuitive" first impressions of applicants. Consequently, investigators have become interested in those factors influencing an in- terviewer's perception of a candidate's acceptability to be employed in the organization. Research on the interviewing process has shown that a candidate's physical attractiveness and display of immediate communicative behaviors increases his/her likelihood of being employed. However, no research to date has investi- gated the possible conjoint effects of these two variables on hiring decisions. The goal of the present research was to determine whether or not an interviewer's perception is influenced by both a candidate's level of attractiveness and verbal and nonverbal immediacy. For clarification purposes it is necessary to note that under the construct of immediacy, both immediate and non-immediate cues will be analyzed. The present paper will begin by reviewing the literature supporting the subjective nature of the inter- viewing process, the influence of physical attractiveness, and verbal and nonverbal immediacy in determining employ- ment evaluations. Literature Review The interviewing process is used by organizations to 'size-up' applicants during a face-to-face conversation. According to Peshkin (1971), the interview is an indispen- sible process that provides invaluable knowledge about ap- plicants' motivation to work, life goals, background, re- action to pressure, ability to think on their feet, and in- hibitions. Traditionally, the content and process of an interview is thought of as being a brief, dyadic interaction, whereby, the interviewer asks a set of standard questions to the applicants to assess their job aptitude. The inter- viewee, on the other hand, simply responds to the inter- viewer's questions. Bellow and Estep (1959) contend that ideally, the interviewer's main responsibility is to exert selective control over the information he/she receives. Specifically, the interviewer's duty is to keep in mind the underlying rationale and purpose of the interview. Following the in- terview, the interviewer evaluates the applicant on the basis of his/her responses and resume (or other relevant data on the applicant). He/she then makes a decision to hire or reject the applicant. One would presume that if interviewers were objective in their assessment of applicants there would be more validity and reliability in the interviewing process. Un- fortunately, much data has been documented to suggest that the interview is a subjective and dubious process (Randell, 1978; Carlston, et a1., 1971; Anstey et a1., 1976; Anstey and Mercer, 1956). Beneath the ritualistic and standardized exterior of the interviewing process lies a unique sort of social in- teraction between two persons in a face-to-face context. Erickson and Schultz (1982) argue that while the interview seems to be the type of speech situation that is confined by a brief period of time, organizational rules, and general cultural norms of appropriate behavior, the participants are also reacting to each other as individuals. Therefore, in understanding the nature of the interviewing process, one must take under consideration the notion that the interviewer is a human being who is reacting to another human being. In other words, the interviewer is not immune to evaluating ap- plicants on a subjective basis. Thinking of the interviewer as a human being rather than as an objective robot may explain why there is little reliability and validity in the interviewing process. To illustrate this point, Hollingsworth (1923) conducted an 4 experiment wherein twelve sales managers were asked to inter- view fifty-seven applicants for sales positions. Each ap- plicant was separately screened and appraised by each manager. Hollingsworth found that there was little consensus and amazing discrepancies in the managers' evaluation of the candidates. For example, one applicant was ranked fifty- seventh by one interviewer and first by another. While the nature and purpose of the interviewer's job is to make certain judgments about an applicant, the above illustration demonstrates that many interviewers fall victim to their personal perception on which they form attitudes and ultimately make decisions about applicants (Peshkin, 1971). Furthermore, Peshkin argues that many interviewers believe that they possess an intuitive ability to categorize applicants in a certain way. Specifically, they believe that they have the ability to label certain applicants as being honest, motivated, and reliable, all of which are char- acteristics necessary to be employed (Bassett, 1965). Peshkin (1971) contends that an interviewer's overall perception of a candidate is primarily influenced by his/ her first impression of the candidate. A first impression is formed by an individual's stereotypical judgment of another based upon limited information. Stano (1982) argues that because most interviews are brief, the participants must rely on first impression information to assess each other. While Stano contends that impression formation within the interview is reciprocal, it can be argued that the in- terviewer's impression of the applicant is more crucial in determining the outcome of the interview. Cohen and Ethredge (1975) make this point directly in their definition of an interview. They state: "(an interview is) an appraisal process in which recruiters observe various applicant be- haviors that prompt referral decision" (p. 210). In the interview setting, researchers have found that interviewers assign positive or negative "halos" to candi— dates on the basis of their first impressions (McQuaig, 1981; Peshkin, 1971; Lopez, 1965). Investigators have referred to this phenomena as the "halo effect" which is a favorable or unfavorable generalization alloted to an applicant. McQuaig (1981) contends that it is an overwhelming impres- sion that a certain candidate either has everything and is perfect for the job or is completely unqualified. Moreover, a positive halo influences an interviewer into feeling a strong, subconscious attraction for the candidate, which hypnotizes her/him into concluding that the candidate is the 'right' person for the position. It can be further argued that the converse is true with unfavorable candidates. Though the nature and purpose of the interviewer's job is to make certain judgments about applicants, many inter- viewers rely on subjective characteristics, traits and/or behaviors possessed by applicants which are completely un- related to the interview. For example, an applicant's rdidity 01 geatly re; Erick: d an appl wcial ide phv~' .lilfiéfl One fOund t' phISica asSOCia I. - Seal-Chi 6 attentiveness may be a relevant behavior, while his/her ner- vous habits may not. With these barriers infringing upon the objectivity of the interviewing process, the reliability and validity of successful screening of job applicants is greatly reduced. Erickson and Schultz (1982) refer to the collectiveness of an applicant's behavior in an interview as "performed social identity." This identity is an aggregate of relevant (e.g., "universalistic attributes") and irrelevant appli- cant characteristics (i.e., "particularistic attributes"). Erickson and Schultz argue that while the interviewer is officially confined to evaluate universalistic attributes held by a candidate, particularistic attributes tend to leak in and occupy the center of attention. Therefore, the candidate's probability of being hired may be contingent upon possession of favorable particularistic attributes. Physical Attractiveness One particularistic attribute which has been generally found to make a favorable impression on peOple is that of physical attractiveness, while unattractiveness is usually associated with negative impressions (Dion et al., 1972; Miller, 1970). Therefore, it is not surprising that re- searchers have found that physically attractive candidates are more likely than unattractive candidates to be employed by organizations. 7 Defining physical attractiveness, however, has been problematic due to the notion that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. However, this enigma has not deterred re- searchers from finding a standardized conceptualization of physical attractiveness. Some researchers have theorized that the media (e.g., Hollywood, television, and advertising) has conditioned people to recognize beautiful persons (Burgoon and Saine, 1978; Kendrick and Guitierres, 1980). To support this contention, research findings indicate that people can unanimously agree upon what an attractive female looks like (KOpera et al., 1971; Cavior, 1981 in Kendrick and Guitierres, 1980; and Martin, 1964). Interviewing textbooks have advised candidates that their appearance is an important part of their self-presen- tation to the interviewer and therefore it is necessary to look as "good" as possible (Moffat, 1979). Studies have shown that a candidate's appearance is a reliable indicator of being chosen for a position (Wexley, Fugita, and Malone, 1975; Austin and Vines, 1980). While this literature is primarily concerned with a candidate's neatness (i.e., clothes, hair, grooming, etc.), it is possible that the more attractive a candidate appears as a result of following these guidelines, the more likely he/she will make a favor- able impression on the interviewer. Physically attractive persons make favorable impres- sions because observers like them (Joseph, 1977; Snyder and Rothbart, 1977). As observers, there is a tendency to assign the physically attractive person innumerable socially desirable traits. For instance, Dion et a1. (1972) found that college men and women expected physically attractive people of both sexes to possess more strength, sexual warmth, sensitivity, kindness, poise, modesty and better character than unattractive persons. Dipoye et al. (1977), found that physical attractiveness was quite an influential determiner in the perceived competence of business managers. Miller (1970) analyzed bi-polar adjectives attributed to attractive and unattractive persons. He found that in fifteen out of seventeen adjectives (i.e., competent/incompetent, logical/ illogical, friendly/unfriendly, warm/cold, etc.) physically attractive persons were rated more favorably than unattractive persons. Research on the effects of a physically attractive can- didate on personnel selection has indicated that physically attractive persons are more likely to be hired than unat- tractive candidates (Dipoye et al., 1977; Cash et al., 1977). Dipoye et a1. (1977), found that male college recruiters and business students were more willing to hire a physically attractive candidate for a supervisory position than an equally qualified unattractive candidate regardless of sex. Cash et a1. (1977) found that employment potential for both sexes is significantly greater for attractive rather than unattractive candidates. 6 While the previous findings have indicated that at- tractive applicants have an edge over their unattractive counterparts, none of these results have yet been substan- tiated in actual or simulated interviews. The above re- search simply assessed an interviewer's likelihood of hiring an applicant on the basis of a photograph (e.g., manipu- lated to depict either an attractive or unattractive candi- date) along with an attached resume which enumerated the qualifications of the applicant. Additionally, this limited methodology has overlooked the possibility that a candidate's physical attractiveness may have a totally different effect on hiring decisions when considered in conjunction with his/her nonverbal and verbal communicative behaviors, since these variables occur in unison in the real life interview. Scherer et al. (1977) supported this notion when they found that the number of channels available to pe0p1e on which to make judgments about others affected their evaluations. Immediacy Nida and Williams (1977) contend that there are two major categories from which pe0p1e can gather information: (1) appearance and (2) behavior. The latter suggests that how a person 'acts' in the presence of another has an ef- fect on how others perceive him/her. It is not surprising to find that much research has been dedicated to uncovering what impressions certain verbal and nonverbal communicative behaviors convey to others. It can be argued that the 10 majority of this research falls under the rubric of com~ municative Immediacy and Non-immediacy. Verbal and nonverbal immediacy has been conceptualized as the decreasing of physical or psychological distance between communicators (Mehrabian, 1967, 1969, 1971(a); Andersen, 1979; Andersen, Andersen and Jensen, 1979). Im- mediate communication is used when one wishes to convey liking, trust, caring or intimacy to another person or object (Burgoon et al., 1982). Conversely, non-immediate communication has been de— fined as the increasing of psychological or physical dis- tance between participants in a communication transaction (Mehrabian, 1967, 1969, 1971(a); Mehrabian and Weiner, 1968). Non-immediate communication expresses one's detachment, distance and coldness towards another person or object (Burgoon et al., 1982). Nonverbal Immediacy To date, nonverbal communication has been accentuated in the research on the interviewing process. This trend has been perpetuated by investigators who suggest that how one non-verbally communicates is more important than one's verbal message (Argyle, 1972; Beier and Valens, 1975; Beier, 1966). Birdwhistle (1975) found that only thirty- five percent of verbal communication in face-to-face inter- action carries social meaning, while fifty-five percent is interpreted through nonverbal communication. 11 Though many nonverbal immediate and non-immediate be- haviors have been studied, four of them are commonly cited in one form or another: (1) physical proximity, (2) eye contact, (3) body lean and (4) smiling (Fugita and Makel, 1977). According to (Argyle and Dean, 1965; Mehrabian, 1971; Anderson, 1979), proximity corresponds directly with the psychological distance that is created. Goldring (1967) found that observers judged a far distance as being cold and unresponsive. Patterson and Sechrest (1970) found that confederates were judged as least extroverted and socially active at a far distance and most active at a near distance. In terms of eye contact, increased looking has been associated with more favorable socio-emotional evaluations by the receiver (Beebe, 1980; Goldberg, Kiesler and Collins, 1969; Kleinke, Meeker and LaForge, 1974; McDowell, 1973; Reece and Whitman, 1961). Research clearly indicates that frequency and duration of eye contact induces positive re— gard, while lack of eye contact has been found to have the opposite effect on receivers. Researchers have found that non-immediacy and psychological distance were strongly linked with minimal eye contact (Andersen, 1979; Andersen, Andersen and Jensen, 1979; Mehrabian, 1968, 1971(b), 1972; Mehrabian and Williams, 1969; Patterson, 1976). Students of communication have found that a forward body lean characterizes rapport and immediacy, while a re- clining posture is perceived as expressing passivity and boredom (Goldring, 1967; Trout and Rosenfeld, 1980). And 12 finally, smiling is universally recognized as meaning attraction, liking, and intimacy (Burgoon et al., 1982). When people are seeking positive evaluations from others, they tend to smile (Coults and Schneider, 1976; Rosenfeld, 1966). Friendliness is conveyed through smiling (Patterson et al., 1981) and is more immediate (Bayes, 1970; Gutsell and Anderson, 1980). The lack of smiling has not yet been researched (Burgoon et al., 1982), however, it can be argued that no smiling will usually be evaluated less positively than the presence of smiling. Interviewer's hiring decisions have been found to be swayed by a variety of nonverbal cues exhibited by appli- cants during the interview session (Imada and Hakel, 1977; Hopper and Williams, 1973; Hopper, 1972). Interviewers tend to interpret certain nonverbal behaviors as being indicative of positive social behavior and vocational motivation (Sigleman and Davis, 1978). It can therefore be argued that nonverbal behaviors which are positively evaluated are immediate because the applicant seems to convey interest and liking for the position. Conversely, non-immediate behaviors are interpreted by the interviewer as representing a lack of motivation and laziness on the part of an appli- cant. Wexley, Fugita and Malone (1975) found that high levels of eye contact, gesturing, smiling and appr0priate tone of voice were taken to represent enthusiasm and re- sulted in higher evaluations of applicants in simulated 13 interviews. Barbee and Kiel (1973) found that global ratings of posture and mannerisms were closely related with positive hiring ratings of job applicants in simulated job inter- views. Young et a1. (1979) contend that sometimes candi- dates fail in interviews because they engage in poor eye contact, sullen facial expressions and lack of head nodding. This indirectly supports the notion that non-immediate nonverbal behaviors are negatively evaluated by inter- viewers. Imada (1975) found that an active or immediate display in simulated job interviews yielded favorable hiring ratings when compared with less active styles. The above literature makes it possible to argue that there is a parallel between a candidate's display of non- verbal covational motivation and immediacy. These behaviors are more likely to be interpreted as positive or favorable by the interviewer and this increases the candidate's hiring potential. In the same vein, the converse may hold true between a candidate's nonverbal display of boredom/pas~ sivity and non-immediacy. A decrease in the candidate's hiring potential should be most likely in these instances. Verbal Immediacy While Birdwhistle (1970) was earlier cited as arguing that verbal communication was subordinate to nonverbal cues in terms of the interpretation of meaning in social inter- action, other research has shown that verbal communication does serve as an important evaluative criterion in l4 impression formation. Verbal skills can be evaluated by interviewers in terms of the degree to which the information is valuable and understandable (Sigleman and Davis, 1978). Tinsley (1978) found that one of the critical characteris- tics that recruiters look for in candidates is their ability to communicate. Fiester and Giamba (1972) found that there was a significant correlation between several language indices and vocational success. Sigleman and Davis (1977) found that in their study, raters consciously perceived a candi- date's speaking style. All of these findings suggest that verbal style may have a strong bearing on the interviewer's hiring decision. Specifically, an applicant's verbal im- mediacy may directly convey his or her enthusiasm, sincerity and motivation to work. On the other hand, non-immediate communication may be interpreted as aloofness, boredom and laziness toward work. Mehrabian and Weiner (1968) composed a nine category verbal non—immediacy scale which presents various methods by which pe0p1e create physical and/or psychological distance between themselves and others. Sorted into four groups, the categories provide a consistent way of assessing subtle communication attitudes towards an object of communication (e.g., a communication partner, t0pic, or situation). Donohue, Diez, Stable and Burgoon (1983) restructured these groups for valid and reliable coding purposes by using the 15 following categories: (1) Spatial, (2) Temporal, (3) Implicit, and (4) Modified. The first category has been labelled at "spatial." Here the communicator refers to the object of communication by using demonstrative pronouns such as "those", indicating an inconsistency between the spatial context in which the communication is taking place and the demonstrative pro- nouns used. This is representative of non-immediate com- munication. By using a demonstrative pronoun such as "these", on the other hand, it can be argued to exemplify more immediate communication, since there is more con- sistency between it and the spatial context. The second category "temporal" involves the communi- cator's relationship to the object as being either in the past, present, or future. Mehrabian and Weiner (1968) argue that the past and future tenses connote less contact between the communicator and object while the present tense conveys that the communicator and object are still close and there is an anticipation for further interaction between the two. Under the rubric of "implicit", the degree of ambiguity created by the communicator is determined. Non—specific reference to the object of communication is considered more non-immediate while more direct references indicate a higher degree of immediacy. The final category described as "modified" serves to uncover non-immediate communication by the passivity of the communicator's tone towards the object. 16 Conversely, a more active tone has been found to connote more immediacy. Mehrabian and Wiener's (1968) non-immediacy categories make it possible to create both immediate and non«immediate messages and/or code for them in transcripts. Anthony (1974) conducted a study whereby raters evaluated hand- written paragraphs describing people using immediate or non-immediate language. When the paragraphs were written using immediate communication, raters tended to think that the author liked the person he/she was describing and wished for continued interaction with them. This suggests that verbal immediacy is recognizable in human dialogue, and is more positively evaluated than non-immediate language. While the previous section separately focused on im- mediate nonverbal and verbal communication as each contri- buting to one's evaluation of others, it should be empha- sized that in social interaction both verbal and nonverbal communication occur in unison. Studying the interaction between verbal and nonverbal communication is a growing area of research. It has been found that nonverbal be« haviors are capable of either enhancing or detracting from a verbal message (Mehrabian, 1968; Mehrabian and Diamond, 1971; Mehrabian and Ferris, 1967). Moreover, researchers have found that the amount of "agreement" between verbal and nonverbal messages (Shapiro, 1966) or their degree of ”congruence" (Haase and Tepper, 1972) enhances the credi— bility of the communicator's message while noncongruence l7 weakens its impact. Therefore, the present study focused on the candidate's display of consistent immediate behavior. Hypothesis In regard to physical attractiveness, most published experiments main effects for attractive females are rarely reported; however, interactions between attractiveness and other variables are frequently observed (Chaiken, 1979; Chaiken, Eagly, Sejwaz, Gregory and Christensen, 1978; Mills and Aronson, 1965). Joseph (1982) argues that the evidence on the persuasive effects of physical attractive- ness indicates that in the case of female communicators, the impact of their good looks is dampened or occasionally reserved by other cues present. Therefore, although at- tractive candidates may make more favorable impressions on interviewers, the candidates' communication behaviors may impede or reinforce their chances of being hired. In general, the literature cited above suggests that there will be a main effect for immediacy, but none for attractiveness and a possible interaction between these two variables. Past research has indicated that raters will evaluate the candidate more favorably when she behaves in an im- mediate manner. Anthony (1974) found that when a person communicates using immediate expressions, they were rated as being attracted to or liking the object of communica- tion, while the converse (i.e., non-immediate communication) 18 was rated as being unattracted to or disliking the object of communication. Imada and Hakel (1977) found that immediate nonverbal behavior yielded higher rates of persona acceptance by pseudo-employers. Finally, Graves and Robinson (1974) report that consistency between verbal and nonverbal cues which communicated warmth, closeness and concern to their clients were more likely to make favorable impressions on their clients and thus had better working relationships with them. In lieu of these research findings, the following hypotheses are proposed: H1: Physically attractive candidates who exhibit non-immediate behaviors are less likely to be hired than unat- tractive candidates who display im- mediate behaviors. H : Physically attractive candidates who exhibit immediate behaviors will be more likely hired than unattractive candidates who display non-immediate behaviors. H : Candidates who display immediacy are more likely to be hired than those who behave non—immediately. CHAPTER II METHODOLOGY The present study was a 2 x 2 x 3 factorial design. There were two levels of attractiveness (e.g., attractive and unattractive), corresponding levels of immediacy (e.g., immediate and non-immediate verbal and nonverbal communica- tion) and finally a control factor: three sets of messages (e.g., interviewing questions and answers). This control factor was included to observe its possible variance in the selection of personnel. Specifically, the selection process could be confounded by the desirability of one message type over another (Jackson and Jacobs, 1983). Preparation of Stimulus Materials Three scripts of standardized interview questions were chosen. The content of these questions involved the candi- date's work experiences, career objectives, course prepara- tion, hobbies and educational experiences. Using Donohue et al's. (1982) coding manual, correSponding answers were written in both the immediate (see Appendix A) and non- immediate (see Appendix B) format. Two female theatre students and one male communication student volUnteered to be videotaped while role playing the interviewees and interviewer, respectively. In each 19 20 interview, an actress memorized the answers to the corres- ponding questions and was trained depending on the immediacy condition to verbally or nonverbally act accordingly. The components of nonverbal behavior were selected on the basis of previous interview research, namely Imada and Hakel's (1977) study on the effect of candidate's display of nonverbal immediacy in determining employment evaluations. They include: (1) frequency and duration of eye contact; (2) distance between communicators (e.g., proximity); (3) body lean (e.g., forward, reclined); and, (4) presence or absence of smiling. In each attractive/immediacy condition, three separate "interviews" were taped, each containing different interview questions and answers. These twelve videotapes served as the stimulus materials for the experiment. Subjects. Two hundred and eleven males and females enrolled in various sections of an introductory communication course at a large Midwestern university volunteered and were randomly assigned to observe one of the twelve stimulus tapes. Measurement Scales. Physical Attractiveness Scale -- Although McCroskey and McCain's (1974) attractiveness scale was adopted in this study, it was altered in order to more accurately measure a candidate's attractiveness in the in- terviewing setting. See original (Appendix C) and revised version (Appendix D). The scale was modified to focus 21 solely on the overall attractiveness of the candidate because it can be argued that candidates normally groom themselves neatly when they interview for a position. Nonverbal immediacy/non-immediacy scale -- A scale was developed in order to assess the candidate's nonverbal behavior (see Appendix E). The scale consisted of a seven point continuum ranging from: 1 = strongly agree to 7 = strongly disagree. Verbal immediacy/non-immediacy scale -- This scale was constructed in order to determine whether the degree of im- mediacy could be recognizable through auditory means. As with the nonverbal immediacy scale, this measure was also a seven point Likert-type (see Appendix F). Hiring scale -- Two scales which measured interviewer's impressions and hiring probability of candidates were modi- fied and then merged into one scale for the present study (see originals Appendix G, H and revised version Appendix I). The scales were revised for two reasons: (1) overlapping statements, and (2) some wording was vague or misleading and would not adequately measure the constructs of interest in this experiment. The first scale (constructed by McGovern and Tinsley, 1978) was a culmination of ten interviewee characteristics which have been consistently identified in previous research as critical factors that affect an inter- viewer's judgment. Evaluations were made by using a seven point Likert-type scale with response Options which ranged from 1 = superior to 7 - completely unsatisfactory. The 22 second scale was a nine item recall measure developed by Imada and Hakel (1975) which assessed an observer's feelings about the applicant. Procedure Subjects were randomly assigned to one of twelve groups where they were to watch one of the twelve interviewing sessions. Before the actual viewing of the tapes, the sub- jects were given a packet which contained a bogus job description for the position of "tutor/counselor" and a fictitious resume. The resume was identical for both the attractive and unattractive candidate and was written set- ting forth only favorable expectations. The resume was pretested with the Director of Student Advising in the Department of Communication for its suitability in meeting the criteria of its purpose. After reading the resume and job description, the subjects were asked to role play interviewers while they watched their assigned videotape. After the viewing, they evaluated the candidate on the modified hiring scale. Manipulations Before the actual experiment, several pre-tests were conducted to insure that attractiveness and verbal/nonverbal immediacy were successfully manipulated. Ten groups of subjects (e.g., ranging from seven to thirteen students per group). The total number of subjects equalled 110. 23 Two groups of subjects were assigned to rate either the attractive or unattractive candidate. The subjects in these groups were given five minutes to fill out the at— tractiveness scale while viewing a slide depicting either the attractive or unattractive female. Another pair of groups were randomly assigned to view a videotape depicting the attractive female exhibiting im- mediate or non-immediate nonverbal behavior. The sound track was not heard while the subjects viewed the tape. At the end of the tape, the subjects filled out the non? verbal immediacy measure. Another two groups rated the unattractive female in the same manner. The remaining two pairs of groups listened to a sound track version of the interview without viewing the video- tapes. Two groups separately assessed the attractive female communicator's immediacy or non-immediacy, while the other two groups did the same for the unattractive female. Following these sessions, the groups were given the verbal immediacy/non-immediacy scale to complete. CHAPTER III RESULTS Manipulation Checks Both attractiveness and immediacy were successfully manipulated (see Table 1). The attractive female was clearly perceived more attractive than her unattractive counterpart -- T(22) = 10.65, p < .01, (M = 1.97, M = 5159), respectively. The attractive female's verbal com- munication was rated more favorably in the immediate con- dition rather than in the non-immediate condition -- (M = 2.14, M = 6.06), respectively, T(19) = 11.62, p < .01). This also held true for the unattractive candidate -- (M = 2.67, M = 5.31), T(23) = 4.62, p <-.01. The rater's judgments were also in accordance to the type of nonverbal immediacy displayed by both the attrac- tive and unattractive females. In the immediate condition, the attractive female was rated more favorably than when she behaved non-immediately -- (M = 1.92, M = 6.35), T(l7) = 12.31, p < .01. Similar results held true for the unattrac- tive female -- T(19) = 12.01, p < .01, (M = 2.5, M = 6.10). The alpha levels for the scales used in the study were quite high indicating a high level of reliability. The re- liability obtained for the nonverbal immediacy scale was .94, while the verbal immediacy scale was .94 also. The 24 25 attractiveness scale received a reliability coefficient of .97. These high coefficients may have been due to the successful manipulations. 26 Table 1 Group Means Variable Groups ‘df t Physical Att. Unatt. ' * Attractiveness 1.97 5.59 22 10.65 Att. Im. Att. Non-Im. * Verbal 2.14 6.06 19 11°62 Immediacy Unatt. Im. Unatt. Non-Im. 9': 2.67 5.31 23 4'62 Att. Im. Att. NonoIm. it Nonverbal 1.92 6.35 17 12°31 Immediacy Unatt. Im. Unatt. Non—Im. it 2.50 6.10 19 12°01 27 Analysis of Employment Evaluations A 2 x 2 x 3 analysis of variance was performed on subject's ratings of willingness to hire candidates and is summarized in Table 2. This analysis was conducted by treating the message variable as a random factor. The relevant means based on this analysis are found in Table 3. Since there was no main or interaction effects with the message variable, these means were collapsed in order to discuss the results (see Figure 1). All hypotheses were supported. Specifically, sub- jects were more willing to recommend the hiring of an ap- plicant who displayed immediacy regardless of her attrac- tiveness level -- F (1,2) = 383.65, p < .001. The physiv cally attractive applicant who engaged in non—immediate com- munication was less likely to be hired than the attrac- tive applicant who exhibited immediate behaviors (M = 5.92, M = 2.81, respectively). The analysis further revealed that a physically attractive candidate was more likely to be hired when she behaved in an immediate manner as Opposed to an unattractive candidate who communicated non-immediately (M = 2.45, M = 5.34, respectively). Attractive Unattractive Immediate 2.45 2.81 Non-Immediate 5.92 5.34 Figure 1. Collapsed Means Across Messages Attractiveness by Immediacy by 28 Table 2 Message Type (as a random factor) Analysis of Variance Source df 55 MS F n? Attractiveness 1 .72095 .72095 2.57 .001 Immediacy l 457.90636 457.90636 383.65* .76 Message 2 3.08824 1.54412 2.56 .005 Attractiveness x Message 2 .03384 .01692 .2805 0 Attractiveness * x Immediacy l 12.93030 12.93030 76.719 .02 Message x ‘ Immediacy 2 2.37143 1.18572 1.96595 .003 Attractiveness x Immediacy x 2 .33709 .16854 .27945 0 Message Error 199 120.2193 .60313 Within Total 210 597.1207 * p < .001 29 Table 3 Analysis of Means and Standard Deviations i .. H - . STANDARD LONDIIION MEAN DEVIATION ATTRACTIVE/IMMEDIATE Message One 2.27 1.06 Message Two 2.51 1.07 Message Three 2.47 .58 ATTRACTIVE/NON-IMMEDIATE Message One 6.10 .71 Message Two 6.15 .36 Message Three 5.59 .71 UNATTRACTIVE/IMMEDIATE Message One 2.71 .69 Message Two 2.96 .71 Message Three 2.77 .72 UNATTRACTIVE/NON-IMMEDIATE Message One 5.37 .78 Message Two 5.50 .80 Message Three 5.10 .90 30 In addition to the predicted main effect for immediacy, a significant interaction between attractiveness and im- mediacy was yielded -- F (1,2) = 76.71, p < .001. The Tukey post—hoc comparison test was used to discern the dif- ferences between the four cells and pinpoint the inter- action. This analysis revealed that there was no signifi- cant differences between the attractive/immediate and unv attractive/immediate conditions. However, there were dif- ferences found between the attractive/non-immediate and unattractive/non«immediate conditions -- Tukey (3.67), p < .05. Moreover, significant differences between the attrac- tive/immediate condition and the unattractive/non-immediate and the attractive/non-immediate conditions were also noted. Further analysis was required to pinpoint what cells were causing the interaction. A graphic presenta- tion of this interaction was designed. In Figure 2, it becomes evident that there is a disordinal interaction- Specifically, the graph suggests that the attractive candi- date was penalized more severely than her unattractive counterpart in the non-immediate condition. The attractive candidate was the 13353 likely to be hired in the non-immediate condition, while she was the most likely to be hired in the immediate condition. A pos- sible explanation of the phenomenon is that attractive persons may appear to be ”snobbish" or "stuck up" when they communicate distance to others. 31 As Dion et al. (1972) reported, attractive persons are expected to possess socially desirable traits such as warmth, sensitivity, kindness and modesty, all which can be argued to prompt immediate behavior. Because attrac— tive pe0p1e are believed to have these traits, it would logically follow that they would be the approachable type. In the event that the attractive individual communicates distance to another transactor, the latter is likely to interpret the former's behaviors as acts of "uppitiness" which in turn may harbor ill feelings towards the attrac- tive person. On the other hand, the unattractive candidate was more likely to be hired than her attractive counterpart when she behaved non-immediately. According to Miller (1970), unattractive persons are more likely to have had lives whereby they are coerced and ridiculed. It can be argued that this may add to their "expected" display of distant behaviors in the presence of others. Their past experiences may have reinforced their lack of confidence and feelings of inadequacy when transacting with others. Therefore, it is suggested that the subjects were more sensitive and empathetic towards the unattractive candidate by taking under consideration that her distant behaviors were a function of her unattractiveness. 32 Completely Unsatisfactory 7 _ 6.5 _ 6 _ attractive 5.5 _ 5 _ unattractive Mean 4.5 _ Response 4 _ 3.5 - 3 J 2.5 _ . 2 _ Satisfactory | I immediate non-immediate Figure 2. Graphic Illustration of the Attractiveness by Immediacy Interaction. 33 A loss of power was evident in analyzing the results by treating messages as a random factor due to the use of "tailored" error terms for testing the source effects. Therefore, the analysis was repeated by treating the meSv sage variable as a fixed factor. It was hoped that there would be an increase in the sensitivity of the test through the use of the subjects-within variance as the error term for all sources of variance. These results are shown in Table 4. As can be observed, similar results were yielded in this analysis. More specifically, the main effect for immediacy is evident here also -- F (1,199) = 759.3, p < .001. In this analysis, the power has increased consider- ably for the immediacy variable. However, there is a de« crease in strength of effect for the interaction between immediacy and attractiveness -- F (1,199) = 21.44, p < .001. To further support the main effect for immediacy and the interaction effect between immediacy and attractive- ness, three additional analyses were conducted. The data were treated as if three separate experiments were con- ducted. In each experiment, the subjects listened to one of the three messages. This made it possible to observe the effects of attractiveness and immediacy on the dependent varialbe in three similar trials. The results are diSplayed in Tables 5, 6, and 7. Attractiveness by Immediacy by Message Type Analysis of Variance Summary Table (Fixed Effects) 34 Table 4 Source df SS MS F q} Attractiveness l .721 .721 1.19 .001 Immediacy 1 457.91 457.91 759.22* .76 Message 2 3.09 1.54 2.55 .005 Attractiveness x Message 2 .034 .016 .026 0 Attractiveness * x Immediacy l 12.93 12.93 21.44 .02 Message x Immediacy 2 2.37 1.19 1.97 .003 Attractiveness 2 .337 .169 .28 0 x Immediacy x Message Error Within 199 120.02 .60313 Total 210 597.41 * p < .001 35 Table 5 Attractiveness by Immediacy Analysis of Variance (Message One) Source df DD MS F (£2 Attractiveness 1 .36930 .36930 .5936 .001 Immediacy l 156.74663 156.74663 251.9488* .78 Attractiveness * x Immediacy 1 5.03108 5.03108 8.0868 .02 Error Within 60 37.32820 .62214 Total 63 199.47521 162.76915 * p < .001 36 Table 6 Attractiveness by Immediacy Analysis of Variance (Message Two) Source df 85 MS F m2 Attractiveness 1 .19359 .19359 .29133 0 Immediacy l 168.37280 168.37280 253.38320* .76 Attractiveness * x Immediacy 1 5.27293 5.27293 7.93520 .02 Error Within 69 45.85041 .66450 Total 72 219.68973 174.50382 37 Table 7 Attractiveness by Immediacy Analysis of Variance (Message Three) Source df SS MS F n} Attractiveness 1 .17080 .17080 .32452 0 Immediacy l 134.07371 134.07371 254.73164* .77 Attractiveness ‘ ** x Immediacy 1 2.08730 2.08730 5.336369 .01 Error Within 70 36.84332 .52663 Total 73 173.17513 136.85844 * p < 01 ** p < .05 CHAPTER IV DISCUSSION While the media persuade us to spend billions of dollars each year on the idea that attractiveness is sexy, better, and more rewarding, it's comforting to tentatively learn that physical attractiveness does not have a robust effect on hiring decisions. More specifically, in the interviewing context, one competes within the realm of self-presentation. Earlier studies dealing with the ef- fects of physical attractiveness on job employment have been based on the notion that interviewers make their decisions on the basis of a picture of the candidate; this seriously overlooks the communicative interaction that takes place between the interviewer and the interviewee. Some implications can be drawn from the immediacy construct since its effects are robust in the present study. Immediacy may not only be a critical characteristic for one to possess in the context of the interview, but also in counseling situations. It may be that counselors who en- gage in immediate communication with their clients are more aps to have better relationships with them. Favorable out- comes such as high rates of problem solving, and better mental health for the patients may be contingent upon the counselor's ability to act in an immediate manner. 38 39 Immediacy may also have a positive effect in the class- room context. Instructors may find that engaging in im- mediate communication with students may increase their class attendance, attentiveness and grades. Specifically, the student's perception of the instructor and the class may become more favorable. Of course, it's necessary to not overlook the strong possibility that in both of the above cases, an interaction between immediacy and other variables is most probable. Variables such as race, age, sex, and experience may cause some peculiar interaction effects with the immediacy con- struct. For instance, in the counseling context an inter- action between sex and immediacy may become apparent. That is, a woman counselor may experience discomfort in acting in an immediate manner towards a male patient. The patient may misinterpret her physical closeness and warmth as at— tempts to form an intimate relationship. This misunder- standing may have detrimental effects on the progress of the counseling sessions. On the other hand, in the classroom context an inter- action between age and immediacy may occur. In this case, an instructor who is recently a college graduate and teaches a college level course using an immediate approach is likely to encounter some difficulties in dealing with stu- dents. He/she may find that the students become "too friendly" and start relating to him/her on a peer basis. When the instructor does not reciprocate on a symmetrical 40 level to the students, there may be no change in the scholastic behavior of the students. Suggestions for Further Research In future research, it would be fruitful to expand upon the present study by using the following approaches. One interesting study would be to determine how conflicting communicative behaviors (e.g., verbal vs. nonverbal) on the part of the attractive/unattractive candidate affect hiring evaluations. One could predict on the basis of research on conflicting messages, that regardless of the attractiveness variable, employers would hire those candidates who diSplay immediate nonverbal behaviors. Research indicates that non- verbal behavior is more attended to than verbal communica- tion (Ekman and Friesen, 1969; Haase, 1970; Hall, 1969). A linguistically-based approach could also be taken in order to better understand what characteristics are ap- pealing to job interviewers. By mixing and matching attractive/unattractive interviewers and interviewees, one could transcribe the verbal and nonverbal behaviors exhibited in the interviewing context. The coded data would unveil whether or not a "matching" of attractiveness and/or communicative behaviors determines the outcome of the interview. For example, do interviewers hire candi~ dates who match them in attractiveness? 15 more matching evident between interviewer and interviewee when the latter is attractive? If so, does this matching behavior 41 increase the likelihood of employment? What type of matching is most evident (e.g., verbal or nonverbal)? These research undertakings would be fruitful in expanding our knowledge of personal characteristics that influence the outcome of the interview. REFERENCES 42 REFERENCES Andersen, J.F. Teacher immediacy as a predictor of teaching effectiveness. Paper presented to the International Communication Association convention, Philadelphia, 1979. In Burgoon, J.K. et al., "Relational Messages Associated with Nonverbal Behaviors," Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1982. Andersen, J.F. et al. ”The Measurement of Immediacy," Journal of Applied Communication Research, 7, 153-180, 1979. Anstey, E.F. Staff Appraisal and Deve10pment. London: Allen and Ulwin, 1976. Anstey, E.F. and Mercer, E.O. Interviewing: For the Selection of Staff. Great Britain: George Allen and UniversityLTD, 1956. Anthony, S. "Immediacy and Nonimmediacy: Factors in Communicating Interpersonal Attraction," The Journal of Social Psychology, 93, 141-142, 1974. Argyle, M. and Dean, J. "Eye Contact, Distance, and Affiliation,” Sociometry, 28, 289-304, 1965. Argyle, M. "Nonverbal Communication in Human Social Interaction," In R. Hinde (Ed.), Nonverbal Communication, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972. Austin, F. and Vines, H. "Interview Training: Which Method Works Best?" Journal of College Placement (Fall), 56-80, 1980. Barbee, J.R. and Kiel, E.C. "Experimental Techniques of Job Interview Training for the Disadvantaged: Video- taped Feedback, Behavior Modification and Micro- counseling," Journal of Applied Psychology, 58, 209- 213, 1973. Bassett, G.A. Practical Interviewing: A Handbook for Mana ers. New York: American Management—Assoc1ation, 1965. Bayes, M.A. "An Investigation of the Behavioral Cues of Interpersonal Warmth" (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Miami, 1970), Dissertation Abstracts International, 31, 2272B, 1970. 43 Beebe, S.A. "Effects of Eye Contact, Posture and Vocal Inflection Upon Credibility and Comprehension," Australian SCAN: Journal of Human Communication, 7-8, 57-70, 1980. '*f Beier, E.G. and Valens, E.G. People Reading. New York: Stein and Day, 1975. Beier, E.G. 'The Silent Language of Psychotherapy. Chicago: Aldine, I966. Bellow, R.M. and Estep, M.F. Employment Psychology: The Interview. New York: Rhinehart and Company, 1959. Bersheid, E. and Walster, E. "Physical Attractiveness," In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 7), New York: Academic Press, 1974. Bersheid, E. et al. "Physical Attractiveness and Dating Choice: A Test of the Matching Hypothesis," Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1, 173-189, 1971. Birdwhistle, R.L. Kinesics and Context. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1970. Burgoon, J.K. et al. "Relational Messages Associated with Nonverbal Behaviors," Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1982. Burgoon, J.K. and Saine, T. The Unspoken Dialogue: An Introduction to Non-Verbal Communication. FBOston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1978} Carlson, R.E. et a1. "Improvements in the Selection Interview," Personnel Journal, 317, April, 275-286, 1971. Cash, T. et al. "Sexism and 'beautism': In Personnel Consultant Decision Making," Journal of Applied Psychology, p2, 301—310, 1977. Cavior, N. "Physical Attractiveness, perceived attitude similarity, and interpersonal attraction among fifth and eleventh grade boys and girls," In E.T. Kendrick and S.E. Guitierres, Contrast Effects in Judgements of Physical Attractiveness: ’When Beauty Becomes a Social Problem, JournaI of PersonaIity and SociaIi Psychology, 38, 131-140, 1981. 44 Chaiken, S. et al. "Communication Physical Attractiveness as a Determinant of Opinion Change," JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psyghology, 8, MS No. 1639, I978. Chaiken, S. "Communicator Physical Attractiveness and Persuasion," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 1387-1396, 1979. Cohen, B.M. and Etheredge, J.M. "Recruiting's Main Ingredient," Journal of College Placement, Winter, 75-77, 1975. Coutts, L.M. and Schneider, F.W. "Affiliative Conflict Theory: An Investigation of the Intimacy Equilibrium and Compensation Hypothesis," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 1135-1142, 1976. Dion, E. et a1. "What is Beautiful is Good," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 285- , Dipoye, E. et al. "Sex and Physical Attractiveness of Raters and Applicants as Determinants of Rater Evaluations," Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 1977. Donohue, W., Diez, M., Stahle, R. and Burgoon, J. "The Effects of Distance Violations on Verbal Immediacy: An Exploration," Paper presented to the International Communication Association Conference, Dallas, Texas, May, 1983. Downs, C.W. "Perceptions of the Selection Interview," Personnel Administration, 88, 8-23, 1969. Drake, L.R., Kaplan, H.R. and Stone, R.A. "How do Employers Value the Interview?" Journal of College Placement, February/March, 47-50, 1977. Ekman, R. and Friesen, W.V. "Nonverbal Leakage and Clues to Deception," Psychiatry, 81, 88-105, 1970. Erickson, F. and Schultz, J. The Counselor as Gatekeeper: Social Interaction in Interviews. New York? Academic Press, 1982. Fiester, A.R. and Giambra, L.M. "Language Indices of Vocational Success in Mentally Retarded Adults," American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 11, 332-337, 1972. 4S Goldberg, G.N., Kiesler, C.A. and Collins, B.E. "Visual Behavior and Face-to-Face Distance During Interaction," Sociometyy, 88, 43-53, 1969. Goldring, P. "Role Distance and Posture in the Evaluation of Interaction," The Proceedings of the Seventy-fifth Annual Convention of the American Psychological As- sociation, 1967, In M. Burgoon et al's "Relational Messages Associated with Nonverbal Behaviors," Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1982. Gutsell, L.M. and Andersen, J.F. "Perceptual and Behavioral Responses to Smiling," Paper presented at the International Communication Association Conven- tion, Acapulco, Mexico, 1980, In Burgoon, J.R. "Re- lational Messages Association with Nonverbal Be- haviors," Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1982. Haase, R.E. "The Relationship of Sex and Instructional Set to the Regulation of Interpersonal Interaction Distance in Counseling Analogue," Journal of Counseling Psychology, 88, 233-236, 1970. Hall, E.T. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Doubleday, 1966. Hollingworth, H.L. Judginnguman Character. New York: Appleton-Century-Crdfts, Inc., 1923. Hopper, R. "Language Attitudes in the Employment Inter- view," Communication Monpgraphs, 88, 346-351, 1977. Hopper, R. and Williams, F. "Speech Characteristics and Employability," Speech Monogrgphs, 88, 346-351, 1973. Illiffe, A.H. "A Study of Preferences in Feminine Beauty," British Journal of Psychology, 88, 267-273, 1960. Imada, A.S. "The Effects of Implicit Nonverbal Cues and Sources of Rating on Post Interview Ratings in a Simulated Employment Interview," Unpublished Master's Thesis, Ohio State University, In Young et al. "Beyond Words: Influence of Nonverbal Behavior of Female Job Applicants in the Employment Interview," Personnel and Guidance Journal, 88, 346-350, 1979. Imada, A.S. and Hakel, M.D. "Influence of Nonverbal Com- munication and Rater Proximity on Impressions and Decision in Simulated Employment Interviews," Journal of Applied Psyghology, 88, 295-300, 1977. 46 Jackson, S. and Jacobs, 5. "Generalizing About Messages: Suggestions for Design and Analysis of Experiments," Human Communication Research, 8, 169-191, 1983. Joseph, W.B. "The Credibility of Physically Attactive Communicators: A Review," Journal of Advertising, 88, 15-23, 1982. Joseph, W.B. "Effect of Communicator Attractiveness and Expertness on Opinion Change and Information Processing," In Joseph, W.B., "The Credibility of Physically Attractive Communicators: A Review," Journal of Advertising, 88, 15-23, 1982. Kendrick, D.T. and Guitierres, S.E. "Contrast Effects in Judgments of Physical Attractiveness: When Beauty Becomes a Social Problem," Journal of Personalipy and Social Psychology, 88, 131-140, 1980. Kleinke, C.L. Meeker, E.F. and LaFong, C. "Effects of Gaze, Touch and Use of Name on Evaluation of 'Engaged' Couples," Journal of Research in Personality, 7, 368-373, 1974. — Kopera, A.A. et al. "Perception of Physical Attractiveness: The Influence of Group Interaction and Group Coaction Ratings of Attractiveness of Photographs of Women," In Joseph, W.B., "The Credibility of Physically Attractive Communicators: A Review," Journal of Advertising, 88, 15-23, 1982. Lopez, F.M. Personnel Interviewing: Theory and Practice, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965. Lumdsden, H.H. and Scharf, J.C. "Behavioral Dimensions of the Job Interview," Journal of Collegp Placement, 88, 63-68, 1974. Martin, J.C. "Racial Ethnocentrism and Judgment of. Beauty," Journal of Social Psychology, 88, 59-63, 1964. McDowell, K.V. "Accomodations of Verbal and Nonverbal Behaviors as a Function of the Manipulation of Inter- action Distance and Eye Contact," Proceedin s of the Slst Annual Convention of the American sycho- 8pgical Association, 8, 207-208, 1973, In Burgoon et a1. "ReIational Messages Associated with Nonverbal Behaviors," Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1982. 47 McGovern, T.V. and Tinsley, H.E. "Interviewer Evaluating of Interviewee Nonverbal Behavior," Journal of Vocational Behavior, 88, 163-171, 1978. McQuaig, J. et al. How to Interview and Hire Productive People. New York: FrederickiFell Publishers, 1981. Mehrabian, A. and Wiener, M. "Nonimmediacy Between Com- municator and Objects of Communication in a Verbal Message" Application to the Interference of Atti- tudes," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 88, 420-425, 1966. Mehrabian, A. "Orientation Behaviors and Nonverbal At- titude Communication(a)," Journal of Communication, 88, 324-332, 1967. Mehrabian, A. and Ferris, S.R. "Inference of Attitudes from Nonverbal Communication in Two Channels," Journal of Counseling Psychology, 88, 248-252, 1967. Mehrabian, A. "Inference of Attitude from Posture, Orien- tation, and Distance of a Communicator," Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 88, 296-308, 1966. Mehrabian, A. and Williams, M. "Nonverbal Concomitants of Perceived and Intended Persuasiveness," Journal of Personality and Social Psycholsgy, 88, 37-58, 1969. Mehrabian, A. "Significance of Posture and Position in the Communication of Attitude and Status Relationships," Psychological Bulletin, 88, 359-372, 1969. Mehrabian, A. Silent Messages. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1971(a). Mehrabian, A. "Verbal and Nonverbal Interaction of Strangers in a Waiting Room," Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 8, 127-138, 1971(b). Mehrabian, A. and Diamond, 5.6. "Effects of Furniture Arrangement, Pr0ps, and Personality on Social Inter- action," Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 20, 18-30, 1971. Mehrabian, A. Public and Private Spaces. New York: Basic Books, 1972? Miller, A.C. "Role of Physical Attractiveness in Impres- sion Formation," Psychonomic Science, 88, 241-243, 1970. 48 Mills, J. and Aronson, E. "Opinion Change as a Function of the Communicator's Attractiveness and Desire to Influence," Journal of Personality and Social Psycholsgy, 8, 173-177, 1965. Moffat, T.L. Selection Interviewing for Managers. New York" Harper and Row Continuifig Management Education Series, 1979. Nida, S.A. and Williams, S.E. "Sex Stereotyped Traits, Physical Attractiveness and Interpersonal Attraction," Psychological Reports, 88, 1311, 1322, 1977. Patterson, M.L. "An Arousal Model of Interpersonal Intimacy," Psychological Review, 88, 235-245, 1981. Patterson, M.L., Jordan, A., Hogan, M.B. and Frerker, D. "Effects of Nonverbal Intimacy on Arousal and Behavioral Adjustment," Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 8, 184-198, 1981. Patterson, M.L. and Sechrest, L.B. "Interpersonal Distance and Impression Formation," Journal of Personalisy, 88, 161-166, 1970. Peshkin, D.B. Human Behavior and Employment Interviewing. New York: American Management Association, 1971. Randell, G. "Interviewing at Work," In Warr, P.B. (Ed.), Psychology at Work (2nd Edition). Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin, 1978. Reece, M.M. and Whitman, R.N. "Warmth and Expressive Movements," Psychological Rsports, 8, 76, 1961. Rosenfeld, H.M. "Instrumental Affiliative Functions of Facial and Gestural Expression," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 1966. Schere et a1. "Differential Attribution of Personality Based on Multi-Channel Presentation of Verbal and Nonverbal Cues," Psychological Research, 88, 221- 247, 1977. Shapiro, J.C. "Agreement Between Channels of Communication in Interviews," Journal of Consulting Psychology, 88, 535-538, 1966. Sigleman, C.K. and Davis, P.J. "Making Good Impression in Job Interviews: Verbal and Nonverbal Predictors," Education and Trainipgof the Mental8y Retarded, 88, 71-77, 1978. 49 Snyder, M. and Rothbart, M. "Communicator Attractiveness and Opinion Change," Canadian Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 8, 337-387, 19711 Stano, M. Communication in Interviewing. Reisnch, N., NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1982. Tschirgi, H.D. "What do Recruiters Really Look for in Candidates?" Journal of College Placement, 88, 75-79, 1973. Trout, D.L. and Rosenfeld, H.M. "The Effect of Postural Lean and Body Congruence on the Judgment of Psychotherapeutic Rapport," Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 8, 176-190, 1980. Wexley et al. "An Applicant's Nonverbal Behavior and Student Evaluators' Judgments in a Structured Interview Setting," Psycholpgical Rsports, 88, 391-394, 1975. Young et a1. "Beyond Words: Influence of Nonverbal Behavior and Female Job Applicants in the Employment Interview," Personnel and Guidance Journal, 88, 346-350, 1979. Young, D.M. and Beier, E.G. "Role of Applicant Nonverbal Communication in Employment Interview," Journal of Employment Counseling, 88, 154-165, 1977. APPENDICES APPENDIX B Interviewing Questions and Immediate Answers SET 1 S3 01. 02. 03. Q4. 05. C222. -l\: What qualifications do you have that make you feel you will be a successful Tutor/Counselor? Since most of my previous experience is in tutoring and helping others, this qualifies me and will make me successful in the position. I feel that I am pre- pared to deal with students who have academic problems. What courses did you like best? I like Science and Math courses. This is the way I've always felt since grade school. As a result, they are my best subjects in college. If you were starting college all over again, what courses would you take. I enjoy communicating with others, so communication related courses are of most interest to me. The communication courses I take are fun and advan- tageous because I learn how to become an effective communicator. How do you spend your spare time? Reading novels is my favorite pastime. By doing this during my free time, I relieve a lot of daily pressure and it helps me relax. What courses did you like least? Art, History and courses of this nature are subjects that do not appeal to me. These courses, however, are necessary for graduation. What are your hobbies? I love to ski, play racquetball and swim. These are hobbies that I consider to be fun and I try to do all of them as much as possible. Do you plan to continue your education? Yes, I want to continue my education and attend medical school but I have to make some money first. This is a tough way to get through med school but I'm starting 51 SET 2 (cont.) Q3. A: Q4. 05. What are your career objectives? It would be nice to go into family medicine when I get out of school. Those jobs are supposedly easy to find. I would go on to medical school first, but it all depends on the money situation. What personal characteristics do you consider to be important in order to be a good Tutor/Counselor? It seems that empathy would be important. Obviously, if you have it then you would be able to effectively deal with (academically related) problems. I kind of think that knowledge of the subject matter would obviously be necessary; and of course good com- munication skills. In a situation where one person will have to help another, it is important to have them. If you were starting college all over again, what course(s) would you take? Possibly, more communication courses. I kind of thought it was fun and advantageous to learn about how to become an effective communicator. In the COM course I took I learned a lot of subject matter. What have you done to prepare yourself for this position? Over the years, I have always been a good student in Math and Science so I tutored those subjects in high school. Having been a camp counselor and currently a resident assistant I feel that I've had a great deal of counseling experience. I should think it added an empathetic dimension to me. Do you feel that up to this point in your college career you have done the best scholastic work that you are capable of? Yes, but perhaps I could have done better in my Humanities (courses). That would have, you know, made a big difference in my grade point average. 52 SET 3 (cont.) Q3. A: Q4. 05. Tell me about some of your accomplishments. I've been recognized mostly for my academic achieve- ments. Like in high school, I was in the National Honor Society, and Quill and Scroll. After being in college for a year, I was voted into the Golden Key and Mortar Board Honor Societies. That's about it. Why did you decide to come to Michigan State University? Supposedly, Michigan State University was the best (school) to come to when I graduated from high school (for Pre-Med majors). That was the main reason I ended up coming here. What have you learned from the jobs that you have held? I suppose I've learned how to help others. It seems as though I've become a more effective communicator. Also, that many times pe0p1e, you know, will not only need help, but that they will need a friend. Somehow I've found that I have become better at it. APPENDIX C Attractiveness Scale 55 SET 3 (cont.) Q3. A: Q4. 05. Tell me about some of your accomplishments? Most of my accomplishments are academic achievements. My high school achievements include National Honor Society and Quill and Scroll. Currently I am a member of the Golden Key and Mortar Board Honor Societies. These accomplishments are not all that I have done but they are the most significant to me. Why did you decide to come to Michigan State University? Michigan State University is rated one of the best schools in the country for pre-med majors. This is the main quality that attracted me here to study. What have you learned from jobs you have held? As a result of my previous job experiences in tutoring, camp counseling, and being a resident assistant, I am more of an effective communicator. Also, I find that many times students not only need someone who can understand their academic problems, but someone who can be their friend. These qualities benefit me in helping others. 56 (l) I think she is quite pretty. 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (2) She is very sexy looking. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (3) I find her very attractive physically. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (4) I don't like the way she looks. I 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (5) She is somewhat ugly. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (6) She is wearing neat clothes. 1 2 3 4 S 6 7 strongly strongly agree d1sagree 57 (7) The clothes she is wearing are becoming. 1 2 3 4 strongly agree (8) She is not very good looking. 1 2 3 4 strongly agree (9) She is well groomed. l 2 3 4 strongly agree (10) She is repulsive to me. 1 2 3 4 strongly agree 5 S 7 strongly disagree 7 strongly disagree 7 strongly disagree 7 strongly disagree APPENDIX D Revised Attractiveness Scale (Please observe the picture of the female and rate her on the scale accordingly.) 58 (1) I think she is quite pretty. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (2) She is very sexy looking. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (3) I find her very attractive physically. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (4) I don't like the way she looks. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (5) She is somewhat ugly. I 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (6) She is not very good looking. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree 59 (7) She is quite appealing to look at. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (8) I find her very unattractive physically. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (9) She is pleasant to look at. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (10) She is repulsive to me. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree dlsagree APPENDIX E Non-Verbal Immediacy Scale 60 Please observe the following videotape and make the following judgments on the nonverbal behavior that the female is ex- hibiting. Please pay particular attention to her eye contact behavior, degree of distance from the interviewer, whether or not she is leaning forward or backwards and her smiling frequency. (1) This female maintained frequent eye contact with the interviewer. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (2) I would say that this female is leaning away from the interviewer. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (3) This female moved closer to the interviewer. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (4) I would say that this female maintained little eye contact with the interviewer. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree dlsagree 61 (5) This female did not smile very much. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (6) I would say that this female is leaning towards the interviewer. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (7) This female moved farther away from the interviewer. l 2 3 4 S 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree APPENDIX F Verbal Immediacy Scale 62 Please listen to the audiotape and make the following judgments on the way you perceive this female candidate is answering the questions. (1) She sounds as if she really wants the job. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (2) She sounds like she doesn't really care whether or not she gets the job. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (3) She sounds motivated. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (4) She sounds enthusiastic. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree d1sagree 63 (5) She is not trying very hard to get the job. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree disagree (6) She sounds unmotivated. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 strongly strongly agree d1sagree APPENDIX G Hiring Scale 1 64 (1) Ability to communicate. 1 2 3 4 superior (2) Aggressiveness/initiative. 1 2 3 4 superior (3) Confidence in self. 1 2 3 4 superior (4) Enthusiasm/motivation. 1 2 3 4 superior (5) Intelligence. 1 2 3 4 superior (6) Leadership potential. 1 2 3 4 superior 5 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 65 (7) Maturity. 1 Z 3 4 superior (8) Persuasiveness. l 2 3 4 superior (9) Pleasant personality. 1 2 3 4 superior (10) Positive attitude. 1 2 3 4 superior 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory APPENDIX H Hiring Scale 2 66 (1) Likelihood of acceptance. 1 2 3 4 5 superior (2) Likelihood of success. 1 2 3 4 5 superior (3) Qualifications. 1 2 3 4 5 superior (4) Applicant's characteristics. 1 2 3 4 5 superior (5) Recommendation for hiring. l 2 3 4 5 superior (6) Motivation. 1 2 3 4 5 superior 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 67 (7) Competence. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory (8) Satisfaction if accepted. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory APPENDIX I Revised Hiring Scale (On the continuum, please mark your impressions of this job candidate. Your answers will be kept con- fidential. Thank you.) 68 (1) She is a good communicator. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory (2) She is aggressive and shows initiative. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory (3) She has confidence in herself. I 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory (4) She would do well working with students. She has leadership potential. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory (5) She shows enthusiasm. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory (6) She is persuasive. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory 69 (7) She has a pleasant personality. 1 2 3 4 5 6 superior (8) She seems mature. l 2 3 4 5 6 superior (9) She has a positive attitude. 1 2 3 4 5 6 superior (10) I would consider her for the job. 1 2 3 4 5 6 superior 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory (11) She would be successful in the position. 1 2 3 4 5 6 superior (12) She has good characteristics. 1 2 3 4 5 6 superior 7 completely unsatisfactory 7 completely unsatisfactory 7D (13) I would recommend that she be hired. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory (14) She seems motivated. l 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory (15) I think she would be competent in this position. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 superior completely unsatisfactory APPENDIX J Job Description 71 Tutor/Counselor: Jovaescription The Tutor/Counselor has both tutoring and counseling responsibilities. As a tutor, he/she must be knowledgeable and skilled in the areas of Math and Science. As a Counselor, he/she must have the ability to aide students with academi- cally related problems such as study skills and time manage- ment . Duties: (1) Tutoring Math and Science (2) Aiding students in improving academically related skills (3) Preparing monthly reports on the academic progress of students ' (4) Sponsoring various academically related workshops on topics such as: a. Study skills b. Stress alleviation/relaxation c. Test taking d. Time management Requirements: (1) Junior or Senior class standing (2) Minimum of 3.0 grade point average (cumulative) (3) Minimum of 3.5 grade point average in Math and Science courses 72 Requirements (cont.): (4) Good organizing skills (5) Good communication skills (6) Ability to empathize with students APPENDIX K Sample Resume 73 Mary Sims 2147 Abbott Road, #104 East Lansing, Michigan 48823 (517) 555-2348 Career Objective: To obtain a position as a Tutor/ Counselor. To help students with academically related problems. Experience: 9/25/78-6/12/88 Peer tutor: 6/15/79-8/17/79 Camp Counselor: 7/2/80-9/6/80 Night School Tutor: 9/24/80-Current Resident Assistant: Education: Served as Math and Science tutor during Sophomore and Senior years of High School. Taught swimming, arts and crafts and games to first, second and third graders. Aided high school drOp-outs with academic difficulties in Math and Science. Manage 50 college students in dormitory; Organize activities. High School Diploma: Everett High School, 1980; Graduated Summa Cum Laude. Bachelor of Science: Michigan State University (expected in March 1984, Pre-Med); Current grade point average 3.70. Related Courses Taken: College Algebra and Trigonometry 1 College Algebra and Trigonometry 11 Chemistry 101 Chemistry 301 Physiology 400 bM-P-h-h OU’IOOO Hobbies: Swimming, Skiing and racquetball. References: Available upon request. "Illllllllllllli‘llllllll I I I» A I ,u