- A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.
- Learn more
Preview content only
Content available from Journal of Applied Psychology
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Journal
of
Applied
Psychology
1996,
Vol.
81,
No. 2.
f34-141
Ccpyrighl
I
996
by
the
Am
n
Psychological
Association, Inc.
002l-90IO/96/$3.00
Fairness Reactions
to
Personnel Selection Techniques
in
France
and the
United States
Dirk
D.
Stciner
and
Stephen
W.
Gilliland
Louisiana
State
University
and
Agricultural
and
Mechanical
College
The
authors
examined
the
bases
for
fairness
reactions
to
different
selection practices
and
considered cross-cultural
differences
in
these reactions
by
comparing
respondents
from
2
cultures. College students
(Ar
=
259)
from France
and the
United States rated
the fa-
vorability
of
10
selection procedures
and
then indicated
the
bases
for
these reactions
on
7
procedural
dimensions.
Selection decisions
based
on
interviews, work-sample tests,
and
resumes
were
perceived
favorably
in
both
cultures.
Graphology
was
perceived more
favorably
in
France than
in the
United
States,
but
even
French
reactions
toward graphol-
ogy
were somewhat
negative.
The
perceived
face
validity
of the
selection
procedure
was
the
strongest
correlate
of
favorability
reactions among both samples. Beyond comparing
the
results
from
each
culture,
the
discussion addresses
implications
for
multinational
companies establishing selection systems
in
foreign
countries.
Applicant
reactions
to
specific
selection procedures
have
had
a
research tradition
in the
United States
for at
least
two
decades (Dodd, 1977;
Ryan
&
Sackett, 1987;
Schmitt
&
Coyle,
1976).
More
recently,
research
has
compared
the
favorability
or the
acceptability
of
different
selection proce-
dures (e.g.,
Smither,
Reilly,
Millsap,
Pearlman,
&
Stoffey,
1993),
and
researchers have begun
to
identify
the
bases
for
these
reactions.
For
example,
Rynes
and
Connerley
(1993)
found
that
beliefs
regarding scoring
and the
organization's
need
to
know
were
the
strongest predictors
of
reactions
to a
variety
of
selection procedures.
The
limited research
to
date
on the
bases
of
selection reactions
has
identified
deter-
minants
through
inductive
or
empirical means.
One of the
principal
purposes
of our
study
was to
examine these bases
from
a
more systematic, theoretical perspective.
Gilliland
(1993)
approached this issue
by
using organi-
zational justice theories
and
developed
a
justice-based
Dirk
D.
Steiner
and
Stephen
W.
Gilliland, Department
of
Psychology,
Louisiana State University
and
Agricultural
and
Mechanical
College. Stephen
W.
Gilliland
is now at the
Depart-
ment
of
Management
and
Policy,
University
of
Arizona.
This
study
was
conducted
in
part
while Dirk
D.
Steiner
was
participating
in an
exchange program
at
Universite
de
Pro-
vence,
Aix-en-Provence,
France.
We
thank
Neal
Schmitt
for his
valuable comments
on an
ear-
lier
draft
of
this study.
We
thank Kadidja Benkada, Bouba
Os-
mani,
and
Corinne Siringo
for
collecting
the
data
in
France
and
Scott
Klafke
for
collecting
the
data
in the
United
States.
Correspondence concerning this article should
be
addressed
to
Dirk
D.
Steiner,
Department
of
Psychology, Louisiana
State
Uni-
versity
and
Agricultural
and
Mechanical College, Baton Rouge,
Louisiana
70803-5501.
Electronic mail
may be
sent
via
Internet
to
psstei@lsuvm.sncc.lsu.edu.
model
of
applicants' reactions
to
selection systems. Spe-
cifically,
he
proposed
several procedural justice dimen-
sions that
may
form
the
basis
for
fairness
reactions.
One
of
the
major suggested
influences
on
these dimensions
is
selection
(or
testing) procedures. Four procedural justice
dimensions that apply
explicitly
to
selection procedures
are
perceived
job
relatedness,
opportunity
to
demonstrate
one's
abilities, interpersonal treatment,
and
propriety
of
questions. Gilliland
(1994)
found
job
relatedness
to be an
important determinant
of
perceptions
of
selection process
fairness.
Research
has
also distinguished between per-
ceived
face
validity
and
perceived predictive validity
(Smither
et
al.,
1993),
both
of
which
reflect
job
related-
ness.
Opportunity
to
demonstrate one's abilities
is
based
on
considerable
organizational
justice research demon-
strating
the
value
of
having
a
voice
or a
chance
to
offer
input
into organizational decisions
(Lind
&
Tyler,
1988).
Interpersonal treatment during
a
decision process
affects
reactions
to
that
process
(Bies
&
Moag,
1986;
Greenberg,
1994),
and
some selection procedures
may be
perceived
to
be
cold
and
insensitive while others
are
seen
as
warm
and
more personal. Propriety
of
questions
refers
to
inappropri-
ate or
illegal
questioning previously shown
to
relate
to ap-
plicants' perceptions
of
unfairness
(Bies
&
Moag.
1986).
Invasion
of
privacy
is an
additional procedural dimension
relevant
to
selection
techniques,
based
on
research dem-
onstrating
its
relationship
to
fairness
perceptions
of
selec-
tion
procedures
(Kravitz,
Stinson,
&
Chavez,
1994).
In
addition
to
these procedural dimensions,
a
selection
procedure
may be
viewed
as
more
acceptable
when
it is
widely
used; people
may
make
an
implicit
judgment that
a
widely
used technique
must
be
valid.
Thus,
in
this study
we
examined
perceptions
of
fairness
of a set of
selection
134
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
