Is anybody listening? The impact of automatically evaluated job interviews on impression management and applicant reactions

Purpose: Automatic evaluation of job interviews has become an alternative for assessing interviewees. Therefore, questions arise regarding applicant reactions and behavior when algorithms automatically evaluate applicants' interview responses. This study tests arguments from previous research suggesting that applicants whose interviews will be automatically evaluated may use less impression management (IM), but could react more negatively to the interview. Design/methodology/approach: Participants (N = 124; primarily German students) took part in an online mock interview where they responded to interview questions via voice recordings (i.e. an asynchronous interview). Prior to the interview, half of them were informed that their answers would be evaluated automatically (vs by a human rater). After the interviews, participants reported their honest and deceptive IM behavior as well as their reactions to the interview. Findings: Participants in the automatic evaluation condition engaged in less deceptive IM, felt they had fewer opportunities to perform during the interview, and provided shorter interview answers. Research limitations/implications: The findings of this study suggest a trade-off between IM behavior and applicant reactions in technologically advanced interviews. Furthermore, the results indicate that automatically evaluated interviews might affect interview validity (e.g. because of less deceptive IM) and influence interviewees' response behavior. Practical implications: Hiring managers might hope that automatically evaluated interviews decrease applicants' use of deceptive IM. However, the results also challenge organizations to pay attention to negative effects of automatic evaluation on applicant reactions. Originality/value: This study is the first empirical study investigating the impact of automatically evaluated interviews on applicant behavior and reactions.