September 19th, 2018 Organizational Behaviour Discussion Post 3

The perceptual biases in person perception make it difficult for employment interviewers to form accurate perceptions of interviewees. They are as follows:

• The primacy affect- The tendency of first impressions carrying more weight for a perception of an interviewee even when other contradictory evidence presents itself. If an interviewee leaves a particularly good first impression, information about their poor performance or attitude may go unnoticed. Conversely, if an interviewee leaves a bad first impression, it may be difficult for them to change that perception, even if their attitude, attendance and performance is above par.
• The recency affect- The tendency of more recent impressions to carry undue weight of a perception of an interviewee even if other experiences with this person have not supported that perception. If an interviewee has consistently positive performance but leaves the interview on a bad note, that negative experience could dissolve all of the good things that person achieved. Similarly, if an interviewee has a sequence of negative performances and then ends the interview on a high note, the interviewer may perceive that the interview was more successful than it actually was.
• Reliance on Central traits- The tendency to over-focus on a person’s central traits that are of interest to the perceiver, while ignoring important cues about the person’s abilities. If interviewers have selectivity in which cues they perceive and which they ignore (consciously or sub-consciously) they may tend to over-emphasize the extent to which the interviewee’s central traits are relevant. People tend to look for cues that confirm their assumptions about others, while ignoring other cues that may contradict their initial perceptions.  
• Implicit personality theories- The tendency to group certain behaviours together, such as hard-working and honest, which creates a biased perception of an interviewee. If an interviewee has a track record of high work ethic and job performance, it may be assumed this person has a great attitude and team spirit. That assumption, however, may be proved wrong when the interviewer discovers this interviewee actually has a trouble with interpersonal relationships or has a history of conflict.
• Projection- The tendency for the perceiver to project their own feelings and emotions onto the interviewee. This clouds the perceivers judgement of the actual events and interaction.
• Stereotyping (and stereotype threat)- The tendency to over-generalize an entire group of people based on the assumed characteristics of people in a certain group; and also, the threat of being stereotyped causes interviewees to behave differently than in environments where they feel workplace diversity is a cornerstone. In a study, the effects of the “stereotyping threat” affects peoples’ cognitive ability and math test performance scores. Stereotyping is particularly damaging toward visible minorities, POC, women, Indigenous peoples and differently-abled people. An interviewer who stereotypes may feel that the African American applicant will not handle stressful situations well, that the women candidate will oftentimes be absent, or that the person in a wheelchair would not have the capacity to carry out the duties required. All these assumptions are based on stereotypes, not facts, and should carry no merit in the decision-making process. Unfortunately, however, stereotyping (and therefore, prejudice) is still prevalent in many areas of our society.
• Contrast effects- The tendency to under-favour or over-favour an interviewee in contrast to the other interviewees during a certain period of time. If Bob saw 3 really awesome candidates, the mediocre candidate would seem less than average. If Bob saw 3 really terrible candidates, the mediocre candidate would seem above average. Obviously this creates a distorted perception of the candidate and doesn’t allow the interviewer to fully appreciate the unique individuality of the interviewee who is subject to this effect.
• Similar-to-me effect- The tendency to favour interviewees who are similar to ourselves, either by background, attitude, beliefs, political affiliation, etc. This feeds into stereotyping, discrimination and prejudice. If we favour people who are similar to us we are discrediting and devaluing the differences and diversity between us and giving undue favour to people, simply based on superficial characteristics like looks and social class.  

“Racial, ethnic and religious stereotypes are pervasive, persistent and frequently negative.”
Gender and racial stereotypes oftentimes have more of an effect on hiring than performance appraisal. This can be explained using the Bruner Model of Perceptual Processes. Selectivity, constancy and consistency are steps in the perceptual process that aids in building perceptions but can oftentimes leave out important or relevant cues, or information. Once interviewers detect familiar cues, their own experiences, beliefs, attitudes and feelings will frame how the interviewer perceives the interviewee. And because stereotyping and perceptual biases cloud our judgement of real life events and facts, people who are subject to the most harmful stereotyping (women, POC, etc.) are most negatively affected by these perceptual biases.

There are tools available to interviewers to aid them in overcoming these barriers of perception. Implementing a behaviourally anchored rating scale, or a rating scale with specific behavioural examples of good, average and poor performance, can help standardize evaluations and assessments of an interviewee. Frame-of-reference training, a training method to improve rating accuracy by providing a common frame of reference, are two administrative tools that can be used to create more fair, equitable interview scenarios.