Disentangling the Effects of Applicant Defensive Impression Management Tactics in Job Interviews

  1. Wei-Chi Tsai1,
  2. Tun-Chun Huang2,
  3. Chih-Yun Wu3,
  4. I-Hsuan Lo4

Article first published online: 18 MAY 2010

DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00495.x

Issue

International Journal of Selection and Assessment

International Journal of Selection and Assessment

Volume 18, Issue 2, pages 131–140, June 2010

Additional Information

How to Cite

Tsai, W.-C., Huang, T.-C., Wu, C.-Y. and Lo, I.-H. (2010), Disentangling the Effects of Applicant Defensive Impression Management Tactics in Job Interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18: 131–140. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00495.x

Author Information

  1. 1

    Department of Business Administration, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan

  2. 2

    Department of Business Administration, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan

  3. 3

    Department of Business Administration, Tung-Hai University, No. 181, Section 3, Taichung Harbor Road, Tai-Chung 407, Taiwan. annacywu@thu.edu.tw

  4. 4

    Yang Ming Marine Transport Corp., Keelung, Taiwan

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 18 MAY 2010
  2. Article first published online: 18 MAY 2010

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (101K)

This study explores (1) the effects that three kinds of applicant defensive impression management (IM) tactics (apologies, justifications, and excuses) have on interviewer evaluation and (2) the moderating effects that two types of interviewer negative concerns (competence-related and integrity-related concerns) have on the aforementioned relationship. Two hundred and one managers from Taiwan participated in this study by watching a simulated interview. Compared with the control group, applicants using defensive IM tactics received higher interviewer ratings when negative concerns surfaced. Moreover, the type of interviewer negative concern moderated the effects of defensive IM tactics. All three tactics had similar effects on interviewer evaluation when the concern was competence related. Apology was, however, the most effective tactic when the concern was integrity related.

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (101K)