Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply
Identifieur interne : 001320 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001319; suivant : 001321Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply
Auteurs : Udo Konradt ; Tim Warszta ; Thomas EllwartSource :
- International Journal of Selection and Assessment [ 0965-075X ] ; 2013-06.
Abstract
This study examines the Gilliland model of applicants’ reactions to selection procedures in a Web‐based context, revealing new theoretical and empirical insights. We extend existing research by further considering a reflective first‐order formative second‐order model consisting of three second‐order justice factors of formal characteristics, explanation, and interpersonal treatment modeled by 11 formative indicators representing the procedural justice rules. Partial least squares path modeling analysis revealed that formal characteristics and interpersonal treatment are positively related to perceptions of process fairness in Web‐based selection. Most salient procedural justice rules revealed were treatment of the applicants, opportunity to perform, propriety of questions, and reconsideration opportunity. Furthermore, process fairness, which was positively related to applicants’ reactions, fully mediated the relationship between justice factors and applicants’ reactions.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/ijsa.12026
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply</title><author><name sortKey="Konradt, Udo" sort="Konradt, Udo" uniqKey="Konradt U" first="Udo" last="Konradt">Udo Konradt</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Kiel, Institute of Psychology, Olshausenstr. 40, D‐24098, Kiel, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: konradt@psychologie.uni-kiel.de</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Warszta, Tim" sort="Warszta, Tim" uniqKey="Warszta T" first="Tim" last="Warszta">Tim Warszta</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Westcoast University of Applied Sciences, Department of Economics, Heide, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Ellwart, Thomas" sort="Ellwart, Thomas" uniqKey="Ellwart T" first="Thomas" last="Ellwart">Thomas Ellwart</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Trier, Department of Psychology, Trier, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520</idno><date when="2013" year="2013">2013</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/ijsa.12026</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001320</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001320</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply</title><author><name sortKey="Konradt, Udo" sort="Konradt, Udo" uniqKey="Konradt U" first="Udo" last="Konradt">Udo Konradt</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Kiel, Institute of Psychology, Olshausenstr. 40, D‐24098, Kiel, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: konradt@psychologie.uni-kiel.de</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Warszta, Tim" sort="Warszta, Tim" uniqKey="Warszta T" first="Tim" last="Warszta">Tim Warszta</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Westcoast University of Applied Sciences, Department of Economics, Heide, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Ellwart, Thomas" sort="Ellwart, Thomas" uniqKey="Ellwart T" first="Thomas" last="Ellwart">Thomas Ellwart</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Trier, Department of Psychology, Trier, Germany</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Int J Select Assess</title><idno type="ISSN">0965-075X</idno><idno type="eISSN">1468-2389</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><date type="published" when="2013-06">2013-06</date><biblScope unit="volume">21</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="155">155</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="169">169</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0965-075X</idno></series><idno type="istex">C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/ijsa.12026</idno><idno type="ArticleID">IJSA12026</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0965-075X</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract">This study examines the Gilliland model of applicants’ reactions to selection procedures in a Web‐based context, revealing new theoretical and empirical insights. We extend existing research by further considering a reflective first‐order formative second‐order model consisting of three second‐order justice factors of formal characteristics, explanation, and interpersonal treatment modeled by 11 formative indicators representing the procedural justice rules. Partial least squares path modeling analysis revealed that formal characteristics and interpersonal treatment are positively related to perceptions of process fairness in Web‐based selection. Most salient procedural justice rules revealed were treatment of the applicants, opportunity to perform, propriety of questions, and reconsideration opportunity. Furthermore, process fairness, which was positively related to applicants’ reactions, fully mediated the relationship between justice factors and applicants’ reactions.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Udo Konradt</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Kiel, Institute of Psychology, Olshausenstr. 40, D‐24098, Kiel, Germany</json:string><json:string>E-mail: konradt@psychologie.uni-kiel.de</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Tim Warszta</name><affiliations><json:string>Westcoast University of Applied Sciences, Department of Economics, Heide, Germany</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Thomas Ellwart</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Trier, Department of Psychology, Trier, Germany</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>IJSA12026</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>This study examines the Gilliland model of applicants’ reactions to selection procedures in a Web‐based context, revealing new theoretical and empirical insights. We extend existing research by further considering a reflective first‐order formative second‐order model consisting of three second‐order justice factors of formal characteristics, explanation, and interpersonal treatment modeled by 11 formative indicators representing the procedural justice rules. Partial least squares path modeling analysis revealed that formal characteristics and interpersonal treatment are positively related to perceptions of process fairness in Web‐based selection. Most salient procedural justice rules revealed were treatment of the applicants, opportunity to perform, propriety of questions, and reconsideration opportunity. Furthermore, process fairness, which was positively related to applicants’ reactions, fully mediated the relationship between justice factors and applicants’ reactions.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>6.464</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>595.276 x 782.333 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>985</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>9102</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>62988</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>15</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>122</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply</title><refBibs><json:item><host><author></author><title>Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Chicago, IL: The Dorsey Press.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N. Anderson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>11</volume><pages><last>136</last><first>121</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title></host><title>Applicant and recruiter reactions to new technology in selection: A critical review and agenda for future research</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Arbuckle, J. (2003). Amos 5.0 update to the Amos user's guide. Chicago, IL: SmallWaters.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. Arthur</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. M. Glaze</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. J. Villado</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. E. Taylor</name></json:item></author><host><volume>2</volume><pages><last>45</last><first>39</first></pages><author></author><title>Industrial and Organizational Psychology</title></host><title>Unproctored internet‐based tests of cognitive ability and personality: Magnitude of cheating and response distortion</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. P. Bagozzi</name></json:item></author><host><volume>35</volume><pages><last>292</last><first>261</first></pages><author></author><title>MIS Quarterly</title></host><title>Measurement and meaning in information systems and organizational research: Methodological and philosophical foundations</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. P. Bagozzi</name></json:item><json:item><name>Y. Yi</name></json:item></author><host><volume>16</volume><pages><last>94</last><first>74</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Academy of Marketing Science</title></host><title>On the evaluation of structural equation models</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. N. Bauer</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. P. Maertz Jr</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. R. Dolen</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. A. Campion</name></json:item></author><host><volume>83</volume><pages><last>903</last><first>892</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>Longitudinal assessment of applicant reactions to employment testing and test outcome feedback</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. N. Bauer</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. M. Truxillo</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. J. Sanchez</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. M. Craig</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. Ferrara</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. A. Campion</name></json:item></author><host><volume>54</volume><pages><last>420</last><first>387</first></pages><author></author><title>Personnel Psychology</title></host><title>Applicant reactions to selection: Development of the selection procedural justice scale (SPJS)</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. N. Bauer</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. T. Truxillo</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. S. Tucker</name></json:item><json:item><name>V. Weathers</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Bertolino</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. Erdogan</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. A. Campion</name></json:item></author><host><volume>32</volume><pages><last>621</last><first>601</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Management</title></host><title>Selection in the information age: The role of personal information privacy concerns and computer use in understanding applicant reactions</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L. A. Bettencourt</name></json:item></author><host><volume>80</volume><pages><last>180</last><first>165</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Retailing</title></host><title>Change‐oriented citizenship behaviors: The direct and moderating influence of goal orientation</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>E. Beulen</name></json:item></author><host><volume>14</volume><pages><last>224</last><first>213</first></pages><author></author><title>Information Technology for Development</title></host><title>The enabling role of information technology in the global war for talent: Accenture's industrialized approach</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Bhattacharya</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. Premkumar</name></json:item></author><host><volume>28</volume><pages><last>254</last><first>229</first></pages><author></author><title>MIS Quarterly</title></host><title>Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward information technology usage: A theoretical model and longitudinal test</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. W. Brislin</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>444</last><first>349</first></pages><author></author><title>Handbook of cross‐cultural psychology: Vol 2. Methodology</title></host><title>Translation and content analysis of oral and written material</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. Bruhn</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. Georgi</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. Hadwich</name></json:item></author><host><volume>61</volume><pages><last>1301</last><first>1292</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Business Research</title></host><title>Customer equity management as formative second‐order construct</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Brünn, S. (2010). Internettestverfahren zur Personalauswahl – Einflussgrößen der Fairnesswahrnehmung und ihre Wirkung auf die Intentionen und Reaktionen der Bewerber. [Internet‐based tests in personnel selection – Factors on fairness perceptions and their impact on applicants’ intentions and reactions]. Munich: Rainer Hampp.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. Carstairs</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. Myors</name></json:item></author><host><volume>25</volume><pages><last>742</last><first>738</first></pages><author></author><title>Computers in Human Behavior</title></host><title>Internet testing: A natural experiment reveals test score inflation on high‐stakes, unproctored cognitive test</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. W. Chin</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>336</last><first>295</first></pages><author></author><title>Modern methods for business research</title></host><title>The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W. W. Chin</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. L. Marcolin</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. R. Newsted</name></json:item></author><host><volume>14</volume><pages><last>217</last><first>189</first></pages><author></author><title>Information Systems Research</title></host><title>A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and voice mail emotion/adoption study</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysts for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. Coltman</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. M. Devinney</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. F. Midgley</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. Veniak</name></json:item></author><host><volume>61</volume><pages><last>1262</last><first>1250</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Business Research</title></host><title>Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. J. Conger</name></json:item></author><host><volume>34</volume><pages><last>46</last><first>35</first></pages><author></author><title>Educational and Psychological Measurement</title></host><title>A revised definition for suppressor variables: A guide to their identification and interpretation</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>I. Coyne</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. Warszta</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. Beadle</name></json:item><json:item><name>N. Sheehan</name></json:item></author><host><volume>13</volume><pages><last>224</last><first>220</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Selection an Assessment</title></host><title>The impact of mode of administration on the equivalence of a test battery: A quasi‐experimental design</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. Cropanzano</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. E. Bowen</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. W. Gilliland</name></json:item></author><host><volume>21</volume><pages><last>48</last><first>34</first></pages><author></author><title>Academy of Management Perspectives</title></host><title>The management of organizational justice</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Diamantopoulos</name></json:item><json:item><name>H. M. Winklhofer</name></json:item></author><host><volume>38</volume><pages><last>277</last><first>269</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Marketing Research</title></host><title>Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. Diamantopoulos</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. Riefler</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. P. Roth</name></json:item></author><host><volume>61</volume><pages><last>1218</last><first>1203</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Business Research</title></host><title>Advancing formative measurement models</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. R. Dineen</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. A. Noe</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. Wang</name></json:item></author><host><volume>43</volume><pages><last>145</last><first>127</first></pages><author></author><title>Human Resource Management Journal</title></host><title>Perceived fairness of web‐based applicant screening procedures: Weighing rules of justice and the role of individual differences</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. R. Edwards</name></json:item></author><host><volume>14</volume><pages><last>388</last><first>370</first></pages><author></author><title>Organizational Research Methods</title></host><title>The fallacy of formative measurement</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1998). An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. Ellwart</name></json:item><json:item><name>U. Konradt</name></json:item></author><host><volume>145</volume><pages><last>27</last><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Psychology</title></host><title>Formative versus reflective measurement: An illustration using the work‐family balance construct</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K. F. Geisinger</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>117</last><first>95</first></pages><author></author><title>Handbook of psychology: Vol. 10. Assessment psychology</title></host><title>Testing and assessment in cross‐cultural psychology</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Ghiselli, E. E., Campbell, J. P., & Zedeck, S. (1981). Measurement theory for the behavioural sciences. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman and Company.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. W. Gilliland</name></json:item></author><host><volume>18</volume><pages><last>734</last><first>694</first></pages><author></author><title>Academy of Management Review</title></host><title>The perceived fairness of selection systems: An organizational justice perspective</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. W. Gilliland</name></json:item></author><host><volume>79</volume><pages><last>701</last><first>691</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>Effects of procedural and distributive justice on reactions to a selection system</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. W. Gilliland</name></json:item></author><host><volume>18</volume><pages><last>281</last><first>271</first></pages><author></author><title>Human Resource Management Review</title></host><title>The tails of justice: A critical examination of the dimensionality of organizational justice constructs</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. W. Gilliland</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Groth</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. C. Baker VI</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. F. Dew</name></json:item><json:item><name>L. M. Polly</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. C. Langdon</name></json:item></author><host><volume>54</volume><pages><last>704</last><first>669</first></pages><author></author><title>Personnel Psychology</title></host><title>Improving applicants’ reactions to rejection letters: An application of fairness theory</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. Greenberg</name></json:item></author><host><volume>16</volume><pages><last>432</last><first>399</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Management</title></host><title>Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. A. Harkness</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. P. Mohler</name></json:item><json:item><name>F. J. R. van de Vijver</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>16</last><first>3</first></pages><author></author><title>Cross‐cultural survey methods</title></host><title>Comparative research</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>Harman, H. H. (1967). Modern factor analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M. M. Harris</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. Van Hoye</name></json:item><json:item><name>F. Lievens</name></json:item></author><host><volume>11</volume><pages><last>236</last><first>230</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title></host><title>Privacy and attitudes towards internet‐based selection systems: A cross‐cultural comparison</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. P. Hausknecht</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. V. Day</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. C. Thomas</name></json:item></author><host><volume>57</volume><pages><last>683</last><first>639</first></pages><author></author><title>Personnel Psychology</title></host><title>Applicant reactions to selection procedures: An updated model and meta‐analysis</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>B. C. Holtz</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. E. Ployhart</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. Dominguez</name></json:item></author><host><volume>13</volume><pages><last>86</last><first>75</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title></host><title>Testing the rules of justice: The effects of frame‐of‐reference and pre‐test validity information on personality test responses and test perceptions</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. Hulland</name></json:item></author><host><volume>20</volume><pages><last>204</last><first>195</first></pages><author></author><title>Strategic Management Journal</title></host><title>Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. B. Jarvis</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. B. MacKenzie</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. M. Podsakoff</name></json:item></author><host><volume>30</volume><pages><last>218</last><first>199</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Consumer Research</title></host><title>A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. Kanfer</name></json:item></author><host><volume>1</volume><pages><last>170</last><first>75</first></pages><author></author><title>Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology</title></host><title>Motivation theory and industrial and organizational psychology</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>U. Konradt</name></json:item><json:item><name>O. Rack</name></json:item></author><host><volume>5</volume><pages><last>59</last><first>53</first></pages><author></author><title>Zeitschrift für Personalpsychologie</title></host><title>Personalrekrutierung im Internet: Einfluss der Qualität von Recruiting‐Sites auf die Arbeitgeberattraktivität</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>U. Konradt</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. Syperek</name></json:item><json:item><name>G. Hertel</name></json:item></author><host><volume>2</volume><pages><last>10</last><first>1</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Business and Media Psychology</title></host><title>Testing on the internet: Faking in a web‐based self‐administered personality measure</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>F. Lievens</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. M. Harris</name></json:item></author><host><volume>18</volume><pages><last>165</last><first>131</first></pages><author></author><title>International review of industrial and organizational psychology</title></host><title>Research on internet recruitment and testing: Current status and future directions</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>T. H. Macan</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. J. Avedon</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. Paese</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. E. Smith</name></json:item></author><host><volume>47</volume><pages><last>738</last><first>715</first></pages><author></author><title>Personnel Psychology</title></host><title>The effects of applicants’ reactions to cognitive ability tests and an assessment center</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>S. B. MacKenzie</name></json:item><json:item><name>P. M. Podsakoff</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. B. Jarvis</name></json:item></author><host><volume>90</volume><pages><last>730</last><first>710</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>The problem of measurement model misspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommended solutions</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D. P. MacKinnon</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. L. Krull</name></json:item><json:item><name>C. M. Lockwood</name></json:item></author><host><volume>1</volume><pages><last>181</last><first>173</first></pages><author></author><title>Prevention Science</title></host><title>Equivalence of the mediation, confounding, and suppression effect</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. S. Mattila</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. J. Mount</name></json:item></author><host><volume>22</volume><pages><last>145</last><first>135</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Hospitality Management</title></host><title>The impact of selected customer characteristics and response time on E‐complaint satisfaction and return intent</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>E. Parry</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. Tyson</name></json:item></author><host><volume>18</volume><pages><last>274</last><first>257</first></pages><author></author><title>Human Resource Management Journal</title></host><title>An analysis of the use and success of online recruitment methods in the UK</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R. E. Ployhart</name></json:item><json:item><name>A. M. Ryan</name></json:item></author><host><volume>83</volume><pages><last>16</last><first>3</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>Applicants’ reactions to the fairness of selection procedures: The effects of positive rule violations and time of measurement</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P. M. Podsakoff</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. B. MacKenzie</name></json:item><json:item><name>J.‐Y. Lee</name></json:item><json:item><name>N. P. Podsakoff</name></json:item></author><host><volume>88</volume><pages><last>903</last><first>879</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D. T. Regan</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. Fazio</name></json:item></author><host><volume>13</volume><pages><last>45</last><first>28</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Experimental Social Psychology</title></host><title>On the consistency between attitudes and behavior: Look to the method of attitude formation</title></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>SmartPLS, 2.0 (beta)</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author></author><title>PLS marker variable approach to diagnose and control for method variance</title></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>A. M. Ryan</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. E. Ployhart</name></json:item></author><host><volume>26</volume><pages><last>606</last><first>565</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Management</title></host><title>Applicants’ perceptions of selection procedures and decisions</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D. J. Schleicher</name></json:item><json:item><name>V. Venkataramani</name></json:item><json:item><name>F. P. Morgeson</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. A. Campion</name></json:item></author><host><volume>59</volume><pages><last>590</last><first>559</first></pages><author></author><title>Personnel Psychology</title></host><title>So you didn't get the job … Now what do you think? Examining opportunity‐to‐perform fairness perceptions</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N. Schmitt</name></json:item><json:item><name>B. W. Coyle</name></json:item></author><host><volume>61</volume><pages><last>192</last><first>184</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>Applicant decisions in the employment interview</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J. W. Smither</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. R. Reilly</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. E. Millsap</name></json:item><json:item><name>K. Pearlman</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. W. Stoffey</name></json:item></author><host><volume>46</volume><pages><last>76</last><first>48</first></pages><author></author><title>Personnel Psychology</title></host><title>Applicant reactions to selection procedures</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P. E. Spector</name></json:item></author><host><volume>9</volume><pages><last>232</last><first>221</first></pages><author></author><title>Organizational Research Methods</title></host><title>Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend?</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D. D. Steiner</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. W. Gilliland</name></json:item></author><host><volume>81</volume><pages><last>141</last><first>134</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>Fairness reactions to personnel selection techniques in France and the United States</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>H. Sylva</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. T. Mol</name></json:item></author><host><volume>17</volume><pages><last>323</last><first>311</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title></host><title>E‐recruitment: A study into applicant perceptions of an online application system</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N. T. Tippins</name></json:item></author><host><volume>2</volume><pages><last>10</last><first>2</first></pages><author></author><title>Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice</title></host><title>Internet alternatives to traditional proctored testing: Where are we now?</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D. M. Truxillo</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. N. Bauer</name></json:item></author><host><volume>2</volume><pages><last>397</last><first>379</first></pages><author></author><title>APA handbook of I–O psychology</title></host><title>Applicant reactions to organizations and selection systems</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D. M. Truxillo</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. D. Steiner</name></json:item><json:item><name>S. W. Gilliland</name></json:item></author><host><volume>12</volume><pages><last>53</last><first>39</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title></host><title>The importance of organizational justice in personnel selection: Defining when selection fairness really matters</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>D. B. Turban</name></json:item><json:item><name>T. L. Keon</name></json:item></author><host><volume>78</volume><pages><last>193</last><first>184</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>Organizational attractiveness: An interactionist perspective</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>F. Van de Vijver</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. K. Hambleton</name></json:item></author><host><volume>1</volume><pages><last>99</last><first>89</first></pages><author></author><title>European Psychologist</title></host><title>Translating tests: Some practical guidelines</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. Viswesvaran</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. S. Ones</name></json:item></author><host><volume>12</volume><pages><last>186</last><first>172</first></pages><author></author><title>International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title></host><title>Importance of perceived personnel selection system fairness determinants: Relations with demographic, personality, and job characteristics</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C. Viswesvaran</name></json:item><json:item><name>D. S. Ones</name></json:item></author><host><volume>25</volume><pages><last>226</last><first>169</first></pages><author></author><title>International review of industrial and organizational psychology</title></host><title>Employee selection in times of change</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L. J. Williams</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. A. Cote</name></json:item><json:item><name>M. R. Buckley</name></json:item></author><host><volume>74</volume><pages><last>468</last><first>462</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Applied Psychology</title></host><title>Lack of method variance in self‐reported affect and perceptions at work: Reality or artifact?</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>L. J. Williams</name></json:item><json:item><name>J. R. Edwards</name></json:item><json:item><name>R. J. Vandenberg</name></json:item></author><host><volume>29</volume><pages><last>936</last><first>903</first></pages><author></author><title>Journal of Management</title></host><title>Recent advances in causal modeling methods for organizational and management research</title></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>H. Wold</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>252</last><first>221</first></pages><author></author><title>Measuring the unmeasurable</title></host><title>Systems analysis by partial least squares</title></json:item></refBibs><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><volume>21</volume><publisherId><json:string>IJSA</json:string></publisherId><pages><total>15</total><last>169</last><first>155</first></pages><issn><json:string>0965-075X</json:string></issn><issue>2</issue><subject><json:item><value>Original Article</value></json:item></subject><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1468-2389</json:string></eissn><title>International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2389</json:string></doi></host><categories><wos><json:string>social science</json:string><json:string>psychology, applied</json:string><json:string>management</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>economic & social sciences</json:string><json:string>economics & business </json:string><json:string>business & management</json:string></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>2013</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2013</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/ijsa.12026</json:string></doi><id>C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520</id><score>0.94978905</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><availability><p>Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd</p></availability><date>2013-03-22</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Udo</forename><surname>Konradt</surname></persName><email>konradt@psychologie.uni-kiel.de</email><affiliation>University of Kiel, Institute of Psychology, Olshausenstr. 40, D‐24098, Kiel, Germany</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Tim</forename><surname>Warszta</surname></persName><affiliation>Westcoast University of Applied Sciences, Department of Economics, Heide, Germany</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-3"><persName><forename type="first">Thomas</forename><surname>Ellwart</surname></persName><affiliation>University of Trier, Department of Psychology, Trier, Germany</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Int J Select Assess</title><idno type="pISSN">0965-075X</idno><idno type="eISSN">1468-2389</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2389</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><date type="published" when="2013-06"></date><biblScope unit="volume">21</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="155">155</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="169">169</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/ijsa.12026</idno><idno type="ArticleID">IJSA12026</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2013-03-22</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract><p>This study examines the Gilliland model of applicants’ reactions to selection procedures in a Web‐based context, revealing new theoretical and empirical insights. We extend existing research by further considering a reflective first‐order formative second‐order model consisting of three second‐order justice factors of formal characteristics, explanation, and interpersonal treatment modeled by 11 formative indicators representing the procedural justice rules. Partial least squares path modeling analysis revealed that formal characteristics and interpersonal treatment are positively related to perceptions of process fairness in Web‐based selection. Most salient procedural justice rules revealed were treatment of the applicants, opportunity to perform, propriety of questions, and reconsideration opportunity. Furthermore, process fairness, which was positively related to applicants’ reactions, fully mediated the relationship between justice factors and applicants’ reactions.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="Journal Subject"><list><head>article-category</head><item><term>Original Article</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2013-03-22">Created</change><change when="2013-06">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component type="serialArticle" version="2.0" xml:id="ijsa12026" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2389</doi><issn type="print">0965-075X</issn><issn type="electronic">1468-2389</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="IJSA"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title sort="INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SELECTION AND ASSESSMENT" type="main">International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title><title type="short">Int J Select Assess</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="06102"><doi>10.1111/ijsa.2013.21.issue-2</doi><copyright ownership="publisher">Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd</copyright><numberingGroup><numbering number="21" type="journalVolume">21</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue">2</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2013-06">June 2013</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" position="30" status="forIssue" type="article"><doi>10.1111/ijsa.12026</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="IJSA12026"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count number="15" type="pageTotal"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Original Articles</title><title type="articleCategory">Original Article</title></titleGroup><copyright ownership="publisher">© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd</copyright><eventGroup><event agent="bestset" date="2013-03-22" type="xmlCreated"></event><event type="firstOnline" date="2013-05-15"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2013-05-15"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-02-14"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.6.4 mode:FullText" date="2015-10-04"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst">155</numbering><numbering type="pageLast">169</numbering></numberingGroup><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:IJSA.IJSA12026.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><titleGroup><title type="short">Fairness in Web‐based Selection</title><title type="shortAuthors">Udo <fc>K</fc>onradt, <fc>T</fc>im <fc>W</fc>arszta and <fc>T</fc>homas <fc>E</fc>llwart</title><title type="main">Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply</title></titleGroup><creators><creator affiliationRef="#ijsa12026-aff-0001" creatorRole="author" xml:id="ijsa12026-cr-0001"><personName><givenNames>Udo</givenNames><familyName>Konradt</familyName></personName><contactDetails><email>konradt@psychologie.uni-kiel.de</email></contactDetails></creator><creator affiliationRef="#ijsa12026-aff-0002" creatorRole="author" xml:id="ijsa12026-cr-0002"><personName><givenNames>Tim</givenNames><familyName>Warszta</familyName></personName></creator><creator affiliationRef="#ijsa12026-aff-0003" creatorRole="author" xml:id="ijsa12026-cr-0003"><personName><givenNames>Thomas</givenNames><familyName>Ellwart</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation countryCode="DE" xml:id="ijsa12026-aff-0001"><orgDiv>University of Kiel</orgDiv><orgName>Institute of Psychology</orgName><address><street>Olshausenstr. 40</street><postCode>D‐24098</postCode><city>Kiel</city><country>Germany</country></address></affiliation><affiliation countryCode="DE" xml:id="ijsa12026-aff-0002"><orgDiv>Westcoast University of Applied Sciences</orgDiv><orgName>Department of Economics</orgName><address><city>Heide</city><country>Germany</country></address></affiliation><affiliation countryCode="DE" xml:id="ijsa12026-aff-0003"><orgDiv>University of Trier</orgDiv><orgName>Department of Psychology</orgName><address><city>Trier</city><country>Germany</country></address></affiliation></affiliationGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main"><p>This study examines the <fc>G</fc>illiland model of applicants’ reactions to selection procedures in a Web‐based context, revealing new theoretical and empirical insights. We extend existing research by further considering a reflective first‐order formative second‐order model consisting of three second‐order justice factors of formal characteristics, explanation, and interpersonal treatment modeled by 11 formative indicators representing the procedural justice rules. Partial least squares path modeling analysis revealed that formal characteristics and interpersonal treatment are positively related to perceptions of process fairness in Web‐based selection. Most salient procedural justice rules revealed were treatment of the applicants, opportunity to perform, propriety of questions, and reconsideration opportunity. Furthermore, process fairness, which was positively related to applicants’ reactions, fully mediated the relationship between justice factors and applicants’ reactions.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Fairness in Web‐based Selection</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Udo</namePart><namePart type="family">Konradt</namePart><affiliation>University of Kiel, Institute of Psychology, Olshausenstr. 40, D‐24098, Kiel, Germany</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: konradt@psychologie.uni-kiel.de</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Tim</namePart><namePart type="family">Warszta</namePart><affiliation>Westcoast University of Applied Sciences, Department of Economics, Heide, Germany</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Thomas</namePart><namePart type="family">Ellwart</namePart><affiliation>University of Trier, Department of Psychology, Trier, Germany</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2013-06</dateIssued><dateCreated encoding="w3cdtf">2013-03-22</dateCreated><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2013</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract>This study examines the Gilliland model of applicants’ reactions to selection procedures in a Web‐based context, revealing new theoretical and empirical insights. We extend existing research by further considering a reflective first‐order formative second‐order model consisting of three second‐order justice factors of formal characteristics, explanation, and interpersonal treatment modeled by 11 formative indicators representing the procedural justice rules. Partial least squares path modeling analysis revealed that formal characteristics and interpersonal treatment are positively related to perceptions of process fairness in Web‐based selection. Most salient procedural justice rules revealed were treatment of the applicants, opportunity to perform, propriety of questions, and reconsideration opportunity. Furthermore, process fairness, which was positively related to applicants’ reactions, fully mediated the relationship between justice factors and applicants’ reactions.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>International Journal of Selection and Assessment</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>Int J Select Assess</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><subject><genre>article-category</genre><topic>Original Article</topic></subject><identifier type="ISSN">0965-075X</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1468-2389</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1468-2389</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">IJSA</identifier><part><date>2013</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>21</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>2</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>155</start><end>169</end><total>15</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/ijsa.12026</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">IJSA12026</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001320 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001320 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Rhénanie
|area= UnivTrevesV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:C29C41EC4AA21A0053C6CC174B1AD5121C503520
|texte= Fairness Perceptions in Web‐based Selection: Impact on applicants’ pursuit intentions, recommendation intentions, and intentions to reapply
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |