Search results

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

This study is the first empirical study investigating the impact of automatically evaluated interviews on applicant behavior and reactions.

This paper aims to provide a gendered analysis of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) benchmarked upon the global commitments to women’s health and well-being in the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. It reviews evidence of the global consequences of neglecting women’s tobacco use and health, as well as analyzes persistent issues related to sex and gender that compromise the efficacy of tobacco control and science. Actionable recommendations are made to the Conference of the Parties to the FCTC and other key stakeholders.

This paper draws upon empirical studies, literature reviews and global health data at the varying intersections of gender, sex, tobacco and global health.

The global tobacco control framework and its implementation by state governments have been largely gender blind to date with dire health and economic consequences, including inequitable positive outcomes for men compared to women, and an increase in women’s smoking with associated morbidity and mortality. Gender equitable progress in combatting the tobacco epidemic will not be possible without resolving the gender bias, stigmatization, sexism and lack of intersectionality that plague tobacco control policy, research and interventions for cessation and harm reduction.

This paper provides an updated global overview of current trends in women’s tobacco use and comprehensively details the persistent structural barriers in tobacco control and science that limit their capacity to effectively analyze and address tobacco use and its impact on women.