Ageism on LinkedIn: Discrimination towards older applicants during LinkedIn screening

IF 9 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Maaike Schellaert , Janneke K. Oostrom , Eva Derous
{"title":"Ageism on LinkedIn: Discrimination towards older applicants during LinkedIn screening","authors":"Maaike Schellaert ,&nbsp;Janneke K. Oostrom ,&nbsp;Eva Derous","doi":"10.1016/j.chb.2024.108430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Building on impression formation theories and the stereotype content model, this study examined age bias in LinkedIn screening, which is an understudied topic despite the aging workforce. An experimental study among 366 HR professionals considered the effects of LinkedIn recommendations (warmth/competence) and recruiters' age stereotypes on older applicants' job suitability ratings. First, we investigated and found that LinkedIn screening is prone to bias against older applicants. Furthermore, although having a recommendation on LinkedIn stressing competence or warmth is beneficial for both younger and older applicants, younger applicants benefited more from a recommendation reflecting their competence compared to older applicants. Second, recruiters' positive stereotypes regarding older workers' competence positively influenced job suitability ratings of older job applicants. This positive effect of recruiters' stereotypes was not affected by counter-stereotypical information emphasized through a recommendation. Understanding how applicants' LinkedIn profile affect recruiters’ hiring outcomes might help organizations to develop policies for fair selection procedures.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48471,"journal":{"name":"Computers in Human Behavior","volume":"162 ","pages":"Article 108430"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in Human Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074756322400298X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Building on impression formation theories and the stereotype content model, this study examined age bias in LinkedIn screening, which is an understudied topic despite the aging workforce. An experimental study among 366 HR professionals considered the effects of LinkedIn recommendations (warmth/competence) and recruiters' age stereotypes on older applicants' job suitability ratings. First, we investigated and found that LinkedIn screening is prone to bias against older applicants. Furthermore, although having a recommendation on LinkedIn stressing competence or warmth is beneficial for both younger and older applicants, younger applicants benefited more from a recommendation reflecting their competence compared to older applicants. Second, recruiters' positive stereotypes regarding older workers' competence positively influenced job suitability ratings of older job applicants. This positive effect of recruiters' stereotypes was not affected by counter-stereotypical information emphasized through a recommendation. Understanding how applicants' LinkedIn profile affect recruiters’ hiring outcomes might help organizations to develop policies for fair selection procedures.

LinkedIn 上的年龄歧视:LinkedIn 筛选过程中对老年申请人的歧视
本研究以印象形成理论和刻板印象内容模型为基础,考察了 LinkedIn 筛选中的年龄偏差,尽管劳动力老龄化严重,但对这一问题的研究还不够深入。一项针对366名人力资源专业人士的实验研究考虑了LinkedIn推荐(温暖/能力)和招聘人员的年龄刻板印象对老年求职者工作适合度评级的影响。首先,我们调查发现,LinkedIn筛选容易对年龄较大的求职者产生偏见。此外,尽管LinkedIn上强调能力或热情的推荐对年轻求职者和年长求职者都有好处,但与年长求职者相比,年轻求职者从反映其能力的推荐中获益更多。其次,招聘者对年长员工能力的积极刻板印象会对年长求职者的工作适合度评级产生积极影响。招聘者刻板印象的这种积极影响并不受通过推荐强调的反刻板印象信息的影响。了解求职者在LinkedIn上的个人资料如何影响招聘者的招聘结果,可能会帮助企业制定公平选拔程序的政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
19.10
自引率
4.00%
发文量
381
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: Computers in Human Behavior is a scholarly journal that explores the psychological aspects of computer use. It covers original theoretical works, research reports, literature reviews, and software and book reviews. The journal examines both the use of computers in psychology, psychiatry, and related fields, and the psychological impact of computer use on individuals, groups, and society. Articles discuss topics such as professional practice, training, research, human development, learning, cognition, personality, and social interactions. It focuses on human interactions with computers, considering the computer as a medium through which human behaviors are shaped and expressed. Professionals interested in the psychological aspects of computer use will find this journal valuable, even with limited knowledge of computers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信