It's Only a Small Lie: Forgivability of LinkedIn Fraud.

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Eryn A Nielsen, Dalia L Diab
{"title":"It's Only a Small Lie: Forgivability of LinkedIn Fraud.","authors":"Eryn A Nielsen, Dalia L Diab","doi":"10.1177/00332941251344829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>LinkedIn has become a more prevalent recruitment and selection tool for employers. However, two issues that could potentially arise in the usage of LinkedIn in the hiring process are fraud and racial discrimination. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to examine the effect of type of LinkedIn fraud (embellishment vs. fabrication) on ratings of forgivability and hireability based on an applicant's race (Black vs. White). Using a 2 x 2 between-subjects factorial design, 179 participants recruited from Prolific were randomly assigned to one of four hypothetical LinkedIn profiles: Black applicant with an embellished LinkedIn profile, Black applicant with a fabricated LinkedIn profile, White applicant with an embellished LinkedIn profile, or White applicant with a fabricated LinkedIn profile. After reviewing the profile, participants were asked to rate their likelihood of hiring the applicant and forgiving them for committing fraud. Results revealed that the main effect of type of fraud was significant, such that it was significantly more likely for participants to forgive and hire an applicant if they embellished rather than fabricated their LinkedIn profile. Therefore, it was easier to excuse a less harsh lie. However, the current study did not find evidence of an interaction between applicant race and type of fraud committed on either forgivability or hireability, suggesting that no racial discrimination was detected in this study. Tendency to forgive and religiosity were also included as covariates in further analyses, but neither changed the pattern of results. These findings suggest that forgiveness and hiring decisions may not be based on who committed the lie, but the nature of the lie itself.</p>","PeriodicalId":21149,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Reports","volume":" ","pages":"332941251344829"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Reports","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941251344829","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

LinkedIn has become a more prevalent recruitment and selection tool for employers. However, two issues that could potentially arise in the usage of LinkedIn in the hiring process are fraud and racial discrimination. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to examine the effect of type of LinkedIn fraud (embellishment vs. fabrication) on ratings of forgivability and hireability based on an applicant's race (Black vs. White). Using a 2 x 2 between-subjects factorial design, 179 participants recruited from Prolific were randomly assigned to one of four hypothetical LinkedIn profiles: Black applicant with an embellished LinkedIn profile, Black applicant with a fabricated LinkedIn profile, White applicant with an embellished LinkedIn profile, or White applicant with a fabricated LinkedIn profile. After reviewing the profile, participants were asked to rate their likelihood of hiring the applicant and forgiving them for committing fraud. Results revealed that the main effect of type of fraud was significant, such that it was significantly more likely for participants to forgive and hire an applicant if they embellished rather than fabricated their LinkedIn profile. Therefore, it was easier to excuse a less harsh lie. However, the current study did not find evidence of an interaction between applicant race and type of fraud committed on either forgivability or hireability, suggesting that no racial discrimination was detected in this study. Tendency to forgive and religiosity were also included as covariates in further analyses, but neither changed the pattern of results. These findings suggest that forgiveness and hiring decisions may not be based on who committed the lie, but the nature of the lie itself.

这只是一个小谎言:LinkedIn欺诈的可原谅性。
LinkedIn已经成为雇主们更普遍的招聘和选择工具。然而,在招聘过程中使用LinkedIn可能会出现两个问题:欺诈和种族歧视。因此,本研究的目的是检验LinkedIn欺诈类型(美化与捏造)对基于申请人种族(黑人与白人)的可原谅性和可雇佣性评级的影响。采用2 × 2的受试者间因子设计,从多产公司招募的179名参与者被随机分配到四种假设的LinkedIn资料中:黑人申请人的LinkedIn资料美化,黑人申请人的LinkedIn资料伪造,白人申请人的LinkedIn资料美化,或白人申请人的LinkedIn资料伪造。在看完个人资料后,参与者被要求评估他们雇佣申请人并原谅他们欺诈的可能性。结果显示,欺诈类型的主要影响是显著的,例如,参与者更有可能原谅并雇用美化而不是伪造LinkedIn个人资料的申请人。因此,不那么残酷的谎言更容易被原谅。然而,目前的研究并没有发现申请人种族和欺诈类型之间的相互作用的证据,无论是可原谅性还是可雇佣性,这表明在这项研究中没有发现种族歧视。在进一步的分析中,宽恕倾向和宗教信仰也被纳入协变量,但两者都没有改变结果的模式。这些发现表明,原谅和雇佣决定可能不是基于谁说了谎,而是谎言本身的性质。
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
Psychological Reports
Psychological Reports PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
171
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信