↓ Skip to main content

Ethnic Minorities’ Impression Management in the Interview: Helping or Hindering?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Ethnic Minorities’ Impression Management in the Interview: Helping or Hindering?
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00086
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eva Derous

Abstract

Cross-cultural impression management (IM) has not been considered much, which is remarkable given the fast rate at which the labor market is becoming multicultural. This study investigated whether ethnic minorities and majorities differed in their preference for IM-tactics and how this affected ethnic minorities' interview outcomes. A preliminary study (focus groups/survey) showed that ethnic minorities (i.e., Arab/Moroccans) preferred 'entitlements' whereas majorities (i.e., Flemish/Belgians) preferred 'opinion conformity' as IM-tactics. An experimental follow-up study among 163 ethnic majority raters showed no main effect of IM-tactics on interview ratings. Ethnic minorities' use of IM-tactics only affected interview ratings if rater characteristics were considered. Specifically, interview ratings were higher when ethnic minorities used opinion conformity (i.e., majority-preferred IM-tactic) and lower when minorities used entitlements (i.e., minority-preferred IM-tactic) if recruiters were high in social dominance orientation, and when they felt more experienced/proficient with interviewing. IM-tactics are a human capital factor that might help applicants to increase their job chances on the labor market. It is concluded that ethnic minority applicants' preferences for certain IM-tactics might lead to bias even in structured interview settings, but that this depends on ethnic majority recruiters' interview experience and ingroup/outgroup attitudes. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 38%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Other 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 6 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 17 34%
Psychology 10 20%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 12%
Social Sciences 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 8 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 June 2018.
All research outputs
#3,264,708
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,024
of 30,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,666
of 420,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#135
of 459 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,092 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,290 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 459 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.