Online professional networks are important tools used by recruiters to find qualified candidates for job openings. Within these networks, professional recommendations are used to supplement profiles and add credibility. These recommendations tend to be overly positive, full of superlatives, and lacking in critical statements (referred to as scope of improvement). We draw on the theory of online trust to argue that having scope of improvement and superlatives may affect various dimensions of trust and to show how online trust, in turn, can affect the usefulness of a recommendation and the likelihood of receiving an interview. We contribute to the body of work on online trust both theoretically and empirically. From a theory perspective, we explain why including scope of improvement and superlatives in recommendations on online professional networks may help certain candidates in getting an interview but hurt others. From an empirical perspective, we provide a unique empirical setting that allows us to observe not only the effect of scope of improvement and superlatives, but also validate the theoretically argued underlying process. Furthermore, through discussion with recruiters, we identify then test contextual factors that differentiate recommendations on online professional networks from traditional recommendations. In this study, we use a scenario-based, quasi-experimental survey to test the effects of superlatives and scope of improvement on the usefulness and effectiveness of recommendations. Further, we test the mediating role of trust and how the experience levels of the recommendee affect the sign and strength of these relationships. Our findings indicate that including scope of improvement increases the effectiveness and usefulness of recommendations for candidates at low- and middle levels of experience. For the most experienced candidates, including scope of improvement has a negative effect on effectiveness. Superlatives negatively affect the perceived competence of the recommender and thus should be avoided. This negative effect is reduced when combined with scope of improvement.

中文翻译：

---

在线推荐的最高级和改进范围：生命的气息还是死亡之吻？

在线专业网络是招聘人员用来寻找职位空缺的合格候选人的重要工具。在这些网络中，专业推荐用于补充个人资料并增加可信度。这些建议往往过于积极，充满最高级，缺乏批判性陈述（称为改进范围）。我们利用在线信任理论来论证具有改进范围和最高级可能会影响信任的各个方面，并展示在线信任如何反过来影响推荐的有用性和接受采访的可能性。我们在理论和经验上都为在线信任的工作做出了贡献。从理论的角度来看，我们解释了为什么在在线专业网络的推荐中包含改进范围和最高级可能会帮助某些候选人获得面试，但会伤害其他人。从经验的角度来看，我们提供了一个独特的经验设置，使我们不仅可以观察改进范围和最高级的影响，还可以验证理论上争论的潜在过程。此外，通过与招聘人员的讨论，我们确定并测试了将在线专业网络上的推荐与传统推荐区分开来的背景因素。在这项研究中，我们使用基于情景的准实验调查来测试最高级和改进范围对建议的有用性和有效性的影响。更远，我们测试了信任的中介作用以及被推荐人的经验水平如何影响这些关系的符号和强度。我们的研究结果表明，包括改进范围可以提高针对中低经验水平候选人的建议的有效性和实用性。对于最有经验的候选人来说，包括改进范围对有效性有负面影响。最高级会对推荐者的感知能力产生负面影响，因此应该避免。当与改进范围相结合时，这种负面影响就会减少。对于最有经验的候选人来说，包括改进范围对有效性有负面影响。最高级会对推荐者的感知能力产生负面影响，因此应该避免。当与改进范围相结合时，这种负面影响就会减少。对于最有经验的候选人来说，包括改进范围对有效性有负面影响。最高级会对推荐者的感知能力产生负面影响，因此应该避免。当与改进范围相结合时，这种负面影响就会减少。