Perceived resiliency: The influence of resilience narratives on attribution processes in selection

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103653Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Resilience narratives, perceived trait resiliency, and self-reported resiliency are conceptually distinct.

  • Attributions of resiliency are formed based on resilience narrative loci.

  • Perceived trait resiliency directly predicts hiring recommendations and emotional ratings.

  • Perceived trait resiliency predicts selection ratings incrementally beyond competence perceptions.

Abstract

Resilience narratives (stories of encountering and overcoming adversity) are often solicited in pre-interview (e.g., application) and interview selection contexts. In this work, we examine the effectiveness of resilience narratives in pre-interview and interview selection contexts where applicants share personal narratives about themselves. Drawing on Attribution Theory (Heider, 1958; Kelley, 1967) we make hypotheses about how perceived resiliency is shaped by resilience narratives and how this perception influences the hiring recommendations and emotional reactions of organizational decision-makers. Specifically, we examine the effects of two key elements of resilience narratives (locus of adversity and locus of support) on attribution processes and decision-making. To test the hypothesized model, we conducted a set of in-depth interviews and three experiments. Preliminary interview data demonstrated that hiring personnel consciously seek to assess perceived resiliency and resilience narrative loci in selection. In Study 1 we tested proposed effects with 178 working adults in a university application pre-interview context, Study 2 included a parallel experiment in an organizational interview context with 194 participants who had hiring experience, and Study 3 involved quantitative experimental assessments of job interviewees conducted with 124 working adults with hiring experience. Across two selection contexts (pre-interview applications, interviews) and three samples, results revealed that: (a) resilience narrative loci affect perceived trait resiliency attributions formed about applicants, and (b) perceived resiliency directly relates to emotional reactions and hiring recommendations, incrementally beyond competence perceptions. We detail theoretical and practical implications for the extension of Attribution Theory by integrating resilience narratives, perceived resiliency, and selection processes.

Section snippets

Resilience in selection contexts

Selection research offers insights concerning selection method reliability and validity, applicants' intentional and unintentional impression management, and applicant experiences and reactions. Yet, a clear picture of how and why applicants' sharing of personal stories shape organizational decision-makers' perceptions of applicants is still emerging (Levashina et al., 2014; McFarland et al., 2003). We aim to demonstrate how and why resilience narratives relate to decision-makers' perceptions

Resilience conceptual grounding

Research has identified that the conceptualization of resilience involves two elements: (1) facing adversity and (2) overcoming the adversity (Fisher et al., 2019). Individuals are said to have an opportunity to demonstrate resilience if they have faced difficulty—there must be some current or past adversity that presents a threat to normative functioning (Masten, 2001). Resilience researchers have studied adverse conditions such as parental mental illness, socioeconomic disadvantage, and

Preliminary qualitative exploration

Although online job search resources, such as Glassdoor, claim that hiring managers are interested in how applicants overcome adversity, we aimed to test this claim to ensure that hiring managers seek information regarding resilience narratives in pre-interview and interview contexts. Organizational psychology research has yet to directly assess resilience narratives in the selection context, and we intended to provide empirical evidence to demonstrate whether resilience narratives are relevant

Manipulation pilot study

The experiment manipulation material wording was assessed in a pilot study. This was done to determine whether the wording used to describe the manipulated resilience narrative factors (i.e., locus of support and locus of adversity) was adequate and effective in conveying the intended loci. Subject matter experts (SMEs; Organizational Behavior and I-O Psychology Ph.D. students) were recruited via email to participate in this pilot study. Twenty-three individuals made up the SME sample (Mage

Participants and procedure

We surveyed 199 working adults in the United States using Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) task system. Participants were selected based on their approval rating on previous human intelligence tasks (HITs; self-contained tasks) that they completed to receive a reward. We used at least 95% approval ratings as a cut-off for eligibility to ensure the sample contained MTurk workers who have a reputation for successful and attentive completion of surveys. Research has demonstrated that MTurk workers

Study 1 results

Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) using MPlus with listwise deletion and maximum likelihood estimation (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2012) was conducted to test the measurement model. The hypothesized 4-factor model: perceived resiliency, hiring recommendation, emotional reaction, and participant resiliency (X2 [344] = 1042.87; CFI = 0.82; SRMR = 0.09) demonstrated superior fit to two alternative models. The hypothesized model was compared to an alternative 3-factor model that combined hiring score

Study 1 discussion

Study 1 results demonstrated that the interaction between locus of support and adversity related to perceived resiliency in the expected manner. Further, the hypothesized moderated mediation relationship between resilience narrative loci and hiring recommendation via perceived resiliency was supported. Further, although perceived resiliency related to emotional reactions, the moderated mediation effect was not significant. To extend this assessment beyond a pre-interview application context, we

Participants and procedure

For Study 2, we surveyed working adults at or above the age of 18 in the United States using the Qualtrics Panel participant recruitment system. We restricted this sample to individuals with prior experience in the hiring context (i.e., experience conducting job interviews). Participants received two dollars (U.S.) for completing the survey.

The initial sample included 273 participants. For improved data quality, we removed 21 participants from the sample prior to data analyses because they

Study 2 results

Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) using MPlus with listwise deletion and maximum likelihood estimation (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2012) demonstrated superior fit for the hypothesized 4-factor model: perceived resiliency, hiring recommendation, emotional reaction, and participant resiliency (X2 [344] = 1202.64; CFI = 0.71; SRMR = 0.12), as compared to two alternative measurement models. The hypothesized model was compared to an alternative 3-factor model that combined hiring score and emotional

Study 2 discussion

Study 2 results, parallel to Study 1, showed that the interaction between locus of support and adversity related to perceived resiliency. Perceived resiliency also directly related to selection ratings (i.e., hiring recommendations and emotional reactions). Further, the hypothesized moderated mediation relationship between resilience narrative loci and both hiring recommendation and emotional reactions via perceived resiliency was supported in this study. Next, to further assess

Participants and procedure

For this study, we surveyed 124 adults who have previous hiring experience (i.e., conducing job interviews) in the United States. To recruit adults with hiring experience, we posted study recruitment flyers on social media groups (e.g., Facebook, LinkedIn) comprised of hiring personnel, as well as on local online community boards. We also contacted the HR departments of organizations, advertised the study in professional social media circles, and used snowball sampling—invited participants to

Study 3 results

Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) using MPlus with listwise deletion and maximum likelihood estimation (Muthén & Muthén, 1998–2012) demonstrated superior fit for the hypothesized 5-factor model: perceived resiliency, hiring recommendation, emotional reaction, participant resiliency, and perceived competence (X2 [485] = 1022.75; CFI = 0.83; SRMR = 0.08), as compared to two alternative measurement models. The hypothesized model was compared to an alternative 4-factor model that combined hiring

Study 3 discussion

Study 3 results, in line with Studies 1 and 2, demonstrated that perceived resiliency directly related to selection ratings (i.e., hiring recommendation and emotional reaction), although evidence of moderated mediation was not found. In addition, this study showed incremental validity for perceived resiliency, beyond the variance explained by perceived competence, in relation to both hiring and emotional ratings. In terms of relative effects, perceived competence was more strongly related to

General discussion

Resiliency is an important characteristic to understand because it is recognized as a competitive advantage in today's organizations (e.g., Avey et al., 2011; Shin et al., 2012). Accordingly, it is useful to understand the factors influencing how resiliency is attributed in pre-interview and interview selection contexts and the effects of such attributions. However, current research on resiliency has mainly adopted a self-report approach and has not investigated the factors that contribute to

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Danielle D. King: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – original draft. Brent Lyons: Conceptualization, Investigation, Supervision, Writing – original draft. Cassandra N. Phetmisy: Data curation, Investigation, Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References (80)

  • A. Bangerter et al.

    Storytelling in the selection interview? How applicants respond to past behavior questions

    Journal of Business and Psychology

    (2014)
  • M.R. Barrick

    What you see may not be what you get: Relationships among self-presentation tactics and ratings of interview and job performance

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2009)
  • R.F. Baumeister et al.

    Four selves, two motives, and a substitute process self-regulation model

  • D.J. Bem

    Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena

    Psychological Review

    (1967)
  • T.W. Britt et al.

    How much do we really know about employee resilience?

    Industrial and Organizational Psychology

    (2016)
  • E. Brunswik

    The conceptual framework of psychology

    (1952)
  • M. Buhrmester et al.

    Amazon’s mechanical turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data?

    Perspectives on Psychological Science

    (2011)
  • D. Byrne

    The attraction paradigm

    (1971)
  • S. Cheng et al.

    Understanding how resilience is measured in the organizational sciences

    Human Performance

    (2020)
  • J. Cohen et al.

    Applied multiple regression correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences

    (1984)
  • M. Conrad et al.

    Protective and resource factors in high- and low-risk children: A comparison of children with unipolar, bipolar, medically ill, and normal mothers

    Development and Psychopathology

    (1993)
  • A.J.C. Cuddy et al.

    The BIAS map: Behaviors from intergroup affect and stereotypes

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2007)
  • E. Derous et al.

    Hiring discrimination against Arab minorities: Interactions between prejudice and job characteristics

    Human Performance

    (2009)
  • A.P.J. Ellis et al.

    The use of impression management tactics in structured interviews: A function of question type?

    Journal of Applied Psychology

    (2002)
  • D.M. Fisher et al.

    The importance of definitional and temporal issues in the study of resilience

    Applied Psychology

    (2019)
  • S.T. Fiske et al.

    A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (2002)
  • B.L. Fredrickson

    The broaden–and–build theory of positive emotions

    Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences

    (2004)
  • Glassdoor Team

    50 most common interview questions

  • J.H. Harvey et al.

    A potpourri of attribution

    Contemporary Psychology

    (1981)
  • F. Heider

    The psychology of interpersonal relations

    (1958)
  • M.L. Hoffman

    Empathy, role-taking, guilt, and development of altruistic motives

  • T.A. Hudgins

    Resilience, job satisfaction and anticipated turnover in nurse leaders

    Journal of Nursing Management

    (2016)
  • A.I. Huffcutt

    An empirical review of the employment interview construct literature

    International Journal of Selection and Assessment

    (2011)
  • A.I. Huffcutt et al.

    Interviews APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology

  • H. Ibarra et al.

    Identity as narrative: A process model of narrative identity work in macro work role transition

    Academy of Management Review

    (2010)
  • H. Ibarra et al.

    What’s your story?

    Harvard Business Review

    (2005)
  • S.C. January

    Integrating multiple perspectives into the study of resilience

    Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice

    (2016)
  • E. Jones et al.

    Social stigma: The psychology of marked relationships

    (1984)
  • H.H. Kelley

    Attribution theory in social psychology

    Nebraska Symposium on Motivation

    (1967)
  • H.H. Kelley

    The process of causal attribution

    American Psychologist

    (1973)
  • Cited by (0)

    This research did not receive any specific grant funding from funding agencies in public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

    View full text