Author(s): Renee McCauley
Mentor(s): Afra Ahmad, Psychology
For my study, we were asking the question: if we change how someone talks about themselves in a job interview, can we increase perceptions of the warmth or competence?
A job interview is a high-stakes interaction where someone is making a bunch of judgments about who you are, and based on those judgments they either offer you a job or they don’t.
So we came up with three scripts that could all reasonably be the way the same person would answer the same question. One was a control script where the candidate presents themselves as qualified enough, but doesn’t present a lot of information that hints at their warmth or competence. And then we made a warmth script that indicated warmth, and a competence script that indicated competence.
Our participants listened to the same person reading each script and after each script, they answered a few questions about how warm and competent the job candidate was.
And as you can see on this graph here, we found out that there was no statistically significant difference in the competence among the three scripts. We did a little better on differentiating warmth, but it still wasn’t what we wanted. The only statistically significant difference was between the control script and the competence script, with the control script being warmer than the competence script.
So what went wrong? I dove back into the literature to see why we hadn’t signaled warmth and competence as intended. I found some experiments that suggest that humans are better at intentionally signaling warmth-we try a bunch of strategies that really do signal warmth- but when it comes to competence, we think some things positively affect perceptions of competence, but they either don’t matter or they hurt competence perceptions. I suspect that better ability to signal warmth is partially responsible for our results. The other factor we think affected our results was that in the warmth and competence scripts, the job candidate was very proactive, which could have been perceived as overreaching, presumptuous, or too assertive.
With all these lessons learned, we’re going to go back and rewrite the scripts, submit them to the IRB, rerun the experiment, and then analyze the results. Hopefully we’ll get the results we wanted this time around!
Once we crack the code on intentionally signaling warmth and competence, we’ll use these scripts in a larger study I’m conducting on the interaction between gender and accent on hireability in job interviews.
The judgments of warmth and competence that we make about other people, they’re not just limited to individuals, they’re actually the basis of stereotypes.
Current research indicates that non-native-accented individuals are perceived as less hireable than their native-speaking counterparts.
We basically suggest that part of what’s happening is that based on a person’s speech, an interviewer can make an educated guess about their ethnicity and gender which activates stereotypes in their mind which affect how hireable they think the candidate is. We’re going to see if changing the way the candidate talks about themselves could influence some of these judgments and hopefully counteract them.