How to define a good recruiter: a dual-process model of recruiter effect
Current Psychology, ISSN: 1936-4733, Vol: 42, Issue: 34, Page: 30111-30124
2023
- 2Citations
- 14Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Using the elaboration likelihood model (ELM), this paper aims to investigate a complete dual process model of the recruiter effect and the initiated role of recruiters’ social skills. Recruiters’ informativeness and affective delivery are two processing cues used separately by applicants in central and peripheral processing mechanisms, and hypothesized as the mechanisms underlying the recruiter effect. Two studies using higher education institutions’ recruitment populations were conducted to test three hypotheses. Outcomes from different recruitment stages were used separately in the two studies – informative usability and applicants’ satisfaction from the early stage (Study 1) and pursuit intention from the later stage (Study 2). Multilevel modeling was used for both studies. The results support three hypotheses. Specifically, recruiters with strong social skills demonstrate greater informativeness and affect, shown as higher recruiters’ informativeness and affective delivery. Applicants thus perceive the information provided to be usable, are satisfied with recruiters (Study 1), and have increased intentions to pursue the applied-for job (Study 2). This paper focuses on recruiters’ informativeness as the central cue and tests the possibility of multi-channel processing, making it the first investigation about ELM in recruitment after multi-channel processing was proposed. By thoroughly testing and extending ELM, the paper highlights the dual process model underlying the recruiter effect and the role of recruiters’ social skills. The investigation elucidates the factors initiating the recruiter effect and the corresponding influencing mechanism. Practical implications for organizations are discussed.
Bibliographic Details
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know