Sex and physical attractiveness of raters and applicants as determinants of resumé evaluations.

Male and female student "interviewers," classified as either high, moderate, or low on physical attractiveness, evaluated 12 bogus job applicants for whom sex, physical attractiveness, and qualifications had been varied. A 2 X 3 X 2 X 3 X 2 analysis of variance was computed, with the first two variables (interviewer sex and attractiveness) constituting between-group factors, and the last three variables (applicant sex, attractiveness, and qualifications) constituting repeated measures factors. Regardless of interviewer sex and attractiveness, highly qualified applicants were preferred over poorly qualified applicants, male applicants were preferred over female applicants, and attractive candidates were preferred over unattractive candidates. Discrimination in employment decisions was attributed to sex-role and physical attractiveness stereotypes.

[1]  R. Carlson,et al.  Selection interview decisions: the relative influence of appearance and factual written information on an interviewer's final rating. , 1967, The Journal of applied psychology.

[2]  Philip Goldberg,et al.  Are women prejudiced against women? , 1968 .

[3]  D Byrne,et al.  The effects of physical attractiveness, sex, and attitude similarity on interpersonal attraction. , 1968, Journal of personality.

[4]  D. Broverman,et al.  Sex-role stereotypes and clinical judgments of mental health. , 1970, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[5]  A. Miller.  Role of physical attractiveness in impression formation , 1970 .

[6]  S. Kiesler,et al.  Evaluation of the Performance of Women as a Function of Their Sex, Achievement, and Personal History. , 1971 .

[7]  I. Silverman.  Physical Attractiveness and Courtship. , 1971 .

[8]  G. William Walster,et al.  Physical attractiveness and dating choice: A test of the matching hypothesis☆ , 1971 .

[9]  B. I. Murstein.  Physical attractiveness and martial choice. , 1972, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[10]  E. Berscheid,et al.  What is beautiful is good. , 1972, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[11]  Ted L. Huston,et al.  Ambiguity of acceptance, social desirability, and dating choice , 1973 .

[12]  B. Rosen,et al.  The influence of sex-role stereotypes on evaluations of male and female supervisory behavior. , 1973, The Journal of applied psychology.

[13]  V. E. Schein.  The relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics. , 1973, The Journal of applied psychology.

[14]  W. Clay Hamner,et al.  Race and sex as determinants of ratings by potential employers in a simulated work-sampling task. , 1974 .

[15]  Harold Sigall,et al.  Beauty is talent: Task evaluation as a function of the performer's physical attractiveness. , 1974 .

[16]  Milton D. Hakel,et al.  The college student as interviewer: A threat to generalizability? , 1975 .

[17]  D. Ilgen,et al.  A theoretical approach to sex discrimination in traditionally masculine occupations , 1975 .

[18]  V. E. Schein.  Relationships between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics among female managers. , 1975, The Journal of applied psychology.

[19]  Biased Attitudes toward Females as Indicated by Ratings of Intelligence and Likeability , 1975 .

[20]  T. F. Cash,et al.  When Counselors Are Heard But Not Seen: Initial Impact of Physical Attractiveness. , 1975 .

[21]  Stephen L. Cohen,et al.  Subtle effects of sex role stereotypes on recruiters' hiring decisions. , 1975 .

[22]  R. L. Dipboye,et al.  Relative importance of applicant sex, attractiveness, and scholastic standing in evaluation of job applicant resumes. , 1975 .