What a Difference Your E-Mail Makes: Effects of Informal E-Mail Addresses in Online Résumé Screening
Publication: Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking
Volume 18, Issue Number 3
Abstract
Résumés are screened rapidly, with some reports stating that recruiters form their impressions within 10 seconds. Certain résumé characteristics can have a significant impact on the snap judgments these recruiters make. The main goal of the present study was to examine the effect of the e-mail address (formal vs. informal) used in a résumé on the hirability perceptions formed by professional recruiters (N=73). In addition, the effect of the e-mail address on hirability perceptions was compared to the effects of spelling errors and typeface. Participants assessed the cognitive ability, personality, and the hirability of six fictitious applicants for the job of an HR specialist. The hirability ratings for the résumés with informal e-mail addresses were significantly lower than the hirability ratings for résumés that featured a formal e-mail address. The effect of e-mail address was as strong as the effect of spelling errors and stronger than that of typeface. The effect of e-mail address on hirability was mediated by perceptions of conscientiousness and honesty-humility. This study among actual recruiters shows for the first time that the choice of the e-mail address used on a résumé might make a real difference.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Cole MS, Feild HS, Giles WF, et al. Job type and recruiters' inferences of applicant personality drawn from resume biodata: their relationships with hiring recommendations. International Journal of Selection & Assessment 2004; 12:363–367.
2.
Knouse SB. Impressions of the resume: the effects of applicant education, experience, and impression management. Journal of Business & Psychology 1994; 9:33–45.
3.
Feldman DC, Klich NR. (1991) Impression management and career strategies. In Giacalone RA, Rosenfeld P, eds. Applied impression management: how image making affects managerial decisions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 67–80.
4.
Brunswik E. (1956) Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
5.
Hursch CJ, Hammond KR, Hursch JL. Some methodological considerations in multiple-cue probability studies. Psychological Review 1964; 71:42–60.
6.
Gosling SD, Ko SJ, Mannarelli T, et al. A room with a cue: personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 2002; 8:379–398.
7.
Buss DM, Craik KH. Act prediction and the conceptual analysis of personality scales: indices of act density, bipolarity, and extensity. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 1983; 45:1081–1095.
8.
Vazire S, Gosling SD. e-Perceptions: personality impressions based on personal websites. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 2004; 87:123–132.
9.
Leirer VO, Hamilton DL, Carpenter S. Common first names as cues for inferences about personality. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin 1982; 8:712–718.
10.
Mehrabian A. Characteristics attributed to individuals on the basis of their first names. Genetic Social & General Psychology Monographs 2001; 127:59–88.
11.
Burns GN, Christiansen ND, Morris MB, et al. Effects of applicant personality on résumé evaluations. Journal of Business & Psychology 2014; 1–19.
12.
Crystal D. (2001) Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Workman JE, Johnson KK. Effects of conformity and nonconformity to gender-role expectations for dress: teachers versus students. Adolescence 1994; 29:207–223.
14.
Charney DH, Rayman JR. The role of writing quality in effective student resumes. Journal of Business & Technical Communication 1989; 3:36–53.
15.
Charney DH, Rayman JR, Ferreira-Buckley L. How writing quality influences readers' judgments of résumés in business and engineering. Journal of Business & Technical Communication 1992; 6:38–74.
16.
McDowell EE. Perceptions of the ideal cover letter and ideal résumé. Journal of Technical Writing & Communication 1987; 17:179–191.
17.
Ling J, Van Schaik P. The influence of font type and line length on visual search and information retrieval in web pages. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies 2006; 64:395–404.
18.
Shaikh D, Fox D. (2008) Does the typeface of a resume impact our perception of the applicant http://surl.org/usabilitynews/101/pof.asp (accessed Dec. 22, 2014).
19.
Bernard M, Mills M. (2000) So, what size and type of font should I use on my website? http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/22/font.asp (accessed Dec. 22, 2014).
20.
Back MD, Egloff B, Schmukle SC. How extraverted is [email protected]? Inferring personality from e-mail addresses. Journal of Research in Personality 2008; 42:1116–1122.
21.
Schmidt FL, Hunter JE. The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin 1998; 124:262–274.
22.
Carless S, Waterworth R. The importance of ability and effort in recruiters' hirability decisions: an empirical examination of attribution theory. Australian Psychologist 2012; 47:232–237.
23.
Wechsler D. (2001) Wechsler Individual Achievement Test—Second Edition. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
24.
Lee K, Ashton MC. Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research 2004; 39:329–358.
25.
De Vries RE. The 24-item Brief HEXACO Inventory (BHI). Journal of Research in Personality 2013; 47:871–880.
26.
Cole MS, Rubin RS, Feild HS, et al. Recruiters' perceptions and use of applicant résumé information: screening the recent graduate. Applied Psychology: An International Review 2007; 56:319–343.
27.
Cable DM, Judge TA. Interviewers' perceptions of person–organization fit and organizational selection decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology 1997; 82:546–561.
28.
Kristof-Brown AL. Perceived applicant fit: distinguishing between recruiters' perceptions of person–job and person–organization fit. Personnel Psychology 2000; 53:643–671.
29.
Singer MS, Bruhns C. Relative effect of applicant work experience and academic qualification on selection interview decisions: a study of between-sample generalizability. Journal of Applied Psychology 1991; 76:550–559.
30.
West B, Welch KB, Galecki AT. (2006) Linear mixed models: a practical guide using statistical software. London: CRC Press.
31.
Carpenter J, Bithell J. Bootstrap confidence intervals: when, which, what? A practical guide for medical statisticians. Statistics in Medicine 2000; 19:1141–1164.
32.
Sobel ME. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology 1982; 13:290–312.
33.
Zettler I, Hilbig BE, Heydasch T. Two sides of one coin: honesty–humility and situational factors mutually shape social dilemma decision making. Journal of Research in Personality 2013; 47:286–295.
34.
Wiltshire J, Bourdage JS, Lee K. Honesty-Humility and perceptions of organizational politics in predicting workplace outcomes. Journal of Business & Psychology 2014; 29:235–251.
35.
Lee K, Ashton MC, Wiltshire J, et al. Sex, power, and money: prediction from the dark triad and honesty–humility. European Journal of Personality 2013; 27:169–184.
36.
Johnson MK, Rowatt WC, Petrini L. A new trait on the market: honesty–humility as a unique predictor of job performance ratings. Personality & Individual Differences 2011; 50:857–862.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking
Volume 18 • Issue Number 3 • March 2015
Pages: 135 - 140
PubMed: 25751044
Copyright
Copyright 2015, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
History
Published online: 9 March 2015
Published in print: March 2015
Authors
Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export Citation
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.
View Options
Access content
To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.⚠ Society Access
If you are a member of a society that has access to this content please log in via your society website and then return to this publication.