This study examined the extent that personality information in resumes impacts hiring judgments through applicant’s resumes. Study 1 examined lay theories regarding relationships between resume cues and the applicant’s personality and hireability. Study 2 examined how the applicant’s personality impacted hiring judgments through resumes.
Data for both studies were collected in the context of a managerial position. For Study 1, participants assessed resume cues in regards to their relationship with personality and hireability. For Study 2, Human Resource personnel evaluated each resume in regards to personality and hireability.
Results for Study 1 highlight several connections between applicants’ personality and resumes, with strong links between resume content and perceptions of conscientiousness and agreeableness. Results for Study 2 indicate that personality was largely unrelated to ratings of hireability but perceptions of personality were strongly linked to hireability; actual personality was linked to the variability in cue information related to hireability, and conscientiousness was indirectly related to hireability through judgments of conscientiousness.
Results from these studies suggest that personality and perceptions of personality play a greater role in resume development and screening than has been previously suggested. The pattern of results reported suggest that there are a number of resumes cues that accurately reflect an applicant’s personality and influence perceptions of hireability.
By taking an exploratory approach, the current studies were able to explore a large variety of cues linked to personality and ratings of hireability. Results have implications for both applicants and HR personnel evaluating resumes.
This is a preview of subscription content,to check access.
Access this article
Similar content being viewed by others
Note that multilevel regression produces unstandardized regression coefficients. Hox (2010) presents a formula (2.13, p. 22) to derive standardized coefficients from the unstandardized coefficients. This is accomplished by multiplying the unstandardized coefficient by the standard deviation of the explanatory variable and dividing the product by the standard deviation of the outcome variable. As these regression results are computed with one explanatory and one outcome variable, the resulting standardized coefficient is analogous to a correlation controlling for the multilevel nature of the data.
Altheide, D. L. (1987). Reflections: Ethnographic content analysis. Qualitative Sociology, 1, 65–77.
Bradford, B. (2012, October 6). Why companies use software to scan resumes. NPR.org. Retrieved May 20, 2013, from http://www.npr.org/2012/10/06/162440531/why-companies-use-software-to-scan-resumes.
Bright, J. E. H., & Hutton, S. (2000). The impact of competency statements on résumes for short-listing decisions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 8, 41–53.
Brown, B. K., & Campion, M. A. (1994). Biodata phenomenology: Recruiters’ perceptions and use of biographical information in resume screening. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 897–908.
Cole, M. S., Feild, H. S., & Giles, W. F. (2003a). Using recruiter assessments of applicants’ resume content to predict applicant mental ability and big five personality dimensions. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 78–88.
Cole, M. S., Feild, H. S., & Giles, W. F. (2003b). What can we uncover about applicants based on their resumes? A field study. Applied HRM Research, 8, 51–62.
Cole, M. S., Feild, H. S., Giles, W. F., & Harris, S. G. (2004). Job type and recruiters’ inferences of applicant personality drawn from resume biodata: Their relationships with hiring recommendations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 12, 363–367.
Cole, M. S., Feild, H. S., Giles, W. F., & Harris, S. G. (2009). Recruiters’ inferences of applicant personality based on resume screening: Do paper people have a personality? Journal of Business and Psychology, 24, 5–18.
Cole, M. S., Field, H. S., & Stafford, J. O. (2005). Validity of resume reviewers’ inferences concerning applicant personality based on resume evaluation. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 13, 321–324.
Corwen, L. (1988). Your resume: Key to a better job (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Field, H. S., & Holley, W. H. (1976). Resume preparation: An empirical study of personnel managers’ perceptions. Vocational Guidance Quarterly, 24, 229–237.
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the big-five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42.
Hakel, M. D., Dobmeyer, T. W., & Dunnette, M. D. (1970). Relative importance of three content dimensions in overall suitability ratings of job applicants’ resumes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54, 65–71.
Hox, J. J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. New York, NY: Routledge.
Huang, J. L., Curran, P. G., Keeney, J., Poposki, E. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2012). Detecting and deterring insufficient effort responding to surveys. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27, 99–114.
Hutchinson, K. L. (1984). Personnel administrators’ preferences for resume content: A survey and review of empirically based conclusions. Journal of Business Communication, 21, 5–14.
Julian, M. W. (2001). The consequences of ignoring multilevel data structures in nonhierarchical covariance modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 8, 325–352.
Knouse, S. B. (1994). Impressions of the resume: The effects of applicant education, experience, and impression management. Journal of Business and Psychology, 9, 33–45.
Knouse, S. B., Giacalone, R. A., & Pollard, H. (1988). Impression management in the resume and its cover letter. Journal of Business and Psychology, 3, 242–249.
Levine, E. L., & Flory, A. (1975). Evaluation of job applications: A conceptual framework. Public Personnel Management, 4, 378–385.
Maas, C. J. M., & Hox, J. J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 1, 85–91.
Meade, A. W., & Craig, S. B. (2012). Identifying careless responses in survey data. Psychological Methods, 17, 437–455.
Nemanick, R. C, Jr, & Clark, E. M. (2002). The differential effects of extracurricular activities on attributions in resume evaluation. International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 10, 206–217.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. D., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.
Preacher, K. J., & Selig, J. P. (2012). Advantages of Monte Carlo confidence intervals for indirect effects. Communication Methods and Measures, 6, 77–98.
Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stevens, C. K., & Kristof, A. L. (1995). Making the right impression: A field study of applicant impression management during job interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 587–606.
Stewart, G. L., Dustin, S. L., Barrick, M. R., & Darnold, T. C. (2008). Exploring the handshake in employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1139–1146.
Thoms, P., McMasters, R., Roberts, M. R., & Dombkowski, D. A. (1999). Resume characteristics as predictors of an invitation to interview. Journal of Business and Psychology, 13, 339–356.
Wilson, R. F., & Lewis, A. (1996). Better resumes for executives and professionals (3rd ed.). Hauppauge, NY: Barron’s Educational Series.
See Table 4
Appendix 2: Example Cue Rating Form and Instructions from Study 1
In the following survey, you will answer questions about specific cues found in resumes, and how they are related to an applicant’s personality and hireability. Below is an example of how you will answer each question. Please follow these directions exactly how we present them.
On each page of the survey, you will be presented with one resume cue. Below this cue will be a matrix table (see example below).
The first column of the matrix table includes personality adjectives. First, start with the first row (e.g., extraverted) and work your way across the columns of the matrix table from the left to the right.
The second column asks “Is this resume cue related to the following adjective?” At this time you will answer whether you think the resume cue “Applicant’s name” is related to the adjective “Extraverted.” You will check either “Related” or “Unrelated.”
Then you will move on to the third column which states “If you checked Related, what type of relationship is it?” At this time if you checked that the resume cue “Applicant’s name” was related to the adjective “Extraverted,” you will check whether it is a “Positive” or a “Negative” relationship with the adjective.
Lastly, you will move to the fourth column which states “If you checked Related, how strongly is this resume cue related to this adjective?” At this time, if you checked that the resume cue “Applicant’s name” was related to the adjective “Extraverted,” you will check how strongly it is related to the adjective, either “Slightly” related, “Moderately” related, or “Strongly” related.
Go across each column for each adjective. If you answered “Unrelated” for any of the adjectives then leave the third and fourth columns blank.
Example of question:
Applicant uses sentence fragments versus complete sentences
Is this resume cue related to the follow adjective?
If you checked Related, what type of relationship is it?
If you checked Related, how strongly is this resume cue related to this adjective?
How important is this resume cue for making decisions about the applicant’s hireability?
Of little importance.
About this article
Cite this article
Burns, G.N., Christiansen, N.D., Morris, M.B. et al. Effects of Applicant Personality on Resume Evaluations. J Bus Psychol 29, 573–591 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9349-6