Costly mistakes: Why and when spelling errors in resumes jeopardise interview chances

Costly mistakes: Why and when spelling errors in resumes jeopardise interview chances

The analysis of hiring penalties due to spelling errors has been restricted to white-collar occupations and error-laden resumes. Moreover, the mechanisms underlying these penalties remained unclear. To fill these gaps, we conducted a scenario experiment with 445 recruiters. Compared to error-free re...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one Vol. 18; no. 4; p. e0283280
Main Authors: Sterkens, Philippe, Caers, Ralf, De Couck, Marijke, Van Driessche, Victor, Geamanu, Michael, Baert, Stijn
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States Public Library of Science 05-04-2023
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Subjects:
Age discrimination
Analysis
Behavior
Biology and Life Sciences
Communication
Education
Employees
Employers
Employment
Errors
Evaluation
Experiments
Fines & penalties
Heterogeneity
Hiring
Job performance
Job qualifications
Language
Medicine and Health Sciences
People and Places
Perceptions
Personnel Selection
Research and Analysis Methods
Resumes (Employment)
Social Sciences
Spelling
Validity
Vocational qualifications
Belgium
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The analysis of hiring penalties due to spelling errors has been restricted to white-collar occupations and error-laden resumes. Moreover, the mechanisms underlying these penalties remained unclear. To fill these gaps, we conducted a scenario experiment with 445 recruiters. Compared to error-free resumes, hiring penalties are inflicted for error-laden resumes (18.5 percent points lower interview probability) and resumes with fewer errors (7.3 percent points lower interview probability). Furthermore, we find heterogeneity in penalties inflicted. Half of the penalty can be explained by the perceptions that applicants making spelling errors have lower interpersonal skills (9.0%), conscientiousness (12.1%) and mental abilities (32.2%).
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0283280