This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: A firm handshake used to be all a job candidate needed to make a good first impression, but today a growing number of firms are relying on artificial intelligence to screen applicants. Using AI to conduct first-round interviews saves time and money.
But it also changes how job candidates act—and not always for the better, according to a new study from the University of Georgia. The study is published in the journal Information Systems Research. The researchers found job seekers often overcompensate for nervousness during one-way interviews when they know they'll be evaluated by AI.
And AI candidate rating systems can't tell when candidates are stretching the truth. "We spoke to a lot of people who were interviewing with AI recruiters, and it was affecting the way they would behave during the interview," said Akshat Lakhiwal, corresponding author of the study and an assistant professor in UGA's Terry College of Business. "So naturally, that affects the outcome of the interview." During a "one-way" asynchronous video interview, a job seeker records answers to basic interview questions such as "Why should we hire you?" or "Can you tell us about yourself?" When the practice was first introduced, the tool made it easier to schedule initial interviews, and the sorting process made it easy for recruiters to compare how multiple candidates answered the same question.
Today, many companies save time by allowing AI systems to grade and sort candidates' responses. The change has left candidates feeling somewhat disoriented and helpless, Lakhiwal said. "If you're applying for a job at your dream company and your dream company wants to interview you using AI, you really don't have a lot of choice," he said.
"You don't really want to say no to it, but you also don't know how it works." That leads many applicants to change their behavior to fit whatever they imagine the criteria might be. In a study of hundreds of online job seekers, Lakhiwal found a considerable increase in applicants' self-reported "exaggerations" or "deceptive embellishments" when candidates knew their videos would be evaluated by an AI agent rather than a human. An analysis of their videos and answers confirmed what they reported.
When participants were asked whether embellishing qualifications was ethical, they said it was necessary to perform well in an unpredictable environment. "A lot of embellishment was happening," Lakhiwal said. "They seemed to be throwing the kitchen sink at the situation to try to give the 'evaluator' what it was looking for." On the hiring end, the industry-favored AI agent Lakhiwal used in the study didn't penalize job applicants who stretched the truth and scored them as well as those who earnestly described having the same qualifications.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
