Establishing an Interview Anxiety Baseline: Assessing Applicants’ Readiness

Abstract

This research includes survey data about the types of anxiety levels that college students experience while preparing for job interviews. Survey findings included female students reporting higher levels of anxiety than their male counterparts on four of the five scales. Results suggest that additional training for female applicants could reduce anxiety levels and help them excel in job interviews. Implications for job applicants, academic communities, and recruiters are discussed. The article concludes with study limitations and suggestions for future research.

Keywords

interviewing interview anxiety interview performance

Both job seekers and recruiters have expressed concerns about the job interview process and the predictive value of adequately assessing the candidate (McCarthy & Goffin, 2004;Young & Kacmar, 1998). One of the primary tools that organizations still use to determine whether a job applicant is a match for a company is the job interview (Joyce, 2008). This interview usually includes both subjective and objective components, with the objective components including factors such as work experience and credentials (Young & Kacmar, 1998) and the subjective components including nonverbal communication (McShane, 1993) and emotional factors that are part of interpersonal evaluations (Rivera, 2015).

Job applicants are often apprehensive about the job interview process and most commonly experience anxiety (Joyce, 2008;McCarthy & Goffin, 2004;Young & Kacmar, 1998) regarding the applicant-recruiter interactions. This anxiety may be manifested in several key areas including communication, appearance, social, performance, and behavioral dimensions (McCarthy & Goffin, 2004). AsMcCarthy and Goffin (2004)have explained, “Applicant anxiety has serious implications, as it may bias the predictive validity of job interviews and result in the selection of less promising candidates” (p. 608). Thus, students at universities are interested in preparation strategies to improve their performances on job interviews.

Researchers have noted that a better assessment of the interview process can only be obtained by examining all components of the interview that may contribute to applicant anxiety. The effectiveness of matching the applicants with the recruiters may be contingent on the abilities of the applicants to manage their anxiety levels (Joyce, 2008). Thus, it is important for prospective job applicants to integrate anxiety reduction strategies in their job preparation plans in order to heighten the chances of obtaining the job. Additionally, it is important for the recruiters to understand the level at which anxiety can influence selection outcomes. This research contributes to the interview selection literature by providing an empirical understanding of several anxiety dimensions in the job interview process using a sample of college students in a communication course. More specifically, the purpose of this research is to examine students’ anxiety levels before the job interview process. Previous research required respondents to report anxiety levels or perform an anxiety-causing event within a short time frame (Blume, Dreher, & Baldwin, 2010;Feiler & Powell, 2013;Marks & O’Connor, 2006). In contrast, this study asked respondents to remember previous interview anxiety experiences or to anticipate how they might feel prior to a job interview. Through the lens ofSpence’s (1973)signaling theory, this research includes a discussion of (a) interview anxiety and the dimensions of anxiety, (b) gender differences related to interview anxiety, (c) the importance of understanding the signals that applicants and recruiters send, (d) anxiety preparation strategies, (e) survey results and a discussion of the findings, (f) implications for applicants and recruiters, and (g) limitations and future research suggestions.

Literature Review

Theoretical Background

The premise of the signaling theory is that recruiters process potential signals as a way to compensate applicants who react to those signals. For example, according toSpence (1976), recruiters use education as a signal for work outcomes; however, the essence of the signal is measured by the investment of the applicant, which usually is determined by compensation. Thus, recruiters use signals during interviews by the questions they ask, the expressions on their faces, and the ways they ask the questions (Karasek & Bryant, 2012). Likewise, job applicants may also signal during job interviews by their interest in the organization and the job fit characteristics. For example, the job applicants may ask questions related to the size of the organization, reward structure, and job skill variety. These questions may signal to the recruiters the job applicant is concerned about movement within the organization and rewards for job skill variety and performance (Karasek & Bryant, 2012). In this study, signaling theory supports the examination of interview anxiety as behaviors that may reduce applicant attraction outcomes.

The interview process includes job applicant outcomes such as a job applicant’s interest in the organization and job skill variety. Additionally, the recruiter’s signals, such as the supply of interested job applicants and the associated quality of those applicants, will influence the organizational outcomes.Spence (1973)also posited that there is a signaling cost to employees engaging in signaling activities. These signaling costs are undertaken if there is a sufficient return as defined by high-performing employees.

Engers (1987)extended the research on signaling theory and suggested that employers may have difficulty in determining the value of goods whose quality varies among applicants. For example, “if low-quality sellers mimic the signal choices of high-quality sellers, the signal is uninformative” (Engers, 1987, p. 663).Connelly, Certo, Ireland, and Reutzel (2011)suggested the “job applicants signaling quality may be drowned out by large numbers of signals” (p. 58) that may affect the quality and accuracy of the signals, resulting in conflicting signals. For example, the large number of signals may be related to the applicant’s veracity, credibility, or fit or the recruiter’s attention that is given to the job applicant’s responses. The large number of signals may also include conflicting signals related to verbal and nonverbal communication. These situations tend to occur because organizations and applicants often have competing goals (Bangerter, Roulin, & Konig, 2012). However, it is in the best interest of the applicant and recruiter to align their goals in an effort to increase the quality of the applicant selections. To that end, there may be a need for employers to look at multiple signals, because interview anxiety may cause signals that are uninformative and other measures of productivity may need to be investigated prior to acting on signals.

Preparation Strategies to Reduce Interview Anxiety

Interview anxiety tends to be more common in college settings and experienced by upper-level undergraduate students beginning the job search process (Kwon, Powell, & Chalmers, 2013). Without anxiety reduction techniques, recruiters may not recognize an applicant’s fit with an organization and its culture (McCarthy & Goffin, 2004;Posthuma, Morgeson, & Campion, 2002). For example, the recruiter may reject the applicant due to the quality and accuracy of the job applicant’s signals, but the signals may be distorted due to the applicant’s anxiety. Thus, academic environments need to teach students communication and job interview skills in order to mitigate anxiety levels related to a lack of preparation (Joyce, 2008;McCarthy & Goffin, 2004;Young & Kacmar, 1998). These job interview skills have typically been provided in the career services departments within colleges and universities; however, some research has supported the need to include these skills in the classroom (Joyce, 2008;Kwon et al., 2013;Young & Kacmar, 1998).

Recognizing that students need assistance with communication and job skills, several faculty members have included various approaches to teaching job skills in their curriculum such as career-planning activities, mock interview activities, and storytelling (Bloch, 2011;Kleiman & Benek-Rivera, 2010;Marks & O’Connor, 2006).Smart (2004)suggested that instructors encourage students to develop proof statements to help them verbalize their skills to prospective employers during job interviews. The proof statements would prepare students to demonstrate to potential employers that they possess experiences and skills necessary for success. Another approach, as noted byHansen, Oliphant, Oliphant, and Hansen (2009), is to use several activities to support the mock interview exercise, including writing answers to interview questions, conducting partner interviews, and devoting class lectures to proper interview skills.Ralston, Kirkwood, and Burant (2003)noted that storytelling is an essential skill when engaging in the interview-applicant interaction.

In addition to assignments being integrated in the academic curriculum, some instructors have also integrated entire teaching modules to help students address their concerns related to job interviews. The various modules focus on topics related to job descriptions, storytelling, and mock job interviews, including debriefings (Browning & Cunningham, 2012;Litchfield, 2008;Ralston et al., 2003).Litchfield (2008)shared a behavioral technique to respond to interview questions titled STAR (situation, task, action, and result). STAR focuses on using work scenarios to “explain an actual Situation that you had to deal with, or Task you had to undertake, the Action you took to complete this project or how you solved a certain problem and finally the end Result” (p. 640).

AsRuss (2009)noted, only 42.2% of instructors include speaking assignments in their curriculum, and only 37.6% of instructors include writing assignments related to interview questions. Thus, teaching modules may consider the use of the STAR technique to engage in storytelling and the use of interview simulations to introduce more speaking assignments into their courses.Browning and Cunningham (2012)reported a class assignment where students created job descriptions and then were paired with other students to interview each other (peer interviews). The students were encouraged to use the STAR format when responding to behavioral questions. The authors recommended instructors meet with the students following the interviews for debriefing and further suggested that all communication teachers incorporate behavior-based interview activities into their teaching plans.Kwon et al. (2013)investigated the use of graphical realism in a virtual simulation to reduce job interview anxiety. The results of the study suggest that realistic virtual environments have the potential to help people overcome phobias, including anxiety about job interviews.

Dimensions of Anxiety

A successful job interview is still one of the most common job selection criteria today (Kwon et al., 2013;Posthuma et al., 2002;Young & Kacmar, 1998). As a result, most job applicants experience interview anxiety before and during the interview process. This anxiety may be revealed in various forms of nervousness, including shaking hands and communication problems as noted by the dimensions of anxiety (communication, appearance, social, performance, and behavior;Feiler & Powell, 2013;McCarthy & Goffin, 2004). These types of interview anxiety tend to be more prevalent in academic settings and are often experienced by students who are close to finishing college and are engaged in the job-seeking process (Kwon et al., 2013). Thus, it is important for colleges and universities to teach students job interview preparation skills to reduce the potential for anxiety issues that may impede performance.

The job interview is “perhaps the most commonly experienced stressful social evaluation” (Cuddy, Wilmuth, Yap, & Carney, 2015, p. 1286). Nervous candidates are less likely to perform well, thereby unable to establish the “chemistry” or job fit necessary for a successful interview (Coverdill & Finlay, 1998). Chemistry in job interviews has been identified as an important factor and includes to a great extent the applicants’ ability to signal their performance about their job-related skills as well as their similar or familiar characteristics to the recruiter during the interview process. More specifically,Hollandsworth, Kazelskis, Stevens, and Dressel (1979)reported that to be successful applicants must (a) satisfy the recruiters’ questions about subject matter by engaging in effective communication and (b) display proper eye contact, body posture, voice intonation, and personal appearance. The rating of the applicants during the job interview is usually related to the five dimensions of interview anxiety, as noted byMcCarthy and Goffin (2004), including communication, appearance, social, performance, and behavior.

Communication anxiety is related to an individual’s nervousness about his or her verbal and nonverbal communication skills (McCarthy & Goffin, 2004). This dimension has been noted as being prevalent for most interviews because the interview format requires an exchange of information between the recruiter and the applicant.McGovern, Jones, Warwick, and Jackson (1981)found that the applicant’s nonverbal behavior influenced hiring decisions, and recommended candidates paid attention to eye contact, facial expressions, and general body movement. Although nonverbal behaviors are important,Rasmussen (1984)found they were minor factors when considered with the résumé and the content of the interview. Thus, higher levels of nonverbal behavior helped the applicant only if the verbal content was also effective.

Appearance anxiety is related to anxiety that is based on an individual’s physical appearance (McCarthy & Goffin, 2004).Posthuma et al. (2002)suggested that some appearance factors can be managed by the interviewee and can yield a positive response from the interviewer. These include grooming, dress attire, and eyewear (Posthuma et al., 2002).

Social anxiety, as defined bySchlenker and Leary (1982), is “anxiety resulting from the prospect or presence of personal evaluation in real or imagined social situations” (p. 642).McCarthy and Goffin (2004)reported that social anxiety is related to an individual’s ability to collaborate with the interviewer. Thus, social anxiety can be further considered as collaboration that is built on the idea that candidates act and reside in social situations, and the response to the situations may affect their behaviors and consequently influence the outcomes of interviews (Posthuma et al., 2002).

Performance anxiety and behavior anxiety, as noted byMcCarthy and Goffin (2004), were originally identified in studies related to test taking in the academic environment. Performance anxiety has been related to worry, and behavioral anxiety has been related to emotionality (Spielberger & Vagg, 1995). More specifically, performance anxiety is related to an individual’s fear of failing in the interview process, and behavior anxiety reflects the emotional arousal as a result of the situation and is manifested in physical outcomes, such as sweaty palms (McCarthy & Goffin, 2004).Oliphant, Hansen, and Oliphant (2008)reported that job applicants who scored high on the behavioral interview measures during job interviews performed better in the workplace and were less likely to leave the company for poor productivity.

Gender Differences

In most interview situations, there may be “a tendency to view candidates as being somewhat homogeneous in their approach and mindsets, yet that may not be the case” (Huffcutt, Van Iddekinge, & Roth, 2011, p. 358). Some researchers have suggested that there may be a difference in the way males and females respond to anxiety during a job interview (Feiler & Powell, 2013;Graves & Powell, 1995;Sieverding, 2009;Tamres, Janicki, & Helgeson, 2002).Egloff and Schmukle (2004)studied gender differences in implicit and explicit anxiety measures that are used to help individuals process information about themselves and their environments.

Implicit anxiety measures are related to automatic or nonconscious modes of processing, and explicit anxiety measures are related to controlled or conscious modes. More specifically, “explicit measures assess introspectively accessible self-descriptions and evaluations. In contrast, implicit measures assess introspectively inaccessible processes that operate outside of awareness” (Egloff & Schmukle, 2004, p. 1807).Egloff and Schmukle (2004)noted that the correlation between implicit and explicit anxiety measures was higher for women than men. Thus, gender seemed to moderate the implicit-explicit anxiety measure association. Some researchers have suggested that females engage in more anxiety-coping techniques or may even hide their anxiety levels before and during the job interview process to perform better than males (Feiler & Powell, 2013;McCarthy & Goffin, 2005;Sieverding, 2009). Thus, it is important for organizations to structure job interviews in ways that give male and female applicants equal chances to present and display their skills and attributes (Sieverding, 2009).

Taylor et al. (2000)noted that women pursue opportunities more than men due to men’s general tendency to “fight or flight.” Conversely, women have a tendency to “tend and befriend,” which focuses on the attachment and caregiving system and the development and monitoring of social network systems. Therefore, females are generally more effective in dealing with interview anxiety than males and generally perform at a higher level. One reason why men may engage in avoidance tactics is because they are socialized to conceal their emotions (Sieverding, 2009). These concealed emotions are more frequently related to insecurity. According toTamres et al. (2002), “Because men stereotypically are considered to be action oriented, direct, and assertive, they also might be more likely to engage in problem-focused coping” (p. 4). In an effort to use the coping theory to mitigate the impacts of anxiety during interviews with male applicants,Feeney, McCarthy, and Goffin (2015)have recommended that interview training for males focus on effective coping strategies for appearance and social anxieties, including coaching and assessments on the appropriateness of attire and techniques to create feelings of similarity with the interviewee.

Sex-linked anxiety coping theory has been applied to the five interview anxiety dimensions in this study (communication, appearance, social, performance, and behavior;Feeney et al., 2015;Feiler & Powell, 2013).Feeney et al. (2015)reported that there were “significant male–female mean differences for the Appearance Anxiety, Behavioral Anxiety, and Performance Anxiety scales” (p. 299). Additionally, there were marginally significant differences for the Social Anxiety and Communication Anxiety scales.

Study Background

This study was conducted at a private, historically Black institution located with an enrollment of approximately 3,500 students in a metropolitan southern city. The population of the institution included 74% females and 26% males. All of the participants were students who were enrolled in an accredited school of business communication course. In recent years at the institution, faculty, staff, and employment recruiters expressed concerns about student performance during job interviews. Thus, the business communication instructors included employment interview preparation assignments to improve the interview process skills of the students. These assignments include answering behavior-based and situational interview questions, preparing résumés, dressing in business attire, and participating in mock employment interviews. In an effort to determine whether anxiety had an influence on the interviewee’s performance, the students were asked to anonymously complete a pencil-and-paper survey to assess anxiety levels.

Methodology

Students enrolled in a communication course in the school of business at a Southern U.S. university participated in a self-report questionnaire indicating their anticipated job interview anxiety levels prior to the job interview. The student population consisted of females and males who were sophomores, juniors, and seniors. After reviewing the instructions and agreeing to participate, the students completed the Measure of Anxiety in Selection Interviews (MASI) scale created byMcCarthy and Goffin (2004). This scale includes a 30-item questionnaire that focuses on five high-anxiety areas for job applicants, including communication, appearance, social, performance, and behavior. Student respondents were asked to evaluate each item using a 5-point scale (1 =strongly disagreeto 5 =strongly agree).

Results and Discussion

The questionnaire was administered to 205 students who were enrolled in six sections of a communication course. Of the 205 students, 144 completed the questionnaire, a response rate of 70%. The respondents ranged in age from 18 to 34 years with an average age of 21.5 years. Additionally, 70% of the respondents were women and 30% were men. Of the participating students, 23% were sophomores, 31% were juniors, and 26% were seniors, and approximately 20% were graduates. Only one student identified as a freshman and was excluded from analyses.

The interscale correlation matrix, Cronbach’s alpha (reliability) estimates, and scale descriptive statistics are reported inTable 1. Cronbach’s alpha ranged from .73 to .82, with scale interitem mean correlations ranging from .32 (communication anxiety) to .49 (social anxiety). The Cronbach’s alpha estimates and mean interitem correlation provide evidence that the MASI subscales were reliable for this sample. Prior to running comparative analyses, Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances was used to verify the equal variance assumption (Maxwell & Delaney, 2004). Results from this analysis revealed that the equal variance assumption was met.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics and Psychometric Properties.

Scale	M	SD	α	r_M	Scale intercorrelations
Scale	M	SD	α	r_M	1	2	3	4
Communication	1.79	0.62	.73	.32
Appearance	2.13	0.81	.76	.36	.38
Social	2.02	0.78	.82	.49	.62	.64
Performance	2.48	0.88	.82	.45	.52	.45	.63
Behavioral	2.11	0.80	.77	.36	.51	.39	.49	.60

Note. N= 142.M= scale mean;SD= scale standard deviation; α = Cronbach’s alpha;r_M = mean interitem total correlation.

Some researchers have suggested that there may be a difference in the way males and females respond to anxiety during a job interview (Egloff & Schmukle, 2004;Feeney et al., 2015;Feiler & Powell, 2013;McCarthy & Goffin, 2005;Sieverding, 2009;Tamres et al., 2002;Taylor et al., 2000). However, similar studies have not been identified that examine the gender differences in various anxiety levels for various subscales before the job interview in a communication course. Thus, a series ofttests were used to examine gender differences for each subscale. It was expected that females would report higher levels of anxiety for each subscale.Table 2displays results from these analyses. The results reveal significant differences for each of the MASI dimensions, excluding social anxiety,t(140) = −1.96,p= .052. All other findings were significant atp< .05. Only the Social Anxiety Scale failed to yield significant differences, though it did approach significance. These results are aligned with results noted byEgloff and Schmukle (2004)andSieverding (2009)in that females experienced and signaled higher levels of interview anxiety than males. More specifically,Feeney et al. (2015)reported that there were significant mean differences for appearance, behavioral, and performance anxiety. Additionally, there were marginally significant differences for social anxiety and communication anxiety. These findings further support research that suggests women signal more experiences—via verbal and nonverbal cues—with anxiety than men, even though they may be better at managing these feelings (Feeney et al., 2015;Tamres et al., 2002).

Table 2.

Results FromtTests Comparing Anxiety Scales by Sex.

Scale	Female		Male		N	df	t	p
Scale	M	SD	M	SD	N	df	t	p
Communication	1.88	0.61	1.55	0.60	80	78	−2.15	.035*
Appearance	2.22	0.80	1.89	0.79	142	140	−2.25	.026*
Social	2.10	0.80	1.82	0.69	142	140	−1.96	.052
Performance	2.60	0.88	2.21	0.80	143	141	−2.51	.013*
Behavioral	2.22	0.82	1.87	0.71	141	139	−2.39	.018*

Note. N= number of participants included in analysis;M= scale mean in analysis group;SD= standard deviation in analysis group;df= degrees of freedom;pvalue = significance level (p< .05). Number of participants varies due to missing data per scale.

Survey results also suggest female and male students are anxious about the interview process and may need more knowledge and experiences related to communication and the interview process in order to mitigate the impact of anxiousness. For example, faculty may need to include more classroom activities in their communication courses that incorporate current business practices (Joyce, 2008) to assist the applicant in not signaling high-anxiety levels.Joyce (2008)stated, “Job interviewing is challenging and can be stressful, the key is for the applicant to be overly prepared for a successful face-to-face interview” (p. 379). Some of the suggested instructional techniques include participating in study groups, observing others perform in mock interviews, and obtaining tips on how to do well in interviews (Maurer, Solamon, Andrews, & Troxtel, 2001). Other examples of teaching strategies include developing proof statements, conducting interview simulations, and engaging in storytelling (Bloch, 2011;Hansen et al., 2009;Kleiman & Benek-Rivera, 2010;Marks & O’Connor, 2006;Ralston et al., 2003;Smart, 2004).

Implications

This research supports the need to include a multilevel perspective of the influence of anxiety levels and their impacts on the job selection process. This multilevel perspective includes implications related to how job applicants react to signals from recruiters concerning the selection process and how the recruiters read applicants’ signals, including gender. This study suggests that the integration of signaling theory with anxiety levels of job applicants will further facilitate an understanding of how and why job applicant anxiety levels may influence applicant attraction outcomes. This research suggests that faculty members should take additional steps to prepare students for selection interviews by integrating activities that help both females and males reduce anxiety levels through interview preparation assignments. Additionally, this research serves as a baseline for faculty to consider the levels of anxiety that students may experience prior to the instruction (including the differences in females and males) and use this as a basis for structuring the curriculum in communication classes. For example,Tamres et al. (2002)noted that instruction for females needs to include more task-related and emotion-focused coping approaches and fewer avoidance tactics. The authors suggest supplementing mock interviews with recruiter panel interviews that include at least four recruiters from organizations (Tamres et al., 2002). This panel approach (Macan, 2009) includes females and males practicing task-related and emotion-focused coping strategies. After the interview process, the recruiter panel members need to debrief the students on how the students’ signals were interpreted and perceived based on the fit for the organization. The authors further recommend that the faculty allocate at least one class period to discuss the feedback from the recruiters, including ways to further manage anxiety levels during the interview process.

Implications of the research for the recruiter, as noted byHuffcutt et al. (2011), include the need to focus on the recruiter’s performance during the interview process. Preinterview impressions of applicants based on signals of gender and race may skew the recruiter’s assessment of the applicant.Coverdill and Finlay (1998)noted that females were disadvantaged in the hiring process and that some recruiters tend to favor male applicants over females. In order to mitigate the impact of the recruiter’s signals, recruiters need to smile and establish rapport with the applicant by empathizing, not prejudging, and starting the interview with easy, open-ended questions (Kleiman & Benek-Rivera, 2010). These mitigation strategies are geared toward helping the applicants reduce their anxiety levels in an effort to increase performance.

Implications of this research for the academic communities include the need to develop interview and communication skills in order to reduce anxiety levels that are typically associated with the job interview process (Joyce, 2008;McCarthy & Goffin, 2004;Russ, 2009;Young & Kacmar, 1998). A key component of the interview process is communicating with the recruiters, and this is oftentimes difficult if the applicant lacks the skills, abilities, or confidence. Therefore, some faculty members have incorporated job interviewing skills and other business foundational skills into the curriculum (Browning & Cunningham, 2012;Hollandsworth, Dressel, & Stevens, 1977;Joyce, 2008), such as résumés and cover letter writing (Randazzo, 2012). Other assignments have been designed to facilitate literacy through informational interviews (Decarie, 2010) and teach students to create job reference lists and network effectively (Muir, 2009).

Some researchers suggest that females engage in more anxiety-coping techniques or may even hide their anxiety levels before and during the job interview process to perform better than males (Feiler & Powell, 2013;McCarthy & Goffin, 2005;Sieverding, 2009).Sieverding (2009)reported that men engage in avoidance tactics because men are socialized to conceal their emotions that are more frequently related to insecurity.Feeney et al. (2015)proposed including interview training for males to reduce anxiety levels related to appearance and social anxieties. This interview training needs to include coaching and assessments on the appropriateness of attire and techniques to create feelings of similarity with the recruiters. The authors support the inclusion of one teaching module focusing on appearance that not only includes a discussion about how students should dress in the interview but also a discussion about the consequences of not dressing in appropriate attire and the significance of first impressions on recruiter perceptions. The researchers in this study further recommend including an appearance module in the course content. More specifically, faculty need to integrate the mock recruiter panel process with the students’ appearance content. After the recruiter panel mock interviews, the authors suggest that the panel members provide written assessment of the students’ appearances (as well as an assessment of the students’ overall performance). This assessment process will not only facilitate the appropriateness of the students’ appearances but also create feelings of support from recruiters who make hiring decisions.

Limitations and Future Research

This research is limited to one group of students in six communication courses at one university in the Southern United States. This limitation imposes restrictions on the generalizability of the findings across all student populations. Thus, future research needs to include the administration of the questionnaire to various communication courses across various institutions to determine whether there are differences in anxiety levels between males and females.

This research is also limited because the students completed the anxiety scales without providing information about their prior interview or job-related experiences. The female students may have displayed higher anxiety levels than males for communication, appearance, performance, and behaviors because they may have limited experiences with recruiters and the interview process. Additionally, the differences in the anxiety levels may be attributed to the differences in the natural learning abilities by gender. Therefore, future research needs a qualitative component that includes questions related to the types of interview experiences as well as an assessment of the anxiety levels before and after the instruction and training administered in the classroom.

Another limitation of this research is that recruiters were not involved in the research process and, as such, their possible influences on the students’ anxiety levels were not considered. To that end, future research studies need to include additional quantitative and qualitative research approaches to better identify and understand the signals that applicants give recruiters during interviews, including the differences in how females and males interpret, process, and communicate responses to interview questions.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

This article is based on an article presented at the 42nd Annual Conference of the Southwestern Region of the Association of Business Communication, Houston, TX, USA, 2015. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Clark Atlanta University.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Lori Boyeris an assistant professor in the School of Business at Clark Atlanta University. Her research interests include corporate communication, recruitment practices, and diversity issues. She teaches business communication classes.

Lila Cardenis a visiting assistant professor at the University of Houston–Downtown. Her research focuses on project management as a strategic core competency and the impacts of management-related issues on employees and organizations.

Lars Johnsonis a doctoral candidate in the Industrial and Organizational Psychology program at the University of Houston. His research interests include leadership, individual differences, small-business issues, top-down theory, and applied methods.

Raphael Boydis a professor of legal studies at Clark Atlanta University. His research interests include workplace bullying and corporate citizenship.

References

Bangerter

Roulin

Konig

C. J.

(2012).Personnel selection as a signaling game.Journal of Applied Psychology,97,719-738. doi:10.1037/a0026078

Bloch

(2011).Teaching job interviewing skills with the help of television shows.Business Communication Quarterly,74,7-21. doi:10.1177/1080569910395565

Blume

B. D.

Dreher

G. F.

Baldwin

T. T.

(2010).Examining the effects of communication apprehension within assessment centres.Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology,83,663-671. doi:10.1348/096317909X463652

Browning

B. W.

Cunningham

J. R.

(2012).Students better be on their best behavior: How to prepare for the most common job interviewing technique.Communication Teacher,26,152-157. doi:10.1080/17404622.2011.650700

Connelly

B. L.

Certo

S. T.

Ireland

R. D.

Reutzel

C. R.

(2011).Signaling theory: A review and assessment.Journal of Management,37,39-67. doi:10.1177/0149206310388419

Coverdill

J. E.

Finlay

(1998).Fit and skill in employee selection: Insights from a study of headhunters.Qualitative Sociology,21,105-127. doi:10.1023/A:1023464326912

Cuddy

A. J. C.

Wilmuth

C. A.

Yap

A. J.

Carney

D. R.

(2015).Preparatory power posing affects nonverbal presence and job interview performance.Journal of Applied Psychology,100,1286-1295. doi:10.1037/a0038543

Decarie

(2010).Literacy and informational interviews.Business Communication Quarterly,73,306-317. doi:10.1177/1080569910376533

Egloff

Schmukle

S. C.

(2004).Gender differences in implicit and explicit anxiety measures.Personality and Individual Differences,36,1807-1815. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.07.002

10.

Engers

(1987).Signaling with many signals.Econometrica,55,663-674. doi:10.2307/1913605

11.

Feeney

J. R.

McCarthy

J. M.

Goffin

(2015).Applicant anxiety: Examining the sex-linked anxiety coping theory in job interview contexts.International Journal of Selection and Assessment,23,298-305. doi:10.1111/ijsa.12115

12.

Feiler

A. R.

Powell

D. M.

(2013).Interview anxiety across the sexes: Support for the sex-linked anxiety coping theory.Personality and Individual Differences,54,12-17. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.07.030

13.

Graves

L. M.

Powell

G. N.

(1995).The effect of sex similarity on recruiters’ evaluations of actual applicants: A test of the similarity-attraction paradigm.Personnel Psychology,48,85-98. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01747.x

14.

Hansen

Oliphant

G. C.

Oliphant

B. J.

Hansen

R. S.

(2009).Best practices in preparing students for mock interviews.Business Communication Quarterly,72,318-327. doi:10.1177/1080569909336951

15.

Hollandsworth

J. G.

Dressel

M. E.

Stevens

(1977).Use of behavioral versus traditional procedures for increasing job interview skills.Journal of Counseling Psychology,24,503-510. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.24.6.503

16.

Hollandsworth

J. G.

Kazelskis

Stevens

Dressel

M. E.

(1979).Relative contributions of verbal, articulative, and nonverbal communication to employment decisions in the job interview setting.Personnel Psychology,32,359-367. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1979.tb02140.x

17.

Huffcutt

A. I.

Van Iddekinge

C. H.

Roth

P. L.

(2011).Understanding applicant behavior in employment interviews: A theoretical model of interviewee performance.Human Resource Management Review,21,353-367. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2011.05.003

18.

Joyce

M. P.

(2008).Interviewing techniques used in selected organizations today.Business Communication Quarterly,71,376-380. doi:10.1177/1080569908321427

19.

Karasek

III Bryant

(2012).Signaling theory: Past, present, and future.Academy of Strategic Management Journal,11,91-98.

20.

Kleiman

L. S.

Benek-Rivera

(2010).A four-step model for teaching selection interviewing skills.Business Communication Quarterly,73,291-305. doi:10.1177/1080569910376536

21.

Kwon

J. H.

Powell

Chalmers

(2013).How level of realism influences anxiety in virtual reality environments for a job interview.International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,71,978-987. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2013.07.003

22.

Litchfield

(2008).Effective interviewing for changed jobs market.Engineers Journal,62,640-641.

23.

Macan

(2009).The employment interview: A review of current studies and directions for future research.Human Resource Management Review,19,203-218. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2009.03.006

24.

Marks

O’Connor

A. H.

(2006).The round-robin mock interview: Maximum learning in minimum time.Business Communication Quarterly,69,264-275. doi:10.1177/1080569906291257

25.

Maurer

T. J.

Solamon

J. M.

Andrews

K. D.

Troxtel

D. D.

(2001).Interviewee coaching, preparation strategies, and response strategies in relation to performance in situational employment interviews: An extension of Maurer, Solamon, and Troxtel (1998).Journal of Applied Psychology,86,709-717. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.709

26.

Maxwell

S. E.

Delaney

H. D.

(2004).Designing experiments and analyzing data: A model comparison perspective.New York, NY:Psychology Press.

27.

McCarthy

J. M.

Goffin

(2004).Measuring job interview anxiety: Beyond weak knees and sweaty palms.Personnel Psychology,57,607-637. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00002.x

28.

McCarthy

J. M.

Goffin

R. D.

(2005).Selection test anxiety: Exploring tension and fear of failure across the sexes in simulated selection scenarios.International Journal of Selection and Assessment,13,282-295. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2005.00325.x

29.

McGovern

T. V.

Jones

B. W.

Warwick

C. L.

Jackson

R. W.

(1981).A comparison of job interviewee behavior on four channels of communication.Journal of Counseling Psychology,28,369-372. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.28.4.369

30.

McShane

T. D.

(1993).Effects of nonverbal cues and verbal first impressions in unstructured and situational interview settings.Applied H.R.M. Research,4,137-150.

31.

Muir

(2009).Rethinking job references: A networking challenge.Business Communication Quarterly,72,304-317. doi:10.1177/1080569909340687

32.

Oliphant

G. C.

Hansen

Oliphant

B. J.

(2008).Predictive validity of a behavioral interview technique.Marketing Management Journal,18,93-105.

33.

Posthuma

R. A.

Morgeson

F. P.

Campion

M. A.

(2002).Beyond employment interview validity: A comprehensive narrative review of recent research and trends over time.Personnel Psychology,55,1-81. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00103.x

34.

Ralston

S. M.

Kirkwood

W. G.

Burant

P. A.

(2003).Helping interviewees tell their stories.Business Communication Quarterly,66(3),8-22. doi:10.1177/108056990306600303

35.

Randazzo

(2012).Positioning résumés and cover letters as reflective-reflexive process.Business Communication Quarterly,75,377-391. doi:10.1177/1080569912459267

36.

Rasmussen

K. G.

(1984).Nonverbal behavior, verbal behavior, resumé credentials, and selection interview outcomes.Journal of Applied Psychology,69,551-556. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.4.551

37.

Rivera

L. A.

(2015).Go with your gut: Emotion and evaluation in job interviews.American Journal of Sociology,120,1339-1389. doi:10.1086/681214

38.

Russ

T. L.

(2009).The status of the business communication course at U.S. colleges and universities.Business Communication Quarterly,72,395-413. doi:10.1177/1080569909349524

39.

Schlenker

Leary

(1982).Social anxiety and self-presentation: A conceptualization and model.Psychological Bulletin,92,641-669. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.92.3.641

40.

Sieverding

(2009).“Be cool!” Emotional costs of hiding feelings in a job interview.International Journal of Selection and Assessment,17,391-401. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00481.x

41.

Smart

K. L.

(2004).Articulating skills in the job search.Business Communication Quarterly,67,198-205. doi:10.1177/1080569904265300

42.

Spence

(1973).Job market signaling.Quarterly Journal of Economics,87,355-374. doi:10.2307/1882010

43.

Spence

(1976).Competition in salaries, credentials, and signaling prerequisites for jobs.Quarterly Journal of Economics,90,51-74. doi:10.2307/1886086

44.

Spielberger

C. D.

Vagg

P. R.

(1995).Test anxiety: Theory, assessment, and treatment.Washington, DC:Taylor & Francis.

45.

Tamres

L. K.

Janicki

Helgeson

V. S.

(2002).Sex differences in coping behavior: A meta-analytic review and an examination of relative coping.Personality and Social Psychology Review,6,2-30. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0601_1

46.

Taylor

S. E.

Klein

L. C.

Lewis

B. P.

Gruenewald

T. L.

Gurung

R. A. R.

Updegraff

J. A.

(2000).Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: Tend-and-befriend, not fight-or-flight.Psychological Review,107,411-429. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.107.3.411

47.

Young

A. M.

Kacmar

K. M.

(1998).ABCs of the interview: The role of affective, behavioral, and cognitive responses by applicants in the employment interview.International Journal of Selection and Assessment,6,211-221. doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00092