Can explanations improve applicant reactions towards gamified assessment methods?

Abstract

Abstract Gamification is increasingly being used by organizations in hiring decisions. However, the use of gamification in assessment has advanced quicker than corresponding research. One area in need of research is how applicants' perceptions of fairness are formed when gamified assessments are used in employee selection. Therefore, two studies were conducted to explore the impact of using gamified assessments to applicants' justice perceptions and the role of providing explanations to applicants. Adopting an experimental design to explore organizational justice model in the context of gamified assessments, results indicated that individuals' perceptions of job relatedness are higher when a situational judgment tests (SJT) is used rather than a gamified version, leading to more positive perceptions of procedural fairness and organizational attractiveness (Study 1). The mediating effects of the procedural rules of ease of faking and opportunity to perform were not supported. Subsequently, a 2 × 2 design was used (Study 2) to explore the role of providing explanations. It seems that the provision of explanations on the assessment's faking difficulty generates more positive reactions towards gamified SJTs than text‐based SJTs, in relation to ease of faking and procedural justice, and a spillover effect, invoking favorable reactions to the recruiting organization as well (Study 2).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.