Appearance Stereotypes 1

Running head: APPEARANCE STEREOTYPES AND HIRABILITY

Effects of Appearance Stereotypes and Trustworthiness on Likelihood of Being Hired Nathalie Arbel University of California, Los Angeles

Appearance Stereotypes 2
!

Abstract Attractiveness stereotypes can affect the trait inferences made about a person. The present study investigated the effects of female job applicants appearance and trustworthiness on their perceived hirability. Fifteen participants completed questionnaires after reviewing photos and behavioral anecdotes of 4 women. A 2x2 within-subjects factorial design was implemented, with the first independent variable (IV) being applicant appearance, manipulated by attractive and unattractive photographs. The second IV was applicant trustworthiness, manipulated by honest and dishonest behavioral anecdotes. The dependent variable (DV) was target hirability, measured by questionnaires in which subjects indicated how likely they were to hire applicants for a job. As predicted, the data demonstrated main effects of appearance and trustworthiness; attractive applicants were rated more hirable than unattractive applicants F (1,14) = 21.34, p < .05, and honest applicants were rated more hirable than dishonest applicants F (1,14) = 21.34, p < .05. Results further revealed an interaction between appearance and trustworthiness. Whereas appearance affected the hirability of honest applicants, it did not affect the hirability of dishonest applicants F (1,14) = 7.88, p < .05. Findings support existing research that attractiveness biases influence job hiring practices, while suggesting that merit-based traits such as trustworthiness may attenuate the effects of these stereotypes.

Appearance Stereotypes 3
!

The Effects of Appearance Stereotypes and Trustworthiness on Hirability Previous research demonstrates that stereotypes strongly influence the trait inferences humans make about others. For example, sex stereotypes influence the degree to which people engage in gender-based trait inference, in which gender stereotypes color perceptions of males and females differently (Murphy, Martin & Paulhus, 1992). Participants in this study were provided with a targets gender and an anecdote portraying an instance of the targets behavior, which was gender-neutral. They then rated targets on a variety of gender-related traits (i.e. passive, daring, arrogant gentle, clinging). Results showed that subjects made judgments about targets traits based solely on target genders. The trait inferences one makes about others are similarly influenced by appearance stereotypes. This type of trait inference is called physiognomy, or the tendency to assume internal characteristics based on outward appearance. For example, prior research has demonstrated that attractive persons are judged to possess more socially desirable traits (i.e., altruistic, interesting, genuine, outgoing, sociable, kind, strong). They are furthermore assumed to have achieved higher occupational status and greater professional happiness (Berscheid, Dion & Walster, 1972). Subjects in this study viewed photographs of men and women previously rated to be attractive, neutral, or unattractive, and then rated these stimulus persons on several personality traits and potential professions. Indices of social desirability and perceived occupational success were obtained for each target, and results showed that a what is beautiful is good stereotype applied to trait inferences subjects made about the targets. Stereotype-based trait inferences can have implications for participants in the modernday job market; they may affect perceptions of an applicants social desirability and therefore his or her status as a desirable employee. The candidacy of job applicants is affected by hirers

Appearance Stereotypes 4
!

perceptions of the applicant, and as demonstrated by the previously mentioned studies, these perceptions can be strongly influenced by gender stereotypes, attractiveness stereotypes, and others. Physiognomy, therefore, can affect an applicants likelihood of being hired, which has been previously called his or her hirability (e.g., Marlowe, Schneider, & Nelson, 1996). In their literature on hirability, Marlowe et al. (1996) found that women may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of attractiveness stereotypes in that attractiveness may play a bigger role in hirability for females than it does for males. In this study, participants reviewed rsums and accompanying photographs of highly attractive and marginally attractive men and women, and then reported how strongly they recommend the applicant for hire or promotion within a company. Results revealed that, consistent with previous research, attractive job applicants are more hirable than less attractive job applicants, and men are more hirable than women. Importantly, however, findings indicated an interaction between gender and attractiveness: being unattractive was more of a disadvantage for females than for males in hiring. So, by concentrating on female targets only, we may increase the visibility of our effects as well as hold gender stereotypes constant. Furthermore, in their previously discussed study, Berscheid et al. (1972) found that there was no interaction between subject (rater) gender and target gender; that is, attractiveness stereotypes strongly held whether or not the subject was rating a target of the same or opposite gender. Therefore, the current research focused on the role that visual attractiveness plays in the perceived hirability of young women, which is relevant to todays female college graduate entering the job market. The current research further examined how appearance stereotypes affect the use of other given traits to evaluate a person. We chose to focus on the trait of trustworthiness because one can reasonably assume that a job candidates trustworthiness significantly influences her

Appearance Stereotypes 5
!

hirability, given the common use of background checks and letters of recommendation. Because prior research has not confirmed this, however, we explored this here. Several factors may contribute to ones perceived trustworthiness, including honest and dishonest actions. We sought to determine whether, when given a job applicants level of attractiveness and her demonstrated level of honesty, attractiveness changes how important her trustworthiness is to an employer. In the current research we examined the influence of female appearance stereotypes on socially desirable trait inferences, specifically a job applicants hirability. We also evaluated how a job candidates appearance influences an employers consideration of her trustworthiness when assessing her hirability. We hypothesized a positive main effect of a job candidates visual appearance on her likelihood of being hired; that is, an increase in level of attractiveness will cause an increase her likelihood of being hired. We also hypothesized a positive main effect of a job candidates trustworthiness: an increase in level of honesty will cause an employer to find her more hirable. Furthermore, we predicted a significant interaction between appearance and trustworthiness: when honesty is a given trait, an attractive candidate is more likely to be hired than an unattractive one. When dishonesty is a given trait, an attractive candidate is more likely to be hired than an unattractive one to a greater extent than the two honest candidates. In other words, we hypothesized that dishonesty is a greater detriment to job candidacy for an unattractive applicant than for an attractive one. Method Participants The participants in this study were 15 undergraduate psychology students at a large American university. Of the 15 participants, 11 were female and 4 were male, and the mean age

Appearance Stereotypes 6
!

was approximately 19.5 years old. Subjects were selected from a psychology class and received course credit for participation. Design The study was a two-way within-subjects experiment with two levels of each independent variable (IV). The first IV was trustworthiness, and its two levels were honest (the honest condition) and dishonest (the dishonest condition). Trustworthiness was operationally defined by four behaviors associated with a trustworthy person (i.e., keeping a secret, repaying loans, telling the truth, and not stealing). In the honest level, a target engages in these behaviors, whereas in the dishonest level, a target engages in the opposites of these behaviors (i.e., lets a secret slip, does not repay a loan, lies, and steals). The second IV was appearance, and its two levels were attractive (the attractive condition) and unattractive (the unattractive condition). Appearance was operationally defined by the visual facial attractiveness of a target, shown by a photograph. The dependent variable (DV) was hirability, operationally defined by the likelihood that a target would be hired for a job. The DV was measured on a Likert-type interval scale. Materials and Apparatus The stimulus for the appearance IV consisted of four passport-sized head-and-shoulders photos of women, previously independently rated for attractiveness on a Likert-type scale by undergraduates at a large American university. Two of the photos selected were rated attractive and two were rated unattractive. Photos were selected based on high interrater agreement, equidistance from the center of the provided range of attractiveness, and moderation, in that whereas the four photos received scores at the extreme ends of the spectrum, none were outliers. All four women were 20-25 years old, Caucasian, and had neutral, closed-mouth expressions in order to hold basic facial characteristics constant. In order to increase the generalizability of our

Appearance Stereotypes 7
!

findings, one attractive woman and one unattractive woman had brunette hair and the two other targets had blonde hair. The trustworthiness IV was manipulated by four types of anecdotes about the target engaging in behavior related to trustworthiness (i.e., keeping a secret, repaying loans, telling the truth, and not stealing). In the honest condition, the anecdote ended with the target engaging in these behaviors, but in the dishonest condition, the anecdote ended with the target failing to do so (i.e., lets a secret slip, does not repay a loan, lies, and steals). Therefore, there were eight total trustworthiness anecdotes that were counterbalanced with the appearance IV, creating 16 different possible exposures to conditions. First, a balanced Latin square was used to control for order and sequence effects of conditions; all conditions followed all other conditions an equal number of times, and no conditions were visited in a particular ordinal position more frequently than others. A balanced Latin square was used again to match scenarios with conditions so that scenarios did not vary systematically, in order to prevent specific item effects. The DV was measured by a short questionnaire in which the subjects were asked three distracter questions about the target and then the question Imagine that you are interviewing this woman for a job. How likely are you to hire her? The subjects answered questions on a 1-7 point Likert scale, in which 1 represented not likely and 7 represented very likely (see Appendix B for a complete questionnaire). Participants responses to the question were averaged for each condition. The three distracter questions were used to ensure subject navet, and the order in which the four questions were presented on the questionnaire was randomized for each participant in order to prevent sequencing and order biases. Subjects received a packet in which each condition was represented by one sheet of paper. Each sheet had one behavioral anecdote about a targets trustworthiness and her photo at the top, and the DV questionnaire underneath (see Appendix A for a sample exposure to conditions). The four sheets

Appearance Stereotypes 8
!

of paper only contained one condition and were bound in sequence after a page of instructions so that subjects would not move to the next condition until instructed to do so. Procedure Subjects were randomly assigned to experience the four conditions in one of 16 combinations that controlled for order, sequence effects, and specific item effects. Each subject received one packet of five sheets of paper. The first page was a set of instructions read by the experimenter, and the following four pages each represented one condition, with the photograph and anecdote on the top half of the sheets front and the questionnaire on the bottom half. The experimenter instructed subjects not to turn pages until told, to turn them in the order presented, and not to turn back after completion of a page. Furthermore, subjects were instructed not to discuss the experiment with one another for its duration. Next, the experimenter asked the subjects to turn to the second sheet in the packet (the first condition), review the information presented, answer the questionnaire on the bottom of the sheet, and remain on the same page when completed. After two minutes the experimenter instructed subjects to turn to the next page in the series. Subjects repeated with the remaining two pages with two minutes for each, in order to keep the time exposed to each condition constant. The packet was collected at the end of the eight minutes. Results Figure 1 presents the mean ratings of targets hirability when targets were attractive versus unattractive and as a function of the targets trustworthiness. Looking at the pattern of results displayed in Figure 1, it appears that targets, in general, were more likely to be hired when they were attractive than when they were unattractive and when they were honest rather than dishonest. The degree to which hirability was affected by appearance, however, appears to

Appearance Stereotypes 9
!

depend on the targets trustworthiness. More specifically, when targets were portrayed as honest, appearance seems to have had a large effect on their hirability; whereas, when those targets were portrayed as dishonest, appearance seems to have had little or no effect on how hirable they were. To test these apparent effects, the data were analyzed using a two-way within subjects ANOVA, which revealed a significant main effect of appearance, such that the average hirability was significantly higher when targets were attractive (M = 4.33, SD = 0.88) than when they were unattractive (M = 3.47, SD = 1.23), F (1,14) = 13.44, MSE = .84, p < .05. A significant main effect of trustworthiness was also revealed, such that average hirability was significantly higher when targets were portrayed as honest (M = 4.73, SD = 1.00) than when portrayed as dishonest (M = 3.07, SD = 1.36), regardless of their level of attractiveness, F (1,14) = 21.34, MSE = 1.95, p < .05. Additionally, the apparent interaction between target appearance and target trustworthiness that is indicated in Figure 1 was also revealed to be significant, F (1,14) = 7.88, MSE = 0.686, p < .05. To compare individual condition means, multiple pairwise t-tests, with a Bonferonni correction to maintain an alpha level of .05, were conducted. When portrayed as honest, attractive targets were rated significantly more hirable (M = 5.47, SD = 1.25) than when they were unattractive (M = 4.00, SD = 1.31), t (14) = 3.56, p < .0125. In contrast, when portrayed as dishonest, the difference in hirability for attractive targets (M = 3.20, SD = 1.47) versus unattractive targets (M = 2.93, SD = 1.33) was not found to be significant, t (14) = 1.47, p > .0125. Thus, as indicated in Figure 1, whereas appearance significantly affected hirability of honest targets, appearance did not have a significant effect on the hirability of dishonest targets.

Appearance Stereotypes 10
!

Furthermore, the average hirability for attractive targets was found to be significantly higher when they were portrayed as honest (M = 5.47, SD = 1.25) than when they were portrayed as dishonest (M = 3.20, SD = 1.47), t (14) = 4.21, p < .0125. At the unattractive level, the hirability of honest targets (M = 4.00, SD = 1.31) was significantly greater than when the targets were dishonest (M = 2.93, SD = 1.33), t (14) = 4.30, p < .0125. Discussion The current research aimed to investigate the effects of visual appearance stereotypes and job applicant trustworthiness on the likelihood of being hired by a potential employer. As predicted by our first hypothesis, the data demonstrate that facial attractiveness increases a female job applicants hirability. Furthermore, we found strong support for our second hypothesis that an honest applicant is more hirable than a dishonest one. An interaction between appearance and trustworthiness occurred as predicted, however it was different in nature from what was expected. We hypothesized that dishonesty would be a detriment to a female job applicant to a greater extent when she was unattractive than when she was attractive. However, results indicate that attractive targets experience a greater drop in hirability when they are dishonest than unattractive persons. Another interpretation of these findings stems from the fact that although appearance makes a difference in hirability for honest applicants, all dishonest applicants receive the same low hirability rating. From this one might conclude that dishonesty creates a floor effect in hirability for unattractive applicants; all applicants are perceived at the same low level of hirability when they are dishonest, so the hirability ratings of unattractive applicants simply cannot fall as far as those of attractive applicants. This suggests that a trait such as trustworthiness may be dominant over appearance stereotypes, and may attenuate them under certain conditions.

Appearance Stereotypes 11
!

The findings of the current research support the conclusions of existing literatures on stereotypes while expanding on them by providing novel insights about the conditions under which biases influence trait inferences. It supports the conclusion that people generally make inferences about internal traits based on stereotypes (Murphy et al., 1992). Specifically, under some conditions, they support the findings of Berscheid et al. (1972) that there exists a what is beautiful is good stereotype. However, in the presence of an unfavorable characteristic like dishonesty, appearance stereotypes appear to have little to no effect on trait inferences. Future research may seek to investigate whether merit-based traits other than trustworthiness, such as applicant experience, are similarly dominant over appearance stereotypes. The present findings are congruent with the conclusions of earlier reported research by demonstrating that women are subject to appearance stereotypes in hiring practices (Marlowe et al., 1996). However, unlike the study by Marlowe and colleagues, the current research does not compare the effects of these stereotypes on females versus males due to limitations of study design. Future studies may aim to increase the generalizability of these findings by using both male and female targets, as well as targets that occupy parts of a range of attractiveness. The history of stereotype research has revealed the effects of attractiveness biases on physiognomy, the tendency to make inferences about ones character based on outward appearance. The current research supports these findings by increasing awareness of attractiveness biases toward women and their implications in hiring practices such as face-to-face interviews. Furthermore, conclusions of the present research contribute to the understanding of appearance stereotypes by revealing that their tendency to affect trait inferences is complex; their effects may be reduced or exaggerated when combined with other given characteristics of job applicants, such as trustworthiness. The finding that dishonest applicants may face low chances

Appearance Stereotypes 12
!

of being hired regardless of their appearance suggests that trustworthiness may attenuate the effects of attractiveness stereotypes. This has two important implications: first, applicant trustworthiness may be more important in hiring decisions than previously thought; and second, other characteristics of a person that are made salient may potentially significantly reduce attractiveness biases.

Appearance Stereotypes 13
!

References Berscheid, E., Dion, K., & Walster, E. (1972). What is Beautiful is Good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285-290. Marlowe, C. M., Nelson, C. E., Schneider, S. L. (1996). Gender and Attractiveness Biases in Hiring Decisions: Are More Experienced Managers Less Biased? Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 11-21. Murphy, G. K., Martin, C. L., & Paulhus, D. L. (1992). Some Effects of Arousal on Sex Stereotyping. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 325-330.

Appearance Stereotypes 14
!

Appendix A Sample Exposure to the Attractive Condition and Honest Condition (Keeping a Secret)

On Wednesday, Lisa had coffee with her friend Samantha at Starbucks. They sat at the outdoor tables, but the sun was too bright so they moved inside. As they were updating each other on their lives, Samantha confided in Lisa that she was one month pregnant. She then asked Lisa not to tell anyone, as she wished to keep it private for the time being. Two days later, as Lisa ate lunch with her friend Sandy at Corner Bakery Cafe, she was tempted to tell her that Samantha was pregnant. Lisa decided not to tell Sandy about Samanthas secret.

Appearance Stereotypes 15
!

Appendix B Sample Questionnaire

Instructions: Please answer the following questions regarding the woman in the photo and the scenario (circle one): ! If you were driving down the street and saw this woman hitchhiking, how likely are you to pick her up and give her a ride? 1
Not likely

7
Very likely

Imagine that you are interviewing this woman for a job. How likely are you to hire her? 1
Not likely

7
Very likely

If this womans tire got a flat while driving home one day, how likely do you think it is that she would change it herself? 1
Not likely

7
Very likely

Imagine that you are this womans mother. How often does she call you? 1
Never

7
Very often

Appearance Stereotypes 16
!

Figure Caption Figure 1. Mean hirability ratings of targets as a function of target attractiveness in honest and dishonest conditions.

Appearance Stereotypes 17
!

6! Attractive! Unattractive!

5!

4!

Hirability

3!

!
2!

1!

0! Honest! Trustworthiness! Dishonest!