Social Science Computer Review 2011 Caers 437 48

Social Science
Computer Review
http://ssc.sagepub.com/
LinkedIn and Facebook in Belgium: The Influences and Biases of Social Network
Sites in Recruitment and Selection Procedures
Ralf Caers and Vanessa Castelyns
Social Science Computer Review 2011 29: 437 originally published online 12 December 2010
DOI: 10.1177/0894439310386567
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://ssc.sagepub.com/content/29/4/437
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for Social Science Computer Review can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://ssc.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://ssc.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://ssc.sagepub.com/content/29/4/437.refs.html
>> Version of Record - Nov 22, 2011

OnlineFirst Version of Record - Dec 12, 2010
What is This?
Downloaded from ssc.sagepub.com by Mara Stan on October 2, 2014
LinkedIn and Facebook in

Belgium: The Influences and
Biases of Social Network
Sites in Recruitment and
Selection Procedures
Social Science Computer Review

29(4) 437-448
The Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0894439310386567
http://ssc.sagepub.com
Ralf Caers1 and Vanessa Castelyns1
Abstract
This study investigates whether Belgian recruitment and selection (R&S) professionals use LinkedIn
and Facebook during their R&S procedures and to what extent. A total of 398 and 353 respondents,
respectively, from various sectors and from organizations of various sizes, responded to an online
questionnaire concerning Facebook and LinkedIn. Descriptive analyses indicate that both the social
network sites have become extra tools for recruiting applicants, to find additional information about
them, and to decide who will be invited for an interview. Belgian R&S professionals do, however, use
LinkedIn and Facebook in a different way, both for recruitment and for selection. Finally, it is shown
that while R&S professionals claim profile pictures on Facebook do not provide signals on
personality dimensions like emotional stability and agreeableness, they do tend to recognize
signals of extraversion and maturity. The latter creates the risk that common selection biases
occur even before the first interview.
Keywords
social network sites, recruitment, selection, Facebook, Linkedin
Selection procedures have yet been widely researched, both from a normative (Braddy, Thompson,
Wuensch, & Grossnickle, 2003; Van Hoye & Lievens, 2007; Wanberg, Kanfer, & Banas, 2000) and
from a descriptive point of view (Dubois & Pansu, 2004; Rooth, 2009). Theory states that employers
should only take into account information that is related to future performance on the vacant job. But
empirical research indicates that decision makers are often influenced by other factors, such as age
(Lahey, 2008; Weiss & Maurer, 2004), gender (Harvie, Marshall-McCaskey, & Johnston, 1998;
Riach & Rich, 2002; Swim, Aikin, Hall, & Hunter, 1995), sexual orientation (Drydakis, 2009;
Weichselbaumer, 2003), race (Cesare, 1996; Neumark, Bank, & Van Nort, 1996; Pager, 2003), obesity (Klesges et al., 1990; Roehling, 1999; Swami, Chan, Wong, Furnham, & Tovee, 2008), and
Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium
Corresponding Author:
Ralf Caers, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Centrum voor Duurzaam Ondernemen (CEDON), Brussels, 1000, Belgium
Email: ralf.caers@hubrussel.be
438
Social Science Computer Review 29(4)
facial attractiveness (Luxen & van de Vijver, 2005; Tews, Stafford, & Zhu, 2009). With the rise of
social network sites (SNSs) like LinkedIn and Facebook, individuals are broadcasting information
about themselves on the Internet at a more rapid rate and to a higher extent. This information may
also be visible to the organizations to which they apply. SNSs, therefore, hold the risk of introducing
biases into the selection process even before the first interview is held.
In this article, we seek to extend knowledge on how Belgian employers are influenced by SNSs
and how they are used. We test our hypotheses in a field study of Belgian professionals involved in
the recruitment and selection of applicants (R&S professionals), using nonparametric tests. The article proceeds as follows. We commence by presenting the literature on biases in selection and recruitment procedures. Special attention is given to e-recruitment and social media. Next, it is explained in
the method section how data are collected using a self-constructed and validated questionnaire.
Afterward, the results are provided and discussed. Policy implications and directions for future
research form the articles ending.
What We Know So Far

SNSs are on a rise. Yet unknown in 2003, Facebook and LinkedIn have rapidly grown to, respectively, more than 500 million (Facebook, 2010) and 80 million (LinkedIn, 2010) users in 2010.
Today, Facebook and LinkedIn do appear to be used for different purposes and in different contexts.
Facebook allows to connect friends, to share personal information, and to meet new people
(Papacharissi, 2009), while LinkedIn allows to connect professionals, to market ones skills, to share
knowledge and experiences, and to plan future career steps (Trusov, Bucklin, & Pauwels, 2009).
Facebook, thus, appears to belong to an individuals private sphere, and LinkedIn to the professional
sphere. Despite the difference, Facebook and LinkedIn have in common the visibility of individuals
network, foster connection sharing, social capital generation and effective communication (Donath,
2007; Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007) and offer opportunities to create new content and new
connections (Breeding, 2009; Trusov et al., 2009). The latter, however, does not yet drive people
to join, as most users are prone to stay in contact with the friends and acquaintances they already
have, rather than meeting new people (Boyd and Ellison, 2007). The online centralization of information draws attention from the industry curious about whether SNSs may facilitate or improve
applicant R&S (Roberts and Roach, 2009).
The Internet has changed the recruitment process before (Anderson, 2003; McManus and Ferguson, 2003). By creating a website with a vacancy section, employers can for example make their
external and internal job boards more accessible (Galanaki, 2002) and more visible, to a broader
audience as well. Moreover, information about the organization can be provided to potential applicants at a lower cost (Braddy et al., 2003) and may also alleviate inaccurate negative information
from company-independent sources, which cannot be controlled (Cable & Turban, 2001; Van Hoye
& Lievens, 2007). As the usability of the website is found to affect applicants perception of the job
(Cappelli, 2001) and its informational content to determine the perception of the organizations
image (Rynes, Bretz, & Gerhart, 1991; Turban, 2001; Turban, Forret, & Hendrickson, 1998) and
values (Braddy et al., 2003), it is important to design this website well. When constructed properly,
applicants have a more accurate perception of personorganization fit, which in turn makes organizations more attractive (Turban, Lau, Ngo, Chow, & Si, 2001) and leads to higher job satisfaction,
more effective employment results, and higher organizational commitment (OReilly, Chatman, &
Caldwell, 1991; Saks, Ashforth, & Blake, 1997). This form of passive recruitment can be copied to
Facebook using group or fan pages, with the advantage that changes can be highlighted directly
through users home pages. Another form of passive recruitment that can be formalized by SNSs
is the technique of referrals. Organizations use referrals because it simplifies information gathering
on the qualifications of the applicants and lowers recruitment and monitoring costs (Finneran &
Caers and Castelyns
439
Kelly, 2003). Referrals are also found to perform better given the referrers presence (Castilla,
2005), less likely to quit and to have longer tenure on the job (Taylor, 1994). Employees of the organization may hereby spread vacancies to their friends or professional connections using their profile
page on Facebook or by an e-mail to all their LinkedIn connections, thus broadcasting on a larger
scale. As individuals are found to be highly selective on those they refer to their organization due
to reputation effects (Burt, 2001; Casella & Hanaki, 2008; Finneran & Kelly, 2003), the added value
of social networks could, however, be rather limited. Finally, the visibility of ones network to outsiders, both on Facebook and on LinkedIn, facilitates organizations active recruitment efforts. By
analyzing their employees networks, names of potential applicants can quite easily be found. More
qualitative information is, however, yet to be obtained from the owners of these networks
themselves.
As with recruitment, SNSs may also affect decision making in the selection phase. Search robots
like Google already handed organizations the opportunity to screen their applicants on the Internet,
searching for personal information that could be added to the information available in paper curriculum vitae ([CV] Roberts & Roach, 2009). Whether this strategy creates added value, however, yet
remains under debate. Research has long indicated that interviewers are sometimes biased in their
hiring recommendations, drawing conclusions based on information unrelated to effective performance on the job at hand (Dubois & Pansu, 2004; Purkiss, Perrewe, Gillespie, Mayes, & Ferris,
2006; Shannon & Stark, 2003). Frequent biases in selection interviews are decisions based on age
(Lahey, 2008; Maurer & Rafuse, 2001; Weiss & Maurer, 2004), gender (Harvie, MarshallMcCaskey, & Johnston, 1998; Riach & Rich, 2002; Swim et al., 1995), sexual orientation (Black,
Makar, Sanders, & Taylor, 2003; Blandford, 2003; Drydakis, 2009; Weichselbaumer, 2003), race
(Kawakami, Dion, & Dovidio, 1998; Pager, 2003; Riach & Rich, 2002), facial attractiveness (Luxen
& van de Vijver, 2005; Tews et al., 2009), facial maturity (Zebrowitz & Montepare, 1992; Zebrowitz, Tenenbaum, & Goldstein, 1991), obesity (Klesges et al., 1990; Pingitore, Dugoni, Tindale, &
Spring, 1994; Rooth, 2009; Swami et al., 2008), handicap (Kalick, Zebrowitz, Langlois, & Johnson,
1998), tattoos (Seiter & Hatch, 2005), and applicant name (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2004; Cotton,
ONeill, & Griffin, 2008; Fernandez & Fernandez-Mateo, 2006; Fryer & Levitt, 2004). Applicants
are thereby stereotyped, believed to have the same desirable and undesirable traits as other members
of that group. This can obviously become a pitfall in the selection phase, but SNSs also allow many
of these biases to occur even before the first interview has taken place. Organizations often use the
paper CV to reduce the number of applicants to be invited for an interview (Lievens, van Dam, &
Anderson, 2002). Online information about the applicant may now be added. On Facebook, most
personal information are shielded from unconnected users by standard, but not profile pictures.
These pictures may be more expressive and provide more signals on ones personality than the standard head-and-shoulder picture that is often attached to the CV. So unless applicants explicitly shield
their profile picture, screening may be biased, and may result in a lower probability of being invited.
SNSs may thus aggravate the situation, as suitable applicants are no longer able to compensate a
possible bias with a positive performance in the selection interview. LinkedIn, on the other hand,
heightens the risk of guilt-by-association errors to occur, as applicants networks are explicitly
visualized.
Besides R&S, SNSs may also affect retention policies (Cappelli, 2001). Users unwilling to
change jobs may pass information about the vacancy to those they are connected with (CalvoArmengol & Jackson, 2004). Once connected, employees may thus be better informed about job
opportunities elsewhere. Moreover, they become more visible to competing organizations in search
of staff and are more easily pinched away.
Finally, it should be noted that the impact of SNSs may not yet be similar in different parts of the
world, due to Internet availability and literacy limitations (Hargittai, 2007), which also may allow
demographical biases to arise.
440
Sample and Procedure

The data for this research are collected by means of a self-constructed questionnaire, based on R&S
literature and piloted by three professionals. The time required to participate was estimated as below
8 min.
The studys sample consists of Belgian professionals involved in the R&S of applicants
(R&S professionals). The data were collected in February and March 2010. Respondents were
contacted as follows. A mailing list of 2,320 e-mail addresses was created by the author,
searching the Internet for R&S-professionals and through job sites. Furthermore, two existing
mailing lists were used: (a) a list of 2,000 e-mail addresses containing all business connections
of a large college in the center of Brussels, and (b) a list of 6,644 e-mail addresses containing
alumni of a postgraduate program on Human Resource Management (HRM) at a management
school in Brussels. Circa 350 addresses were bounced, 50 were added using information in the
automatic out-of-office replies. E-mail invitations were sent to these e-mail addresses including
an invitation to participate, a link to the online questionnaire, and contact information. All
e-mails from respondents requesting (future) information or commenting on the research
received a response within 12 hours. Respondents were also explicitly informed to only participate if they met the R&S condition. If not, they were asked to forward the invitation to their
HR department.
It should be noted that this method does not completely exclude the possibility that, despite the
warning, respondents who are not responsible for the R&S of applicants have completed the survey.
Although possible, it is nevertheless considered unlikely given that respondents participated voluntarily and did not receive payment for their participation. We also note that the results of this study
are not easily generalized to the entire population of Belgian R&S professionals.
We received a total of 731 questionnaires; 456 respondents (62.4%) claimed having a Facebook
profile and 426 respondents (58.3%) claimed having a LinkedIn account. However, 58 and 73
respondents, respectively, admitted not to use their Facebook or LinkedIn account and were,
together with nonusers, removed from the data set. The analyses presented below are thus based
on 398 active users (using the SNSs at least once a month) for the Facebook part and on 353 active
users for the LinkedIn part. All active LinkedIn users owned an account on Facebook. Figure 1
shows a descriptive analysis of the databases.
In both databases, the majority of respondents work for small and medium-sized enterprises
(SMEs). Compared to the Belgian economy, however, large organizations are still somewhat overrepresented. Most respondents work in the for-profit sector, which is in line with Belgian economy,
and most have recruited less than six employees in the past year. The latter is due to the relatively
large number of small organizations compared to large organizations.
It is also found that Facebook is more intensely used by active users than is LinkedIn, with,
respectively, 31.2% and 17.8% using the SNSs on a daily basis. The intensity of use appears to have
an effect on users perceptions of the usefulness of the SNS in a professional context. Independent
samples t tests reveal that daily Facebook users (daily users) often differ from users who use the
SNSs less (light users). Interestingly, the case is somewhat different for LinkedIn. Here, it is the
users who use the SNSs at least every 2 days or daily (frequent users) differ from the users who use
it less (occasional users, using it once a week or less). This difference will be taken into account
when discussing the findings of this research.
Results
We first investigated whether Facebook and LinkedIn indeed belong to, respectively, the private and
the professional sphere.
45,9%
45,8%
Figure 1. Descriptive analysis
18,5%
35,6%
22,5%
31,7%
Large
Medium
Small
Large
Medium
Small
7,3%
11,6%
81,1%
87,6%
5,1%
7,2%
Public
Nonprofit
Profit
Public
Nonprofit
Profit
8,2%
7,7%
3,9%
2,6%
16,3%
11,2%
7,6%
4,4%
2,8%
43,0%
44,2%
15,3%
17,2%
15,7%
50+
41-50
31-40
21-30
11-20
6-10
0-5
50+
41-50
31-40
21-30
11-20
6-10
0-5
16,4%
25,2%
27,6%
10,1%
14,6%
30,0%
At least once a
day
At least every
two days
10,5% At least once a
week
At least every
two weeks
At least once a
month
17,8%
16,6%
31,2%
At least once a
day
At least every
two days
At least once a
week
At least every
two weeks
At least once a
month
Facebook
LinkedIn
441
442
Table 1. Perceptions on the Professional Character of Facebook and LinkedIn

Totally Disagree
To stay up-to-date on my friends career changes
Facebook
LinkedIn
To stay up-to-date on the activities of other organizations Facebook
LinkedIn
To make appointments with my
Facebook
professional contacts
LinkedIn
To find information about applicants that
Facebook
I need to interview/evaluate
LinkedIn
To determine which applicants will be invited
Facebook
for a first interview
LinkedIn
41.5%
4.7%
59.9%
10.5%
72.8%
21.8%
25.1%
13.5%
59.9%
36.0%
16.5% 7.4% 26.5%

5.1% 5.1% 41.1%
16.2% 4.8% 17.3%
17.5% 14.2% 36.7%
18.8% 2.9% 5.5%
23.6% 7.6% 33.5%
14.7% 5.5% 30.9%
10.2% 5.5% 41.8%
18.8% 8.1% 8.8%
26.2% 11.6% 18.5%
Totally
Agree
8.1%
44.0%
1.8%
21.1%
0.0%
13.5%
12.1%
29.1%
4.4%
7.6%
This perception indeed appears to be correct. A majority of active LinkedIn users claim the SNSs
is suited to be informed on friends career developments (85.1%) and to find updates on developments in other organizations (57.8%). It also appears to be considered appropriate for making professional appointments (47%). The contrast with Facebook is quite clear. The majority of active
users do not consider Facebook to be of help for any of these professional activities.
Looking at recruitment, we asked respondents whether LinkedIn and Facebook were used for
active recruitment purposes (i.e., actively searching for potential applicants). The results presented
in Table 1 indicate that respondents are quite heterogeneous in their perceptions on how useful LinkedIn can be in this context. Nearly as many respondents (44.3%) claim to use LinkedIn to search for
potential applicants that fit the vacancies of the organization than respondents who do not (47.3%).
An independent samples t test reveals that this difference is mainly due to the intensity with which
LinkedIn is used, marking a significant difference (0.000) between frequent and occasional users.
This finding indicates that LinkedIn may indeed have benefits in an active recruitment setting. Frequent users appear to have discovered this opportunity, while occasional users may not use their
accounts sufficiently enough to experience or create the benefit. Facebook clearly is not frequently
used for active recruitment, with 82% of respondents disagreeing with the statement. Respondents
do, however, clearly agree that both LinkedIn and Facebook are not suited for internal recruitment,
with, respectively, only 5.9% and 3.3% respondents actually having used them in this context.
Looking at selection, respondents were asked whether they used LinkedIn and Facebook to find
additional information about applicants they had to interview and whether these SNSs were used to
reduce the number of applicants to be invited for an interview (Table 2).
In all, 70% of active LinkedIn users admit to use their LinkedIn account to find additional information about applicants; 43% of active users searches for information Facebook, daily users being
significantly more eager than light users (0.001), which is a lot lower but still a reasonable amount.
Interestingly, this search is not only meant to improve the quality of the selection interview. Respectively, 26.1% and 13.2% of active LinkedIn and Facebook users admit to use their account to decide
who will be invited for an interview and who will not. Frequent LinkedIn users are significantly
more inclined (0.039) to trust the information on LinkedIn sufficiently enough to take such highlevel decision than do occasional users.
As we suspected that both social networks are used to gather information, respondents were also
asked whether they believed LinkedIn and Facebook could help to put an individual in a good (or
better) perspective (Table 3).
A large majority of respondents (78.7%) indeed agrees that LinkedIn can help to promote oneself
when references to trainings and professional experiences are posted on the LinkedIn account.
Caers and Castelyns
443
Table 2. Using Information From SNSs in the Selection Process

Totally Disagree
To find information about applicants that
I need to interview/evaluate
To determine which applicants will be
invited for a first interview
Facebook
LinkedIn
Facebook
LinkedIn
25.1%
13.5%
59.9%
36.0%
14.7%
10.2%
18.8%
26.2%
Totally Agree
5.5%
5.5%
8.1%
11.6%
30.9%
41.8%
8.8%
18.5%
12.1%
29.14%
29.1%
7.6%
Table 3. Self-Promotion on SNSs

Totally Disagree
You can promote yourself by showing
organizations what training you received
organizations how much people you
organizations you know important people
Facebook
LinkedIn
Facebook
LinkedIn
Facebook
LinkedIn
52.4%
6.1%
60.3%
11.8%
57.7%
9.9%
19.5%
7.3%
22.1%
28.6%
22.8%
28.6%
11.2%
8.0%
7.5%
17.9%
9.0%
20.2%
Totally Agree
15.7%
63.4%
9.0%
36.6%
9.0%
35.1%
1.1%
15.3%
1.1%
5.0%
1.1%
6.1%
Nearly as many active Facebook users (69.9%) are convinced Facebook is not helpful in this context.
Remarkably, 41.6% of respondents believe that one can promote oneself by showing on LinkedIn
how many professional connections you have. Again, active Facebook users (82.4%) are convinced
that the number of Facebook friends will not help to promote oneself. It thus appears that the number
of individuals you know on a professional basis means something different from how many you
know in your personal life. In search of a potential guilt-by-association error, we also asked the
respondents whether they believed one could promote himself or herself by showing that one has
important or powerful friends. Surprisingly, 41.2% of active LinkedIn users believe this is indeed
the case. This is again in contrast with Facebook, where 80.5% of the respondents disagree. There
appears to be a difference between whether you know someone professionally or personally.
The R&S professionals who were actively using Facebook were asked what information they
would look for if one of their applicants Facebook account was publicly available. Majority of
respondents (57.6%) admit that when the account is publicly available they would look at all available information. Three out of four respondents would have seen at least the profile picture. Interestingly, a chi-square test shows that daily and light users do not differ in their behavior, 0.612, df
3. It is thus not so that daily users, more familiar with Facebook and more frequently using it, are
more likely to investigate an applicants Facebook account than do light users. Unlike what is argued
in popular media, a large majority of respondents (95%) refrain from sending a friend request to
applicants when the Facebook account is not publicly available.
As we suspected R&S professionals would look for an applicants profile picture on Facebook,
we investigated what signals these decision makers thought to extract from such a picture. Respondents were presented with some personality aspects and asked whether a profile picture on Facebook
could reveal information on these aspects. The research did not ask the same questions for the profile
picture on LinkedIn, so that comparisons cannot be made. The majority of respondents, respectively,
72.1%, 70.5%, and 60.9%, do not believe a profile picture signals something about the applicants
reliability, emotional stability, and agreeableness (Table 4).
However, a remarkable 40.2% of respondents believe the profile picture provides a signal on the
applicants level of extraversion and 43.4% see a correlation with maturity. It is also apparent that one
444
Table 4. What Profile Pictures Reveal

Totally
Agree
Totally Disagree
The profile picture on Facebook reveals whether
the person is reliable
The profile picture on Facebook reveals ones level
of emotional stability
of agreeableness
of extraversion
The profile picture on Facebook reveals how mature
the person is
the person has a healthy lifestyle
the person is intelligent
The profile picture on Facebook reveals how
highly a person thinks of himself or herself
A person who is more serious has a more serious profile
picture, and vice versa
39.0%
33.1%
22.3%
4.4%
1.2%
30.7%
39.8%
18.0%
9.2%
2.3%
27.2%
33.7%
19.2%
18.4%
1.5%
21.1%
24.9%
13.8%
36.0%
4.2%
20.7%
21.9%
13.9%
37.9%
5.6%
28.3%
35.9%
23.1%
11.6%
1.2%
38.2%
29.5%
21.9%
8.4%
2.0%
24.3%
24.7%
19.5%
27.9%
3.6%
24.7%
25.5%
22.3%
23.5%
4.0%
out of five doubts whether the picture signals something about the healthy/unhealthy lifestyle of the
applicant, his intelligence, and whether he likes to show off or not. Majority of the respondents
(50.2%) also disagree with the statement that serious applicants also have serious profile pictures
on Facebook.
Finally, we asked respondents who had accounts on both LinkedIn and Facebook whether their
organization had a policy on the use of SNSs for recruitment purposes. Findings indicate that many
organizations do not. Respectively, 90.4% and 86.9% of respondents claim their organization has no
policy on Facebook and LinkedIn. When there is a policy, it appears to be a positive one: 10.1% of
respondents are asked to post vacancies on LinkedIn, and less than 3% is asked or obliged not to post
them. Only 4% of users are asked by their organization to post vacancies on Facebook. In contrast
with some recent research (De Standaard, 2010), a large majority of respondents (69.9%) are
allowed to use social networks during work hours, only 28.3% should wait for a work break, and
44.5% may even use it for personal purposes.
Conclusion
This study shows LinkedIn and Facebook, although used differently, are used by Belgian decision makers in both SMEs and large organizations during R&S processes. In the recruitment
phase, LinkedIn is more often used than Facebook, the latter considered less professional than
the former, to communicate vacancies to the outside world and to actively search for potential
applicants. It was also found that the intensity of SNSs use affects how the SNSs are used in a
professional context. Looking at selection, both LinkedIn and Facebook are used by many
respondents to increase the volume of information available for the selection interview and for
a minority of decision makers to decide on invitations to a first selection interview. Information
available on SNSs may thus affect applicants success of being invited. Decision makers do
value the information on LinkedIn differently from information on Facebook, marking the benefit of LinkedIn to promote ones training and work experience. Despite this view on LinkedIn,
Caers and Castelyns
445
most professionals admit they would look to all information on Facebook if it is publicly available. The hypothesis that SNSs may allow often cited biases to occur earlier in the selection
process is supported, with decision makers stating to be able to draw conclusions on personality
dimensions and behavior from applicants profile pictures, and looking at the applicants network. This research thus highlights the importance of an increased awareness among applicants
regarding the effects their social network accounts may have on their application success, in a
positive or negative sense, and of anti-bias interviewer training. Organizational policy making
should then be able to contribute to the success of R&S efforts in the social network era.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
References
Anderson, N. (2003). Applicant and recruiter reactions to new technology in selection: A critical review and
agenda for future research. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 121-136.
Bertrand, M., & Mulainathan, S. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? American Economic Review, 94, 991-1013.
Black, D. A., Makar, H. R., Sanders, S. G., & Taylor, L. J. (2003). The earnings effects of sexual orientation on
earning. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 56, 3, 449-469.
Blandford, J. M. (2003). The nexus of sexual orientation and gender in the determination of earnings. Industrial
and Labor Relations Review, 54, 4, 622-642.
Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 11.
Braddy, P. W., Thompson, L. F., Wuensch, K. L., & Grossnickle, W. F. (2003). Internet recruiting: The effects
of web page design features. Social Science Computer Review, 21, 374-385.
Breeding, M. (October 2009). Social networking strategies for professionals. Computers in Libraries, 9, 29-31.
Burt, R. (2001) Structural holes versus network closure as social capital. In: Lin, N., Cook, K. & Burt, R. Social
Capital: Theory and Research, pp 31-56.
Cable, D. M., & Turban, D. B. (2001). Establishing the dimensions, sources and values of job seekers employer
knowledge during recruiting. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 2, 239-273.
Calvo-Armengol, A., & Jackson, M. O. (2004). The effects of social networks on employment and inequality.
American Economic Review, 94, 426-454.
Cappelli, P. (March 2001). Making the most of on-line recruiting. Harvard Business Review, 79, 139-146.
Casella, A., & Hanaki, N. (2008). Information channels in labor markets: On the resilience of referral hiring.
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 66, 492-513.
Castilla, E. J. (2005). Social networks and employee performance in a call center. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 1243-1283.
Cesare, S. J. (1996). Subjective judgments and the selection interview: A methodological review. Public Personnel Management, 25, 291-306.
Cotton, J. L., ONeill, B. S., & Griffin, A. (2008). The name game: Affective and hiring reactions to first
names. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 18-39.
De Standaard. (2010). Bazen nemen Facebook en Twitter in het Vizier. Retrieved on April 23, 2010, from http://
www.standaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelidDMF20100421_068
Donath, J. (2007). Signals in social supernets. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 1.
446
Drydakis, N. (2009). Sexual orientation discrimination in the labour market. Labour Economics, 16,
364-372.
Dubois, M., & Pansu, P. (2004). Facial attractiveness, applicants qualifications and judges expertise about
decisions in preselective recruitment. Psychological Reports, 95, 1129-1134.
Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook Friends: Exploring the relationship
between college students use of online social networks and social capital. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication, 12, 3.
Facebook. (2010). Statistics. Retrieved September 8, 2010, from http://www.facebook.com/press/
info.php?statistics
Fernandez, R. M., & Fernandez-Mateo, I. (2006). Networks, Race, and Hiring. American Sociology Review, 71,
42-71.
Finneran, L., & Kelly, M. (2003). Social networks and inequality. Journal of Urban Economics, 53,
282-299.
Fryer, R., & Levitt, S. (2004). The causes and consequences of distinctively black names. The Quarterly Jounal
of Economics, 119, 767-805.
Galanaki, E. (2002). The decision to recruit online: A descriptive study. Career Development International, 7,
243-251.
Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social networking sites. Journal
of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 1.
Harvie, K., Marshall-McCaskey, J., & Johnston, L. (1998). Gender-based biases in occupational hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1698-1711.
Kalick, S. M., Zebrowitz, L. A., Langlois, J. H., & Johnson, R. M. (1998). Does human facial attractiveness honestly advertise health? Longitudinal data on an evolutionary question. Psychological Science,
9, 8-13.
Kawakami, K., Dion, K. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (1998). Racial Prejudice and stereotype activation. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 407-416.
Klesges, R. C., Klem, M. L., Hanson, C. L., Eck, L. H., Ernst, J., OLaughlin, D., & . . . Rife, R. (1990). The
effects of applicants health status and qualifications on simulated hiring decisions. Journal of Obesity, 14,
527-535.
Lahey, J. (2008). Age, women, and hiring: An experimental study. Journal of Human Resources, 43, 30-56.
Lievens, F., van Dam, K., & Anderson, N. (2002). Recent trends and challenges in personnel selection. Personnel Review, 31, 580-601.
LinkedIn. (2010). Statistics. Retrieved on September 8, 2010, from http://press.linkedin.com/faq
Luxen, M. F., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2005). Facial attractiveness, sexual selection and personnel selection:
when evolved preferences matter. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 241-255.
Maurer, T., & Rafuse, N. (2001). Learning not litigating: Managing employee development and avoiding
claims of age discrimination. Academy of Management Executive, 15, 110-121.
McManus, M. A., & Ferguson, M. W. (2003). Biodata, personality, and demographic differences of recruits
from three sources. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 175-183.
Neumark, D., Bank, R. J., & Van Nort, K. D. (1996). Sex discrimination in restaurant hiring: An audit study.
Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111, 915-941.
OReilly, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and organizational culture: A profile
comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of Management Review, 13,
546-558.
Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937-975.
Papacharissi, Z. (2009). The virtual geographies of social networks: A comparative analysis of Facebook, LinkedIn and ASmallWorld. New Media & Society, 11, 199-220.
Pingitore, R., Dugoni, B. L., Tindale, R. S., & Spring, B. (1994). Bias against overweight job applicants in a
simulated employment interview. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 909-917.
Caers and Castelyns
447
Purkiss, S. L. S., Perrewe, P. L, Gillespie, T. L., Mayes, B. T., & Ferris, G. R. (2006). Implicit sources of bias
employment interview judgments and decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processess,
101, 152-167.
Riach, P. A., & Rich, R. J. (2002). Field experiments of discrimination in the market place. Economic Journal,
112, 480-518.
Roberts, S. J., & Roach, T. (2009). Social networking web sites and human resource personnel: Suggestions for
job searches. Business Communication Quarterly, March 2009, 110-114.
Roehling, M. R. (1999). Weight-based discrimination in employment: Psychology and legal aspects. Personnel
Psychology, 52, 969-1016.
Rooth, D. (2009). Obesity, attractiveness, and differential treatment in hiring: A field experiment. The Journal
of Human Resources, 44, 710-735.
Rynes, S. L., Bretz, R. D. J., & Gerhart, B. (1991). The importance of recruitment in job choice: A different way
of looking. Personnel Psychology, 44, 487-452.
Saks, A., Ashforth, M., & Blake, E. (1997). A longitudinal investigation of the relationships between job
information sources, applicant perceptions of fit, and work outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 50,
395-423.
Seiter, J. S., & Hatch, S. (2005). Effect of tattoos on perceptions of credibility and attractiveness. Psychological
Reports, 96, 1113-1120.
Shannon, M. L., & Stark, C. P. (2003). The influence of physical appearance on personnel selection. Social
Behavior and Personality, 31, 613-624.
Swami, V., Chan, F., Wong, V., Furnham, A., & Tovee, M. J. (2008). Weight-based discrimination in occupational hiring and helping behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38, 968-981.
Swim, J. K., Aikin, K. J., Hall, W. S., & Hunter, B. A. (1995). Sexism and racism: Old-fashioned and modern
prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 199-214.
Taylor, G. S. (1994). The relationship between sources of new employees and attitudes toward the job. Journal
of Social Psychology, 134, 99-110.
Tews, M. J., Stafford, K., & Zhu, J. (2009). Beauty Revisited: The impact of attractiveness, ability any personality
in the assessment of employment suitability. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 92-100.
Turban, D. B. (2001). Organizational attractiveness as an employer on college campuses: an examination of
the applicant population. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 5, 293-312.
Turban, D. B., Forret, M.L., & Henderickson, C.L. (1998). Application attraction to firms: Influences of organization reputation, job and organizational attributes, and recruiter behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
52, 24-44.
Turban, D. B., Lau, C., Ngo, H., Chow, I., & Si, S. X. (2001). Organization attractiveness of firms in the Peoples
Republic of China: A person-organization fit perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 194-206.
Trusov, M., Bucklin, R. E., & Pauwels, K. (September 2009). Effects of word-of-mouth versus traditional marketing: Findings from an internet social networking site. Journal of Marketing, 73, 90-102.
Van Hoye, G., & Lievens, F. (2007). Investigating web-based recruitment sources: Employee testimonials vs
word-of-mouse. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 372-382.
Wanberg, C. R., Kanfer, R., & Banas, J. T. (2000). Predictors and outcomes of networking intensity among
unemployed job seekers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 491-503.
Weichselbaumer, D. (2003). Sexual orientation discrimination in hiring. Labour Economics, 10, 629-642.
Weiss, E. M., & Maurer, T. J. (2004). Age discrimination in personnel decisions: A reexamination. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 34, 1551-1562.
Zebrowitz, L. A., & Montepare, J. M. (1992). Impressions of babyfaced and maturefaced individuals across the
lifespan. Developmental Psychology, 28, 1143-1152.
Zebrowitz, L. A., Tenenbaum, D. R., & Goldstein, L. H. (1991). The impact of job applicants facial maturity,
gender, and academic achievements on hiring recommendations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21,
525-548.
448
Bios
Ralf Caers (ralf.caers@hubrussel.be) is docent-onderzoeker HRM & Management, Hogeschool-Universiteit
Brussel. His website is www.ralfcaers.be.
Vanessa Castelyns (vanessa.castelyns@skynet.be) specializes in social media and is a management consultant
at Administratief Medewerkster at Zakenkantoor Kockaerts BVBA.

Social Science Computer Review 2011 Caers 437 48

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Social Science Computer Review 2011 Caers 437 48

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Social Science

>> Version of Record - Nov 22, 2011

Downloaded from ssc.sagepub.com by Mara Stan on October 2, 2014

LinkedIn and Facebook in