In a famous study, it was found that judges were harsher in trials decided just before lunch. The study is an example of how timing can often have an undue influence on outcomes. A recent study from Chicago Booth highlights how similar issues can affect job candidates.
The study suggests that we might suffer if we’re the last person to be interviewed. The authors argue that when evaluated sequentially, we’re more likely to judge those coming last more harshly.
Unfair assessments
The researchers conducted five distinct experiments that featured profile pictures from Facebook. Participants were asked to describe a series of photos using a single word. The results showed that the descriptions became increasingly negative as they got closer to the end of the series.
Similar findings emerged from the other experiments, with positive traits coming through far more frequently earlier on in the process than those appearing later on.
The researchers believe that this is partly because people simply run out of nice things to say as the process continues. For instance, you might be forced to come up with new adjectives to describe someone, which if they’re the tenth in line could be challenging.
“You can see how for the last person in the series, the set of possible things you can describe while still trying to provide new information has gotten considerably smaller,” the researchers explain.
Due to the fact that we often wish to have useful information about the people we meet, we try and use unique words to describe them. As a result, if we run out of positive words, we have little choice but to use negative words instead.
“You’ll probably witness positive features, but you just won’t store that person in your own memory under those features, and you won’t communicate those features because they’re not new,” the researchers explain.
In a recruitment scenario, this can result in people who are assessed last in a sequence getting a bit of the short end of the stick and being described in less than flattering terms.
