UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A study of the influence of nonverbal communication in the selection interview Posthuma, Allan Bartell 1964

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1964_A8 P6.pdf [ 4.46MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0105314.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0105314-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0105314-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0105314-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0105314-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0105314-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0105314-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0105314-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0105314.ris

Full Text

A STUDY OP THE INFLUENCE OP NONVERBAL COMMUNICATION IN THE SELECTION INTERVIEW  by ALLAN BARTELL POSTHUMA B.A., The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I960  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OP THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OP MASTER OP ARTS  i n the Department of Psychology We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the ' required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OP BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1964  In presenting this thesis i n p a r t i a l fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t freely available for reference and study.  I further agree that permission  for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may  be  granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It i s understood that copying or publication of this thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain shall not be allowed without my written permission.  Department The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver 8, Canada. Date  ?^  - ^ d ^  i ABSTRACT The selection interview i s frequently regarded as a s i t u a t i o n i n which communication between the two participants i s effected solely through the medium of spoken and heard words.  Closer examination reveals i t to be a complex i n t e r -  action involving subtle contents mediated through several channels of communication - v i s u a l , olfactory, t a c t i l e , kinesthetic ( a l l "non-verbal") as well as the verbal  channel.  This study examines the effect of information mediated by non-verbal channels of communication upon the selection judgments made by the interviewer.  Interviews under normal  faee-to-face conditions (where non-verbal communication channels are open) were compared with interviews by another interviewer of the same candidates over a telephone (where non-verbal communication i s eliminated). Three interviewers participated, and they, and the order of conditions, were randomized to control order and interviewer effects.  The forty-three pairs of interviews were conducted  by regular Naval Recruiting Officers upon applicants for o f f i c e r t r a i n i n g i n the R.C.N.  Results of the interviews were  actually used f o r selection. The p r i n c i p a l hypothesis, that assessment ratings by the interviewer are influenced by information communicated through non-verbal channels, was supported:  the assessments of 10 of  the 22 separate attributes rated showed s i g n i f i c a n t differences  ii between telephone and face-to-face condition. The single overall rating of each candidate which represents the interviewers recommendation to higher authority, did not, however, show a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference as made under the two conditions.  A secondary hypothesis,  that overall assessments made i n the face-to-face condition w i l l correlate highly with assessments of appearance and bearing, while overall assessments based on the telephone i n terview w i l l not, was supported.  This suggests that at least one  kind of information communicated through non-verbal channels, namely, the appearance and bearing of the candidate, does i n fact, influence the f i n a l evaluation of his s u i t a b i l i t y . However, appearance and bearing were found to have no s i g n i f i cant relationship to the more detailed assessments of "social interests", "motivation",  "range of knowledge" and "personal  characteristics". Comparisons of the times expended i n the two types of interview showed face-to-face interviews to be substantially larger o v e r a l l than those on the telephone.  The interviewer  talked r e l a t i v e l y more, and the candidate r e l a t i v e l y l e s s i n the face-to-face as compared with the telephone s i t u a t i o n . The proportion of s i l e n t time was substantially the same f o r both types of interview. Implications f o r further research and application to i n terviewing practices are discussed.  vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It i s most d i f f i c u l t to evaluate appreciation f o r those efforts of others who have made t h i s thesis possible. The writer wishes to thank a l l of these, the Royal Canadian Navy f o r allowing him to undertake h i s academic studies; and Professor Edwin Belyea of the Psychology Department, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, whose foresight and guidance has undoubtedly f a c i l i t a t e d the undertaking of t h i s thesis. Gratitude i s also extended to Lieutenant Commander William McGown, the B r i t i s h Columbia Area Recruiting O f f i c e r for the Royal Canadian Navy, who cooperated most generously i n providing the sample and adjusting h i s program so that the interviews were conducted i n a most expedient fashion. The writer also extends h i s thanks to his good friend, Mr. Robert Jones, who constantly challenged h i s assumptions.  Finally,  a most sincere thanks goes to the writer's wife and family who withstood h i s t r i a l s and tribulations over the past year.  iii TABLE OF CONTENTS  ABSTRACT  i  TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF APPENDICES ACKNOWLEDGMENTS DEDICATION CHAPTER I  i i i iv v vi v i i  I n t r o d u c t i o n and Statement o f The Problem  1  CHAPTER I I A Review o f the L i t e r a t u r e Concerned w i t h the Problem  9  CHAPTER I I I Procedure  24  CHAPTER IV R e s u l t s and D i s c u s s i o n  35  CHAPTER V  74  Summary and Conclusions  BIBLIOGRAPHY  77  APPENDICES  80  iv L I S T OF TABLES  Page TABLE I  28  TABLE I I  38  TABLE I I I  38  TABLE I T  41  TABLE V  41  TABLE V I  43  TABLE V I I  43  TABLE V I I I  45  TABLE IX  47  TABLE X  49  TABLE X I  49  TABLE X I I  51  TABLE X I I I  51  TABLE X I V  54  TABLE XV  55  TABLE X V I  57  TABLE X V I I  59  TABLE X V I I I  62  TABLE XXX  64  TABLE XX  66  TABLE XXI  66  TABLE X X I I  68  TABLE X X I I I  71  V LIST OF APPENDICES  APPENDIX A  APPENDIX B  School Report on Naval Officer Candidates  80  O f f i c e r Candidate Interview Form  81  vii  DEDICATION  To my mother, may she rest i n peace.  - 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OE THE PROBLEM 1.  Importance of Nonverbal Communication In the Selection Interview There are many variables which influence decision making  i n selection interview (Webster, 1964).  Some of the most  c r u c i a l variables are the various components of communication. In the s e l e c t i o n interview, one of the prime objectives of the interviewer i s to obtain as much information from the applicant as is. necessary to determine i f he meets the qualifications f o r the job#  In order to f a c i l i t a t e t h i s flow of information the  interview environment must be conducive.  The interviewer,  therefore, becomes very much involved i n communication. One might assume that i n the normal interviewing situation maximum communication should take place i f the interviewer i s permitted to ask f o r a l l the information he requires, and the applicant i s w i l l i n g to divulge t h i s required information. Even i f this were so, communication i s more than just "what" i s said.  "How"  the information i s given i s also an important  component of the communication process. In other words, communication cannot be defined i n the selection interview as the straight-forward passing and receiving of information i n the form of words.  In the s e l e c t i o n  interview there i s a s i t u a t i o n i n which i n t e l l e c t u a l , percept u a l , cognitive, and motivational factors operate.  The  - 2 selection interview i s a s o c i a l context i n which the applicant perceives others and interacts with them i n accordance with h i s usual tendencies.  These are basic  processes  and they w i l l function i n terms of the p a r t i c u l a r environment of the selection interview (Hyman, et a l , 1954). There are many factors influencing the communication process i n the selection interview that eannot be predicted. For example, i f the interviewer asked a question of the applicant and then looked quickly down to h i s desk, the applicant may think that the question i s of l i t t l e importance.  The applicant  would be more l i a b l e to get t h i s impression i f he f e l t that the manner i n which the interviewer expressed the lacked empathy.  question  In fact, the interviewer may have considered  the question most c r u c i a l and the display of the cues that were misinterpreted by the applicant was unintentional. In the same manner, the applicant may give the interviewer unintentional cues.  For example, i f the applicant  unconeiously  moves his chair forward, he may not have done i t deliberately and yet i f noticed by the interviewer i t w i l l evoke a response i n him.  The applicant, quite obviously, did not intend to  communicate t h i s signal and yet the interviewer has made a certain interpretation of t h i s unconcious act and i t could quite possibly influence future communication. Other examples of the d i f f i c u l t y i n defining communication are those situations during an interview when one of the  parties may do h i s best to prevent the communication of some cue.  For example, the interviewer may say something, that  arouses fear i n the applicant.  While the applicant w i l l pro-  bably do h i s best to conceal t h i s anxiety, he could quite possibly give himself away by h i s p a l l o r or change i n breathing rate.  This, i n turn, could be perceived by the interviewer,  and thus influence the interview. For the purposes of t h i s study, communication i s defined as any transmission and receiving of information, signals or other symbols, from one person to another (English and English, 1958).  Some of the various aspects of t h i s communication pro-  cess w i l l now be examined. II  Components of Communication Signals What are the various aspects of communication?  F i r s t of  a l l there are those variables which are d i r e c t l y related to verbal signals (Cameron, 1958).  Aside from the messages that  are conveyed by just "what" i s being said, the way i n which i t i s said also conveys a message. One aspect of t h i s i s i n the actual content i t s e l f .  For  example, the repeated use of a word or a phrase by the a p p l i cant could be of some significance to the interviewer and therefore influence the interview. The form of the verbal message i s another v a r i a b l e . tations, mispronounciations  Hesi-  or transposition of words are some  of the factors that could bias the interview.  Intonation i s  - 4 another variable of the verbal components of communication. j  The interviewer may become aware of the applicant's anxiety by the general tone of h i s speech.  There are some special  types of intonation such as loudness or sudden tightening of the voice which may be perceived by either parties i n the interview. Apart from those variables peculiar to verbal signals, messages can be perceived v i s u a l l y .  The very appearance of  a person, the clothes he wears and his h a i r style w i l l react on the observer i n some sort of way. vey a message.  Gestures could also con-  In t h i s category we would also include f a c i a l  movements (for example, averting of the eyes during questioning, or display of f a c i a l mannerisms). convey a message.  Bodily movements can  For example, the way a person walks or  s i t s i n h i s chair, can be s i g n i f i c a n t when forming an impression of said person.  I f the applicant taps his foot during  the interview t h i s may mean he i s impatient or, on the other hand i t may mean something quite d i f f e r e n t .  How the interview-  er perceives t h i s action i s something else. Man can receive signals from other sources than sight and sound.  One very important factor here i s smell.  Cues received  from t h i s source have not been explored by the l i t e r a t u r e . However, the part that offensive body odor plays i n decision making i n a selection interview could be quite considerable. While the interviewer may think that the odor of the applicant  - 5 indicates nervousness or poor hygiene he may misjudged s i t u a t i o n completely.  the  It may have been the case, f o r instance,  that the applicant was delayed and had to rush to make h i s interview appointment.  His body odor, i n t h i s case, would  have nothing to do with h i s anxiety or hygienic habits. There are also those cues which are transmitted by t a c t i l e sense.  For example, how many interviewers place considerable  f a i t h i n the impression they have received of the applicant a f t e r shaking hands with him? It i s apparent, therefore, that the communication process i s not a simple one.  In the selection interview the interview-  er i s very much exposed to communication signals other than just "what" the applicant said.  The interviewer may make use  of these other aspects of communication, which we w i l l c a l l nonverbal communication.  He may base some of h i s assessments  on these nonverbal cues or he may be e n t i r e l y guided by them. What use he makes of these nonverbal cues i s the area which t h i s study w i l l examine. Ill  The Examination of Nonverbal Cues There are many possible designs f o r experiments on non-  verbal communication.  However, one of the main considerations  of t h i s paper was to determine the influence of t h i s type of communication, upon the selection interview.  Therefore the  question of controlling the various variables becomes much more complicated than would be the case i f we were to set up  a r t i f i c i a l experimental  conditions.  In order to control the  various channels of communication there are several progressive steps one could take. With one-way v i s i o n screens placed between the interviewer and the applicant i t would he possible to block the flow of v i s u a l information to either the interviewer or to the applicant.  Both would be able, however, to talk to each other  i n the usual fashion and would have access to olfactory cues. By placing a s o l i d screen between the interviewer and the applicant the influence of neither party having access to cues transmitted by v i s u a l channels could be examined. Another p o s s i b i l i t y would be to conduct the interview over the telephone, where neither party would have v i s u a l contact. For reasons that w i l l be elaborated on i n Chapter III of t h i s paper, i t was t h i s design which was selected f o r t h i s study. The number of cues available to the interviewer can he r e s t r i c t e d by a further narrowing of the communication channels. With a telephone interview i t i s possible that electronic controls can a l t e r or f l a t t e n the speech to remove the i n f l u ence of tonal q u a l i t i e s of the voice. Or, i t would be possible to conduct the interview by tele-type.  In t h i s method a spontaneous interview could s t i l l  be conducted and yet a l l those nonverbal cues associated with voice, v i s i o n , smell and touch would be eliminated. As we have already mentioned, however, some nonverbal cues can be perceived by h e s i t a t i o n or transposition of words.  A  method of examining these influences would be to conduct the interview by typewritten l e t t e r s with perhaps the ultimate interview being conducted by the applicant f i l l i n g i n a questionnaire.  This l a t t e r method would provide the interviewer  with a minimum of nonverbal cues, the only exception being the choice of words on the part of the applicant which would indicate a l i t t l e more than just "what" i s being said. IV  Summary The problem that i s raised i s the influence of nonverbal  communication i n decision making i n the selection interview. Mention was made of the importance of nonverbal i n the selection interview.  communication  The range of the various compon-  ents of communication and methods of examining these components was  discussed. What i s the contribution of v i s u a l , olfactory, t a c t i l e  kinesthetic cues i n the selection interview?  What w i l l be  the effect of dependency on other nonverbal cues (such as those associated with voice) i n the absence of some nonverbal cues?  Are assessments on personality affected more by the  nonverbal cues than assessments on s o c i a l interests or motivation?  What i s the influence of an impressive physical appear-  ance on the f i n a l assessment rating of the interview?  Can the  interviewer ignore the appearance of an applicant and make h i s assessment on other q u a l i t i e s , or w i l l the appearance of the applicant bias not only the f i n a l assessment rating but also other ratings i n the interview?  How  does the lack of v i s u a l  contact i n the s e l e c t i o n interview influence the duration of verbal components of communication?  Is the interviewer l i k e l y  to t a l k more i n t h i s s i t u a t i o n i n order to compensate f o r the lack of v i s u a l appraisal of the applicant?  Or w i l l there be  long periods of silence i n this s i t u a t i o n caused by the lack of warmth that a face-to-face meeting might induce?  This  study was designed with the purpose of examining these questions .  - 9 CHAPTER II Review of the Literature Concerned with the Problem I - Research on the Influence of Nonverbal Communication i n the Selection Interview, Socrates said "Speak i n order that I may 1949).  see you"  (Reik,  With t h i s appreciation of the importance of nonverbal  communication to the understanding of personality, at such an early stage of development i n our c i v i l i z a t i o n one might expect that t h i s problem has been given a f a i r amount of attention.  However an examination of the l i t e r a t u r e reveals a  s c a r c i t y of material concerned with nonverbal communication. This i s especially true of the selection interview. For example, Kephart's (1952) book on the employment i n terview contains only a passing reference to bias caused by the interviewer's attitudes.  Bellows and Estep (1954) quote  the same attitude study (Rice, 1929) of interviewer bias.  as Kephart i n discussion  They do, however, go into some discussion  of the influence of extraneous factors (such as the effect the applicant's eye glasses may  have on h i s assessment of  honesty and i n t e l l i g e n c e ) and the influence of  stereotype  attitudes (such as the drinking habits of Irishmen). make a b r i e f reference to "halo" e f f e c t s . h a i r style may  They also  They mention that  create an unfavorable impression and influence  other c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s unrelated to personal appearance. However they do not back up these statements with any  research,  and they f a i l to go beyond discussing the influence that  - 10 physical appearance and attitudes may have on judgements i n the selection interview. By means of f a c i a l expression, and vocal intonation the interviewer, according to Fear (1958), may  establish rapport  and obtain more information from the applicant by sounding and looking interested i n him.  Fear (1959) also f a i l s to  support h i s opinions with any reference to research data a l though he mentions from h i s experience  i n t r a i n i n g interviewers,  that f a c i a l expression and vocal intonation i s not f u l l y l i z e d by the majority of interviewers.  uti-  He recommends that i n -  terviewers could learn the value of these aspects of communicat i o n by observing the charming persuasiveness  of salesmen.  One of the standard references to selection interviewing, Bingham and Moore (1959) f a i l to discuss nonverbal communicat i o n adequately.  The authors do, however, present  research  that f a i l s to substantiate some of the interpretations made from Rice's (1929) study on the bias caused by interviewer attitudes.  They also mention that there i s a lack of work de-  voted to the "language of signs and gestures" but no elaborat i o n i s made.  Although Maier (1958) discusses many, aspects  of verbal communication he makes no direct references to the various biases and b a r r i e r s to the communication process caused by nonverbal signals. Webster (1964) has published an interesting selection of studies into decision making i n the employment interview.  - 11 With the caused  exception  by the  no f u r t h e r  of  a few r e f e r e n c e s  interviewer's  attitudes  discussion of nonverbal  The o n l y r e a l l y  adequate  discussion of  view i s  a p u b l i c a t i o n by Kahn and C a n n e l  has to  communication on the  Over the years  we d e v e l o p  other which complicates been  caused  convey  bias  there  the  influence  selection  that  tional  or pressures  forces  convey  the  to  of  They m a i n -  (1957).  go  developed  habits  This w i l l  inhibit  on to  ourselves put  to  express  say  and so  that  the  expressing  t o be  feelings  be  that  or overemphasize that  m i g h t be  same m a n n e r we c o u l d p r e d i c t t i o n would also  try Usually,  true.  that  his  opin-  to  likely evaluate.  create  forces  If  applicant  the  an a t t i t u d e  the  that  applicant  attitude  in conflict the  own  on.  approving of  we c a n p r o b a b l y p r e d i c t repeat  This  forward.  i n t e r v i e w e r has  interview or else  interviewer  to  foot  on a tendency  ceives  motivated  with  others.  or conceal  or d i s t o r t e d communication.  expressed,  to  our best  inaccurate the  reacting  i n w h i c h we u s u a l l y  o f l i s t e n i n g based the  ways o f  the  i n t e r v i e w e r may b e u n d e r m a n y m o t i v a -  a c e r t a i n image,  The a u t h o r s  is  inter-  copnunication process.  a certain impression of  They c o n s i d e r  to  the  by our defensiveness  c l a i m K a h n a n d C a n n e l , we t r y  ions,  of  our s o p h i s t i c a t i o n i n communication complicates  interview. each  dangers  communication.  components  that  the  and s t e r e o t y p e s  various  tain  of  to  converse  per-  he  has  will  and t o  with i t . of  toward  this  In  be avoid the  situa-  - 12 Getting closer to the topic of the present study,  TTahn  and Cannell then observe that unwanted interaction and r e s u l t i n g bias may occur from much more subtle cues than just verbal  communication.  Many of these cues may be beyond the con-  t r o l of the interviewer and may function without any intent on his part.  concious  The authors state that these cues (non-  verbal cues) are especially important  i n the e a r l i e r stages  of the interview process, when the applicant i s attempting to position himself and the interviewer.  However, aside from  mentioning the nonverbal communication that could arise out of superior-subordinate, negro-white, and s o c i a l class d i f f e r ences Kahn and Cannell f a i l to expand on some of the more subtle cues they make reference to. the lack of research.  Perhaps t h i s i s due to  Certainly after surveying the books on  selection interview techniques one might assume that there has been l i t t l e or no research done i n the area of nonverbal communication.  However, there i s some research and this w i l l  now be discussed. The only study that t h i s writer was able to f i n d which examined the influence of communication signals on the select i o n interview, was one by Anderson (i960).  Anderson measured  the length of interviewer speech, applicant speech and periods of silence from 115 disk recordings of employment interviews conducted by s i x Canadian Army personnel o f f i c e r s .  He found  that the amount the interviewer talked i s d i r e c t l y related to  - 13 his decision to accept an applicant.  Anderson's study w i l l  he examined again i n Chapter 17 of t h i s paper i n conjunction with some of the findings on the influence of the nonverbal cues on duration of speaking times. II  Literature on Nonverbal Communication Relevant to the Selection Interview There are other experimental studies that have some im-  p l i c a t i o n s on the selection interview. For example, Landis (1929) i n a most intriguing study argued against a common assumption of man, that he can accurately judge f a c i a l expressions correctly.  Landis presented seventy-seven photo-  graphs of f a c i a l expressions that displayed obvious emotional excitement, to forty-one freshmen psychology students. He found that t h e i r a b i l i t y to judge emotion correctly was no better than chance. There have been many short experiments done on the i n fluence of a single variable on assessments of people. McKeachie (1952) had s i x male students conduct a ten minute interview i n which they were required to rate s i x female students on a twenty-two variable scale. wore l i p s t i c k and three did not. vious knowledge of t h i s factor.  Three of the females  The interviewers had no preMcKeachie found that l i p s t i c k  influence s i g n i f i c a n t l y the ratings of f i v e of the twenty-two variables.  He also had the interviewers l i s t the reasons f o r  t h e i r ratings and found that not one of the interviewers made any reference to l i p s t i c k .  - 14 Two similar studies were conducted "by Thornton (1943, 1944) i n which the wearing of glasses was the variable examined. In t h i s f i r s t study (1943)» Thornton found that persons photographed wearing glasses were usually rated s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher i n i n t e l l i g e n c e , dependability, industriousness, and honesty than were the same persons when photographed without glasses.  As photographs l i m i t the amount of cues available  to the interviewer, Thornton repeated the study i n 1944•  In  t h i s experiment, the subjects appeared b r i e f l y , f o r about two minutes, before two groups of judges.  They appeared before  one group wearing glasses and before the other group without glasses.  This time Thornton found that the group wearing  glasses was rated more i n t e l l i g e n t and more industrious.  Thorn-  ton's study d i f f e r s from MeKeachie's i n the sense that Thornton's subjects represent the bias caused by a certain stereotype of those who wear glasses and McKeachie's study deals more with the bias caused by subtle differences i n personal appearance. Euesch (1955) wrote that "every good therapist eventually arrives at the inescapable conclusion that verbal accounts cannot adequately represent anologically codified events".  He  claims that a great deal of covert l i v i n g can go on without the use of words.  In the average person neither verbal nor  nonverbal communication has been developed to such a degree that one or the other i s s u f f i c i e n t , by i t s e l f , f o r adequate communication.  Usually the nonverbal complements verbal communica-  - 15 tion.  I t i s Ruesch's view that when the balance of nonverbal  and verbal communication i s disturbed then various symptoms of mental disease can be recognized.  I f a person has to deny  himself, or i s denied by others, nonverbal modes of exchange and analogic expression the only solution, i s a psychosis (Ruesch, 1955). Barbara (1956) goes on to emphasize the value of nonverbal communication i n order to arrive at a more complete understanding of human behavior.  Barbara claims there are a multitude  of bodily expressions and. behavioral gestures which give i n sight and understanding to psychosomatic disease.  We communi-  cate every minute of the day with others and the outside world through 'speaking' gestures, p e c u l i a r i t i e s i n gait and dress, a sense of touch while shaking hands, the mannerisms of another person's glance or looks, the condition and texture of h i s skin, the color of h i s eyes, h i s l i p s , h i s body b u i l d , and a multitude of similar bodily characteristics".  In many forms of  therapy (for example, psyehodrama, music therapy, a r t therapy, play therapy,) the attempt i s made to further nonverbal communication of those patients suffering from an acute mental illness.  Gnce the therapist has established channels of non-  verbal communication he then can begin to open up some verbal channels with the patient. Ruesch and Zees (1958) consider that nonverbal forms of c o d i f i c a t i o n f a l l into three d i s t i n c t categories.  The f i r s t  category i s sign language which includes a l l those forms of  - 16 c o d i f i c a t i o n i n which words, numbers and punctuation have been supplanted by gestures..  This would include the gesture  of the hitchhiker as well as the elaborate sign language of the deaf-mute.  The second category i s action language.  This  embraces a l l movements that are not used exclusively as signals.  For example, such actions as walking and drinking  serve personal needs and also constitute a message to those who may perceive them.  The t h i r d category i s object language.  This category comprises a l l intentional and nonintentional displays of material things.  Such things as machines, art  objects, clothing would be included i n t h i s  category.  We can see that the l i t e r a t u r e concerned with psychiatric interviews has paid more attention to the influence of nonverbal communication than has the l i t e r a t u r e concerned with the selection interview.  This i s probably due to the fact, as  already mentioned, that i n the psychiatric interview, the interviewer may  be unable to receive verbal communication from  the patients and therefore has to r e l y on nonverbal modes of expression.  We w i l l now  examine some of the psychiatric  oriented research. M i l l e r (1959) considered that while the theorists emphasized nonverbal communication most of the work i n the c l i n i c a l and experimental cation.  area i s on the verbal components of communi-  M i l l e r conducted a study on an emotional expression  using monkeys as subjects.  He found that effect of fear and/  or anxiety can be perceived by the f a c i a l expression  posture  - 17 of the monkeys* There have "been few studies using humans as subjects. However, Blau (1954) compared the a b i l i t y of f i f t y - s e v e n congenitally b l i n d adolescents with s i x t y - s i x sighted scents i n t h e i r judgment of a f f e c t .  adole-  He found that the blind  were more accurate i n interpreting the a f f e c t i v e meaning of dialogue than were the sighted subjects.  However, i n taking  a l l factors into consideration the sighted subjects were more accurate i n the o v e r a l l judging of emotion.  In other words,  while the b l i n d have sharpened t h e i r sensory components of l i s t e n i n g to compensate f o r t h e i r i n a b i l i t y to see, t h i s compensation i s s t i l l not as adequate f o r judging of affect as having sight would be.  The application of Blau's study to  interviewing would be that better assessments might be possible i f interviewers developed t h e i r a b i l i t y to judge affect from cues associated with verbal communication. There seems to be s u f f i c i e n t research to indicate that how we perceive nonverbal cues i s l a r g e l y a function of our expectations as well as the i n i t i a l cues we receive from the person we are observing  (G-rosack, 1953).  In other words, a  role expectation w i l l define a set of s p e c i f i c goals f o r the observer and make him dependent i n certain ways upon other persons f o r reaching these goals.  Concern w i l l develop over  certain characteristics and the observer w i l l look f o r cues which are relevant to those p a r t i c u l a r characteristics. Gxosaek (1953) used a group experiment to examine his hypotheses.  - 18 Stimulus messages were presented to the various groups, each of whom were unfamiliar with each other.  The groups were un-  able to see each other or communicate verbally.  Grosack  induced various expectations by d i s s i m i l a r competitive and motivational instructions to the groups.  The subjects were  then required to rate each other on a sociometric scale. Haire and G-runes (1950) conducted another study i n t h i s area.  The authors gave descriptions of the average working  man to university students and found that students had a clear and well organized picture of the working man.  In order  to preserve t h i s picture i n face of a disturbing item the students would ( l ) deny the existence of the item, or (2) d i s t o r t or encapsulate the item i n a context that renders i t impotent; or (3) maintain t h e i r o r i g i n a l picture but also recognize the incongruity of the item, or (4) integrate the item into t h e i r picture but allow i t to change t h e i r stereotype as l i t t l e as possible. One of the standard references to bias caused by stereotypes and other attitudes of the interview i s the work of Hyman, et a l (1954).  These authors have reported on a wide  range of studies into the influence of sex, race, r e l i g i o n , s o c i a l status and other biases that effect the perception of the interviewers. One alleged advantage of the psychiatric interview i s its flexibility.  This allows the interviewer to explore  unique areas of behavior f o r each i n d i v i d u a l .  The psychiatric  - 19 interview presents a r e a l - l i f e , interpersonal, or "dynamic" stimulus s i t u a t i o n so that every i n d i v i d u a l i s given an opportunity to manifest h i s unique and presumably learned s o c i a l behavior patterns (Matarazzo, 1958). Matarazzo (1958) states that the object i s to make the interviewer an independent variable i n the interview situation. He found that the interviewer has a d e f i n i t e effect i n the temporal aspects of the patient's utterances when the i n t e r viewer's own verbal behavior i s varied along the same timeunit parameter.  In subsequent studies (Kanfer, P h i l l i p s , et  a l , I960) i t has been found that i n the psychiatric interview verbal rates of the patients change during periods of anxiety. These authors also found that nonverbal measures such as eyeblink also change. Goldman-Eisler (1952) questioned the widely held view of the spontaneity i n the psychiatric interviewing s i t u a t i o n . This b e l i e f rests l a r g e l y on the presupposition that s k i l l e d interviewers can adjust t h e i r own behavior and steer the i n terviewing s i t u a t i o n freely i n order to obtain optimum rapport and maximum information.  Por example, a well ehosen phrase by  the interviewer may contribute markedly to the success of the interview.  On the other hand, i f poorly chosen, i t might  e a s i l y break the trend of the relationship which has been b u i l t up. Goldman-Eisler designed an experiment i n which she used three senior psychiatrists that differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n t h e i r conversational a c t i v i t y .  The psychiatrists interviewed,  i n turn, a sample of f i v e reserved or depressed patients and f i v e talkative or anxious patients.  Chappie's interaction  chronograph (Chappie, 1949) was used to measure: ( l ) the conversational a c t i v i t y (or l i s t e n i n g a b i l i t y ) , (2) the percentage of conversation by eaeh speaker i n the interview (or the amount of action), (3) and the amount of average time elapsing from the start of one action to the starting of the next (or tempo). She found that the interviewer's were consistent i r r e spective of the type of patient i n regards to l i s t e n i n g a b i l i t y and tempo.  A l l psychiatrists adjusted themselves about the  same amount when passing from one type of patient to another with respect to amount of action.  The patient's conversational  a c t i v i t y was consistent with respect to l i s t e n i n g a b i l i t y and the amount of time they spent i n talking was independent of the interviewer.  Goldman-Eisler found that the interviewer with  the highest a c t i v i t y l e v e l and the quickest tempo i n conversat i o n had the greatest modifying influence on the patient's l i s t e n i n g a b i l i t y and tempo. While these findings are based on aspects associated with verbal communication i t would be possible to speculate that a c t i v i t y l e v e l and tempo of nonverbal communication would behave i n a similar fashion.  Matarazzo and h i s group at Oregon Medical  School are doing extensive research i n t h i s .area but with the exception of eyeblink (Kanfer, et a l , I960) these studies have yet to be published.  - 21 A v e r y r e c e n t work ( D a v i t z , 1964)  has made a thorough  review o f the r e s e a r c h concerned w i t h many aspects of nonverbal communication o f affect;;.  They found that there are marked  i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n a b i l i t y to judge the emotional messages expressed i n nonverbal communication.  D a v i t z (1964)  claims that while f e e l i n g s can be expressed a c c u r a t e l y and e f f e c t i v e l y by nonverbal modes, we know l i t t l e about the p a r t i c u l a r cues which communicate meaning.  D a v i t z found that the  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the a b i l i t y t o judge a f f e c t from nonverbal s i g n a l s are c o n s i s t e n t i n a person over a p e r i o d o f time.  Por  example, i f anger i s mistaken f o r j o y once, i t i s l i k e l y that t h i s mistake w i l l occur a g a i n . who  D a v i t z a l s o found that a person  i s accurate i n i d e n t i f y i n g emotion from one  particular  nonverbal cue tends a l s o to be f a i r l y accurate i n judging emotion by other nonverbal cues.  He f u r t h e r found that accuracy  i s a f u n c t i o n o f age, s t a r t i n g at age f i v e and f a l l i n g o f f a f t e r age f o r t y .  However, d u r i n g ages twelve to f o r t y the accuracy  i n judgment of emotion from nonverbal cues i s the same.  I l l - Summary T h i s chapter examined the l i t e r a t u r e on the i n f l u e n c e o f nonverbal communication.  The few p i e c e s o f r e s e a r c h that have  been done that are r e l a t e d to the s e l e c t i o n i n t e r v i e w are i n the area o f b i a s e s t h a t r e s u l t from a t t i t u d e s and s t e r e o t y p e s . The p s y c h i a t r i c l i t e r a t u r e i s more concerned w i t h the problem due to the f a c t that i t i s o f t e n necessary t o r e l y on nonverbal  communication channels i l l  patients.  the  problem appears  experimental  to  However, to  receive  even  verbal  Nonverbal interviewer.  cues  aspects create  The f i r s t  is  his  the  Another problem i s  cant).  cues,  The l i t e r a t u r e  differences nonverbal  i n the  stimuli  This  study  the  (Davitz,  will  is  his  his  physical that  the  on the  influence  of nonverbal  This order this  study w i l l to  also  facilitate  study  of  tion  selection  of  to  the  objection  a t i o n has  this  that  been  some o f  w i t h an a c t u a l  are  wide  use appli-  individual  and  control  of nonverbal the  as  those  to  the  i n t e r v i e w as  might have been  i t  commu-  results  from areas  from the of  selection  psy-  nonverbal interview.  these p o s s i b i l i t i e s . is  selection  necessary  would circumvent  raised  i f  In  that  interview.  i n v e s t i g a t i o n would have a d i r e c t  designed.  cues  the  communication i n  such an examination i t  any r e s u l t s  these  of  certain contributions  applicable  examine  experiment  the  c o n t r o l the  Some o f  interview(such  suggests may b e  in  interpret  interpret  influence  research  communication that  the  selection  a b i l i t y to  perceive,  interview.  interview)  the  perceive  there  selection  chiatric  of  1964).  explore  selection  for  appearance  i n the  than the  with  concerned  a b i l i t y to  nication  other  concern  and most  been  problems  indicates  a b i l i t y to  has  a b i l i t y to  The n e x t  (e.g.  the  mentally  communication.  three  interview.  of nonverbal  of  area  theorists  research  during the cues.  in this  be b y t h e  and c l i n i c a l  main w i t h the  communication from  Thus  applicathe  an a r t i f i c i a l  type situ-  - 23 The hypotheses that w i l l he examined are the following: 1. Nonverbal cia.es influence the assessment of attributes of an applicant i n the selection interview. 2. The personal appearance of an applicant influences the ratings he receives by the interviewer on h i s other attributes. 3. Nonverbal cues influence duration of speaking times i n the s e l e c t i o n interview  CHAPTER  III  PROCEDURE I  Choice o f Interview  Situation  For t h i s study v a r i o u s l a r g e employers throughout the Vancouver a r e a were contacted i n o r d e r to f i n d a s u i t a b l e i n t e r v i e w i n g s i t u a t i o n as w e l l as an employer w i l l i n g to c o operate.  The s e l e c t i o n i n t e r v i e w f o r O f f i c e r Candidates i n  the Royal Canadian Navy emerged as the most a p p r o p r i a t e f o r various reasons.  The object o f the i n t e r v i e w i s to process  and recommend candidates f o r the Regular O f f i c e r T r a i n i n g P l a n (ROTP) to Naval Headquarters.  Here the,; f i n a l d e c i s i o n  i s made on the s u i t a b i l i t y o f candidates from across Canada. T h i s i n t e r v i e w has a unique f e a t u r e i n that the m a j o r i t y a p p l i c a n t s interviewed are accepted (many c a n d i d a t e s , are e l i m i n a t e d p r i o r to t h e i r i n t e r v i e w s demic" p o t e n t i a l examinations).  of  however,  by medical and " a c a -  T h i s d i f f e r s from most s i t u a -  t i o n s i n i n d u s t r y , where, t y p i c a l l y ,  o n l y one or two a p p l i c a n t s  are accepted from the many that a p p l y . T h i s i n t e r v i e w i s conducted by r e g u l a r Naval O f f i c e r s i n Naval R e c r u i t i n g Centres throughout Canada.  In t h i s  case  candidates from a l l over B r i t i s h Columbia contact the Vancouver r e c r u i t i n g o f f i c e i f they wish to apply to the R.C.N, o f f i c e r candidates.  as  They are g i v e n three "academic p o t e n t i a l "  examinations and i f they pass t h e s e , they then have a complete medical examination.  If  they a l s o q u a l i f y i n t h e i r medical  examination, appointments are made f o r t h e i r s e l e c t i o n i n t e r -  - 25 view i n the r e c r u i t i n g o f f i c e .  P r i o r to t h i s interview they  are required to complete biographical questionnaires and obtain references, including one from t h e i r school (See Appendix A). They also are required to write a 300 word essay of t h e i r personal l i f e , t h e i r family relationships, t h e i r interests, ambitions and so on.  A l l of this information i s available to  the interviewer p r i o r to the selection interview. It i s necessary during the interview, that the r e c r u i t i n g o f f i c e r obtain information from the candidate on his background his knowledge of current a f f a i r s and the armed forces, and h i s hopes and ambitions i n regard to a career i n the Navy. The interview i s quite structured and closely follows an interview form (See Appendix B) which the o f f i c e r i s required to complete. This interview could be considered an objective-informationobtaining-interview.  Undoubtedly much of the material could be  as well obtained by a questionnaire.  While i n d i v i d u a l r e c r u i -  t i n g o f f i c e r s w i l l have t h e i r own concept of what makes a good naval o f f i c e r , the interview form f a i l s to provide any systematic guide i n t h i s regard.  The interviewer i s required to  rate each of the attributes of the applicant on the interview form as to the strength of interest, d e s i r a b i l i t y or  experience  but he i s not required to use the information to formulate  a  more comprehensive picture of the candidate by delving into the significance of the biographical data.  - 26 II  Description of Interviewers  Typically, r e c r u i t i n g o f f i c e r s are a heterogeneous group of naval o f f i c e r s approaching retirement from the Royal Canadian Navy.  In the main, they have had no formal t r a i n i n g  i n any phase of interviewing techniques.  Three interviewers  were used i n t h i s study. Two of the interviewers were t y p i c a l of r e c r u i t i n g o f f i c e r s .  One was a professional naval education  o f f i c e r , who had a Master of Education degree. a naval aviator with secondary schooling.  The other was  The t h i r d interview-  er was t h i s writer who has had four years of experience i n the Psychology Branch of the Royal Canadian Navy and who has had intensive work i n Naval personnel selection. The s u i t a b i l i t y of such naval o f f i c e r s f o r selection i n terviews i s not as undesirable as i t f i r s t appears to be. The average naval o f f i c e r has had extensive experience i n dealing with personnel i n regards to administration, leadership and welfare.  He also has a thorough knowledge of the R.C.N, and  has some idea as to the type of person who i s l i k e l y to be suitable as a naval o f f i c e r . III  The Sample of Interviewees  The sample of interviewees consisted of 43 male junior and senior matriculants from high schools i n B r i t i s h Columbia. They had an average age of 18.1 years.  They had voluntarily  applied to j o i n the R.C.N, and the majority were primarily i n terested i n having t h e i r university education subsidized by the  - 27 Navy.  Accepted candidates are obliged to serve a minimum of  three years after university graduation, i n the R.G.N. Their range of intelligence and background are representative of the average high school graduate.  Their interests and ambi-  tions are also t y p i c a l . Only those applicants, who had f i r s t passed a medical examination and the academic potential examinations were i n t e r viewed and therefore used i n t h i s study. IV  Method of Conducting the  Interviews  A l l interviews were conducted within a two month period of time i n the Vancouver Naval Recruiting Centre.  Each candi-  date was interviewed twice, once i n a normal face to face i n terview and once over the telephone by a different interviewer. Both interviews were conducted the same day.  In order to can-  cel out any influence of whether the candidate was  interviewed  faee-to-face f i r s t or by the telephone f i r s t , the order of presentation of the interviews was randomized.  As there would  also be an influence on the results of the interview caused by any aptitude the interviewer may have with either the faceto-face interview or the telephone interview, t h e i r order, too, was also randomized.  Table I indicates how  each candidate  was  interviewed. The interviewer who  conducted the telephone interview had  no previous v i s u a l contact with the candidate he was required to interview.  The other members of the r e c r u i t i n g s t a f f  - 28 -  TABLE I I l l u s t r a t i o n of How the Candidates Were Interviewed* Interviewees  Pace to Pace 1st Interviewer •A 1  Total No. of Interviews Interviewer •B' Total No. of Interviews Interviewer •c»  Total No. of Interviews TOTAL  2nd  1,3,5,9,15, 19,23,32,35, 40 10 8,10,20,27, 30,38,42 7 7,13,21,25, 31,34  2,4,12,16, 24,36,41 7 6,17,22,26 29,33,43 7  1st  Telephone 2nd  6,11,22,26 28,29,37 7 2,4,14,18, 19,24,36, 39 8  11,14,18,28, 12,16,17 33,41,42 37,39  7,10,13,27 31,38,43 7 1,15,21,23, 25,32,34,40 8 3,5,8,9,20, 30,35  6  6  6  7  23  20  21  22  * Each number i n the columns i d e n t i f i e s a candidate. Each candidate was interviewed twice: e.g. candidate #2 received his f i r s t interview by telephone with Interviewer B, h i s second face to face with Interviewer A.  - 29 co-operated i n the arrangements f o r the interview.  In the  case of a face-to-face interview the candidate was  conducted  to an o f f i c e by one of the s t a f f where he was introduced to the interviewers. At t h i s point i t i s necessary to mention that due to Naval regulations i t i s necessary to conduct o f f i c e r candidate interviews with two o f f i c e r s present.  In normal practice one  interviewer conducts the interview and i s the main source of questions.  The other interviewer i s supposedly necessary to  prevent any individual interviewer bias against the  candidate.  For the purposes of t h i s study cooperation was received from the r e c r u i t i n g o f f i c e that the second interviewer (who  was  always one of the three interviewers used i n the study) would r e f r a i n from asking questions and i f any questions were asked they would be d i r e c t l y relevant to trend of the dominant i n terviewer's  questionning.  After the interviewers were introduced to the the interview proceded i n a normal fashion.  candidate  The order of  questions and even the type of questions varied l i t t l e between different interviews.  As a l l interviewers were interchanged  with interview method (face-to-face or telephone) t h i s condit i o n was true of the telephone interview as well.  Questions  did not vary between the face-to-face and telephone interview to any appreciable  extent.  At the conclusion of the interview the candidate was that he would be subsequently informed of the decision to 1  told  - 30 recommend him as an o f f i c e r candidate.  I f he had not already  been interviewed over the telephone, he was then informed that he would also receive a similar interview to the one that had just been conducted, by another naval o f f i c e r who would speak to him over the telephone.  The candidate  received no further elaboration of t h i s subject with the exception that t h i s telephone interview was part of h i s select i o n procedure. The procedure f o r the telephone interview was quite similar to the face-to-face interview. One of the r e c r u i t i n g s t a f f l e d the candidate into an o f f i c e with a telephone.  He  informed the candidate that as part of h i s selection procedure f o r h i s application he would be interviewed by a naval o f f i c e r (who was mentioned by name and rank) over the telephone. The s t a f f member then dialed the telephone (which was not hooked up to the public telephone system but was a special i n t e r o f f i c e phone designed f o r t h i s study). He asked f o r the o f f i cer by name and then said that the candidate (who was named) was ready f o r h i s interview. The telephone was then turned over to the candidate and he was l e f t i n the o f f i c e alone. The telephone interviewer, who was i n another o f f i c e inthe same building introduced himself to the candidate and then proceeded with the interview, as already mentioned, i n a very similar fashion to the face-to-face interview. I f the candidate had not already received h i s faee-toface interview he was informed at the end of the telephone  - 31 session that he would be interviewed again by another naval o f f i c e r using a normal interview method.  The candidate was  not informed of his assessment by the telephone  interviewer.  After a candidate had received both h i s telephone and faceto-face interview, the face-to-face and the telephone viewers got together to compare assessment ratings.  interI f the  candidate was recommended by both of the interviewers, the face-to-face interviewer then informed the candidate of h i s decision.  I f there was some disagreement between the assess-  ments by the two interviewers, then both went over t h e i r i n terview forms carefully to determine the source of disagreement.  I f the face-to-faee interviewer agreed that he lacked  the additional information that the telephone interviewer may have obtained, then he made some a l t e r a t i o n to h i s interview form. For the purposes of t h i s study, the o r i g i n a l data was taken down before these alterations were made.  I t was neces-  sary to a l t e r the face-to-face form only because i t was t h i s form that was forwarded to Naval Headquarters.  I f the t e l e -  phone interview form contained c o n f l i c t i n g information with the face-to-face form i t was not changed.  I t was used only  f o r this study. Both interviews were tape recorded.  In the case of the  telephone interview the tape recorder was i n the o f f i c e with the interviewer and hence the candidate would have no knowledge  - 32 that the interview was being recorded.  In the case of the  face-to-face interview only the microphone was v i s i b l e . I t was placed inconspicuously on the desk, although i t i s assumed most of the candidates were aware that the interview was being recorded.  None of the candidates, however, r e -  marked on the microphone or appeared otherwise disturbed by its  presence. V  Reactions of Interviewers and Interviewees over Selection Procedure The applicants were involved i n other r e c r u i t i n g o f f i c e  processing while waiting f o r t h e i r selection interviews. Hence they had l i t t l e opportunity to discuss the r e c r u i t i n g procedures with each other.  As they were a l l strangers to one  another and came from various parts of the Province to the r e c r u i t i n g o f f i c e where they remained f o r only one day before proceeding home again, i t i s assumed that a l l had equal knowledge of the r e c r u i t i n g procedures and therefore there was l i t t l e chance that the results could be contaminated by t h i s source. Although i t was f i r s t thought that some candidates might appear quite skeptical of the telephone interview, there was no evidence that any candidates suspected that there was anything extraordinary about being interviewed over the telephone. By talking informally with the candidates after they had been interviewed, only one candidate claimed to be quite tense when being interviewed over the telephone.  The majority, i n fact,  - 33 stated that they "prefered" the telephone interview as they f e l t that they were not under as mueh scrutiny as they were i n the face-to-face interview and therefore could relax more. There was very l i t t l e difference "between the interviewer's opinion of the face-to-face interview and the telephone i n t e r view.  I t was anticipated that the interviewer might f i n d i t  d i f f i c u l t to communicate and to conduct an interview over the telephone.  This trouble, however, was not encountered.  One  of the interviewers claimed that he did f e e l some uneasiness over the telephone and f e l t that the telephone was "cold" i n comparison to the warmth that could be established i n the faceto-face interview.  I t i s interesting to note that the other  interviewers had previously commented to one another that t h i s o f f i c e r had d i f f i c u l t y i n communicating and expressing h i s ideas i n normal circumstances.  Both of the other interviewers  "preferred" the telephone interview as i t was shorter.  However,  t h i s was r e a l l y quite a minor observation. VI Differences between the Face-to-Face Interview and the Telephone Interview The assessments required i n both the face-to-face i n t e r view and the telephone interview were essentially the same. The main exception was that i n the normal face-to-face interview, assessments are required of clothing, personal appearance and grooming, physical maturity, and bearing.  For obvious reasons,  these were not assessed i n the telephone interview.  Sections i n the interview form (Appendix 33) concerned with m i l i t a r y experience; comments on range of knowledge; understanding of the difference between various components of the Royal Canadian Navy; source of arousal of interest i n the Royal Canadian Navy, f i n a n c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the candidate; the language i n which the interview was conducted, and the assessment of the candidate's biographical essay were not considered i n t h i s study.  Most of these items are of a nature  that they consist only of the recording of objective information.  Comments on range of knowledge was omitted due to the  fact that t h i s section was seldom completed by the interviewers. Assessment of f i n a n c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y was omitted because t h i s section consisted only of determining the candidates debts and size of bank account.  35 CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION I A  Influence of Nonverbal Cues on Ratings of Attributes i n the Interview  Method of Analysis The choice of the telephone as a medium of communication  enables t h i s study to examine three independent variables: (1) v i s u a l cues, (2) olfactory cues, and (3) t a c t i l e kinesthet i c cues.  Cues associated with spoken content, choice of words,  pauses, unusual expression of ideas, tone of voice, and so on, are discernible over the telephone.  The high quality telephone  c i r c u i t used i n t h i s study had l i t t l e influence on the voice reproduction. For the purposes of quantitative analysis each discrete category of the attributes i n the interview form was numerically ranked (Appendix B).  In every case the top rating ( l ) indicates  the most desirable rating. The ratings to the 'comment' sections i n the various areas of the interview form were added by the writer, f o r purposes of analysis and are based on the most common types of comments used by the iiiterviewers.  I t might be argued that these d i f f e r -  entiations i n the 'comment' section are not adequate but as mentioned they are based on interviewer comments, not the writer's judgment.  In the case of the parents' attitude towards enrol-  ment there was also an a l t e r a t i o n made of the rating scale due  - 36 to interviewer habits.  The oral and grammar ratings were  also modified so that each l e v e l had only one rating weight instead of the three sub-levels of strength as indicated on the interview form. O r i g i n a l l y i t was intended to have each interviewer rate the l e v e l of confidence of h i s ratings of each of the a t t r i butes on the interviewer form.  This data would supply further  information i n the c r i t i c a l areas of the selection interview where nonverbal cues were most i n f l u e n t i a l .  Unfortunately,  t h i s was the only area i n which the cooperation of the i n t e r viewers was not obtained and as a result t h i s information  was  not received. The influence of nonverbal cues upon decisions made i n the selection interview was investigated by comparing the ratings from the face-to-face interview with the ratings on the same applicant from the telephone interview.  In a l l , twenty-three  attributes on the interview form were compared.  The  signifi-  cance of the difference between ratings obtained by a face-toface interview and by a telephone interview was measured by the use of Fisher's ' t test f o r small correlated samples.  A  1  two-  t a i l e d test of significance was used f o r t h i s analysis. For f i v e of the attributes the difference between ratings based upon the face-to-face interview from those based on the telephone interview are s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l .  An addi-  t i o n a l f i v e variables are s i g n i f i c a n t l y different at the level.  We w i l l now  examine each of the attributes on the  .05  - 37 interview form to see how the ratings d i f f e r . B. 1.  Results  Hobbies The difference i n the ratings i n t h i s attribute, between  the faee-to-faee interview and the telephone interview, i s s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l .  That i s , the telephone ratings of  hobbies i s consistently and s i g n i f i c a n t l y lower than ratings of hobbies given i n a faee-to-face interview (see Table I I ) . At f i r s t glance i t may be d i f f i c u l t to appreciate why there should be a difference of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r a t t r i b u t e . Hobbies are rated, i n t h i s selection interview, according to strength of i n t e r e s t .  The interviewer determines the applicant's  amount of interest i n h i s hobbies by exploring his range of knowledge and involvement of time and energy with his various hobbies.  Therefore, the interviewer has a considerable amount  of freedom i n deciding what questions he w i l l ask the applicant, concerning h i s hobbies, and what factors w i l l be the basis of his judgment of strength of interest.  This introduces consi-  derable degree of subjectivity to the interviewer's approach. This element of subjectivity seems to be closely related to the influence of nonverbal cues to decision making i n the selection interview.  As the onus f o r decisions becomes more  and more up to the interviewer the more the interviewer comes to r e l y on nonverbal cues.  This observation w i l l become more  evident as other r e s u l t s are examined.  - 38 -  TABLE I I Comparison Between Ratings on "Hobbies"  Level of Rating  Number of Applicants Difference i n Rated Ratings Face-to-Face Telephone 1. 2.  fl  17  21  19  3.  1  7  Mean of Rating  1.54  1.77  0.23  2.65  <.01  TABLE I I I Comparison Between Ratings on "Clubs and Organizations" Number of Applicants Difference i n Rated Rating Face--to-Face Telephone Level of Rating  1. 2. 3. 4.  Mean of Rating  9 9 12  3 9 12  13  19  2.67  3.09  0.42  t  2.48  P  <.05  - 39 2.  Clubs The difference i n ratings on clubs i s s i g n i f i c a n t at the  .01 l e v e l .  That i s , the attribute i s consistently rated lower  over the telephone than i n a normal face-to-face interview (see Table I I I ) . This attribute i s examined i n t h i s selection interview, by discovering what were the various clubs and organizations the applicant belonged to, what were the positions he held i n these organizations, what were h i s duties, and how long his;; membership i n the groups he joined.  Prom t h i s information the i n t e r -  viewer determines the amount of leadership t r a i n i n g and sense of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y the applicant has. One might expect that the existence of c e r t a i n stereotypes of what a leader "looks l i k e " would be a great influence on these assessments. t h i s i s an important  Undoubtedly  contributing f a c t o r .  An examination of the rating descriptions (1-a leader, 2 assumes r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , 3-average interest, 4 - s l i g h t interest) indicates that the categories are quite d i s s i m i l a r .  Therefore  the interviewer i s not required to explore t h i s area to any appreciable degree i n order to make h i s assessments. His judgements are reduced to noting the actual clubs and positions held by the applicant and observing his appearance.  The s i g n i -  ficance of the difference can probably be explained by the fact that the interviewer's common stereotypes of what a leader should "look l i k e " w i l l contribute to the assessment of the attribute.  Over the telephone, interviewers can only base  - 40 t h e i r judgments on the facts obtained from t h e i r questions and are l e s s w i l l i n g to give the applicant a high rating on leadership t r a i n i n g without having seen him. 3.  Sports One might anticipate that the stereotype  athlete might mean  thao  picture of the  the contribution of v i s u a l nonverbal  cues would produce a difference i n ratings between a face-toface interview and a telephone interview that would be highly s i g n i f i c a n t (see Table IV). The fact that there i s no difference i n the ratings i s probably due to the inadequacies of the r a t i n g categories on sports.  The categories are: - 1-keen i n a l l types of sports,  2-active school athlete, 3-usual school p a r t i c i p a t i o n , 4 - l i t t l e interest i n sports.  These categories are so d i s t i n c t that i t  i s r e a l l y not surprising that there i s l i t t l e difference i n the ratings between the types of interviews.  The interviewer, i n  t h i s selection interview, usually covers t h i s question by making a l i s t of sports i n which the applicant participates. 4.  Comments on Social Interest and Sports The lack of differences i n the ratings i n t h i s section,  between the face-to-face interview and the telephone interview i s again due to d i s t i n c t assessment categories  (l-wide or  deep i n t e r e s t s , 2-average interests, 3 - l i t t l e interest (see Table V ) . Invariably the comment section on s o c i a l interests and sports contains only biographical information and no attempt  - 41 TABLE IV Comparison Between Ratings on "Sports"  Level of Rating  Number of Applicants Difference i n Rated Ratings Face-to-Face Telephone 1.  6  6  2.  10  8  3.  21  19  4.  6  10  Mean o f Rating  2.77  2.63  0.14  0.867  S.05  TABLE V Comparison Between Ratings on "Comments on Social Interests and Sports" Differences i n Number of Applicants Ratings Rated Face-to-Face Telephone Level of Rating  Mean of Rating  1.  14  18  2.  2©  12  3.  9  13  1.88  1.88  P  1.00  42 i s made to t i e i n these interests with s u i t a b i l i t y f o r naval leadership or academic p o t e n t i a l . 5•  I n i t i a t i v e and Self-Reliance One might hypothesize that i n i t i a t i v e and s e l f - r e l i a n c e  could be a c r u c i a l area i n the prediction of future behavior. However, a l l that was done i n t h i s area, by the interviewer, was to make a chronological l i s t of jobs held by the applicant and make some quite d i s t i n c t ratings on the basis of the number of jobs held.  There was no interpretation made as to how the  applicant's job t i e d i n with the f i n a n c i a l position of his f a mily, how he managed h i s income or what he gained i n experience from his various types of employment. It i s therefore, not surprising that the difference between the ratings of t h i s section were i n s i g n i f i c a n t (see Table VI), 6,  Knowledge of Current  Affairs  This section i s t r a d i t i o n a l f o r o f f i c e r candidate interviews and many m i l i t a r y personnel appear to consider t h i s area to be c r i t i c a l to future o f f i c e r success.  This section, however, i s  usually covered by the interviewer asking a set of questions f o r a l l candidates, and seldom i s the candidate ever given the opportunity to expound h i s views or his philosophies of the world s i t u a t i o n . With t h i s type of i n f l e x i b l e questioning i t i s not surprising that nonverbal cues do not contribute  anything  to the decisions made on the applicant's knowledge o f current a f f a i r s (see Table VII).  - 43 TABLE VI Comparison Between Ratings on " I n i t i a t i v e and Self Reliance"  Level of Rating  Number of Applicants Differences i n t Rated Ratings Pace-to-Face Telephone 1.  8  2.  22  9 5  9  14  4  5  3. 4. ^Railing  .  2  '  2  2  '  4  °'  2  L«5  p  *•«  TABLE VII Comparison Between Ratings on "Current A f f a i r s Knowledge"  Level of Rating  W  |atin^  Number of Applicants Differences i n t Rated Ratings Pace-to-Pace Telephone 1.  8  2  2.  13  14  3.  13  24  4.  9  3  2  ,  5  2 , 7  °*  2  p  0.336>.05  - 44 7»  Knowledge of General Topics Questions i n this section ranged from the applicant's  knowledge of physics to h i s ideas on free-love.  Given t h i s  much scope, the interviewer r e l i e s on many components of communication other than just "what the applicant says.  The  difference i n ratings of knowledge of general topics, between the face-to-face interview and the telephone interview i s s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l (see Table V I I I ) .  Over the t e l e -  phone the interviewer consistently rated the applicants lower than he did i n face-to-face interviews i n t h i s p a r t i c u l a r item. When exploring t h i s area, i n a face-to-face interview, the interviewer takes nonverbal cues into consideration to determine how f a r he should go into a p a r t i c u l a r aspect of a question.  Por example, the interviewer w i l l look f o r signs of  nervousness (such as increased respiratory rate, blushing, rapid s h i f t i n g of position i n a chair, etc.) to reveal whether he i s i n an area sensitive to the applicant. The reason that the telephone interviewer rates lower on t h i s section cannot be explained from the data obtained i n t h i s study.  There are, at l e a s t , two possible explanations: one i s  that the telephone interviewer, lacking nonverbal cues to guide his questions, i s not as confident i n h i s decisions f o r the strength of r a t i n g he i s required to give on knowledge of general topics.  The other p o s s i b i l i t y i s that the face-to-face  interviewer i s mislead by the applicant's manipulation  of non-  verbal cues, and rates t h i s section higher than he should.  - 45 -  TABLE VIII Comparison Between R a t i n g s on "Knowledge o f G e n e r a l Topics"  Number o f A p p l i c a n t s Differences Rated Rating Face-to-Face Telephone Level of Rating  Mean o f Rating  1.  5  0  2.  23  13  3.  13  26  4.  2  4  2.3  2.8  0.5  in  3.81  t  <.01  -  46  -  It was the overall impression of the interviewers that they were equally confident i n a l l the ratings i n both the face-to-face interview and the telephone interview.  It i s  therefore possible that, i n fact, the applicant can manipul a t e the basis f o r the interviewer's decisions by the i n f l u ence of nonverbal cues. 8.  Knowledge of the Armed Forces In t h i s section certain stock questions are usually  asked of a l l candidates.  The important difference between  t h i s section and the knowledge of current a f f a i r s section i s that i t i s quite probable that the candidate also f e e l s i t i s important that at least i t appears as i f he knows something of the job he i s getting i n t o .  In other words, the average  applicant f o r the o f f i c e r candidate selection interview does not consider i t very c r u c i a l that he know something of current a f f a i r s , even though h i s interviewer may.  However, the a p p l i -  cant, i f he does not already have a good knowledge of the armed forces, w i l l consider i t important to impress the i n t e r viewer that he has adequately prepared himself f o r h i s a p p l i cation.  The success he has i n convincing the interviewer i s  probably a function of his a b i l i t y to camouflague any ignorance on his part with f a c i a l expression and other related methods. The difference i n ratings of knowledge of the armed forces between the face-to-face interview and the telephone interview i s s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l (see Table IX).  - 47 -  TABLE IX Comparison Between Ratings on "Armed Forces Knowledge" Number of Applicants Differences i n t Rated Rating Face-to-Faee Telephone Level of Rating  Mean of Rating  1.  12  5  2.  11  15  3.  11  15  4.  9  8  2.4  2.6  0.2  1.97  < .05  - 48 The telephone interviewer rates the applicant's knowledge of the armed forces consistently lower.  He obviously does not  f e e l , after asking almost the same questions as asked by the face-to-face interviewer, that the applicants' knowledge of the armed forces i s as high as rated by the face-to-face i n t e r viewer. 9.  Interest i n Enrolment The difference i n ratings between the face-to-face i n t e r -  viewer and the telephone interviewer on t h i s variable i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher f o r the face-to-face interviewer at the .01 l e v e l (see Table X). Here again there i s probably a serious attempt on the applicant's part to "look" very interested i n joining the Navy. The telephone interviewer, not having access to these v i s u a l nonverbal cues, i s l i k e l y to assess a candidate's  interest lower  than does the face-to-face interviewer. 10.  Parents' Attitude to Enrolment This section i s usually covered by the interviewer asking  a simple question as to whether the candidates parents' are happy with h i s decision to j o i n the Navy (see Table X I ) . With such an objective question as t h i s i t i s not s u r p r i sing that there i s no difference i n the ratings between the faeeto-face interview and the telephone interview. 11.  Object of Enrolment In the face-to-face interview the applicant i s l i k e l y to be  rated as "interested i n a Naval career" and i n the telephone  - 49 -  TABLE X Comparison Between Ratings on "Interest i n Enrolment" Number of Applicants Differences i n t Rated Rating Face-to-Face Telephone Level of Rating  1. 2. 3.  Mean of Rating  18 23 2 1.6  p  9 29 5 1.9  0.3  2.91 <.01  TABLE XI Comparison Between Ratings on "Parents Attitude to Enrolment" Number of Applicants Differences i n Rated Rating Paee-to-Face Telephone Level of Rating  Mean of Rating  1.  35  2.  5  3.  3  34 3 6  1.3  1.4  0.1  1.43  >.05  50 interview the interviewer w i l l probably f e e l that the candidate i s mainly interested i n the Navy because h i s university educat i o n w i l l be subsidized (see Table XII),  Since i t i s common  knowledge i n the armed forces that only a small proportion of o f f i c e r candidates go beyond t h e i r required three years of service after graduation from university i t would appear that the telephone interviewer obtains a more v a l i d rating on object of enrolment. The difference i n ratings i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher f o r the face-to-face interviewer i n comparison to the telephone i n t e r viewer at the ,05 l e v e l . The reason that i t i s higher i s probably a function of the applicant's a b i l i t y to manipulate v i s u a l nonverbal cues so that he "looks" interested i n a naval career. 12. and 13.  Mental Maturity and Emotional Maturity  It i s hard to reconcile, at f i r s t glance, why there should be a s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the ratings of emotional maturity and not mental maturity (see Table XIII). This can probably be explained by the fact that the mental maturity rating i s based on some d e f i n i t e areas that have been covered by the interview (such as types of employment, p a r t i c i pation i n s o c i a l organizations and knowledge of current a f f a i r s ) . Most people, r i g h t l y or wrongly, have some preconceived notions as to what constitutes mental maturity.  However, there i s very  l i t t l e i n the interview that gives the interviewer any indication of the applicant's emotional maturity.  This, coupled with the  TABLE  XII  Comparison Between Ratings on "Object o f Enrolment"  Level of Rating  Number o f A p p l i c a n t s D i f f e r e n c e s i n t Rated Ratings Face-to-Face Telephone 1.  31  2.  4  8  3.  6  14  4.  2  2  1.5  2.0  Mean o f Rating  p  19  0.5  2.53 <.05  •  TABLE X I I I Comparison o f Ratings on "Mental M a t u r i t y "  Level of Rating  Number o f A p p l i c a n t s D i f f e r e n c e s i n t Rated Ratings Tej.epnone 1. Face-to-race <L<L 20 2. 26 1 3.  P  h  2  Mean o f Rating  1.5  1.7  0.2  1.73 ->'.05  0.3  3.79 <.01  Comparison o f Ratings on "Emotional M a t u r i t y " Level of Rating  Mean o f Rating  1.  28  16  2.  15  14  3.  0  3  1.5  1.2  - 52 fact, that not many laymen have any r e a l conception of an emotionally mature person explains why there i s a different basis f o r rating mental and emotional maturity. As mental maturity i s based on some quite objective f a c tors and due to the fact that the assessment are quite d i s t i n c t (l-above average maturity, 2-average maturity, 3-immature) means that the interviewer i s not required to explore the basis f o r h i s judgments very throughly.  Therefore, nonverbal  cues do not contribute much to these ratings and as a result there i s not s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the ratings of the face-to-face interview and the telephone interview. The ratings of emotional maturity, however, aire based on much more subjective factors than the ratings of mental maturity.  Physical appearance i s probably a strong contributing  factor to the ratings of emotional maturity.  The face-to-face  interviewer rates emotional maturity s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than does the telephone interviewer.  The telephone interviewer,  not having v i s u a l contact-with the applicant, bases h i s judgment of emotional maturity on either different factors or l e s s factors than does the face-to-face interviewer.  On the  basis of the limited factors he uses, he does not f e e l that the applicant i s as emotionally mature as does the face-to-face interviewer. 14.  Comments on Maturity This section w i l l include any comments on the applicant's  emotional and mental maturity.  As the interviewer obtains a  - 53 d i f f e r e n t impression of the applicant's emotional maturity over the telephone than he does i n a face-to-face interview i t can he anticipated that the interviewer w i l l also note different impressions  i n the comments on maturity  (see Table  xrv). 15.  Personality, 16. Confidence. 17. Behavior. of Answering and 19. Comments on Personality  18. Manners  The discussion of these attributes i s combined due to the fact that they a l l have one characteristic i n common. sults indicate that the rating categories are not  The re-  appropirate  i n t h i s interviewing situation, f o r the purposes of d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g amongst the applicants (Appendix "B* and Table XV).  It  stands to reason that most applicants w i l l be rated as pleasant, well mannered and answers questions f r e e l y .  As the  candidate  has come on his own free w i l l i t i s doubtful that he w i l l be reluctant to answer questions or w i l l be arrogant towards the interviewer. The interview i s just not intensive enough to ascertain whether the candidate i s authorative or assured i n confidence. However, there i s a s i g n i f i c a n t difference between the face-to-face interview and the telephone interview i n the ratings f o r "behavior" and "manner of answering" (Table XV). In both eases the face-to-face interviewer rates them s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher (at .05 l e v e l ) than does the telephone i n t e r viewer. This can probably be explained by the fact that with  - 54 -  TABLE XIY Comparison Between Ratings on "Comments on Maturity" Number of Applicants Difference i n t Rated Ratings Face-to-Face Telephone Level of Rating  Mean of Rating  , l .  9  r o  2.  20  14  3.  14  21  4.  0  0  2.1  2.4  Q  0.3  2.96 <.01  TABLE XV Comparison Between Ratings on "Personality" Number of Applicants Differences i n t Rated Ratings Face-to-Face Telephone Level of Rating  1. 2. 3. 4. 5.  Mean of Rating  9 2 22 5 5  5 3 26 7 2  2.9  3.0  0.1  p  0.246  > .05  1.21  ?.05  1.99  < .05  Comparison Between Ratings on "Confidence"  Level of Rating  1. 2. 3. 4. 5.  Mean of Rating  17 12 13 1  0  2.0  11 15 13 • 2 2 2.3  0.3  Comparison Between Ratings on "Behavior" Level of Rating  1. 2. 3. 4.  Mean of Rating  40 3 0 0  35 7 0 1  1.1  1.2  0.1  Comparison Between Ratings on "Manner of Answering" Level of Rating  1. 2. 3. 4.  Mean of Rating  40 3 0 0  37 4 1 1  1.1  1.2  0.1  1.99  <.05  Comparison Between Ratings on "Comments on Personality" Level of Rating Mean of Rating  1. 2. 3.  4.  16 18 8 1 1.9  14 18 7 4 2.0  0.1  0.684  >.05  - 56 n o n v e r b a l cues t h e i n t e r v i e w e r i s impressed w i t h t h e c a n d i d a t e and  h e n c e more w i l l i n g t o r a t e t h e c a n d i d a t e h i g h e r  on t h e s e  s e c t i o n s t h a n i s t h e i n t e r v i e w e r who d o e s n o t h a v e a c c e s s t o these  cues. One m i g h t e x p e c t t h a t n o n v e r b a l c u e s w o u l d h a v e  greatest tics.  contribution i n the ratings of personal  This i s probably true.  their  characteris-  However, t h e i n a d e q u a c y o f t h e  s e l e c t i o n i n t e r v i e w chosen f o r t h i s study prevents an examinat i o n o f such a 20.  hypothesis.  Power o f E x p r e s s i o n . Power o f E x p r e s s i o n .  21.  Grammar and 22.  Comments o n  As t h e s e a t t r i b u t e s d e a l e n t i r e l y w i t h v e r b a l t i o n i n respect  to c l a r i t y of expression  communica-  and grammar i t i s n o t  s u r p r i s i n g t o f i n d t h a t n o n v e r b a l c u e s do n o t c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e r a t i n g s o f these a t t r i b u t e s (see Table X V I ) . 23.  P i n a l Assessment  Ratings  At t h e c o n c l u s i o n  of the interview the interviewer i s r e -  q u i r e d t o r a t e on a s i x p o i n t s c a l e , t h e degree o f s u i t a b i l i t y of the applicant.  The c a t e g o r i e s  of distinction of this  judg-  ment a r e q u i t e d i f f e r e n t a n d t h e r e i s a t e n d e n c y t o r a t e t h e c a n d i d a t e as average o r a l i t t l e ception being Therefore,  above a v e r a g e .  The o n l y e x -  a p p l i c a n t s who a r e much above o r b e l o w a v e r a g e .  the interviewer i s not required, nor f e e l s i t  necessary, t o explore  t h e r e a s o n f o r h i s r a t i n g on t h e f i n a l  assessment t o o e x t e n s i v e l y .  Therefore the c o n t r i b u t i o n o f  n o n v e r b a l c u e s i s m i n i m a l and t h e r e  i s no s i g n i f i c a n t  ence i n t h e r a t i n g s between t h e f a c e - t o - f a c e  differ-  i n t e r v i e w and t h e  TABLE XVI Comparison of Ratings on "Power of Expression" Humber of Applicants Differences i n t Rated Ratings Pace--to-Pace Telephone Level of Rating  1. 2.  10  14  22  1  3. 4.  10  5.  0  3 1  2.1  2.1  Mean of Rating  1  P  5 10  0.684 >.05  Comparison of Ratings on "Grammar" Level of Rating  1. 2. 3. 4.  Mean of Rating  10 26 7 0  11 22 9 1  1.9  2.0  0.1  0.353 7-05  Comparison of Ratings on "Comments on Power of Expression" Level of Rating  1. 2. 3. 4.  Mean of Rating  7 22 10 4 2.3  9 17 13 4 2.3  0  0.170 >.05  - 58 telephone interview (see Table XVII). It i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that despite the contribution of nonverbal cues to certain of the decisions made i n the i n terview, the overall decision of the interviewer i s not i n f l u enced by nonverbal cues.  This observation w i l l be discussed  further i n the next chapter. II A.  Influence of Physical Appearance Upon Ratings of Attributes  Method of Analysis In the selection interview each applicant was rated on  his physical appearance and bearing.  The d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n r e -  quired i s : 1-impressive, 2-above average, 3-average and 4-poor. It has often been expressed that a selection interviewer can ignore the personal appearance of an applicant and  assess  him on his true p o t e n t i a l . This opinion can be countered with the argument that not only may  the personal appearance of an  applicant r e f l e c t some important aspects of h i s personality, but as well i t i s impossible to ignore the influence on an applicant's appearance.  Every interviewer has his personal  tastes i n dress aifigrooming habits. doubtedly aware of how  Every interviewer i s un-  a t t r a c t i v e a female applicant may  appear.  To i n f e r that the s e l e c t i o n interviewer with strong l i k e s (the sex appeal of a female applicant) or d i s l i k e s (long h a i r s t y l i n g or flashy clothes of the male applicant) will'basechis assessments only on independent evidence i s an area that needs to be explored further.  -59  -  TABLE XVII Comparison of F i n a l Assessment Ratings Number of Applicants Differences i n t Rated Ratings Face--to-Face Telephone Level of Rating  Mean of Rating  1.  7  2.  15  15  3.  11  11  4.  4  9  5.  2  3  6.  3  0  4.17  p  4  4.10  0.07  0.335 >.05  - 60 To i n v e s t i g a t e the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f p h y s i c a l appearanee to other a t t r i b u t e s , the r a t i n g s o f p h y s i c a l appearance and b e a r i n g obtained i n the face-to-face i n t e r v i e w were compared to the r a t i n g of main s e c t i o n s o f the i n t e r v i e w form from both the face-to-face i n t e r v i e w and the telephone i n t e r v i e w .  The  average r a t i n g o f a main s e c t i o n represents the mean score f o r a l l o f the a t t r i b u t e s i n that s e c t i o n .  For example the main  s e c t i o n " S o c i a l I n t e r e s t s and S p o r t s " i n c l u d e s r a t i n g s on h o b b i e s , c l u b s and o r g a n i z a t i o n s , s p o r t s and comments on i n t e r ests".  These i n d i v i d u a l r a t i n g s , as obtained from the face-to  face i n t e r v i e w and the telephone i n t e r v i e w were averaged f o r each a p p l i c a n t f o r a mean o f the whole s e c t i o n . The r e l a t i o n s h i p of the p h y s i c a l appearance and the assessment r a t i n g was a l s o i n v e s t i g a t e d .  final  T h i s was done by  comparing the p h y s i c a l appearance and b e a r i n g r a t i n g as obtained from the faee-to-face i n t e r v i e w with the f i n a l assessment r a t i n g s i n both the face-to-face i n t e r v i e w and i n the telephone interview.  The f i n a l assessment r a t i n g i s a r a t i n g based on  the i n t e r v i e w e r ' s  i m p r e s s i o n o f how the a p p l i c a n t compares w i t h  the average o f f i c e r c a n d i d a t e . T h i s r a t i n g would i n v o l v e a comparison of p h y s i c a l appearance o f the candidates as w e l l as other f a c t o r s . if  However,  there i s a r e l a t i o n s h i p between the p h y s i c a l appearance and  b e a r i n g r a t i n g to the face-to-face f i n a l assessment r a t i n g , and not a c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p t o the telephone i n t e r v i e w f i n a l a s s e s s ment r a t i n g , then i n f a c t , the p h y s i c a l appearance of the c a n d i d a t e does b i a s the assessment of other a t t r i b u t e s .  - 61 The relationship of the physical appearance and bearing rating with the ratings of other attributes was measured by Pearson's product moment c o e f f i c i e n t of correlation.  The  significance of the differences i n the c o e f f i c i e n t s of correl a t i o n was measured by Fisher's t f o r differences i n correlat i o n computed from the same population (Walker and Lev, 1953). B.  Results 1.  Influence on F i n a l Assessment Rating  The f i n a l assessment rating i n the face-to-face interview p o s i t i v e l y correlated  (r = +.59) with ratings of physical  appearance and bearing.  This correlation i s s i g n i f i c a n t at  the .01 l e v e l of confidence (see Table. XVIII). This correlation between the f i n a l assessment rating i n the telephone interview and. the physical appearance rating (r = -.16) i s not s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l of confidence.  This i s an interesting finding, especially  when taken into consideration  that there i s no s i g n i f i c a n t  difference i n the f i n a l assessment rating between the two interviews (see Table XVII). A comparison of the two c o e f f i c i e n t s of correlation i n dicates a s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the influence of physical appearance on the two interviews (^<.05). In other words, the physical appearance of a candidate influences the f i n a l assessment r a t i n g i n a face-to-faee interview (and not i n the telephone interview).  Thus, the more impressive the candidate  - 62 -  TABLE XVIII Comparison of F i n a l Assessment Rating and Appearanee  Comparison  r  Face-to-Face to Appearance +.59  p  Difference  Telephone to Appearance  -.16  .01) ( .05)  Face-to-Face to Telephone  +.70  .01  .75  t  2.17  p  <.05  - 63 the more l i k e l y he i s to he rated highly, i n h i s f i n a l ment.  Conversely the l e s s impressive,  assess-  the l e s s l i k e l y are h i s  chances f o r a favorable f i n a l assessment r a t i n g . 2.  Influence of Ratings of Social Interests  The ratings on hobbies, clubs and organizations,  sports,  and comments on interests were averaged to form the d i s t r i b u t i o n of scores f o r the main section of Social Interests and Sports.  These ratings were compared with the ratings of phy-  s i c a l appearance and bearing to determine the degree of r e l a tionship.  Both the relationship of the ratings of s o c i a l  interests and Sports i n the face-to-face interview and the telephone interview are s i g n i f i c a n t l y correlated (.05 l e v e l ) with the ratings of physical appearance and bearing  (see Table  XIX). In view of the fact that the difference i n the degree of relationship between the face-to-face interview and the t e l e phone interview with the appearance of the applicant i s not s i g n i f i c a n t , i t i s evident that physical appearance of the applicant does not influence the o v e r a l l ratings of s o c i a l interests and sports.  The fact that each of the ratings have  approximately the same degree of correlation to the rating of physical appearance and bearing must be due to the fact that each are related to some other common variable. 3.  Influence on Ratings of Motivation  The ratings of motivation represent  the mean of ratings  on "Interest i n Enrolment" and "Object of Enrolment".  The r a -  t i n g of motivation i n the face-to-face interview and the  64 -  TABLE XIX Comparison of Social Interests Ratings and Appearance  Comparison  r  P  Faee-to-Eace to Appearance  +.35  .05)  Telephone to Appearance  +.33  .05J  Face-to-Face to Telephone  +.94  .01  Difference  t  P  .02  0.377  >.05  -  65  -  telephone i n t e r v i e w were compared to the p h y s i c a l appearance and h e a r i n g r a t i n g to determine the degree o f r e l a t i o n s h i p . The r e l a t i o n s h i p between the face-to-face r a t i n g o f m o t i v a t i o n and the p h y s i c a l appearance r a t i n g i s not s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l .  The r e l a t i o n s h i p between the telephone r a t i n g o f  m o t i v a t i o n and p h y s i c a l appearance r a t i n g i s j u s t at the .05 l e v e l  (See Table XX).  significant  This r e l a t i o n s h i p i s  likely  to be i n c i d e n t a l and due to another v a r i a b l e . As there i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f r a t i n g s o f m o t i v a t i o n i n the face-to-face  inter-  view and the telephone i n t e r v i e w with the p h y s i c a l appearance r a t i n g , i t i s evident that the p h y s i c a l appearance o f an a p p l i cant i s independent o f the o v e r a l l r a t i n g of m o t i v a t i o n i n this selection 3.  interview.  Influence on Ratings o f Range o f Knowledge  The r a t i n g s o f range of knowledge are a mean o f the r a t i n g s o f "Knowledge o f Current A f f a i r s , Knowledge of General T o p i c s and Knowledge o f Armed F o r c e s " .  These r a t i n g s o f the f a c e -  to face i n t e r v i e w and the telephone i n t e r v i e w were compared to the r a t i n g s of p h y s i c a l appearance and b e a r i n g to determine t h e i r degree o f r e l a t i o n s h i p .  Both r a t i n g s are s i g n i f i c a n t l y  c o r r e l a t e d (.01 l e v e l ) w i t h the r a t i n g s o f p h y s i c a l appearance and b e a r i n g (See Table  XXI).  However, there i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n the degree of t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p .  Therefore there i s probably some other  common v a r i a b l e than the p h y s i c a l appearance that e x p l a i n s this relationship.  It  would be q u i t e impossible t h a t there  - 66 TABLE XX Comparison of Motivation Ratings and Appearance  Comparison  Difference  r  P  Face-to-Face to Appearance  +.28  Telephone to Appearance  +.32  .05) ( ( .05)  Face-to-Face to Telephone  +.76  .01  .04  t  P  0.386  .05  TABLE XXI Comparison of Range of Knowledge Ratings and Appearance  r  P  Face-to-face to Appearance  +.45  .01)  Telephone to Appearance  +.42  .01)  Face-to-Face to Telephone  +.64  .01  Comparison  Difference  [  0.03  t  P  0.250  . >.05  - 67 could be r e a l relationship between rating of range of knowledge over the telephone and the physical appearance of the applicant. 4.  Influence on Ratings of Personal Characteristics  The r a t i n g of personal characteristics i s the mean of ratings on mental maturity, emotional maturity, personality, confidence, behavior, and manner of answering.  The reason for  averaging a l l of these ratings i s that these ratings are a l l completed at the same stage by the interviewers i n the study. This takes place near the end of the interview a f t e r the questions from the interviewer have ceased, and i s based on the impression the interviewer has formed of the applicant during the interview. One might expect that there should be a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r ence between the relationship of physical appearance to the ratings i n the telephone interview and the face-to-face i n t e r view.  The fact that the difference i n the relationship i s not  s i g n i f i c a n t i s due to the inadequate d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of assessment of these variables (see Table XXII)• The interviewer does not have the information and i s not required to make any intensive assessment of the applicant's personality i n the selection interview chosen f o r t h i s study. (Since the ' t ' value approaches significance there i s some indication of the influence of appearance which might be expected here).  - 68 -  TABLE XXII Comparison of Personal Characteristic Ratings and Appearance  Comparison  r  p  Difference  Face-to-Face to Appearance  +.63  .01  )  Telephone to Appearance  +.41  .01  )  Eace-to-Face to Telephone  +.60  .01  I  .22  t  1.94  p  >.05  - 69 III Influence of Nonverbal Cues on Duration of Speaking Times i n the Selection Interview A.  Method of Analysis Just as nonverbal cues influence the assessments i n the  selection interview they should bear some relationship to the structure of verbal communication.  Anderson's (i960) study  was discussed i n Chapter II i n regard to speaking times and decision making i n the selection interview. tions that Anderson raised was why  One of the ques-  there wasta direct r e l a t i o n -  ship between the length of speaking time of interviewers and t h e i r decision to accept the applicant.  It i s hoped that by  examining some of the nonverbal aspects of communication some l i g h t might be shed on the problem.  I t i s possible, f o r ex-  ample, that the reason the interviewer talks more i n the faceto-face interview i s that he becomes preoccupied with attempts to int erpret the nonverbal reactions of the applicant to the questions of the interviewer.  The applicant's become aware  of t h i s interest of the interviewer and u t i l i z e nonverbal cues to mislead the interviewer.  The candidate's who  are  most apt i n t h e i r a b i l i t y , to use these cues are therefore successful i n being accepted by the interviewer. To measure the lengths of speaking times i n the interview the writer compared a l l the tape recordings of the face-toface and telephone interviews.  This was done by starting one  stop watch at the beginning of the interview and stopping i t at the end of the interview.  This measured " t o t a l time".  Another stop watch timed interviewer speech and a t h i r d stop  - 70 watch timed the speaking time of the candidates.  By subtrac-  ting interviewer speech plus candidate speech from the t o t a l time, the length of accumulated silence was determined. A l l times were taken to the minute. Anderson (i960) compared absolute speaking times between a group of accepted applicants and rejected applicants.  In  t h i s study i t would not be feasible to compare absolute speaking times.  The average length of the face-to-face i n t e r -  view was 51.6 minutes and the average length of the telephone interview was 36.4 minutes.  In order to compare differences  i n speaking times between the face-to-face and the telephone interview i t i s necessary to convert these times into percentages of t o t a l time of the p a r t i c u l a r interview. B. 1.  Results  Interviewer Speaking Times There was a difference of 47° i n time taken by the i n t e r -  viewer between the telephone and face-to-face interview. This difference was found to be s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l of confidence (see Table XXIII).  In other words i n the face-to-face  interview the interviewer talks s i g n i f i c a n t l y more than he does i n the telephone interview. One might expect these differences i n interviewer speech to be i n the opposite d i r e c t i o n .  The interviewer i n the t e l e -  phone s i t u a t i o n who i s unable to u t i l i z e nonverbal cues might conceivably spend more time talking than the face-to-face i n terviewer.  - 71 -  TABLE XXIII Comparison of Speaking Times i n the Interviews  Pace-Face  Telephone  Total Time (absolute)  51.6  36.4  i» of Time taken by Interviewer  32.5  28.5  II  n  II  it  37.7  42.5  it  it  29.8  29.1  Differences  t  15.2 mins. 7.70 4.0 - 4.8  <*.01  3.31 <.©1 2.94  <.01  0.83  >.05  Applicant Silence  0.7  72 The fact that he does not could possibly be explained by the fact that the faee-to-face interviewer becomes so absorbed i n examining the various nonverbal reactions of the applicant that he spends more time talking i n the interview, to arouse these reactions, than i s necessary i n order to make a decision i n the ratings of the attributes of the applicant.  This  explanation does hold some virtue i n l i g h t of the fact that there i s very l i t t l e difference between the f i n a l assessment ratings of the face-to-face interview ani'the telephone i n t e r view. 2.  Applicant Speaking Times. There was a difference of 4.8$ i n time taken up by the  applicant i n the face-to-face interview and the telephone i n terview. confidence  This difference i s s i g n i f i c a n t at the .01 l e v e l of (see Table XXIII).  This indicates that the applicant talks consistently more i n the telephone interview.  I t follows that i f the amount the  interviewer talks i s greater i n the face-to-face interview and the length of accumulated silenee i s the same (which we w i l l f i n d i s the case) then the applicant w i l l talk more i n the telephone interview.  The reason f o r t h i s can probably be  explained by the fact that when the interviewer lacks nonverbal cues he has to r e l y on those cues associated with verbal communication.  And therefore he allows the applicant to talk  more i n the s i t u a t i o n than he would i n a normal face-to-face interview.  - 73 3»  Duration of Accumulated Silence The difference between the duration of silence i n the  two interviews was not s i g n i f i c a n t at the .05 l e v e l Table XXVTII).  Therefore,  (See  the length of accumulated silence  i s not influenced by nonverbal cues.  Anderson (i960) also  found the length of accumulated silence, remains constant even i n the face of differences i n decisions as to whether the applicant should be accepted or rejected.  The length of  accumulated silence, i n the selection interview, does not therefore, appear to be related to decision making.  - 74 CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS A.  SUMMARY This study examined the contribution of nonverbal cues  to decision making i n the selection interview.  A sample of  forty-three high school graduates were interviewed by three naval o f f i c e r s of widely different backgrounds.  Each candidate  was interviewed twiee, onee i n a face-to-face interview, and once over the telephone i n which the same information was sought.  The interviewers were interchanged  with interview me-  thods and interviewer order of presentation was randomized. The data were analyzed by comparing the differences i n ratings obtained i n the face-to-face interview and ratings obtained i n the telephone interview f o r the same subjects. The relationship between the physical appearance of the applicant and decisions made i n other areas of the interview was also examined by comparing the ratings of the applicant's physical appearance with the ratings of other attributes of the applicant. The influence of nonverbal cues on the duration of speaking times i n the selection interview was also examined. The differences i n percentage of interviewer and applicant speaking time and of accumulated silence of the t o t a l interview time were compared between the face-to-face interview and the t e l e phone interview.  - 75 B.  CONCLUSIONS  1.  In t h i s selection interview nonverbal cues influenced the  interviewers decision of 10 of the 23 attributes assessed i n the interview. 2.  The f i n a l assessment rating i s biased by the physical  appearance of the applicant. 3.  The interviewer talks a higher percentage of time i n the  face-to-face interview than he does over the telephone.  The  applicant talks f o r a higher percentage of time over the t e l e phone.  The accumulated length of silence periods are the same  for both the telephone, interview and the face-to-face interview. The t o t a l duration of the face-to-face interview i s longer than the telephone interview. These conclusions support the hypotheses stated i n Chapter II with the exception that the physical appearance of the applicant influences only the f i n a l assessment rating and not ratings on other attributes. C  IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESULTS In the selection interview, the decisions that w i l l be  made w i l l be influenced by nonverbal cues.  The appearance of  the applicant, h i s gestures and bodily movements, and reaction of his autonomic nervous system (such as blushing or paling) appear to affect the assessments i n the interview. I f t h i s i s so, then how can the interviewer v a l i d l y u t i l i z e and control contributions of nonverbal cues.  Quite ob-  viously much more research i s necessary before any answer  - 76 to t h i s question can be attempted. to examine t h i s area.  I t w i l l be most d i f f i c u l t  Applicants.; i n selection interviews  w i l l continue to generate wide v a r i e t i e s of nonverbal cues that are quite beyond the control of the interviewer. The next step f o r research i n t h i s area i s to examine the contribution of nonverbal cues by some of the other methods to isolate some of the variables.  In t h i s manner i t might be  possible to determine i f nonverbal cues contribute more to interviewer's decision, than they do to the applicant's a b i l i t y to manipulate the interview.  By further r e s t r i c i n g the  nonverbal cues' available to the interviewer a comparison of the contribution of i n d i v i d u a l nonverbal cues could be examined to determine t h e i r influence on decision making i n the selection interview. Further research should be done to determine the influence of nonverbal cues on the v a l i d i t y of decision making i n select i o n interview. Only when t h i s research i s completed w i l l there be some understanding of the contribution of nonverbal communication to decision making i n the selection interview.  - 77 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1.  Anderson, C.W. The r e l a t i o n between speaking times and decision i n the employment interview. J . AppI. Psychol.. I960, 44, 267-268.  2.  Barbara, Dominck. The value of nonverbal communication i n personality understanding. J . Nerv. Ment. P i s . 1956, 123, 286-291.  3.  Bellows, Roger, Employment psychology; the interview. New York, Rinehart & Co., 1954.  4.  Bingham, W.V., Moore, B.V. and Gustad, New York, Harper Row, 1959.  5.  Blau, Sidney. An ear f o r an eye: sensory compensation and judgments of affect by b l i n d . In Joel Davitz (ed) The Communication of Emotional Meaning. New York, McGraw, H i l l , 1964.  6.  Cameron, D.E., Dltraconceptual Communication. In P.A. Hoch and J . Zubin (eds) Psychopathology of Communication. New York, Grune and Stratton, 1958, 1727.  7.  Chappie, E.D. The interaction chronograph: i t s evolution and present application. Personnel. 1949, 25, 295307.  8.  Davitz, Joel R. The communication of emotional meaning. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1964.  9.  English, H.B. and English, A.C. A comprehensive dictionary of psychological and psychoanalytical terms. New York, Longmans, Green, 1958.  How to interview.  10. Fear, R.A. The evaluation interview: - predicting .job performance i n business and industry. New York, McgrawH i l l , 1958. 11.  Goldman-Eisler, F. The measurement of time sequences i n conversational behavior. B r i t . J . Psychol.. 1951, 42, 355-362.  12.  Goldman-Eisler, F. Individual differences between i n t e r viewers and t h e i r effect on interviewees* conversat i o n a l behavior. . J . Ment. S c i . . 1952, 98, 660-670.  13.  Grossack, Martin. Cues, expectations and f i r s t impressions. J. Psychol.. 1953, 35, 245-252.  - 78 14.  Guilford, J.P. Fundamental s t a t i s t i c s i n psychology education. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1956.  15.  Haire, M. and Grunes, W.F. Perceptual defenses: Processes protecting an organized perception of another personality. Hum. Rel., 1950, 3, 403-412.  16.  Horowitz, M., Lyons, J . , and Perlmutter, H. Induction of forces i n discussion groups. Hum. Rel.. 1951, 4, 57-76.  17.  Hyman, H., Feldman, J.J., et a l . Interviewing i n s o c i a l research. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1954.  18.  Kahn, R.L. and Cannell, C E . The dynamics of interviewing. New York, John Wiley and Sons, 1957.  19.  Kanfer, F.H. Verbal rate, eyeblink and content i n structured psychiatric interviews. J . Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. I960, 61, 341-347.  20.  Kanfer, F.H., P h i l l i p s , Jeanne S., Matarazzo, Joseph D., and Saslow, George. Experimental modification of interviewer content i n standardized interviews. J . Consult. Psychol.. I960, 24, 528-536.  21.  Kephart, Newell C. The employment interview i n industry Toronto, McGraw-Hill, 1952.  22.  Landis, C. The interpretations of f a c i a l expression i n emotion. J . Gen. Psychol.. 1929, 2, 59-72.  23.  Maier, Norman R. 1958.  24.  Matarazzo, J.D., Saslow, G. et a l . S t a b i l i t y and modifiab i l i t y of personality patterns during a standardized interview. In P.A. Hoch and J . Zubin (eds.) Psychopathology of Communication. New York, Gruen and Stratton, 1958.  25.  McKeachie, W.J. L i p s t i c k as a determiner of f i r s t impressions of personality. J . Soc. Psychol.. 1952, 36, 241-244.  26.  M i l l e r , R.E., Murphy, J.V., and Mursky, I.A. Nonverbal communication of a f f e c t . J . C l i n . Psychol.. 1959, 15, 155-158.  27.  Reik, T. Listening with the t h i r d ear. Straus, 1949.  The appraisal interview.  and  New York, Wiley,  New York, Rarrar  - 79 28.  Rice, S. Contagious bias i n the interview: a methodol o g i c a l note. Amer. J . Sociol.. 1929, 35, 420-423.  29.  Rogers, Carl R., and Roethlisberger, E.J. Barriers and gateways to communication. Harv. Bus. Rev.. 1952, 30, 46-52.  30.  Ruesch, J . Nonverbal language and therapy. 1955, 18, 323-330.  31.  Ruesch, J . and Kees, W. Nonverbal communication. University of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1956.  32.  Sydiaha, Daniel, Bales' interaction process analysis of personnel selection interviews. J . Appl. Psychol.. 1961, 45 (1), 393-401.  33.  Thornton, G.R., The effect upon judgments of personality t r a i t s varying a single factor i n a photograph. J . Soc. Psych.. 1943, 18, 127-148.  34.  Thornton, G-.R. The effect of wearing glasses upon the judgments of personality t r a i t s of persons seen b r i e f l y . J . appl. Psychol.. 1944, 28, 203-207. Walker, H.M., and Lev, J . York, Holt, 1953.  36.  Psychiatry.  S t a t i s t i c a l inference.  Berkeley,  New  Webster, E.C. Decision making i n the employment interview. Montreal, Eagle, 1964.  - 80 APPENDIX A C O N F I D E N T I A L  ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL'S CONFIDENTIAL REPORT 1. NAME OF STUDENT (Please P r i n t ) in Full  (Surname)  (Given Names)  applicant f o r an  Naval Officer Cadetship.  2. Please check (^) your opinion of t h i s student with regard to» Exellent (a) (b) (o) (d) (e) {!') (g)  Very Good  Good  Fair  Poor  Learning A b i l i t y Industry and Application Ambition and Motivation Integrity Dependability Emotional S t a b i l i t y Behavior and Conduot  3. Please indicate extra-ourricular a c t i v i t i e s such as Students' Councils, olubs, e t c . i n which this applicant has participated, and any leadership position he has held i n these organizations (president, seoretary, etc.)  4. How man years has t h i s applicant spent i n your school? 5. DO YOU RECOMMEND THIS APPLICANT FOR ENROLMENT IN THE REGULAR OFFICER TRAINING PLAN AT A UNIVERSITY OR A CANADIAN SERVICES COLLEGE WITH FEES AND EXPENSES PAYABLE FROM PUBLIC FUNDS? Very Highly  Highly  Yes  With Reservation  Not at A l l  6. DO. YOU RECOMMEND THIS APPLICANT FOR ENROLMENT IN THE SHORT SERVICE OFFICER PLAN FOR TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT IN THE ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY FOR A PERIOD OF 7 YEARS? Very Highly  Highly  Yes  Date  With Reservation  Not at A l l  Signature School O f f i c i a l School  8. Please return t h i s form d i r e c t l y to  ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY TRANSCRIPT OF COMPLETE HIGH SCHOOL RECORD  Subjeet  Maths  Science  Grade 1958-59 June  Grade 1960-61 June  Grade 1959-60 June  Grade 1961-62 June  Grade 1962-65 June  Grade 1963-64 Xmas  Grade 1963-64 Easter  REMARKS  Algebra Geometry Trigonometry Physics Chemis try  English  Literature Composition  Languages  French Auth French Comp  Other Subjeots  Overall Average  %  %  %  %  Rank i n Class Note:  please complete f o r the pre-junior m a t r i c u l a t i o n year and i"or matriculation year (S) as applicable. Where subjects other than those shown have been undertaken, please record.  Signed Title Date  %  BOARD  - 81 -  RECOMMENDATION  CONFIDENTIAL  Unsuitable  Doubtful  •  •  QDQ'  5  4  6  Suitable  3  Very  Suitable  (When completed)  • 2  ROYAL CANADIAN NAVY  1  RECRUITING OFFICER'S  R E C O M M E N D E D f o r S t e p II o f t h e s e l e c t i o n of t h e N a v a l S e l e c t i o n C e n t r e C e n t r a I i a . YES  REASON  FOR RECOMMENDATION;  •  NO  INTERVIEW BOARD REPORT  • IN T E R V I  (Summation)  E W  B O A R D  N A M E  F I L E  R A N K  SHIP  N O .  CHAIRMAN MEMBER MEMBER SHIP/ESTABLISHMENT/RECRUITING  OFFICE:  PARTICULARS OF CANDIDATE NAME  SU  '• C H R I S T I A N  R N A M E  N A M E '  INI  Tl  D A T E O F BIRTH  A L S  i  ADDRESS  N O .  C I T Y  S T R E E T  O R  A G E ON ("JAN 19 '  P L A C E O F BIRTH  EDUCATION  P R O V I N C E  T O W N  S C H O O L  T E L E P H O N E  CITIZENSHIP  PHYSICAL CATEGORY  G R A D E  T h i s B o a r d h a s c o n f i r m e d that t h e c a n d i d a t e ' s c h o i c e s o f t r a i n i n g p l a n s a r e :  (Indicate  order  of p r e f e r e n c e  numerically) MILITARY  •  ROYAL ROADS  •  ROYAL MILITARY C O L L E G E  •  C O L L E G E MILITAIRE R O Y A L E  .  •  UNIVERSITY 3 YR. C O U R S E  •  S S O P AIR  Q  UNIVERSITY-4 Y R . C O U R S E  Q  SSOP  |  | UNIVERSITY'S YR. COURSE  C  •  R C N R  SURFACE  A R M Y  T h i s B o a r d h a s c o n f i r m e d that t h e c a n d i d a t e ' s p r e f e r e n c e of s e r v i c e i s N a v y .  cadet, ( S E C O N D  However,  _  ,.;.  '  ' '  '  ROTP  cadet. ( T H I R D -  . .  ' CHAIRMAN  Q  M I L I T I A Q  A I R C A D E T  U N T D  R C C S C  Q  Q  C O T C  Q  " ~ " RCAF (AUX | |  A P P L I C A T I O N IS F 0 R. E N R 0 L M E N T I N :  :  . . . _  ;r .  Q  U R T P  if h e i s not s e l e c t e d for r e a s o n s  (b) C...  C H O I C E )  C A D E T  Q  P R E S E N T L Y S E R V I N G IN:  o f p h y s i c a l f i t n e s s or s e r v i c e q u o t a s he i s w i l l i n g t o a c c e p t a v a c a n c y a s a n : —  (a)  EXPERIENCE  * '  C H O I C E ) .  -  (Senior Matriculant)  e  -• . . . . RCNR  S I G N A T U R E  ROTP  Q  (Junior Matriculant)  •  » • ' •  CANSERVCOL  SSOP (Air)  •  (Sen Mat.)  •  S S O P (Surface) RCNR  CANSERVCOL  (Junior Matriculant)  • •  R A N K  (OTHER)  MEMBER  MEMBER  S I G N A  TU  R E  S I G N A T U R E  R A N K  CANDIDATE  HAS PREVIOUSLY  APPLIED  FOR -  ROTP  •  SSOP  •  x  IN 1 9 _  I certify that the a b o v e information is c o r r e c t .  DATE  RECRUITING OFFICER  S I G N A T U R E  R A N K  TEST  SCORES CT_  MOTIVATION  /BO  MATH  " A "  VAT-  /4S  -/7S  INTEREST  ArT-EARANCE T Y P E  | • |  OF  CARE  CLOl  | Well chosen Flashy | Poorly dressed  O F  C L O T H E S  SHOES  HAIR  |  | Well cared for  |  | Clean & polished  j  | aotne-£ore taken  j  | Average care  |  | Uncared for  |~n Scuffed, dj.  •  |  CNDS  &  NAILS  Wellfjrs  |  | Immaculate  fAveragrt  I  I Average  | UnKempt  |  | Uncared for  IN  O B J E C T  E N R O L M E N T  I  1 Determined  |  I  I Eoger  |  •  Mild  O F  E N R O L M E N T  | Naval career | Aviation  ( • Subsidation of education |~n Employment  Comments:  Comments:  HOBBIES  CLUBS  4  ORGANIZATIONS  SPORTS  .  .  .  .  r^WJcW  X  I  I Keen interest  3.  [~2 A leader  2  •  Mild interest  2  \~] Assumes responsibilities  5  •  None  3  [~2 Average interest  4  •  JIII/active  3 4  Slight interest  Comments:  1. 2. 3»  O T H E R  INTERESTS Ih  ^eeia. i n a l l sports ,  I  | jktpVrVSchool othlete  |  | Usual school participation  |  | Little interest  1. 2.  | Showed initiative in earning money (explain)  |  | Worked for family (farm, business)  |  | Paper Carrier or equivalent  I  | No attempt to earn money (explain)  3. 4.  |  | Self supporting  5.  |  | Employed in family business  |  | Worked sporadically (explain)  |  | Still dependent (explain)  Armed Forces  U44>M  3 [~2 Indifferent  |  | Otherwise  |  (t ace-to-face _pnl;  INFORMED  • 2 • 2 .• 2  • 1 • 1 • 1  Comments:  BETWEEN:  •  •  n  Immature  •  •  •  1. 2.  LIMITED  n3 03 "Q3  • 4 • 4 •4. . .  RESPONSIBILITY  MANNER  BEHAVIOUR  O F  ANSWERING  [~J Authorative  1  \~2 Well mannered  ! •  2  •  Magnetic  21  | Poised  2  CD Agressive  21  | Average  ^  Q  Pleasant  ^  | Average  _  |  | Domineering  ^ f ~ l Reluctantly  | Poor  ^  |  | Arrogant  1  | ' | Above average | |  fj  NEGLIGIBLE  advanced maturity above average maturity average maturity below average maturity  | Assured  Timid  Unassuming \~2 Colorless  5P  4  Self conscious  1. 2. 3.  good personal q u a l i t i e s average personal q u a l i t i e s below average personal q u a l i t i e s  4.  u n d e s i r a b l e ppraonal q u a ! i t i e s  Freely I Hesitantly  WRITTEN  ORAL  GRAMMER  1  2  3 Fluent  2.  1  2  3 Accomolished  Superior -j^  1  2  3 Clear  2  1  2  3 Clear  Good  1  2  S Adequate  3  1  2  3 Adequate  Adequate  1  2  3 Hesitant  4  1  2  3 Fair  Poor  1  2  3  Comments: T H E CANDIDATE UNDERSTANDS T H E DIFFERENCE  •  1)  PlaWER OF EXPRESSION W E L L  •  C O N F I D E N C E  PERSONALITY  | Impressive  -  INFORMED  •  CHARACTERISTICS  BEARING  superior i n i t i a t v i e above average i n i t i a t i v e average i n i t i a t i v e below average i n i t i a t i v e No display of i n i t i a t i v e  EMOTIONAL  Average  FINANCIAL  PERSONAL  M E N T A L  Above Average  2. happy  Comments:  WELL  PHYSICAL  3. 4.  RANGE OF KNOWLEDGE  General T o p i c s  | Enthusiastic  Comments:  Comments:  |  Current Affairs  |  Wide or' deep interests Average interests L i t t l e interests  INITIATIVE A N D S E L F R E L I A N C E  V E R Y  MATURITY  PARENTS ATTITUDE TO ENROLMENT  SOCIAL I N T E R E S T S AND SPORTS  2  3  1. superior fluency 2. above average fluency 3« average fluency .^ 4. poorpower ox Expression  2 3 4  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0105314/manifest

Comment

Related Items