Erratum: Relative Importance of Applicant Sex, Attractiveness, and Scholastic Standing in Evaluation of Job Applicant Resumes

Abstract

Reports an error in the original article by author's name (Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol 60(1) Feb 1975, 39-43). On page 41, there were several typographical errors in Table 2. (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 1975-12628-001 .) 30 college students and 30 professional interviewers rated and ranked bogus resumes on suitability for a managerial position. Applicant sex, physical attractiveness, and scholastic standing were systematically varied in the resumes. A 2 * 2 * 2 * 3 repeated measures analysis of variance on the ratings yielded 4 significant main effects (p < .05), while the same analysis on the rankings yielded 3 significant main effects (p < .01). Students rated applicants more favorably than professionals. Both groups preferred males to females, attractive applicants to unattractive applicants, and applicants of high scholastic standing. The latter variable accounted for the greatest proportion of variance. However, internal analyses of the rankings reveal that sex and physical attractiveness were more important than indicated by the analysis of variance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)