Respond by Day 6 to a classmate who was assigned a different article than you by further supporting his or her critique or respectfully offering a differing perspective.
Evaluation of the Authors’ Use of Literature
Wilhelmy, Kleinmann, König, Melchers, and Truxillo (2016) make strong use of the existing literature to position their study within organizational psychology. The review highlights how prior research has focused primarily on applicants’ impression management behaviors during interviews, while largely neglecting the interviewer’s role. By synthesizing findings from impression management theory and social psychology, the authors demonstrate that there is a clear knowledge gap. The literature is not simply summarized; rather, it is critically used to highlight what has been studied, what remains underexplored, and why the interviewer perspective matters. This integration grounds the study in established scholarship while creating a rationale for the research questions.
Evaluation of the Research Problem The research problem is that interviewer impression management behaviors are under-investigated despite their potential influence on applicant perceptions, organizational image, and hiring outcomes. The authors argue that this gap is problematic because interviews are one of the most widely used selection tools, and overlooking the interviewer’s role could compromise fairness and validity. The problem is articulated clearly, linked to practical and theoretical concerns, and directly tied to the purpose statement. It aligns with the Problem Statement Checklist in that it identifies (a) the context of employment interviews, (b) the specific gap in the literature, and (c) the potential implications for research and practice.
Justification and Grounding in Literature For a study to be justified and grounded, the problem must be supported by credible evidence showing that the issue is real and worth investigating. Wilhelmy et al. (2016) achieve this by citing multiple studies that demonstrate the importance of impression management in applicant behavior, while simultaneously pointing out the lack of studies addressing interviewer motives. This grounding demonstrates that the study is not arbitrary but rather a response to a substantiated gap. In contrast, an unjustified study would fail to show why the problem matters or how it builds upon prior work.
Originality of the Problem A research problem is original when it advances new knowledge or perspectives beyond what is already known. In this case, originality lies in shifting the focus from applicants to interviewers. While impression management as a construct has been studied extensively, exploring the interviewer’s motivations and strategies opens up new avenues for understanding the dynamics of selection interviews. This originality is both theoretical—expanding the application of impression management theory—and practical—informing how organizations might design fairer, more transparent interview processes.
Conclusion Overall, the authors’ literature use and problem statement demonstrate strong alignment and originality. The study is justified because it responds to a well-documented gap in the literature, grounded in theoretical and empirical work, and original in its focus on the interviewer’s perspective. By addressing this overlooked dimension of the interview process, the study not only contributes to scholarship but also offers insights with implications for positive social change, particularly in terms of fairness and inclusivity in hiring.
Reference
Wilhelmy, A., Kleinmann, M., König, C. J., Melchers, K. G., & Truxillo, D. M. (2016). How and why do interviewers try to make impressions on applicants? A qualitative study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(3), 313–332. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000046Links to an external site.