Log in to your account
 
Industry Careers
  • Posted by Jason Hensel at
    12:00AM 04/09/2012 1 Comments

    Why You Should be a Narcissist During Job Interviews

    Narcissism, a trait considered obnoxious in most circumstances, actually pays off big-time in the short-term context of a job interview, according to a new study to be published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology.

    Narcissists scored much higher in simulated job interviews than non-narcissists, researchers found. They pointed to narcissists’ innate tendency to promote themselves, in part by engaging and speaking at length, which implied confidence and expertise even when they were held to account by expert interviewers.

    “This is one setting where it’s OK to say nice things about yourself and there are no ramifications. In fact, it’s expected,” said Peter Harms, assistant professor of management at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and a co-author of the study. “Simply put, those who are comfortable doing this tend to do much better than those who aren’t.”

    The two-part study examined the effectiveness of the types of behaviors that narcissists exhibit—which would be typically seen as maladjusted—in the narrow context of an interview. In the first part, 72 participants were videotaped in a simulated job-applicant setting. As expected, narcissists were more likely to self-promote. However, it was when expert interviewers challenged applicants that narcissists started behaving in unexpected ways, Harms says.

    While normal individuals backed off of their self-promotion tactics when held accountable, narcissists actually increased their attempts to make themselves look better.

    “When feeling challenged, they tend to double down,” Harms said. “It’s as if they say ‘Oh, you’re going to challenge me? Then I’m not just great, I’m fantastic.’ And in this setting, it tended to work.”

    In the study’s second part, 222 raters evaluated videos of applicants with similar job skills and varying levels of narcissism. The raters consistently awarded chronic self-promoters—who spoke quickly and at length and who used ingratiation tactics such as smiling, gesturing and complimenting others—far more positive evaluations.

    Meanwhile, equally qualified applicants who tended to rely on tactical modesty scored lower, according to the study.

    “This shows that what is getting (narcissists) the win is the delivery,” Harms said. “These results show just how hard it is to effectively interview, and how fallible we can be when making interview judgments. We don’t necessarily want to hire narcissists, but might end up doing so because they come off as being self-confident and capable.”

    For interviewers, the study’s findings mean they must become aware of the tactics used by narcissists, Harms says—and, if necessary, avoid selecting people who chronically use self-promotion and ingratiation, unless those behaviors are appropriate for the position.

    “On the whole, we find very little evidence that narcissists are more or less effective workers. But what we do know is that they can be very disruptive and destructive when dealing with other people on a regular basis. If everything else is equal, it probably is best to avoid hiring them.”

    (Story materials provided by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln/Steve Smith.)




  • Posted by Jason Hensel at
    12:00AM 07/30/2011 0 Comments

    Mimicry May Not Always Be Positive

    In human relationships, mimicry can act as a kind of social glue and foster rapport in subtle ways. If, for example, Amy and Ted are engaged in a conversation, Amy might mirror some of Ted’s mannerisms, leading Ted to like Amy more, trust her, and think of Amy as more similar, even though both are unaware that any mimicry took place. All this has been confirmed by much of psychological research, leading to a popular perception (and advice) that imitating is good for you. New research, though, suggests that mimicry may not always lead to positive social outcomes. In fact, sometimes not mimicking is the smarter thing to do.

    In a study to be published in a forthcoming issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, psychological scientists Piotr Winkielman and Liam Kavanagh, along with philosophers Chris Suhler and Patricia Churchland at the University of California, San Diego, noted that there are often observers to the mimicry that takes place in dyadic relationships. This led them to wonder whether there might be certain situations in which mimicry comes at a reputational cost. That is, are there some cases in which an observer might think less of a person for mimicking the behavior of another, even when the mimicry is not consciously noticed by the observer? After all, Winkielman argues, mimicry is a crucial part of social intelligence and “social intelligence is not only knowing how to mimic, but also when not to mimic.”

    Participants in the study were asked to watch several videotaped interviews staged by the experimenters. Some participants saw videos in which the interviewer was cordial and other participants saw videos in which the same interviewer was condescending. Importantly, in some videos the interviewee mimicked the interviewer’s simple, innocuous mannerisms, such as chin-touching or leg-crossing, and in other videos the interviewee showed no mimicry. After watching each video, participants evaluated the interviewee on general competence, trustworthiness and likability.

    Despite the fact that the participants reported no awareness of mimicry, it still influenced their evaluations of the interviewee. Critically, participants judged the interviewee who mimicked the condescending interviewer to be less competent than the non-mimicking interviewee. In other words, in the eyes of the outside observers, the imitator of the undesirable model incurred reputational costs—their mirroring was seen as an error.

    Interestingly, an additional experiment showed that visually obscuring the interviewer in the same videos eliminates the negative effects of mimicry, showing that observers use alignment in body language to make their judgments. Furthermore, the reputational cost of mimicking a condescending interviewer disappeared when participants first read positive information about his character, suggesting that the observers care about the deeper aspects of the person.

    Winkielman says that this research indicates that mimicry is more nuanced than previously thought. Our social lives are incredibly complex and in order to build or maintain relationships we have to keep in mind “who is competent, high status, trustworthy, who is friends with whom.” We can make these determinations partly by observing who imitates whom. As such, the benefits of mimicry depend very much on the social context. 

    “It’s good to have the capacity to mimic, but an important part of social intelligence is knowing how to deploy this capacity in a selective, intelligent, context-dependent manner," Winkielman said. "Sometimes, the socially intelligent thing to do is not to imitate.”

    (Story materials provided by the Association for Psychological Science.)