Age Bias in Selection Decisions: The Role of Facial Appearance and Fitness Impressions

Overview

Journal Front Psychol

Date 2017 Dec 26

PMID 29276492

Citations 3

Authors

Michele C Kaufmann

Franciska Krings

Leslie A Zebrowitz

Sabine Sczesny

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

This research examined the impact of facial age appearance on hiring, and impressions of fitness as the underlying mechanism. In two experimental hiring simulations, one with lay persons and one with Human Resource professionals, participants evaluated a chronologically older or younger candidate (as indicated by date of birth and age label) with either younger or older facial age appearance (as indicated by a photograph). In both studies, older-looking candidates received lower hireability ratings, due to less favorable fitness impressions. In addition, Study 1 showed that this age bias was reduced when the candidates provided counter-stereotypic information about their fitness. Study 2 showed that facial age-based discrimination is less prevalent in jobs with less costumer contact (e.g., back office).

Citing Articles

Examining attitudes about the virtual workplace: Associations between zoom fatigue, impression management, and virtual meeting adoption intent.

Lim C, Ratan R, Foxman M, Beyea D, Jeong D, Leith A PLoS One. 2025; 20(2):e0312354.

PMID: 39908226 PMC: 11798524. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0312354.

Measuring concern about smile appearance among adults.

Silva B, Campos L, Martins B, Maroco J, Peltomaki T, Campos J Eur J Orthod. 2024; 46(6).

PMID: 39428974 PMC: 11491515. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjae053.

Evaluating Single-Surgeon Bias Toward Recommending Corrective Procedures for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Based on Demographic Factors and Comorbidities in a 484-Patient Cohort.

Anastasio A, Niu S, Kim E, Rhee J Global Spine J. 2020; 11(2):167-171.

PMID: 32875846 PMC: 7882819. DOI: 10.1177/2192568219896296.

Women Who Emerge as Leaders in Temporarily Assigned Work Groups: Attractive and Socially Competent but Not Babyfaced or Naïve?.

Gruber F, Veidt C, Ortner T Front Psychol. 2019; 9:2553.

PMID: 30618974 PMC: 6305720. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02553.

References

van Dalen H, Henkens K, Schippers J . Productivity of older workers: perceptions of employers and employees. Popul Dev Rev. 2010; 36(2):309-30. DOI: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2010.00331.x. View

Berger E . Managing age discrimination: an examination of the techniques used when seeking employment. Gerontologist. 2009; 49(3):317-32. DOI: 10.1093/geront/gnp031. View

Abrams D, Swift H, Drury L . Old and Unemployable? How Age-Based Stereotypes Affect Willingness to Hire Job Candidates. J Soc Issues. 2016; 72(1):105-121. PMC: 4999032. DOI: 10.1111/josi.12158. View

Willis J, Todorov A . First impressions: making up your mind after a 100-ms exposure to a face. Psychol Sci. 2006; 17(7):592-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x. View

Diekman A, Hirnisey L . The effect of context on the silver ceiling: a role congruity perspective on prejudiced responses. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2007; 33(10):1353-66. DOI: 10.1177/0146167207303019. View

Zebrowitz L, Olson K, Hoffman K . Stability of babyfaceness and attractiveness across the life span. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1993; 64(3):453-66. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.64.3.453. View

Spencer S, Logel C, Davies P . Stereotype Threat. Annu Rev Psychol. 2015; 67:415-37. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-073115-103235. View

Zebrowitz L, Franklin Jr R . The attractiveness halo effect and the babyface stereotype in older and younger adults: similarities, own-age accentuation, and older adult positivity effects. Exp Aging Res. 2014; 40(3):375-93. PMC: 4020290. DOI: 10.1080/0361073X.2014.897151. View

Sczesny S, Kuhnen U . Meta-cognition about biological sex and gender-stereotypic physical appearance: consequences for the assessment of leadership competence. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2004; 30(1):13-21. DOI: 10.1177/0146167203258831. View

10.

North M, Fiske S . Resource Scarcity and Prescriptive Attitudes Generate Subtle, Intergenerational Older-Worker Exclusion. J Soc Issues. 2016; 72(1):122-145. PMC: 4972495. DOI: 10.1111/josi.12159. View

11.

Leopold D, Rhodes G . A comparative view of face perception. J Comp Psychol. 2010; 124(3):233-51. PMC: 2998394. DOI: 10.1037/a0019460. View

12.

Zebrowitz L, Fellous J, Mignault A, Andreoletti C . Trait impressions as overgeneralized responses to adaptively significant facial qualities: evidence from connectionist modeling. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2003; 7(3):194-215. DOI: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0703_01. View

13.

von Schrader S, Nazarov Z . Trends and Patterns in Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) Charges. Res Aging. 2015; 38(5):580-601. DOI: 10.1177/0164027515593989. View

14.

Todorov A, Mandisodza A, Goren A, Hall C . Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes. Science. 2005; 308(5728):1623-6. DOI: 10.1126/science.1110589. View

15.

Freeman J, Ambady N . A dynamic interactive theory of person construal. Psychol Rev. 2011; 118(2):247-79. DOI: 10.1037/a0022327. View

16.

PERRY E, Kulik C, Bourhis A . Moderating effects of personal and contextual factors in age discrimination. J Appl Psychol. 1996; 81(6):628-47. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.81.6.628. View

17.

Kite M, Johnson B . Attitudes toward older and younger adults: a meta-analysis. Psychol Aging. 1988; 3(3):233-44. DOI: 10.1037//0882-7974.3.3.233. View

18.

Bal A, Reiss A, Rudolph C, Baltes B . Examining positive and negative perceptions of older workers: a meta-analysis. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2011; 66(6):687-98. DOI: 10.1093/geronb/gbr056. View

19.

Heilman M, Okimoto T . Why are women penalized for success at male tasks?: the implied communality deficit. J Appl Psychol. 2007; 92(1):81-92. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.81. View

20.

Zebrowitz L, Montepare J . Social Psychological Face Perception: Why Appearance Matters. Soc Personal Psychol Compass. 2011; 2(3):1497. PMC: 2811283. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00109.x. View