Publisher
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Place of Publication
Chattanooga (Tenn.)
Abstract
While interviews have been studied extensively, second-round interviews have remained understudied. The extent to which second-round interviews replicate, reinforce, or extend the information obtained in initial interviews remains unclear. According to Aptitude Research (2022), when the interview process is delayed or when too many interviews are conducted, organizations risk losing high-quality talent. SHRM (2015) includes second-round interviews in its selection process checklist, indicating their prevalence. These practical concerns increase the importance of determining whether a second structured interview contributes meaningful information beyond the first. This proposed study aims to examine whether there is a change in scores from the first-round interview to the second-round interview. Specifically, it asks whether there is a significant overall score difference between first and second employment interviews and whether scores differ for candidates’ responses to behavioral and situational questions. Competencies are thought to be relatively stable within the person; as a result, ratings of competencies across two interview panels should be stable. The present study will use archival data obtained from a statewide law enforcement agency’s standardized selection process for a Special Agent Criminal Investigator I position between 2019 and 2022. Applicants who completed both interviews will be the focus of the analyses. The first-round interviews were conducted by three trained Special Agents using a standardized interview protocol and consisted of four behavioral questions, two situational questions, and one introductory question. The second-round interview was typically held the following week, was conducted by supervisory personnel, and included six behavioral questions and one situational question. Interviewers independently rated each response using five-point Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales before reaching consensus. All panelists completed structured interviewer training. Prior to the primary analyses, the data will be screened for missing data, data entry errors, and potential outliers. Cases with incomplete interview scores will be excluded. All statistical analyses will be conducted in IBM SPSS Statistics. Descriptive statistics will summarize the study variables, and internal consistency reliability of the competency ratings will be evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha. Paired-samples t tests will examine differences between the first and second structured interviews. A Bonferroni correction will be considered to control the familywise Type I error rate. Examining consistency across interview rounds may help clarify the role of second interviews and inform efforts to improve selection efficiency and the applicant experience.
Date
November 2026
Subject
Industrial and organizational psychology
Document Type
posters
Language
English
Rights
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Included in
Second Interviews in Employee Selection: Redundancy or Added Insight?
While interviews have been studied extensively, second-round interviews have remained understudied. The extent to which second-round interviews replicate, reinforce, or extend the information obtained in initial interviews remains unclear. According to Aptitude Research (2022), when the interview process is delayed or when too many interviews are conducted, organizations risk losing high-quality talent. SHRM (2015) includes second-round interviews in its selection process checklist, indicating their prevalence. These practical concerns increase the importance of determining whether a second structured interview contributes meaningful information beyond the first. This proposed study aims to examine whether there is a change in scores from the first-round interview to the second-round interview. Specifically, it asks whether there is a significant overall score difference between first and second employment interviews and whether scores differ for candidates’ responses to behavioral and situational questions. Competencies are thought to be relatively stable within the person; as a result, ratings of competencies across two interview panels should be stable. The present study will use archival data obtained from a statewide law enforcement agency’s standardized selection process for a Special Agent Criminal Investigator I position between 2019 and 2022. Applicants who completed both interviews will be the focus of the analyses. The first-round interviews were conducted by three trained Special Agents using a standardized interview protocol and consisted of four behavioral questions, two situational questions, and one introductory question. The second-round interview was typically held the following week, was conducted by supervisory personnel, and included six behavioral questions and one situational question. Interviewers independently rated each response using five-point Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales before reaching consensus. All panelists completed structured interviewer training. Prior to the primary analyses, the data will be screened for missing data, data entry errors, and potential outliers. Cases with incomplete interview scores will be excluded. All statistical analyses will be conducted in IBM SPSS Statistics. Descriptive statistics will summarize the study variables, and internal consistency reliability of the competency ratings will be evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha. Paired-samples t tests will examine differences between the first and second structured interviews. A Bonferroni correction will be considered to control the familywise Type I error rate. Examining consistency across interview rounds may help clarify the role of second interviews and inform efforts to improve selection efficiency and the applicant experience.
Department
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga. Dept. of Psychology