Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /comphumbeh

Understanding internet recruitment via signaling theoryand the elaboration likelihood model

0747-5632/$ - see front matter � 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.013

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 919 513 4857; fax: +1 919 515 1716.E-mail addresses: christy.marie.gregory@gmail.com (C.K. Gregory), awmeade@

ncsu.edu (A.W. Meade), lfthompson@ncsu.edu (L.F. Thompson).1 Tel.: +1 919 513 4857; fax: +1 919 515 1716.

Christina K. Gregory 1, Adam W. Meade ⇑, Lori Foster Thompson 1

North Carolina State University, Department of Psychology, Campus Box 7650, Raleigh, NC 27695-7650, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:Available online 30 April 2013

Keywords:Internet recruitmentOnline recruitmentWeb recruitmentEmployee recruitment

A detailed model specifying the linkages between Internet recruitment websites and organizationalattraction was examined. Participants (N = 581) viewed Fortune 500 company websites and respondedto questions about the content and design of these websites and their resulting attitudes, fit perceptions,and organizational attraction. Results showed that recruitment website content and design influence atti-tudes toward the recruitment websites, organizational attitudes, and subsequently organizational attrac-tion. The moderating effects of person-organization (P-O) and person-job (P-J) fit were examined. Twosets of hypotheses based on signaling theory (Spence, 1973, 1974) and the elaboration likelihood model(Petty & Cacioppo, 1981) were largely supported. Consistent with signaling theory, the amount of job andorganizational information on a recruitment website interacted with website usability, such that whenless job information was presented, website usability played a greater role in predicting favorable atti-tudes towards the organization. Consistent with the elaboration likelihood model, when P-J fit was high,website aesthetics were less important in predicting attitudes towards the organization.

� 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

With the exponential growth in technology in recent years,organizational websites now play a central role in applicantrecruiting (Allen, Mahto, & Otondo, 2007). This is unsurprising asorganizational websites are one of the most cost and time efficientways of attracting and hiring employees (Cappelli, 2001; Cober,Brown, Blumental, Doverspike, & Levy, 2000; Kay, 2000; Marcus,2001; Millman, 1998). Estimates published in 2006 suggest thatover 50% of all new hires originate from the Internet, with thegreatest number coming from organizational recruitment websitesin particular (Cober & Brown, 2006). Estimated savings ofweb-based recruiting (or e-recruiting) over alternates can be ashigh as 87% (Maurer & Liu, 2007).

Trailing the rapid implementation of online recruitment,researchers have searched for models investigating how websitefeatures affect potential applicants’ decisions to apply for a positionwith the organization. Much of the early work in this area focusedon aspects of the websites themselves, such as usability and aes-thetics (Braddy, Thompson, Wuensch, & Grossnickle, 2003; Cober,Brown, Levy, Cober, & Keeping, 2003; Cober et al., 2000; Coyle &Thorson, 2001; Scheu, Ryan, & Nona, 1999; Williamson, Lepak, &

King, 2003; Zusman & Landis, 2002) and the effects of employee tes-timonials (Braddy, Meade, & Kroustalis, 2008; Highhouse, Hoffman,Greve, & Collins, 2002; Van Hoye & Lievens, 2007; Walker, Feild,Giles, Armenakis, & Bernerth, 2009). More recent work has investi-gated a series of other variables not directly associated with thewebsite, such as person-organization (P-O) fit (De Goede, Van Via-nen, & Klege, 2011; Pfieffelmann, Wagner, & Libkuman, 2010), therole of previous information such as industry stereotypes (De Goedeet al., 2011), and organizational familiarity (Walker, Feild, Giles,Bernerth, & Short, 2011). Perhaps the most comprehensive studyto date was that of Allen et al. (2007) which examined organiza-tional brand and amount of information on attitudes towards theorganization and website, and ultimately employment intention.

As organizations must hire from available job applicants, gener-ating a strong applicant pool is essential for organizational success.Because of the central role of the internet in employee recruitment,it is essential to better understand the features and content ofrecruitment websites that are more likely to attract job applicants.This study compliments and extends prior research in two ways.First, we provide a considerably more extensive model of factorsthat affect applicants’ attitudes towards organizations based ontheir reactions to the organizations’ websites, directly incorporat-ing website content (i.e., information provided), website designfeatures, P-O and person-job (P-J) fit perceptions, and attitudesabout the recruiting website than has any previous study. Whileother studies have examined aspects of this model, this study isthe first to examine these aspects simultaneously. Second, this

1950 C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959

study adopts a more nuanced theoretical approach to investigatingthe interplay between website characteristics (content and design)and the dynamics of applicants’ perceived fit with an organization.Specifically, we utilize both signaling theory (Spence, 1973, 1974),and the elaboration likelihood model (ELM; Petty & Cacioppo,1981) in order to understand the interactions among websitecontent and design, as well as perceptions of fit, moving beyondthe study of main effects. In this study, we propose a series ofhypotheses that together compromise the relationships presentedin Fig. 1. Many of the hypothesized relationships are based onprevious work, while others are based on the application of signal-ing theory and the ELM to posit a series of interactions.

1.1. Website design and website attitudes

Most research on Internet recruitment has focused on the rela-tionships of usability and aesthetics of recruitment websites andorganizational attraction (e.g., Braddy et al., 2003; Cober et al.,2000, 2003; Coyle & Thorson, 2001; Scheu et al., 1999; Sylva &Mol, 2009; Walker et al., 2011; Williamson et al., 2003; Zusman& Landis, 2002). Website usability refers to individuals’ perceptionsof how effective and efficient a computer-based tool is in helpingthem reach their goals (Karat, 1997). Aspects of usability such asthe navigational ease of finding information have been shown torelate to organizational attractiveness (Cober et al., 2003; Davis,Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Pfieffelmann et al., 2010; Venkatesh& Davis, 1996; Williamson et al., 2003; Zusman & Landis, 2002).Poor usability can have serious consequences. Karr (2000) foundthat 26% of participants chose not to apply for positions in organi-zations due to the ineffective design of their recruitment websitesalone. Similarly, Sylva and Mol (2009) found that ease of useplayed a much larger role in applicant satisfaction than didpersonal characteristics (e.g., Internet savvy). Design features, suchas website aesthetics and website usability, provide indirect cuesabout an organization that can impact job seekers’ perceptionsregarding the attractiveness of an organization (Williamson et al.,2003; Zusman & Landis, 2002).

Hypothesis 1. Website usability will positively affect job seekerattitudes toward the website.

Website Content

Website Design

Job Information

Organizational Information

Website Usability

Website Aesthetics

P-J Fit P-O

Note: Dashed arrows indicate hypoth

P-E Fit

Fig. 1. Hypothesize

To capture the attention of the job seekers, recruitment web-sites also need to have appealing aesthetic features that invite fur-ther exploration (Coyle & Thorson, 2001). Grabbing the attention ofjob seekers enhances the likelihood that they will be attracted toand interested in the organization. Aesthetic characteristics gener-ally include visual elements such as attractive colors, pleasing textimages and fonts, and multimedia presentations (Braddy et al.,2003; Cober et al., 2000; Williamson et al., 2003). By evoking posi-tive reactions to a recruitment website, aesthetics can prompt a jobseeker to further explore the website to gather additional informa-tion about the organization. Much as with a building façade, thedesign of an information system conveys clues as to what the useris likely to experience inside (Cober et al., 2004; Tractinsky, Katz, &Ikar, 2000). Moreover, a pleasing aesthetic implies that the organi-zation takes pride in how it presents information and is willing tospend resources to create a pleasant experience for potential jobcandidates. Cober et al. (2004) argue and empirically demonstratethat aesthetics are an important determinant of initial viewer reac-tions as well as subsequent attitudes and behaviors towards notonly the website, but also the organization.

Hypothesis 2. Website aesthetics will positively affect job seekerattitudes toward the website.

1.2. The effect of information on attitudes

Whiles recruitment websites may differ with respect to the aes-thetics and usability of the site, they may also vary substantiallywith respect to the amount of information provided. For instance,some websites may provide only relatively generic descriptions ofthe organization or job descriptions consisting of one or two sen-tences. Conversely, other recruitment websites may provide de-tailed organizational information such as organizational valuesstatements, explicit information regarding organizational norms,as well as detailed job descriptions. Generally speaking, the morejob and organization-relevant information job seekers are givenduring recruitment, the more attracted they are to the organization(Allen, Van Scotter, & Otondo, 2004; Barber, 1998; Barber & Roeh-ling, 1993; Cable, Aiman-Smith, Mulvey, & Edwards, 2000; Cable& Judge, 1994; Chapman, Uggerslev, Carroll, Piasentin, & Jones,

Fit

Attitudes toward

Organization

Attitudes toward

Website

Attraction to Organization

esized moderation.

d relationships.

C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959 1951

2005; Cober et al., 2003; Rynes, Bretz, & Gerhart, 1991). Similarly,the greater the amount of job and organizational information of-fered, and the more detail the information provides, the higher ajob seeker’s satisfaction and willingness to apply for a job (Feldman& Klaas, 2002; Herriot & Rothwell, 1981; Mason & Belt, 1986).

Williamson et al. (2003) found that when viewing Internetrecruitment websites, job seekers were especially concerned withgathering information about the organization and the job. In turn,job seekers used this information to determine whether theywould fit well within the organization. Similarly, previous researchhas found that job seekers use the information provided on organi-zational recruitment websites (e.g., pictures, employee testimoni-als) to determine their overall fit with the hiring organization(Braddy, Meade, Michael, & Fleenor, 2009; Dineen, Ash, & Noe,2002). Thus, the job and organizational information provided onInternet recruitment websites may be used as informative signalsby prospective applicants in determining their fit and attractionto the organization.

As noted by Allen et al. (2007), there is a lack of research relatedto the optimal amount of job and organizational information in theInternet recruitment context. This is surprising considering that alarge advantage of Internet recruitment ‘careers’ websites is theability to provide much more information about organizationaland job attributes compared with more traditional recruitmentmedia. Allen et al. (2007) found that including more organizationand job information on a recruitment website makes this recruit-ment medium particularly useful to potential applicants. Specifi-cally, the authors found that providing ample information onthese websites influences the attitudes individuals have towardthe recruitment website and, ultimately, their attraction to the hir-ing organization.

Hypothesis 3. The amount of job information on an organizationalrecruitment website will positively affect job seeker attitudestoward the website.

Hypothesis 4. The amount of organizational information on anorganizational recruitment website will positively affect job seekerattitudes toward the website.

1.2.1. Signaling theoryAccording to signaling theory (Spence, 1973, 1974), when indi-

viduals do not have complete data, or are uncertain of the positionthey should take on a matter, they will draw inferences based oncues from whatever information is available. Job seekers often havelimited knowledge of organizations, and recruitment materialsmay be their primary source of information about the hiring com-pany (Rynes & Miller, 1983). Variables that do not seem to have adirect connection to a job or organization (e.g., website aesthetics,usability) can serve as signals for the properties of the organization(Rynes et al., 1991; Turban, 2001; Turban, Forret, & Hendrickson,1998). Internet recruitment websites help shape the first impres-sions job seekers form during the early stages of recruitment byproviding information not only about current open positions with-in the organization, but also information regarding the culture ofthe organization (Braddy et al., 2003). Common features includeorganizational policies, mission and value statements, employeetestimonials, and information regarding benefits, rewards, andorganizational programs and initiatives (Cober et al., 2000).

Signaling theory implies that website usability and aestheticappeal should have a greater influence on organizational attitudeswhen limited job and organizational information are presented onthe recruitment website. That is, without direct informationregarding the job and organization, more assumptions must be

made on the basis of superficial cues such as usability and aes-thetics of the website. For instance, if little is explicitly statedregarding how the organization values its employees, appealingaesthetic and a highly usable web interface may imply that theorganization takes pride in how it is perceived by others and thatit is willing to allocate resources to impress potential employees.However, when more explicit information is available, signalingtheory implies that utilization of superficial cues such as usabilityand aesthetics will play a less prominent role in determining atti-tudes. Thus, having more job and organizational information on arecruitment website should reduce the influence of usability andaesthetics in determining potential applicant attitudes towardsthe organization.

Hypothesis 5. The amount of job information presented on arecruitment website will moderate the effect of website usabilityand aesthetics on organizational attitudes, such that websiteusability and aesthetics will play a greater role in predictingfavorable organizational attitudes when less job information ispresented.

Hypothesis 6. The amount of organizational information presentedon a recruitment website will moderate the effect of websiteusability and aesthetics on organizational attitudes, such thatwebsite usability and aesthetics will play a greater role in predict-ing favorable organizational attitudes when less organizationalinformation is presented.

1.3. Fit perceptions and attraction

Person-environment (P-E) fit generally refers to the compatibil-ity between individual and work environment characteristics(Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). P-E fit encompasses a variety ofmanifestations (e.g., person-organization fit, person-job fit); andfit between an employee and the work environment has beenshown to increase the likelihood of maximum work efficiency(e.g., Tziner, 1987). The P-E fit literature highlights the attractionaspect of Schneider’s (1987) attraction-selection-attrition modeland Byrne (1971) similarity-attraction paradigm, suggesting thatpeople are attracted to organizations which have characteristicscongruent with their own. There are many benefits of fit for boththe organization and employees, including decreased turnover(e.g., Bretz & Judge, 1993; O’Reilly, Chatman, & Caldwell, 1991;Schneider, 1987), increased performance (e.g., Schneider, 1987;Tziner, 1987), pro-social behaviors (e.g., O’Reilly & Chatman,1986), and positive attitudes (e.g., Chatman, 1991; Dawis & Lof-quist, 1984; Meglino, Ravlin, & Adkins, 1989).

1.3.1. Person-organization fitOne of the most commonly examined aspects of P-E fit is

person-organization (P-O) fit. Perceived P-O fit can be defined asindividuals’ overall judgments of how compatible they are withan organization (Judge & Cable, 1997; Kristof, 1996; Kristof-Brownet al., 2005). This congruence can be perceived through sharedvalues (Chatman, 1989; Kristof, 1996; Verquer, Beehr, & Wagner,2003), goals (Vancouver & Schmitt, 1991; Witt & Nye, 1992) andpersonality-climate compatibility (Christiansen, Villanova, & Miku-lay, 1997; Ryan & Schmitt, 1996). Greater P-O fit has been associ-ated with higher organizational commitment and job satisfaction,and lower turnover intentions (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). Priorto entry into the organization, P-O fit perceptions have a stronginfluence on organizational attraction, job acceptance intentions,and rates of job acceptance (Chapman et al., 2005; Kristof-Brownet al., 2005).

1952 C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959

Because perceived P-O fit is a measure of an individual’sperceived congruence with the organization, the organizationalinformation that is provided on an Internet recruitment websitemay allow potential applicants to determine whether theirpersonal characteristics fit well with the organization’s character-istics. Recently De Goede et al. (2011) found that P-O fit percep-tions based on organization websites correlated (r = .38) withorganizational attraction, suggesting the importance of perceivedfit in a recruitment context. Dineen et al. (2002) found that provid-ing customized fit information to individuals on a website withgood aesthetic properties led to lower attraction for poorer fittingpotential applicants. P-O fit should moderate the effects of theorganizational information presented such that receiving moreinformation about an organization is unlikely to enhance positivefeelings about that organization when fit is poor.

Hypothesis 7. P-O fit will moderate the effect of organizationalinformation on attitudes towards the organization, such that theamount of organizational information leads to more favorableattitudes when perceived P-O fit is high.

1.3.2. Person-job fitPerceived P-J fit is defined as individuals’ judgment of the

congruence between their personal characteristics and the charac-teristics of a job (Kristof-Brown et al., 2005). This type of P-E fit istypically characterized by either a congruence between demandsand abilities or supplies and values (Edwards, 1991). Demands-abilities fit refers to a perceived compatibility between an individ-ual’s knowledge, skills, and abilities and those required by the job.Supplies-values fit refers to situations in which the job meets anindividual’s needs, desires, or preferences. Previous research onP-J fit has found that when potential applicants perceive P-J fit,there is an increase in job and organizational attraction, job satis-faction, and organizational commitment, as well as a decrease inintentions to turnover (Chapman et al., 2005; Kristof-Brownet al., 2005). Similar to P-O fit, perceptions of P-J fit may shapethe degree to which increasing the amount of information on arecruitment website enhances prospective applicants’ attitudestoward a hiring organization. Therefore, it is proposed:

Hypothesis 8. P-J fit will moderate the effect of job information onattitudes towards the organization, such that the amount of jobinformation leads to more favorable attitudes when perceived P-Jfit is high.

1.3.3. Elaboration likelihood modelThe ELM (Petty & Cacioppo, 1981) posits that information that is

more personally relevant is more likely to be processed via a ‘‘cen-tral’’ route in which the merits of the information are deliberatelyevaluated. That is, information presented is critically evaluatedand judged on the merit of its content. In contrast, less relevantinformation is more likely to be processed via a ‘‘peripheral’’ routein which more superficial cues (e.g., appearance) play a larger rolein attitude formation. In the context of internet recruitment, ELMsuggests that recruitment information that is highly relevant to aviewer would likely be evaluated on its merit. For instance, a seri-ous job seeker viewing the website of an organization with a rele-vant job in his or her field would likely evaluate the websitebased on information related to the organization and the job. Incontrast, job seekers examining the website of an organization inwhich the fit of the organization or job was poor would be lessmotivated to attend to the specifics of the content and may be morelikely to form an opinion based on more peripheral cues such aswebsite appearance. In one of the few studies applying the ELM

to recruitment, Jones, Shultz, and Chapman (2006) found that high-er quality candidates tended to focus more on central route argu-ments than peripheral cues in print ads. Recently Maurer andCook (2011 have advocated for a stronger role of the ELM in Internetrecruitment research. In the context of Internet recruiting, the ELMimplies that information about the job and organization should playa larger role in determining attitudes for persons for whom there isgood P-E fit (i.e., the information is more relevant) (Maurer & Cook,2011). Conversely, for persons for whom information is less rele-vant (i.e., P-E fit is low), the effects of more peripheral cues suchas usability and aesthetics should be more pronounced.

Hypothesis 9. P-E (both P-O and P-J) fit will moderate the effect ofwebsite usability on attitudes towards the organization such thatthe effect will be stronger for persons with lower P-E fit.

Hypothesis 10. P-E (both P-O and P-J) fit will moderate the effectof website aesthetics on attitudes towards the organization suchthat the effect will be stronger for persons with lower P-E fit.

1.4. Website attitudes, organizational attitudes, and attraction

We expect that attitudes towards the recruitment website willimpact attitudes towards the organization. Drawing on similaritiesbetween consumer advertising and recruitment, consumers’ feel-ings about advertisements influence their attraction to products(see Kim & Hunter, 1993a, 1993b for a review) in the same mannerthat recruitment materials influence job seekers’ attitudes towardan organization. As Allen et al. (2007) state, Internet recruitmentwebsites are a form of advertising for jobs within an organization.Thus the attitudes individuals form about a recruitment websiteshould influence their attitudes about the organization itself and,in turn, influence attraction toward the organization. Allen et al.(2004) found that recruitment information influenced organiza-tional attitudes and subsequent intentions and behaviors to pursueemployment.

Hypothesis 11. Website attitudes will be positively correlatedwith attitudes toward the organization.

Additional evidence from meta-analytic research from Chap-man et al. (2005) has shown that attitudes-mediated models ofjob choice antecedents and organizational attraction fit better thanmodels with direct effects of these antecedents on organizationalattraction. Allen et al. (2007) found that the Internet recruitmentattitudes-mediated models fit better with organizational familiar-ity, image, as well as organizational information. However, atti-tudes did not fully mediate the effects of job information onorganizational attraction as job characteristics and job informationdirectly affected employment intentions. To better understand theeffects of recruitment media and organizational attitudes onattraction in the Internet recruitment realm, it is proposed:

Hypothesis 12. Attitudes toward the organization will mediate therelationship between the predictors and attraction to the organi-zation, where the predictors are website content and designfeatures, website attitudes, and the moderating effects of P-E fit.

2. Materials and method

As the incorporation of real websites is important for the eco-logical validity of Internet recruitment research (De Goede et al.,2011; Pfieffelmann et al., 2010; Selden & Orenstein, 2011), we uti-lized actual websites of Fortune 500 companies as our stimulusmaterials. A four-step process was followed to ensure that the

C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959 1953

websites included as stimulus materials in this study varied suffi-ciently with regard to the website characteristics under investiga-tion. First, we randomly selected 100 Fortune 500 companywebsites for examination. Second, an industrial-organizationalpsychology doctoral student evaluated the ‘careers’ section of eachcompany’s site, assessing the aesthetics and usability as well as theamount of job and organizational information provided. The 24websites rated highest (N = 12) and lowest (N = 12) with respectto aesthetics, usability, and the provision of job/organizationalinformation were chosen as candidates for possible inclusion inour study. Third, data were collected from 610 university studentswho each examined and rated two websites drawn at random fromthe pool of 24 organizations. Fourth, the 10 websites to be used inthis study were selected as those that had the highest (N = 5) andlowest (N = 5) average rating across the criteria of usability, aes-thetics and quantity of job and organizational informationprovided.

2.1. Design and procedure

Participants were undergraduate students asked to assume theywere job seekers who had just graduated from college and wereasked to review the websites of two randomly selected organiza-tions drawn from a pool of ten Fortune 500 companies. Note that294 new participants were selected to participate in the finalstudy. However, as the designs of the pilot and final studies wereidentical, 287 persons in the pilot study that responded to stimuliused in the final study were merged with the new participantsresulting in a total sample size of 581. Analyses involving onlythe new 294 participants resulted in virtually identical resultsand results from the larger sample size are reported as theestimated relationships contain less sampling error.

Each participant was asked to search for a job of his or herchoosing within the organization. Participants were asked to baseall responses on what was seen on the organizations’ websitesonly. Participants were asked to view both the homepages of theFortune 500 company websites and also the ‘careers’ portions ofthe Fortune 500 company websites. No manipulations were madeto the websites; participants viewed the actual websites andsearched for real job openings with the organization. After partic-ipants viewed the organizational websites, they were directed to aseries of questionnaires to assess their perceptions of the amountsof job and organizational information, website aesthetics andusability, and other study variables. Websites were monitored toverify that they did not change over the duration of the study.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Usability and aestheticsWebsite usability was assessed with Williamson et al.’s (2003)

four-item measure of ease of use (a = .91). Eight aesthetic itemswere developed based on Cober et al.’s (2003) measure of websitestyle (a = .87). Both scales utilized a seven-point Likert-type scaleranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.

2.2.2. Amount of job informationTo assess participants’ perceptions of amount of job information

on the Fortune 500 company websites, a three-item measure fromAllen et al.’s (2007) scale of job information was used (a = .75).Participants responded to Likert-type questions on a seven-pointscale ranging from 1 = not much at all to 7 = a very great amount.

2.2.3. Amount of organizational informationTo assess participants’ perceptions of amount of organizational

information on the Fortune 500 company websites, a four-itemmeasure from Allen et al.’s (2007) scale of organizational

information was used (a = .77). Participants responded to Likert-type questions on a seven-point scale ranging from 1 = not muchat all to 7 = a very great amount.

2.2.4. Attitudes toward the websiteChen & Wells, 1999 three-item measure of website attitudes

was used (a = .96) to assess participants’ attitudes toward the orga-nizational websites they viewed. Participants responded to Likert-type questions on a seven-point scale ranging from 1 = stronglydisagree to 7 = strongly agree.

2.2.5. Attitudes toward the organizationParticipants’ attitudes toward the organization were assessed

with Allen et al.’s (2004) five-item measure of attitudes towardthe organization which was adapted from a survey of affectiveresponses developed by Fishbein and Ajzen (1975; a = .94). Eachparticipant responded to the questions on a Likert-type scale rang-ing from 1 = very negative to 7 = very positive.

2.2.6. Perceived P-O fitPerceived P-O fit was examined as the participants’ overall self-

reported perception of fit with the organization. Participants’perceived P-O fit was measured with a three-item questionnairetaken from Cable and Judge (1996; a = .75). The response scaleranged from 1 = not at all to 7 = completely.

2.2.7. Perceived P-J fitPerceived P-J fit was assessed with a five-item measure devel-

oped by Lauver and Kristof-Brown (2001; a = .91). The five itemsassessed different conceptualizations of P-J fit, including perceivedcongruence of skills, abilities, and personality with the job. The re-sponse scale ranged from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly agree.

2.2.8. Organizational attractionIn order to assess participants’ attraction to the organization, a

five-item measure was taken from Highhouse, Lievens, and Sinar(2003; a = .91), using a seven-point response scale (1 = stronglydisagree; 7 = strongly agree).

2.2.9. Control variablesOrganizational familiarity, attractiveness of the industry the

organization is in, attractiveness of the organization’s benefits,prior attitudes toward the organization, and organizational imagewere all used as control variables in the study. Familiarity withthe organization was assessed with a single item ‘‘In general,how familiar are you with this organization?’’ using a 1 = not atall familiar to 7 = very familiar scale. Similarly, attractiveness ofthe industry was assessed as responses to ‘‘In general, how wouldyou rate the attractiveness of the industry of this organization?’’using 1 = very unattractive to 7 = very attractive. Attractiveness ofbenefits was measured with a similar item. Prior organizationalattitudes was measured with ‘‘Before participating in this study,what were your prior attitudes toward this organization?’’ using1 = very unfavorable and 7 = very favorable. Lastly, organizationalimage was assessed using five items with the common stem:‘‘How does this organization compare to other organizations youknow on the following’’ with five dimensions: concern for the envi-ronment, high ethical standards, overall public image, communityinvolvement, and product quality (adapted from Turban & Green-ing, 1997).

3. Results

Descriptive statistics and correlations among study variablesare shown in Table 1. A series of regression equations were used

Table 1Means, standard deviations, and correlations among study variables.

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

1. Familiarity 3.17 1.76 1.002. Benefits 4.40 1.32 .12 –3. Industry 4.12 1.53 .20 .53 –4. Prior attitudes 3.99 1.11 .30 .28 .40 –5. Organizational image 4.55 1.09 .18 .42 .47 .38 –6. Job information 4.32 1.35 .19 .52 .28 .22 .45 –7. Org. information 4.60 1.21 .23 .48 .35 .24 .56 .68 –8. Usability 5.14 1.44 .15 .48 .33 .22 .49 .53 .59 –9. Aesthetics 5.11 1.13 .19 .45 .33 .19 .48 .43 .58 .69 –10. Website attitudes 5.18 1.46 .14 .51 .37 .21 .51 .61 .64 .69 .63 –11. Organizational attitudes 4.91 1.27 .27 .50 .53 .40 .68 .55 .62 .60 .56 .75 –12. P-O fit 4.41 0.95 .15 .38 .42 .28 .56 .31 .43 .41 .40 .44 .57 –13. P-J fit 4.02 1.34 .18 .36 .51 .30 .34 .25 .30 .30 .28 .33 .43 .38 –14. Organizational attraction 3.68 1.42 .22 .46 .62 .34 .40 .32 .31 .28 .24 .37 .51 .42 .68

N = 581. All correlations significant at p < .01.

Table 2Regression analyses predicting attitudes toward the website, Hypotheses 1–4.

Variable B SE B b R2 (DR2)

Model 1: Control variables .37Familiarity .04 .03 .05Benefits .39 .04 .35**

Industry .03 .04 .03prior attitudes �.07 .05 �.05Org. image .48 .05 .36**

R2 = .37**

Added predictor in model 2H1: Usability .51 .04 .51** .54 (.17**)H2: Aesthetics .54 .05 .42** .49 (.12**)H3: Job information .43 .04 .40** .47 (.10**)H4: Org information .53 .05 .44** .48 (.11**)

Note: Models for H1, H2, H3, and H4 are not sequential with one another.� p < .05** p < .01

Fig. 2. Effects website usability and job information on attitudes towards theorganization.

1954 C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959

to evaluate Hypotheses 1–4 which examined whether websitedesign (i.e., website aesthetics, H1, usability, H2) and websitecontent (i.e., amount of job information, H3, and organizationalinformation, H4) predicted website attitudes. In each regressionmodel, the five control variables were entered into the first blockof predictors. Next, each hypothesis was tested by adding a singleadditional predictor to the model and examining the significance ofthe change in R2 values. Each model included only one predictorother than the control variables and each was compared to thebaseline model of only control variables. Each of the hypotheseswere supported as each predictor explained additional variancein attitudes towards the website above and beyond that explainedby the control variables (see Table 2).

Moderated regression analyses were used to test Hypotheses5–6. Hypothesis 5 examined the interaction between the amountof job information and website design (i.e., aesthetics and usabil-ity) on attitudes toward the organization. The control variables(familiarity, benefits, industry, prior attitudes, and organizationalimage) accounted for 56% of the variance. The addition of job infor-mation, usability, and the job information-usability cross-productterms accounted for a total of 64% of the variance, DR2 = .08,F(3,572) = 40.80, p < .001.2 More importantly, the job information-usability interaction was significant (b = �.08, t = �3.06, p = .002).To interpret the interaction, values of amount of job information

2 Throughout the study any variable used to compute interaction terms wasstandardized prior to forming the cross-product term (see Cohen, Cohen, West, &Aiken, 2003).

and usability were plotted at one standard deviation below andabove the mean (see Fig. 2).

In a separate model, the addition of job information, aesthetics,and the job information-aesthetics cross-product terms accountedfor a total of 63% of the variance, DR2 = .07, F(3,572) = 37.77,p < .001. Additionally, the job information-aesthetics interactionwas significant (b = �.081, t = �2.93, p = .004). Thus, Hypothesis 5was supported. Values of amount of job information and aestheticswere also plotted (see Fig. 3). As predicted by signaling theory,when the amount of job information on a recruitment websitewas lower, website usability and aesthetics played a greater rolein predicting favorable organizational attitudes.

Hypothesis 6 examined the influence of organizational informa-tion, aesthetics and usability, and the organizational informationcross-products on attitudes towards the organization. The fullregression model using organizational information, usability, andthe cross product of these two variables accounted for 64% of thevariance, DR2 = .07, F(3,572) = 39.37, p < .001. The interactionbetween amount of organizational information and website usabil-ity was found to be significant (b = �.06, t = �2.36, p = .018). Tointerpret the significant interaction found for Hypothesis 6, valuesfor amount of organizational information were plotted (see Fig. 4).As predicted by signaling theory, when the amount of organizationinformation was lower on a recruitment website, website usabilityplayed a greater role in predicting favorable organizationalattitudes. The model including organizational information, aesthet-ics, and the cross-product of the two accounted for 62% of the vari-ance, DR2 = .06, F(3,572) = 31.15, p < .001, however, the interactionbetween amount of organizational information and website

Fig. 3. Effects website aesthetics and job information on attitudes towards theorganization.

Fig. 4. Effects website usability and organizational information on attitudestowards the organization.

Fig. 5. Effects job information and P-J fit on attitudes towards the organization.

Fig. 6. Effects website aesthetics and P-J fit on attitudes towards the organization.

3 While there was a moderated relationship between some variables and attitudestowards the organization, these effects happen prior to the proposed mediation in themodel. Thus, we did not hypothesize moderated mediation, in which mediationhappens under some conditions but not others, nor did we hypothesize mediatedmoderation as the moderated variable in this study is attitudes towards theorganization (the mediator) not the criterion of organizational attraction.

C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959 1955

aesthetics was not significant (b = �.02, t = �.88, p = .38). On thewhole, Hypothesis 6 was partially supported.

Hypothesis 7 suggested that P-O fit would moderate the effectof organizational information on organizational attitudes such thatmore information about the organization will not enhancefavorable attitudes when fit is poor. While the model that includedP-O fit, organizational information, and the interaction term ac-counted for additional variance above the control variables,DR2 = .06, F(3,572) = 31.25, p < .001, the interaction between P-Ofit and organizational information was not significant. Thus, therewas no support for Hypothesis 7.

Hypothesis 8 examined the same effect using P-J rather thanP-O fit. The model that included P-J fit, job information, and theinteraction term accounted for additional variance beyond the con-trol variables, DR2 = .05, F(3,572) = 126.04, p < .001. The interactionbetween job information and P-J fit was significant (b = �.08,t = �2.88, p = .004) in determining the effect of job informationon attitudes towards the organization. Plotting the interaction inFig. 5 indicates that attitudes towards the organization are moreuniformly high when more job information is presented. Some-what contrary to our expectations, job information was moreimportant for determining attitudes towards the organizationwhen P-J fit was low. Put differently, it would seem that high jobinformation may compensate for poor P-J fit in determiningattitudes towards the organization.

Hypothesis 9 investigated the role of both P-O and P-J fit as amoderator of the relationship between website usability and atti-tudes towards the organization. While the regression modelincluding P-O fit, P-J fit, usability, and the two P-E fit-usabilitycross product terms did account for significantly additional vari-ance, DR2 = .07, F(5,570) = 23.12, p < .001, than the model with

only control variables as predictors, neither of the interactionterms were significant. Therefore, Hypothesis 9 was not supported.

Hypothesis 10 examined both P-O and P-J fit as a moderator ofthe website aesthetic relationship with attitudes towards the orga-nization. The change in R2 of .06 above the control variable onlymodel was significant, F(5,570) = 19.33, p < .001. However,evidence was mixed such that the interaction term involving P-Ofit was not significant (b = .02, t = .67, p = .50), while the P-J fit-aes-thetics interaction term was significant (b = �.08, t = �2.12,p = .03). Thus, Hypothesis 10 was partially supported. Plots of theinteraction appear in Fig. 6. As can be seen, consistent with theELM, when P-J fit was high, aesthetics exerted less influence onattitudes towards the organization. Conversely, the influence ofaesthetics on attitudes toward the organization was morepronounced when P-J fit was low.

Hypothesis 11 predicted a significant relationship betweenwebsite attitudes and organizational attitudes. This was assessedboth via zero-order correlation and hierarchical regression. Thezero-order correlation between website attitudes and organiza-tional attitudes was large and significant (r = .75). The hierarchicalregression also supported Hypothesis 11 in which adding websiteattitudes to the control/base model resulted in an increase in R2

from .57 to .73, DR2 = .16, F(1,574) = 347.05, p < .001.Finally, Hypothesis 12 posited that attitudes towards the orga-

nization would mediate the relationships between other predictors(website content and design, attitudes towards the website, as wellas P-E fit) and organizational attraction.3 A multivariate R version of

Table 3Final regression model predicting organizational attraction.

Variable B SE B b

Control variablesFamiliarity .04 .02 .05Benefits .13 .04 .12**

Industry .23 .03 .25**

Prior attitudes .01 .04 .01Prior org. image .02 .05 .01Hypothesized mediatorAttitudes towards organization .17 .06 .15**

Other predictorsJob information .09 .06 .06Organizational information �.11 .06 �.08Usability �.09 .06 �.07Aesthetics �.16 .06 �.11**

P-O fit .09 .05 .07P-J fit .62 .05 .44**

Website attitudes .03 .05 .03Job information � Usability �.04 .04 �.03P-J fit � Job Information .11 .04 .09**

P-J fit � Aesthetics �.01 .04 �.01

Note: Job Information, organizational information, usability, aesthetics, P-O fit, P-Jfit, and interaction terms are standardized variables.** p < .01

1956 C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959

Baron & Kenny, 1986 procedure was followed, where (1) the multi-ple regression of organizational attraction on the predictors jobinformation, organizational information, website usability, websiteaesthetics, and previously significant cross-products (Job Informa-tion-Usability, Job Information-P-J fit, Aesthetics-P-J fit) must besignificant, (2) the multiple regression of attitudes toward the orga-nization on job information, organizational information, websiteusability, website aesthetics, website attitudes, and cross-productsmust be significant, (3) attitudes toward the organization signifi-cantly predict attraction to the organization, and (4) when the influ-ence of attitudes toward the organization are held constant, anonsignificant effect should be found between attraction and jobinformation, organizational information, website usability, websiteaesthetics, website attitudes, and relevant cross-products. All modelsincluded the control variables.

These analyses suggested that full mediation was notsupported, though partial mediation for some variables was sup-ported. A model including only control variables was significant,R2 = .43, F(5,575) = 86.18, p < .001. A model including thesevariables plus the hypothesized mediator, attitudes towards theorganization, resulted in a significant but small increment in vari-ance accounted for, DR2 = .02, F(1,574) = 19.03, p < .001. The finalmodel including all other model variables resulted in a large signif-icant increase in R2, DR2 = .16, F(10,564) = 23.49, p < .001. Table 3presents the regression coefficients for control variables, organiza-tional attitudes, and other predictors for the final model in the pro-cedure. As can be seen, while some predictors were not significantonce the control variables and attitudes towards the organizationwere in the model, website aesthetics, P-J fit, and the P-J fit-jobinformation interaction remained significant predictors of organi-zational attraction (as did control variables attractiveness of bene-fits and attractiveness of the industry). Thus, attitudes towards theorganization only partially mediated the effects of the other pre-dictor variables on organizational attraction.

4. Discussion

The use of the Internet has become a routine part of employeerecruitment practices for most large organizations. We examined12 hypotheses drawn from previous literature, signaling theory(Spence, 1973, 1974) and the elaboration likelihood model (Petty

& Cacioppo, 1981). The first four hypotheses supported previouswork (e.g., Allen et al., 2007; Selden & Orenstein, 2011) showingthat website usability, aesthetics, amount of job information, andamount of organizational information all impact viewers’ attitudestowards organizational recruitment websites. Support for thesehypotheses are also consistent with past research in the consumerpsychology literature, where individuals’ attitudes toward adver-tisements have been among the best predictors of advertisementeffectiveness (e.g., Brown & Stayman, 1992). Attitudes formedtoward advertisements are positively associated with furtherexploration of the advertisement source (Olney, Holbrook, & Batra,1991), and more information provided on a website influenceswebsite attitudes (Allen et al., 2004, 2007). These results furtherdelineate the importance of effective website design and the inclu-sion of useful content on recruitment websites.

In another confirmation of previous findings (e.g., Allen et al.,2007), support was found for the relationship between attitudestoward the recruitment website and attitudes toward the organi-zation, underscoring the importance of recruitment websites informing attitudes towards the organization and eventually organi-zational attraction. Another interesting finding was that whenexamining the correlations among the control variables (organiza-tion familiarity, attractiveness of benefits, attractiveness of indus-try, prior attitudes towards the organization, and organizationalimage) and organizational attitudes, prior image of the organiza-tion typically played a large role and correlated quite highly withattitudes towards the organization. However, once website-relatedvariables were factored in, the effects of prior image and prior atti-tudes were much reduced (typically to non-significance). Thesefindings suggest that recruitment websites can overturn prioropinions towards an organization.

One of the strengths of this study was the nuanced examinationwe gave to our study variables via moderation hypotheses. For in-stance, we posited that more information leads to more favorableattitudes when P-E fit is good. In other words, we hypothesizedthat when fit was poor, more information would not necessarilyenhance positive feelings toward the organization. While we didfind a significant interaction involving P-J fit, examining the inter-action in Fig. 5 indicates that when P-J fit is low, high levels of jobinformation can compensate such that the attitude towards theorganization is high despite poor fit. While this was counter toour hypothesis, it indicates the crucial role of information avail-ability in determining attitudes towards an organization. Similarly,both organizational and job information was associated with morepositive attitudes towards the organization regardless of P-E fit.Thus, a practical implication is that organizations can improvetheir image among viewers by providing more content even forpersons who are a poor fit for the job in question. Signaling theorysuggests that organizations willing to divulge more information onits public website may be perceived as more open and transparent,which may be perceived as a positive attribute by all viewers, evenwhen fit is poor. Given this, we might expect that viewers havefavorable impressions of an organization that provides a lot ofinformation yet will still not be attracted to it if fit is poor. Thismay also help explain why attitudes towards the organizationdid not fully mediate the relationship between the predictors andorganizational attraction. P-J fit remained a unique predictor oforganizational attraction once attitudes towards the organizationwere entered into the model. This result is consistent with Allenet al. (2007), who found that an attitudes-mediated model fit bet-ter with every antecedent studied except job information. On thewhole, the recommendation to organizations from these findingsis clear. More information is better than less information, particu-larly information related to the job.

While we did not pose formal hypotheses on the matter, wealso found that when P-E fit was high, attitudes towards the

C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959 1957

organization were more favorable. These findings of effects of P-Oand P-J fit complement the limited studies incorporating P-E fitinto Internet recruitment research (i.e., Dineen et al., 2002; Pfieffel-mann et al., 2010).

4.1. Theoretical implications, signaling theory, and the ELM

Perhaps the primary contribution of this study was the incorpo-ration of two sets of hypotheses with particularly important theo-retical implications. This is the first study of which we are aware tosimultaneously incorporate both signaling theory and the ELM inthe Internet recruitment context to form empirically testedhypotheses. As the determinants of viewer opinions of internetrecruitment websites and their corresponding organizations arecomplex, it is important to take a more nuanced view of thesedeterminants in order to better understand them. Signaling theoryprovided a lens through which the impact of website features andcontent can be viewed. We reasoned that when information aboutthe job and the organization is lacking, signals in the form of web-site usability and aesthetics are more important for determiningattitudes towards the organization (Hypotheses 5 and 6). Con-versely, when more information about the organization and jobis directly provided, website characteristics should be less impor-tant in determining potential applicants’ reactions. Three of fourof these relationships were supported such that website usabilitydisplayed the hypothesized relationships for both organizationand job information while aesthetics displayed this pattern forjob information.

In another set of hypotheses, the ELM (Petty & Cacioppo, 1981)provided rationale for the influence of website content and fea-tures under different levels of P-E fit. The ELM can be applied tothe context of Internet recruitment such that when P-E (job andorganization) fit is high, viewers will be motivated to take a morecentral route to information processing. In this case, the actual con-tent related to the job and organization serves as the central routeas explicit information can be evaluated in a deliberate way. Con-versely, the ELM posits that when relevance is low in the form ofpoor P-E fit, viewers’ impressions are more likely to be driven byperipheral cues such as aesthetics and usability. Our findings onlypartially supported this view. Specifically, when P-J fit was high,aesthetics played a less important role in determining attitudes to-wards the organization. However, there was no effect of P-O fit, norwas there a moderating effect of fit on the usability-attitudes link.On the whole, we believe there was some tentative support for thenotion that better fit between viewers and the organizations andjobs being investigated results in more central information pro-cessing, though more research is needed to examine the boundaryconditions under which the ELM may and may not apply.

4.2. Other findings and trends

One finding throughout the study was that P-J fit seemed toplay a stronger role than did P-O fit in determining the relation-ships among the variables. This could be due to the stronger rolethat job fit plays in attraction to the organization for potentialapplicants. In this study, P-J fit correlated with organizationalattraction at .68 which was significantly larger than the P-O fit cor-relation with organizational attraction of .42 (Steiger’s z = 7.35,p < .001; see Meng, Rosenthal, & Rubin, 1992). This was also appar-ent in our final set of analyses in which P-O fit effects appeared tobe mediated by attitudes towards the organization while P-J effectswere not mediated. In other words, the fit of the job was more clo-sely related to organizational attraction than was fit of the organi-zation for most viewers. This may be due to the randomassignment of participants to Fortune 500 company. Our controlvariable results indicated that industry of the organization

correlated more highly with organizational attraction than anyvariable other than P-J fit. In practice, it is likely that job seekerswould target organizations in their primary field of interest, whichwould presumably result in a search with more similar jobs thanthe variety used in this study. In these cases, when the type ofjob being investigated is effectively held constant, organizationalinformation may be a more important factor.

4.3. Limitations and future research

Results of this study provide further insight into the relation-ships between organizations’ websites and viewers’ perceptions;however, some limitations should be noted. Student participantsmay not have taken the task as seriously as might an actual jobseeker. Additionally, the young age of the participants, coupledwith the fact that many were not seeking a career during the timein which this study occurred may have limited the generalizabilityof the study. Additionally, it would have been preferable to havenot only actual job seekers, but also behavioral outcomes such assending a resume to the organization rather than attractionmeasures.

The participants’ lack of experience in the workplace may havelimited results related to fit perceptions. Without experience inmultiple workplaces, many of the participants may not haveknown what they prefer in a job or whether they would fit wellwithin an organization. Experience working with different organi-zations and exposure to different organizational cultures and jobsallows individuals to more accurately assess what they do and donot value in the workplace. Although the participants in the studymay have lacked experience in the workplace, they were veryfamiliar with the Internet, as participants indicated they spent anaverage of approximately 18–19 h/week on the Internet. Addition-ally, many organizations target their recruitment at younger appli-cant pools. Thus, participants in this study are aligned with thepopulation of workers that many large organizations are targeting.

Although important findings have been discovered throughInternet recruitment experiments based on fabricated, fictitiouswebsites, the external validity of such research may be called intoquestion. Accordingly, recent studies have called for more utiliza-tion of actual organizational websites in research (De Goedeet al., 2011; Pfieffelmann et al., 2010; Selden & Orenstein, 2011).While the use of actual Fortune 500 company websites increasedthe realism of the study, the tradeoff for this increased realism isa lack of experimental control. Thus, no unequivocal cause-and-ef-fect conclusions can be drawn from the study. Likewise, the factthat only Fortune 500 company websites were used may have lim-ited the generalizability to larger organizations with potentiallymore resources to invest in Internet recruitment. However, theuse of actual Fortune 500 company websites allowed for meaning-ful control variables, such as organizational familiarity and organi-zational image, to be investigated as sources of influence onorganization attitudes and attraction. Results of this study increasethe external validity of past studies that have examined Internetrecruitment website characteristics via random assignment to fic-tional websites and have found similar results (e.g., Braddy et al.,2009). Correspondingly, the internal validity of this study is bol-stered by the consistency between this study’s findings and thoseobtained in past randomized trial studies.

Another potential limitation of this study is the single-sourceself-report nature of the measures. Common methods variance(CMV) is a complex topic and one can never be certain of the extentto which correlations are inflated or attenuated due to the methodof measurement. Some authors have found very little empiricalevidence of bias as a result of CMV. For instance, in an extremelylarge meta-analysis, Crampton and Wagner (1994) found thatself-other correlations were rarely lower in magnitude than

1958 C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959

self-self correlations. Spector (2006, p. 228) argues, ‘‘CMV is an ur-ban legend, and the time has come to retire the idea and the term.’’As Richardson, Simmering, and Sturman (2009) summarize, Spec-tor does not argue that method cannot influence measurement,but rather that common conceptualizations of CMV incorrectly as-sume (a) method alone is sufficient to produce bias and (b) all con-structs measured with the same method share the same biases.Similar arguments have been made by Bagozzi and Yi (1990),Crampton and Wagner (1994), Doty and Glick (1998), and more re-cently Conway and Lance (2010). Despite skepticism of the role ofCMV from methodologists, we conducted a Harman’s single-factortest (see Mossholder, Bennett, Kemery, & Wesolowski, 1998) onour two most similar constructs with the highest observed correla-tion. We selected the three item website attitudes measure and thefive item organizational attitudes measure and estimated confir-matory factor models. The first model was a two factor model inwhich each set of measures loaded onto their appropriate con-struct. This model fit the data quite well (v2

ð19Þ ¼ 168:60, p < .01;CFI = .97; TLI = .96; SRMR = .042; see Hu & Bentler, 1999 for sug-gested model evaluation criteria). The second model was a singlefactor model which was nested within the two factor model byconstraining the correlation between the factors to 1.0. This modelfit the data much more poorly (v2

ð20Þ ¼ 1505:35, p < .01; CFI = .74;TLI = .64; SRMR = .086), supporting discriminant validity amongthe constructs despite their similarity. We also note that thereare several correlations in Table 1 that are quite small in magni-tude despite measuring related constructs. On the whole, whilewe cannot rule out the impact of common method variance onour correlations, we do not see evidence that hypotheses were sup-ported solely due to common methods variance.

4.4. Conclusions

The use of technology in the workplace has impacted all areas ofwork. Moreover, technical innovations have provided advanta-geous avenues for enhancing organizational recruitment practices.Enhancing recruitment practices through the use of the Internetcan provide beneficial outcomes for both the organization andjob seeker. However, additional research is needed to fully under-stand how recruitment websites impact potential job applicants.This study has taken an important step in that process by examin-ing how recruitment website content and design influence websiteattitudes, organizational attitudes, and ultimately attraction to theorganization. This study expanded previous frameworks examin-ing Internet recruitment in two ways. First, we incorporated a lar-ger number of variables into a more comprehensive model thanhave previous studies on the topic. Second, we proposed severalhypotheses of moderation drawn from signaling theory and theELM, which were largely supported. The result is a more nuancedinvestigation of the role of website features and fit perceptionson the recruitment process. Continuing research of this kind canhelp organizations understand how to technologically enhancetheir current practices in the most effective and efficient waypossible.

References

Allen, D. G., Mahto, R. V., & Otondo, R. F. (2007). Web-based recruitment: Effects ofinformation, organizational brand, and attitudes toward a web site on applicantattraction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1696–1708.

Allen, D. G., Van Scotter, J. R., & Otondo, R. (2004). Recruitment communicationmedia features: Impact on pre-hire outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 57,143–171.

Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1990). Assessing method variance in multitrait–multimethodmatrices: The case of self-reported affect and perceptions at work. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 75, 547–560.

Barber, A. E. (1998). Recruiting employees: Individual and organizational perspectives.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Barber, A. E., & Roehling, M. V. (1993). Job postings and the decision to interview: Averbal protocol analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 845–856.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction insocial psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statisticalconsiderations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 1173–1182.

Braddy, P. W., Meade, A. W., & Kroustalis, C. M. (2008). Online recruiting: The effectsof organizational familiarity, website usability, and website attractiveness onviewers’ impressions of organizations. Computers in Human Behavior, 24,2992–3001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.05.005.

Braddy, P. W., Meade, A. W., Michael, J. J., & Fleenor, J. W. (2009). Internet recruiting:Effects of website content features on viewers’ perceptions of organizationalculture. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17, 19–34.

Braddy, P. W., Thompson, L. F., Wuensch, K. L., & Grossnickle, W. F. (2003). Internetrecruiting: The effects of web page design features. Social Science ComputerReview, 21, 374–385.

Bretz, R. D., & Judge, T. A. (1993). Person-organization fit and the theory of workadjustment: Implications for satisfaction, tenure, and career success. Journal ofVocational Behavior, 44, 32–54.

Brown, S. P., & Stayman, D. M. (1992). Antecedents and consequences of attitudetoward the ad: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 34–51.

Byrne, D. E. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.Cable, D. M., Aiman-Smith, L., Mulvey, P. W., & Edwards, J. R. (2000). The sources and

accuracy of job applicants’ beliefs about organizational culture. Academy ofManagement Journal, 43, 1076–1085.

Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1994). Pay preferences and job search decisions: Aperson-organization fit perspective. Personnel Psychology, 47, 317–348.

Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1996). Person-organization fit, job choice decisions, andorganizational entry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67,294–311.

Cappelli, P. (2001). Making the most of on-line recruiting. Harvard Business Review,79, 139–146.

Chapman, D. S., Uggerslev, K. L., Carroll, S. A., Piasentin, K. A., & Jones, D. A. (2005).Applicant attraction to organizations and job choice: A meta-analytic review ofthe correlates of recruiting outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 928–944.

Chatman, J. A. (1989). Improving interactional organizational research: A model ofperson-organization fit. Academy of Management Review, 14, 333–349.

Chatman, J. (1991). Matching people and organizations: Selection and socializationin public accounting firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 459–484.

Chen, Q., & Wells, W. D. (1999). Attitude toward the site. Journal of AdvertisingResearch, 5, 27–37.

Christiansen, N., Villanova, P., & Mikulay, S. (1997). Political influence compatibility:Fitting the person to the climate. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18, 709–730.

Cober, R. T., & Brown, D. J. (2006). Direct employers association recruiting trendssurvey. Washington, DC: Booz, Allen, & Hamilton. <www.jobcentral.com/DEsurvey.pdf>.

Cober, R. T., Brown, D. J., Blumental, A. J., Doverspike, D., & Levy, P. (2000). The questfor the qualified job surfer: It’s time the public sector catches the wave. PublicPersonnel Management, 29, 479–494.

Cober, R. T., Brown, D. J., Keeping, L. M., & Levy, P. E. (2004). Recruitment on the net:How do organizational web site characteristics influence applicant attraction?Journal of Management, 30(5), 623–646.

Cober, R. T., Brown, D. J., Levy, P. E., Cober, A. B., & Keeping, L. M. (2003).Organizational websites: Web site content and style as determinants oforganizational attraction. International Journal of Selection and Assessment,11(2/3), 158–169.

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: LawrenceErlbaum.

Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authorsregarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business &Psychology, 25(3), 325–334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9181-6.

Coyle, J. R., & Thorson, E. (2001). The effects of progressive levels of interactivity andvividness in web marketing sites. Journal of Advertising, 30(3), 65–77.

Crampton, S. M., & Wagner, J. A. (1994). Percept–percept inflation inmicroorganizational research: An investigation of prevalence and effect.Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1), 67–76.

Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computertechnology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35,982–1003.

Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

De Goede, M. E. E., Van Vianen, A. E., & Klehe, U. (2011). Attracting applicants on theweb: PO fit, industry culture stereotypes, and website design. InternationalJournal of Selection and Assessment, 19(1), 51–61.

Dineen, B. R., Ash, S. R., & Noe, R. A. (2002). A web of applicant attraction: Person-organization fit in the context of web-based recruitment. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 87, 723–734.

Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H. (1998). Common methods bias: Does common methodsvariance really bias results? Organizational Research Methods, 1(4), 374–406.

Edwards, J. R. (1991). Person-job fit: A conceptual integration, literature review, andmethodological critique. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.). International review of industrialand organizational psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 283–357). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Feldman, D. C., & Klaas, B. S. (2002). Internet job hunting: A field study of applicantexperiences with on-line recruiting. Human Resource Management, 41, 175–192.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: Anintroduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

C.K. Gregory et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 1949–1959 1959

Herriot, P., & Rothwell, C. (1981). Organizational choice and decision theory: Effectsof employers’ literature and selection interview. Journal of OccupationalPsychology, 54, 17–31.

Highhouse, S., Hoffman, J. R., Greve, E. M., & Collins, A. E. (2002). Persuasive impactof organizational value statements in a recruitment context. Journal of AppliedSocial Psychology, 32, 1737–1755. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb02773.x.

Highhouse, S., Lievens, F., & Sinar, E. F. (2003). Measuring attraction toorganizations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 986–1001.

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structureanalysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural EquationModeling, 6, 1–55.

Jones, D. A., Shultz, J. W., & Chapman, D. S. (2006). Recruiting through jobadvertisements: The effects of cognitive elaboration on decision making.International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 167–179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00342.x.

Judge, T. A., & Cable, D. M. (1997). Applicant personality, organizational culture, andorganizational attraction. Personnel Psychology, 50, 359–394.

Karat, J. (1997). Evolving the scope of user-centered design. Communications of theACM, 40(7), 33–38.

Karr, A. R. (2000). A special report about life on the job and trends taking shapethere. Wall Street Journal, 4, A1.

Kay, A. S. (2000). Recruiters embrace the Internet. Information Week, 778, 72–80.Kim, M., & Hunter, J. (1993a). Attitude-behavior relations: A meta-analysis of

attitudinal relevance and topic. Journal of Communications, 43, 101–142.Kim, M., & Hunter, J. (1993b). Relationships among attitudes, behavioral intentions,

and behavior: A meta-analysis of past research, Part 2. Communication Research,20, 331–364.

Kristof, A. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of itsconceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49,1–49.

Kristof-Brown, A. L., Zimmerman, R. D., & Johnson, E. C. (2005). Consequences ofindividuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person-job, person-organization,person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 281–342.

Lauver, K. J., & Kristof-Brown, A. (2001). Distinguishing between employees’perceptions of person-job and person-organization fit. Journal of VocationalBehavior, 59, 454–470.

Marcus, A. (2001). Is the island too small for HR ad headhunters? ElectronicEngineering Times, 1152, 129–133.

Mason, N. A., & Belt, J. A. (1986). Effectiveness of specificity in recruitmentadvertising. Journal of Management, 12, 425–432.

Maurer, S. D., & Cook, D. P. (2011). Using company web sites to e-recruit qualifiedapplicants: A job marketing based review of theory-based research. Computersin Human Behavior, 27, 106–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.013.

Maurer, S. D., & Liu, Y. (2007). Developing effective e-recruiting websites: Insightsfor managers from marketers. Business Horizons, 50(4), 305–314.

Meglino, B. M., Ravlin, E. C., & Adkins, C. L. (1989). A work values approach tocorporate culture: A field test of the value congruence process and itsrelationship to individual outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 424–432.

Meng, X., Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1992). Comparing correlated correlationcoefficients. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 172–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.111.1.172.

Millman, H. (1998). Online job sites boom. InfoWorld, 20, 119–120.Mossholder, K. W., Bennett, N., Kemery, E. R., & Wesolowski, M. A. (1998).

Relationships between bases of power and work reactions: The mediational roleof procedural justice. Journal of Management, 24(4), 533–552. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(99)80072-5.

Olney, T. J., Holbrook, M. B., & Batra, R. (1991). Consumer responses to advertising:The effects of ad content, emotions, and attitude toward the ad on viewing time.Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 440–453.

O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organization commitment and psychologicalattachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization onprosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492–499.

O’Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and organizationalculture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit.Academy of Management Journal, 34, 487–516.

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion – classic andcontemporary approaches. Dubuque, Iowa: W.C. Brown Co. Publishers.

Pfieffelmann, B., Wagner, S. H., & Libkuman, T. (2010). Recruiting on corporate websites: Perceptions of fit and attraction. International Journal of Selection andAssessment, 18(1), 40–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00487.x.

Richardson, H. A., Simmering, M. J., & Sturman, M. C. (2009). A tale of threeperspectives: Examining post hoc statistical techniques for detection andcorrection of common method variance. Organizational Research Methods, 12(4),762–800.

Ryan, A. M., & Schmitt, M. J. (1996). An assessment of organizational climate and P-Efit: A tool for organizational change. The International Journal of OrganizationalAnalysis, 4(1), 75–95.

Rynes, S. L., & Miller, H. E. (1983). Recruiter and job influences on candidates foremployment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 147–154.

Rynes, S. L., Bretz, R. D., & Gerhart, B. (1991). The importance of recruitment in jobchoice: A different way of looking. Personnel Psychology, 44, 487–521.

Scheu, C., Ryan, A. M., Nona, F. 1999. Company web sites as a recruiting mechanism:What influences applicant impressions? In Paper presented at the 14th annualmeeting of the society for industrial and organizational psychology, Atlanta, GA.

Schneider, B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, 40, 437–453.Selden, S., & Orenstein, J. (2011). Government e-recruiting web sites: The influence

of e-recruitment content and usability on recruiting and hiring outcomes in USstate governments. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19, 31–40.http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00532.x.

Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urbanlegend? Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221–232.

Spence, A. M. (1974). Market signaling: Information transfer in hiring and relatedscreening processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87, 355–374.Sylva, H., & Mol, S. T. (2009). E-recruitment: A study into applicant perceptions of an

online application system. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17,311–323. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2009.00473.x.

Tractinsky, N., Katz, A. S., & Ikar, D. (2000). What is beautiful is usable. Interactingwith Computers, 13, 127–145.

Turban, D. B. (2001). Organizational attractiveness as an employer on collegecampuses: An examination of the applicant population. Journal of VocationalBehavior, 58, 293–312.

Turban, D. B., Forret, M. L., & Hendrickson, C. L. (1998). Applicant attraction to firms:Influences of organization reputation, job and organizational attributes, andrecruiter behaviors. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 24–44.

Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance andorganizational attractiveness to prospective employees. Academy ofManagement Journal, 40, 658–672. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/257057.

Tziner, A. (1987). Congruency issue retested using Fineman’s achievement climatenotion. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 2, 63–78.

Van Hoye, G., & Lievens, F. (2007). Investigating web-based recruitment sources:Employee testimonials vs word-of-mouse. International Journal of Selection andAssessment, 15(4), 372–382. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2007.00396.x.

Vancouver, J. B., & Schmitt, N. W. (1991). An exploratory examination of person-organization fit: Organizational goal congruence. Personnel Psychology, 44,333–352.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease ofuse: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27, 451–481.

Verquer, M. L., Beehr, T. A., & Wagner, S. H. (2003). A meta-analysis of relationsbetween person-organization fit and work attitudes. Journal of VocationalBehavior, 63, 473–489.

Walker, H. J., Feild, H. S., Giles, W. F., Armenakis, A. A., & Bernerth, J. B. (2009).Displaying employee testimonials on recruitment web sites: Effects ofcommunication media, employee race, and job seeker race on organizationalattraction and information credibility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94,1354–1364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014964.

Walker, H. J., Feild, H. S., Giles, W. F., Bernerth, J. B., & Short, J. C. (2011). So what doyou think of the organization? A contextual priming explanation forrecruitment web site characteristics as antecedents of job seekers’organizational image perceptions. Organizational Behavior and Human DecisionProcesses, 114, 165–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2010.11.004.

Williamson, I. O., Lepak, D. P., & King, J. (2003). The effect of company recruitmentweb site orientation on individuals’ perceptions of organizationalattractiveness. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 242–263.

Witt, L. A., & Nye, L. G. (1992). Organizational goal congruence and job attitudesrevisited. Oklahoma City, OK: FAA Civil Aeromedical Inst..

Zusman, R. R., & Landis, R. S. (2002). Applicant preferences for web-based versustraditional job postings. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 285–296.