TARU PUBLICATIONS
COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management cover

COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management

(Since 2007)
Open Access ·Peer-reviewed·ISSN (Online): 2168-930X·ISSN (Print): 0973-7766

WoS  JIF 2026 : 0.6 (Q3)

Powered by:Powered by

Half-Yearly Journal: Publishes research and articles on scientometrics and information management, including bibliometric analysis and quality assurance models.

Issues up to 2022 co-published with and available at:Taylor & Francis Online
EDITOR-CJSIM@tarupublications.com
Taru Online First Current IssueBrowse all Issues
COLLNET Journal of Scientometrics and Information Management
Open Access Research Article

Human and algorithmic decision-making in the personnel selection process: A comparative bibliometric on bias

* ,

* Corresponding author · click or hover a name for details

pp. 175–189Vol. 17Issue 1June 2023DOI: 10.47974/CJSIM-2022-0063XML
Published Online:
01 Jun 2023
Article type:
Research Article
Language:
EN
Article no.:
CJSIM-2022-0063
Pages:
175–189

Abstract

This article examines, with bibliometrics, the publication on bias in organizations’ personnel selection processes, whether they use automated decision-making systems or human-made decisions. While human bias is dynamic, restricted, mutate, and easier to determine the source; algorithmic bias is large-scale, static, and unpredictable. Despite the apparent discrepancy, there is a symbiotic relationship between those two, but somehow only one of them is getting any attention regarding the consequences of fairness on personnel selection and how this influences organizational diversity. So, looking for a better understanding of organizational behaviour, we conduct a bibliometric review to mappings the relations of these two. Here we reviewed 55 articles from the Web of Science Core Collection, from the earliest research published in 1979 to 2021. Only papers of the document type “article” was considered. The tool used for bibliometric data analysis were bibliometrix packages from the RStudio system version 3.6.3. According to our review, the number of studies on the subject is still tiny, and most of them were conducted under controlled conditions without considering the error agent of an organizational environment such as time, organizational culture, and the emotions of the recruiter; this makes it impossible to develop practices to avoid discrimination in these spaces. Concerning the theme, studies on human bias are the most common, with a focus on gender bias, and have recently adopted diversity. Hardly studies on algorithm decision-making consider the process’s fairness as a topic for investigation. However, neither study demonstrates a correlation or systematic approach between them. More interdisciplinary and empirical research should be the focus of future studies.

Keywords

BibliometricsHuman biasPersonnel selection processAlgorithmic decision-making biasOrganizational behaviourPersonnel selection bias

References

[1] Ahonen, P., and Erkkilä, T. Transparency in algorithmic decision-making: Ideational tensions and conceptual shifts in Finland. Information Polity, 2020, 1-14.
[2] Babbie, Earl R. The practice of social research. Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1989.
[3] Callon, Michel, Jean-Pierre Courtial, and Francoise Laville. “Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry.” Scientometrics 22(10), 1991,155-205.
[4] Calders, Toon, and Indrė Žliobaitė. “Why unbiased computational processes can lead to discriminative decision procedures.” Discrimination and privacy in the information society. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013, 43-57.
[5] Caers, Ralf, and Vanessa Castelyns. “LinkedIn and Facebook in Belgium: The influences and biases of social network sites in recruitment and selection procedures.” Social Science Computer Review 29(4), 2011, 437-448.
[6] Cascio, Wayne F., and John C. Scott. “The business value of employee selection.” Handbook of employee selection. Routledge, 2017, 226-248.
[7] Chiao, Vincent. “Fairness, accountability and transparency: notes on algorithmic decision- making in criminal justice.” International Journal of Law in Context 15(2), 2019, 126-139.
[8] Chien, Chen-Fu, and Li-Fei Chen. “Data mining to improve personnel selection and enhance human capital: A case study in high-technology industry.” Expert Systems with applications 34(1), 2008, 280-290. DOI:10.1016/j.eswa.2006.09.003.
[9] Cordovés, Taymi Ceruto. “Algoritmos heurísticos aplicados a la toma de decisiones en un proceso de selección de personal.” Serie Científica de la Universidad de las Ciencias Informáticas 7(3), 2014. Available at <https://publicaciones.uci.cu/?journal=serieandp age=articleandop=viewandpath%5B%5D=376>. Access in: 5 sep. 2020.
[10] Danks, David, and Alex John London. “Algorithmic Bias in Autonomous Systems.” International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence - IJCAI. 17, 2017, 4691-4697.
[11] de Freitas Alves, Rodrigo Martins, et al. “Seleção de pessoas por meio de algoritmos genéticos.” Revista de Administração da Universidade Federal de Santa Maria 10(2),2017, 307-317.
[12] Eaglin, Jessica M. “Constructing recidivism risk.” Emory LJ 67, 2017.
[13] Fiske, S. T. Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, and G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., 1998, 357–414). New York: McGraw-Hill.
[14] Gaille, Louise. 16 Advantages and Disadvantages of Experimental Research. [Web]. April 13, 2017. Available at: https://vittana.org/16-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-experimental- research. [accessed 17 March 2022]
[15] Giest, S., and Grimmelikhuijsen, S. Introduction to special issue algorithmic transparency in government: Towards a multi-level perspective. Inf. Polity, 25, 2020, 409-417.
[16] Huber, V. L., Neale, M. A., and Northcraft, G. B. Decision bias and personnel selection strategies. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40(1), 1987, 136–147. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(87)90009-4.
[17] Isaac, C., Lee, B., and Carnes, M. Interventions that affect gender bias in hiring: A systematic review. Academic medicine: journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 84(10), 2009, 1440.
[18] Jantan, Hamidah; Hamdan, Abdul Razak; Othman, Zulaiha Ali. Human Talent Prediction in HRM using C4.5 Classification Algorithm. International Journal on Computer Science and Engineering, 2(8), 2010, 2526-2534.
[19] Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2),1979.
[20] Marlowe, C. M., Schneider, S. L., and Nelson, C. E. Gender and attractiveness biases in hiring decisions: Are more experienced managers less biased? Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(1), 1996,11–21. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.1.11
[21] Melnikoff, D. E., and Bargh, J. A. The Mythical Number Two. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(4), 2018, 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.02.001
[22] O’neil, C. Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown. 2016.
[23] Orlikowski, W. J. The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization science, 3(3), 1992, 398-427.
[24] Parrino, Marcelo Damian. Heurística aplicada a la asignación de recursos humanos en una Universidad. Ciencia y Tecnología, 1(11),2011,179. Available at https://dspace.palermo. edu/ojs/index.php/cyt/article/view/754 Access in 14 de sep. 2020.
[25] Ployhart, R. E., and Weekley, J. A. Strategy, selection, and sustained competitive advantage. In Handbook of employee selection. 2017, 115-133. Routledge. ISBN 9781315690193
[26] Raji, I. D., Gebru, T., Mitchell, M., Buolamwini, J., Lee, J., and Denton, E. Saving face: Investigating the ethical concerns of facial recognition auditing. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society. 2020, 145-151.
[27] Rudman, L. A., Glick, P., and Phelan, J. E. From the Laboratory to the Bench: Gender Stereotyping Research in the Courtroom. Beyond Common Sense, 2008,83–101. doi:10.1002/9780470696422.ch5.
[28] Thomas W. Edgar, and David O. Manz, in Research Methods for Cyber Security. Syngress. 2017.
[29] Tversky and Kahneman (1986). Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions. The Journal of Business, 59(4),1986.
[30] Wihbey, J. The possibilities of digital discrimination: Research on e-commerce, algorithms and big data. Journalist’s resource.2015.
[31] Zerilli, J., Knott, A., Maclaurin, J., and Gavaghan, C. Transparency in algorithmic and human decision-making: is there a double standard? Philosophy and Technology, 32(4), 2019, 661-683.
[32] Žliobaitė, I. Measuring discrimination in algorithmic decision making. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 31(4), 2017,1060–1089. doi:10.1007/s10618-017-0506-1.

Views: 577Downloads: 130Citations: 0