MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Measuring Job Interview Anxiety: Beyond Weak Knees and Sweaty Palms

2004· article· en· W2079230473 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonnel Psychology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployer Branding and e-HRM
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDiscriminant validityJob interviewAnxietyClinical psychologyConfirmatory factor analysisSocial anxietySample (material)PsychometricsTest validityApplied psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryStatisticsStructural equation modeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A multidimensional measure of interview anxiety, called the Measure of Anxiety in Selection Interviews (MASI), was developed using a student sample ( N = 212) and tested using a sample of job applicants in a field setting ( N = 276) . The MASI goes beyond the measurement of “weak knees” and “sweaty palms” by providing an assessment of 5 interview anxiety dimensions: Communication, Appearance, Social, Performance, and Behavioral. The psychometric properties of the scales were strong and confirmatory factor analyses supported the a priori structure. In addition, substantial evidence for the concurrent, discriminant, criterion‐related, and incremental validity of the MASI was obtained. Moreover, a multiple correlation of .34 was found for the 5 MASI scales in the prediction of interview performance. The development of the MASI has important implications for the field, as it may provide the foundation for future research on job interview anxiety, guide interview anxiety treatment programs, and promote the enhancement of job interview validity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it