thesis impression management

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Impression Management and Career Related Outcomes: A Systematic Literature Review

Esraa al-shatti.

1 Kedge Business School, Talence, France

2 Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour, Pau, France

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Despite the popularity of the term impression management (IM) in the literature, there is no consensus as how different types of IM (direct vs. indirect) and modes of interaction (face-to-face vs. online) promote career-related outcomes. While most empirical studies focus on direct IM, individuals engage in both types of IM and interaction modes, particularly indirect IM in the online context. Indeed, recent developments suggest that online interactions now prevail over face-to-face interactions, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Accordingly, this study presents the first systematic literature review that differentiates between types of IM (direct vs. indirect) and modes of interaction (face-to-face vs. online) in a career development perspective. The review shows that direct IM is more widely studied in the face-to-face than online interaction mode, while indirect IM is neglected in both interaction modes. This study thus provides evidence of the need to investigate and differentiate between the different types of IM and interaction modes for career-related outcomes, highlighting some research gaps and directions for future inquiry.

Introduction

In recent years, impression management (IM) has received renewed attention among scholars (e.g., Liu et al., 2019 ; Yang et al., 2021 ). IM can be defined as the process by which “individuals attempt to control the impressions others form of them” (Leary and Kowalski, 1990 ). IM is of primary importance for individuals, since the impressions they make on others influences how others perceive and treat them (Bozeman and Kacmar, 1997 ; Gioaba and Krings, 2017 ). Amongst other tools, IM has revolutionized career development, offering competitive and sustainable career opportunities (Villeda and McCamey, 2019 ). For example, developing a resume and showing daily achievements online are unavoidable tools to enhance our career (El Ouirdi et al., 2015 ). In this vein, individuals using IM have higher chances of getting positive job interview ratings (Amaral et al., 2019 ). A better understanding of the mechanism linking IM and the career-related outcomes requires distinguishing between different IM types, as different IM mechanisms might lead to different career outcomes.

First, IM may depend on the mechanism used, creating favorable impressions through two different types: direct and indirect IM. Direct IM refers to “individuals self-promoting their own achievements and success” (Tal-Or and Drukman, 2010 ). Indirect IM (also called impression management by association) refers to “behaviors undertaken by individuals at work through associations with other colleagues to create favorable impressions of themselves” (Cialdini and Richardson, 1980 ). Whereas, the literature mainly considers direct IM, indirect IM is now widely used, especially on social media platforms that are invading our lives. Using posts associated with a particular company/institute and connecting and following people on social network platforms are good examples of indirect IM. Unfortunately, evidence is lacking on the difference that direct and indirect IM might have on career outcomes.

Second, IM may depend on the interaction mode adopted: face-to-face or online (Zhao et al., 2008 ). Face-to-face interaction refers to the visibility of a physical body in social interactions, such as physical characteristics (i.e., gender, race, and looks), physical settings (i.e., furniture and decor), and personal attributes (i.e., appearance, language, and manner). Online interactions instead denote the invisibility of the physical body in social interactions through text or voice messages (Zhao et al., 2008 ). Very few studies explore the notion of IM in the online context. Since recruiters increasingly use social networking platforms in their search for candidates (Villeda and McCamey, 2019 ), understanding online IM for potential career consequences, and differentiating between the online and face-to-face contexts that lead to different career-related outcomes, is pivotal.

In this systematic literature review composed of 55 articles in English published from 1980 to 2020, we explore how the different IM mechanisms (i.e., direct vs. indirect, and face-to-face vs. online) contribute to individuals' career development, and seek to answer the following questions:

• Are there any difference between IM types (direct vs. indirect) and career related outcomes?
• Does IM have similar effects on career development in the face-to-face and online contexts?

A key contribution of this study is providing insights on the state-of-the-art of IM and the difference between the types (direct vs. indirect) and interaction modes (face-to-face vs. online) for a better understanding of the relevance of IM and the resulting career-related outcomes.

Practical Insights Into the Prevalence of New Forms of IM

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, individuals and organizations have been forced to operate through online technologies and social platforms (Bhaskar et al., 2021 ). Consulting the social networking profiles of potential candidates on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn is more than ever a fundamental human resource management practice in the modern organization (Villeda and McCamey, 2019 ). The information provided allows gauging the personality and interests of candidates and their alignment with the organizational culture.

The structure of social media enables individuals to share their achievements directly (direct IM) or through association with others (indirect IM). While direct IM has been widely examined (e.g., Andrews and Kacmar, 2001 ), indirect IM has become more salient in the contemporary context. Indeed, in the individual perspective, the extensive use of social media creates additional opportunities for indirect IM through allowing people to easily associate themselves with others on different social media platforms. In the organizational perspective, contemporary managers systematically consult social media that influence their professional decisions (Fieseler and Ranzini, 2015 ). For example, managers use social media to assess the suitability of a job seeker for a particular position (Van Iddekinge et al., 2016 ). Researching a job seeker's social media presence allows managers to see what others are saying about them. For instance, platforms such as LinkedIn allow users to recommend each other (considered indirect IM), and the testimonials on a user's platform can reveal what they might offer the company. Indirect IM is thus becoming fundamental in determining career outcomes.

As the prevalence and popularity of online social networking has grown extensively in recent years (Schivinski et al., 2020 ), IM has moved from the face-to-face to the online interaction mode. From the employee perspective, online social networking provides valuable resources, such as building business relations, identifying opportunities, and interacting with others (Nazir et al., 2020 ). From an organizational perspective, online social networking is recognized as a dominant communications tool (Dwivedi et al., 2020 ) that allows reducing recruitment costs (Leader-Chivée and Cowan, 2008 ). Interestingly, HR managers consider individuals' information on online social networking platforms as “honest” and accurate in comparison to the traditional résumé used in the face-to-face context (Zide et al., 2014 ). Likewise, Rowell ( 2010 ) shows that 70% of HR managers reject job applicants due to their online social networking behavior. The emergence and anchoring of new forms of IM lead us to differentiate between direct vs. indirect, and online vs. face-to-face IM, to understand their consequences on career outcomes.

Theoretical Impression Management Perspective

Individuals manage their impressions for career path purposes as IM can enhance their career opportunities. We next present the different types of IM linked to career-related outcomes.

Impression Management: From Direct to Indirect

Impression management refers to human behavior designed to obtain a favorable reaction from others (Felson, 1978 ; Bolino et al., 2008 ) through self-presentation (Goffman, 1959 ). IM theory was first conceptualized by Goffman ( 1959 ) who proposed a dramaturgical model of social life composed of two key players: an “actor” who engages in “IM tactics” and an “audience” that interacts with “actors” to create a desired image. IM tactics can be categorized as direct and indirect (Cialdini and Richardson, 1980 ). First, direct IM refers to individuals presenting their own achievements and success (Tal-Or and Drukman, 2010 ), including assertive and defensive tactics (Wayne and Kacmar, 1991 ; Stevens and Kristof, 1995 ). Assertive tactics are “proactive behaviors undertaken by individuals to create a specific identity to further their careers.” Defensive tactics are “reactive behaviors used by individuals following actions that may portray them negatively” seeking to “avoid negative career implications” (Andrews and Kacmar, 2001 ). Direct IM is premised to be linked with outcomes, including interview performance, job offers, hiring decisions, perceived qualifications, adequacy of information, and interviewer confidence (Gilmore and Ferris, 1989 ; Leary and Kowalski, 1990 ; Bolino et al., 2008 ).

Indirect IM refers to individuals managing their association with others for the purposes of creating a favorable impression of themselves (Cialdini and Richardson, 1980 ). Indirect tactics create impressions by involving a third party to manage the individual's image. Indirect IM supports the balance theory of Heider ( 1958 ) postulating that people tend to see things alike when they are associated with one another in order to maintain cognitive balance. According to Andrews and Kacmar ( 2001 ), indirect IM involves four connection-focused tactics: boasting, blurring, blaring, and burying. Boasting is defined as an individual embracing his or her positive connections by associating with favorable others. Burying is the individual tendency to conceal relationships with unsuccessful others for the sake of creating a perfect image of him or herself. Blaring is defined as an individual minimizing a connection with unfavorable others, especially in public. Finally, blurring refers to an individual's tendency to use the success of others, especially in the work place, as this will increase the perception of how successful he/she is in his/her career. Early work on indirect IM deems that it positively influences career-related outcomes, such as self-promotion (Cialdini, 1989 ).

Impression Management: From Face-to-Face to Online

Whatever the tactics, IM is used in two interaction modes: face-to-face and online. While IM research is extensive, studies linking the phenomenon with online social networking and career-related outcomes are scarce. However, the fluidity of social media platforms, especially their ability to address multiple audiences and diverse purposes, renders the online context interesting to understand IM (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010 ). Indeed, IM theory has been extended to the online context (Zhao et al., 2008 ; Hogan, 2010 ; Rosenberg and Egbert, 2011 ; Harrison and Budworth, 2015 ). Several researchers recognize the potential of online social networking and its relation to impression formation (Tong et al., 2008 ; Zhao et al., 2008 ). IM theory provides a framework to assess online impressions created by job seekers through the information they display (Barrick et al., 2009 ; Harrison and Budworth, 2015 ). Therefore, social media users ensure that their profile is catchy, aiming to influence how others perceive them (Rosenberg and Egbert, 2011 ). Indeed, individuals tend to follow and connect with particular people, companies, and associations for the sake of enhancing their image via indirect IM in the online context. This favorable image thus fosters positive career outcomes (El Ouirdi et al., 2015 ).

The Systematic Literature Review Methodology

To explore the effects of the different IM tactics on career related outcomes, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR). SLR involves gathering extant literature on a subject that meets the predetermined inclusion criteria and answers the established research question(s). Its purpose is to formulate a broad perspective of a research area and provide an unbiased summary of the literature (Torraco, 2005 ; Borrego et al., 2014 ). Moreover, a well-structured SLR has numerous benefits, such as explaining a specific problem, revealing gaps and inconsistencies in the literature, and providing guidance for future research and practice (Baumeister and Leary, 1997 ). The methodology also ensures the generation of knowledge in a structured and systematic way from multiple studies. One of the key advantages of SLR is that it allows the restrictive retrieval of data from multiple databases, ensuring it is comparatively less biased than traditional literature reviews (Borrego et al., 2014 ).

Different authors have presented guiding principles to assist SLR researchers in constructing procedures that adhere to the methodology and the strategies to evaluate suitable research (Nightingale, 2009 ). Following the four stages of Tranfield et al. ( 2003 ) in this review, we first defined the search strategy and identified potential databases before embarking on the search (Higgins and Green, 2008 ). Second, we identified suitable articles based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Third, we undertook a synthesis of the selected studies that involved extracting and categorizing the data. Last, we analyzed the results and drew conclusions. For the sake of transparency and to ensure our literature review is reproducible, all the relevant steps are detailed next. Figure 1 represents the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram (Moher et al., 2009 ). It allows to have a better overview of the different steps taken for this SLR.

PRISMA flow diagram.

Searching the Empirical Literature

For this review, we checked different databases according to the IM definition. We then drew on seminal IM research papers to define the key terms and exact concepts later used to define the search terms and the time period. Based on these results and the information on the different terms used to describe IM, we identified the most promising search terms for our literature review as shown in Table 1 (e.g., impression management) using reliable databases, including Web of Science, Scopus, Science Direct, ProQuest, and Wiley. Web of Science and Scopus are citation databases that search multiple databases and sources to identify studies based on keywords, while the ProQuest search encompassed 18 databases.

Summary of search result.

WS, Web of Science; SC, Scopus; SD, Science Direct; PQ, ProQuest; WI, Wiley. The search results are limited to the title field .

We used the following keywords in our search: IM, HR, career, social media, social networking, online, impression management by association, face-to-face , and job search in combination with impression management . We chose to begin our SLR in 1980 because critical theoretical IM frameworks were published at that time (Cialdini and Richardson, 1980 ).

After defining the research parameters, we performed the literature search initially resulting in 1,700 publications which we recorded and organized using Refworks and Excel (Callahan, 2010 ).

Screening the Literature

We screened the resulting 1,700 publications in two steps. In the first step, we searched for relevant publications using the defined search terms and filtered the results for the related literature. Following the literature search recommendations (Brocke et al., 2015 ), we performed a backward (screening the references using these papers) and forward search (publications that cite these papers). Additionally, we followed Levy and Ellis's ( 2006 ) ranking approach to select the appropriate journals. For our selection process, we picked the top tier IM journals enriched with those that focus on similar or adjacent topics, as our study includes online social networking as well as individuals' career-related outcomes. We selected numerous reputable journals, including Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Academy of Management, Journal of Management, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Career Development International , amongst many more. After screening the literature, 237 articles remained.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The inclusion and exclusion criteria were set as part of the protocol prior to the start of the project. Included manuscripts needed to be (a) academic-peer-reviewed, (b) the focus of these publication needed to be centered around impression management, (c) these papers needed to be specifically aligned with career related outcomes from different mode of interactions (i.e., face-to-face and online) (d) in English, (e) the year of publication had to fall between 1980 and 2020. In contrast, we excluded: (1) Publication in non-English format, (2) duplicated research papers, (3) non-peer-reviewed articles (such as non-academic journals), (3) unpublished doctoral theses, and (4) gray literature (such as conferences and working papers).

We considered the 237 articles for inclusion and exclusion. The first step in this process entailed removing unrelated papers, reducing the number of records to 105. Next, we checked the articles for their relevance to our study based on the title, keywords, and abstract. After evaluating all publications, we identified 55 articles as relevant to our research topic. Table 2 provides the authors/date and career related outcomes according to the direct and indirect IM, face-to-face and online research focus. We extracted those variables from the individual papers: salary, promotion, performance assessment, job promotion, job interview ratings, interviewers' judgements, job interview evaluation, hiring recommendations, job offer, second job interview, recruiter evaluation, promotion scores, performance appraisal, supervisor liking, performance ratings, career success, performance evaluation, salary progression, promotability assessments, influence job search, recruitment process, selection process, job interview assessment, job performance, job design, employee selection, job satisfaction, job commitment, career satisfaction, adjusted salary, self-promotion, salary recommendations, and job opportunities.

Search results and classification.

Data Management and Analysis

To identify the current and future research topics according to the 55 articles identified, we developed a framework to classify the articles. As a starting point, we analyzed studies in the face-to-face context, including career-related outcomes of direct and indirect IM. Then, we extended our analysis to the online context. Table 3 shows the classification by frequency, differentiating between the interaction modes (face-to-face vs. online) and career-related outcomes of the IM mechanisms (direct vs. indirect) adopted. Separating the interaction modes (face-to-face vs. online) allows identifying the gap in the literature and illustrating the importance of understanding both modes and IM tactics to achieve the desired career-related outcome.

IM studies.

Indeed, while most of the studies identified deal with direct IM in the online context, some older studies explore the link between indirect face-to-face IM and career-related outcomes. However, while several authors integrate direct IM in the online context, we found no studies dealing with indirect IM in the online context.

Direct IM in the Face-to-Face Context

Regarding direct IM in the face-to-face context, most studies focus on the link between IM and job interview, job performance, and other career-related outcomes as detailed next.

Direct Face-to-Face IM and Job Interview

Numerous studies focus on the effect of direct face-to-face IM, with job interview as the most common career-related outcome (Gilmore and Ferris, 1989 ; Baron, 1993 ; Ellis et al., 2002 ; Kristof-Brown et al., 2002 ; Law et al., 2002 ; Weiss and Feldman, 2006 ; Noor et al., 2017 ; Peck and Levashina, 2017 ; Roulin and Bourdage, 2017 ). For instance, Von Baeyer et al. ( 1981 ) study a male interviewer's knowledge and attitude toward female candidates in a stereotyped environment. Kacmar and Carlson ( 1994 ) focus on the process of women searching for jobs using direct IM. Stevens and Kristof ( 1995 ) examine the relationship between direct IM and job interview outcome. Tsai et al. ( 2005 ) explore the effect of direct IM tactics on job interviews, showing these have a positive influence on interviewer evaluation. Chen et al. ( 2010 ) study applicant direct IM tactics in job interviews with the moderating role of interviewer affectivity. Empirical evidence shows that direct IM tactics, such as self-focused IM, other-focused IM, and non-verbal IM, positively influence interviewer evaluations through self-focused direct IM.

Tsai et al. ( 2010 ) study direct IM tactics in job interviews with an emphasis on three defensive applicant tactics: apologies, justifications, and excuses. Collecting empirical data through observing applicant interviews, they explore the moderating effect of negative competence- and integrity-related concerns on the three direct IM defensive tactics, finding that the apologies tactic has the strongest impact.

Swann et al. ( 2015 ) study direct IM and job interviews in the medical context. Although unable to provide conclusive evidence, the authors offer a brief overview of direct IM over time, and encourage training models that provide a logical and systematic approach for candidates to ensure that the results of interview selection are closely correlated with good clinical outcomes for successful candidates. Bourdage et al. ( 2017 ) show the difference between reality and faking in job interviews. Direct IM is used to impress interviewers, as candidates attempt to create a likable impression and gain job opportunities. They approach direct IM from various perspectives, such as being honest and deceptive, IM effectiveness, IM as a shield against discrimination, and IM as dyadic and beyond the applicant.

Gioaba and Krings ( 2017 ) study effective ways of mitigating discrimination against older applicants based on direct IM in job interviews. They find that the use of direct IM by older applicants provides stronger job interview and hiring opportunities. Similarly to Bourdage et al. ( 2017 ), Roulin and Bourdage ( 2017 ) extend the study of the use of honesty and deceptive direct IM across multiple job interviews.

Overall, these studies show that direct IM tactics lead to positive effects on job interviews in the face-to-face interaction mode.

Direct Face-to-Face IM and Job Performance

Numerous scholars study the positive effect of direct IM in the face-to-face interaction mode on individuals' job performance (Wayne and Ferris, 1990 ; Wayne and Kacmar, 1991 ; Ferris et al., 1994 ; Wayne and Liden, 1995 ; Bolino and Turnley, 2003 ; Zivnuska et al., 2004 ; Barsness et al., 2005 ; Foldes et al., 2006 ; Harris et al., 2007 ; O'Connell et al., 2011 ).

Viswesvaran et al. ( 2001 ) study direct face-to-face IM and job performance by exploring the relationship between direct IM scale scores, overall job performance, and managerial interpersonal interactions. Zivnuska et al. ( 2004 ) investigate the interactive effect of organizational politics and direct IM on supervisor ratings of employee performance. In their study, Ispas et al. ( 2014 ) find a significant link between direct IM and objective job performance. Another study in the field of direct IM and job performance is that of Ingold et al. ( 2015 ) who focus on direct IM, faking in the selection context, and job performance. The authors find that candidates that faked direct IM in interviews also falsified a personality inventory, and that this deceit is positively related to supervisor job performance rating.

Brouer et al. ( 2016 ) study direct IM and the ability to manage resources with job performance as mediator. They find that higher levels of social resources, such as reputation and leader-member exchange, are positively related to job performance. Peck and Levashina ( 2017 ) study direct IM in relation to interviews and job performance, finding that direct IM has a stronger impact on interview and job performance rating. The most recent study is that of Probst et al. ( 2019 ) investigating the relationship between job insecurity and direct IM to determine a relationship between supervisor-focused IM, lower job insecurity, positive in-role behavior, and job performance. Accordingly, if direct IM is correctly practiced, irrespective of whether true or false, it will lead to a better job performance rating.

Overall, the use of direct IM at the workplace has a positive effect on employees' job performance rating.

Direct Face-to-Face IM and Other Career Outcomes

Several studies link direct face-to-face IM and different career-related outcomes, such as salary increase, hiring recommendations, promotions, job commitment, and overall career success (Judge and Bretz, 1994 ; Kacmar and Carlson, 1994 ; Wayne et al., 1997 ; Higgins et al., 2003 ; McFarland et al., 2003 ; Higgins and Judge, 2004 ; Avery and McKay, 2006 ; Bolino et al., 2008 ; Westphal, 2010 ; Asawo and George, 2018 ).

For example, Kang et al. ( 2012 ) investigate the relationship between job insecurity and IM work-related behaviors, finding that the perception of job insecurity leads to reduced extra-role and IM behavior. Evidently, the intensity of withdrawal increases with increased employability. Harris et al. ( 2013 ) study IM behaviors in relation to IM culture and job outcomes, such as performance, promotion, compensation, and IM tactics (intimidation and exemplification), finding that intimidation has negative effects, while exemplification has positive effects on IM tactics. Cheng et al. ( 2014 ) focus on the interactive effects of task performance and IM tactics on career outcomes, finding that the relationship between task performance and career satisfaction is greater among employees who frequently use self-promotion.

Generally, in the face-to-face interaction mode, a strong relation is found between direct IM and career-related outcomes, such as salary increase, job promotion, job commitment, and hiring recommendations.

Indirect IM in the Face-to-Face Context

While generally few scholars focus on indirect compared to direct IM, some studies consider indirect IM in the face-to-face interaction mode with different career-related outcomes, such as job engagement and job satisfaction. Cialdini and Richardson ( 1980 ) show that individuals tend to use indirect IM tactics, for example, highlighting successful connections with others to enhance their personal image (prestige). Cialdini ( 1989 ) shows that an individual's image can be enhanced by associating with successful others and disassociating from failures. Finch and Cialdini ( 1989 ) reveal that unit-connection plays an essential role in individuals' image simply by associating themselves by birth date with favorable or unfavorable individuals. Finally, Andrews and Kacmar ( 2001 ) develop and validate an indirect IM scale, albeit not adopted in relation to career-related outcomes.

Overall, these studies show that indirect IM has positive effects on career-related outcomes that are underestimated.

Direct IM in the Online Context

Some researchers have recently focused on direct IM in the online context (Rosenberg and Egbert, 2011 ; Nestler and Back, 2013 ; Stopfer et al., 2013 ; Harrison and Budworth, 2015 ; Paliszkiewicz and Madra-Sawicka, 2016 ). For instance, Paliszkiewicz and Madra-Sawicka ( 2016 ) illustrate the importance of online IM on LinkedIn to benefit from the platform features and gain job opportunities. Harrison and Budworth ( 2015 ) find a positive relation between verbal and non-verbal IM on hiring and salary recommendations in social media platforms. Three studies deal with the importance of IM in online social networks for self-promotion purposes (Rosenberg and Egbert, 2011 ; Nestler and Back, 2013 ; Stopfer et al., 2013 ).

Overall, these studies show the importance of using direct IM in the online context to obtain the desired career outcomes.

Indirect IM in the Online Context

As mentioned, we found no studies that deal specifically with indirect IM in the online context.

Our analysis of the 55 studies provides deep insights on IM and career-related outcomes in both the face-to-face and online context. Figure 2 provides an illustration of what is IM and what are its associations.

Individuals shape their impressions in accordance with how they represent themselves and what they want to show recruiters and managers, both in a direct and indirect way, and in the face-to-face and online contexts. We do not observe any major differences between IM mechanisms (direct vs. indirect) and interaction mode (face-to-face vs. online) in relation to their positive role in career-related outcomes.

Indeed, both the direct vs. indirect IM mechanisms are linked to individuals' career success. Regarding career-related outcomes, such as job interviews and job performance, most studies naturally relate to direct IM in the face-to-face interaction mode. In the very few studies that deal with the online interaction mode, self-promotion is the common career-related outcome. For a better overview of IM in all contexts and circumstances, further research is needed on the different potential outcomes. For example, in the online mode, it may be worth exploring whether IM is so powerful that it impacts job performance despite the absence of direct physical interactions.

In addition, scholars have focused mainly on direct IM, neglecting the importance of indirect IM. In particular, no studies focus on the indirect online interaction mode, while only 4 deal with indirect face-to-face interactions. There is thus a gap in the literature in differentiating between direct vs. indirect IM in the face-to-face vs. online interaction modes, which is crucial to career-related outcomes. To fully capture the IM phenomenon, scholars should consider the impact of indirect IM in general, and specifically in the online context, on career-related outcomes.

Our review clearly shows the need to differentiate IM (direct vs. indirect) in both contexts (face-to-face vs. online) and the career-related outcomes. Even if not our main aim, this systematic literature review allows highlighting some additional unanswered questions for future researchers to address as specified in Table 4 .

Indirect IM questions and future research avenues.

Implications for Individuals and Career Counselors

Research on IM (direct vs. indirect) has practical implication for individuals and career counselors. For individuals, making the right association with successful others and disassociating from unsuccessful others is a significant element in succeeding at work and enhancing prestige (Andrews and Kacmar, 2001 ). Further, the literature shows that individuals who create an impression need to maintain this impression even at later stages to manage and strengthen the image in the minds of others (Higgins et al., 2003 ; Barrick et al., 2009 ). First, associating with a third party is theoretically proven to create a cognitive balance in the mind of the others (Kacmar et al., 2011 ). As such, individuals in the workplace engage with higher reputation individuals and learn from the best because associating with unfavorable others will affect their career outcome. Second, individuals using online social networking must pay attention to who they are connected and associated with, as this will lead to either valuable or adverse future returns. Individuals are frequently evaluated for career purposes enabled by the accessibility of social network platforms.

A better understanding of online social networking is also crucial for career counselors to stay up to date with digital trends. Scholars indicate the emergence of online social networking for both job seekers and career counselors (Bolino et al., 2016 ). According to the analysis of social networking platforms, career counselors mainly use LinkedIn when checking individuals or job seekers for career purposes, as it is used more for professional networking, while Facebook and Twitter also share non-professional content, potentially leading to bias. However, every jobseeker has a social life, and rejecting individuals because of their Facebook content may lead to disregarding those who could in fact benefit the organization.

Limitations

This SLR took great care to avoid any publication bias. First, the Preferred Reporting Items in Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) flow diagram shows the clarity and credibility of our research (Moher et al., 2009 ). This universally accepted evidence-based checklist reduces publication bias. Second, we were highly concerned about the gray literature. However, we decided to remove gray literature from our inclusion criteria. Gray literature is composed of working papers, conferences and articles that are not academically peer-reviewed (Adams et al., 2016 ). We are aware that some authors encourage to include gray literature (e.g., Briner and Denyer, 2012 ). However, we follow the recommendation of Kraus et al. ( 2020 ) to exclude it. Traditional reviews are criticized for subjective literature selection and quality appraisal (Denyer and Tranfield, 2006 ). Indeed, by integrated peer review articles, the process is more transparent and replicable. Also, the selected papers have been checked through the academic process. It thus represents a guarantee of quality. We acknowledge that this strategy can still be responsible of a publication bias as all papers of good quality are not all published in peer reviewed journals. Third, we considered five main and highly reliable database to reduce the publication bias such as Web of Science, Scopus, Wiley, Science Direct and Proquest. Finally, the included papers were checked by two authors to enhance the credibility and to evaluate the quality of the methodology of the papers that are included in the SLR. Because we chose only peer reviewed articles in main research database and because all papers have been checked by two authors to detect any quality problem, we can ensure a good methodological quality of the included studies.

Besides, our aim was to do a systematic literature review in order to compare direct vs. indirect and online vs. face to face IM. Unfortunately, due to the weak number of peer reviewed publications about indirect IM and online IM, a quantitative meta-analysis would have not been appropriated. Nevertheless, it would be very insightful to do in the future a quantitative analysis of the impact of different types of IM on career related outcomes when more publications will be available.

This literature review shows that indirect IM is often overlooked by researchers, highlighting the need for further investigations on both interactions modes (face-to-face vs. online). While the literature shows that job seekers and recruiters use online social networking to create a positive image, the field has received limited academic attention, and further research is needed to understand this phenomenon in greater detail.

Data Availability Statement

Author contributions.

EA-S did the SLR. MO helped in the writing of the paper. All authors listed have made a substantial, direct and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Adams R. J., Smart P., Huff A. S. (2016). Shades of grey: guidelines for working with the grey literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies . Int. J. Manag. Rev. 19 , 432–454. 10.1111/ijmr.12102 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amaral A. A., Powell D. M., Ho J. L. (2019). Why does impression management positively influence interview ratings? the mediating role of competence and warmth . Int. J. Select. Assess. 27 , 315–327. 10.1111/ijsa.12260 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Andrews M. C., Kacmar K. (2001). Impression management by association: construction and validation of a scale . J. Vocat. Behav. 58 , 142–161. 10.1006/jvbe.2000.1756 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Asawo S. P., George B. M. (2018). Leaders' intimidation impression management and subordinates' affective job commitment in Nigeria . Int. J. Organ. Theory Behav. 21 , 2–16. 10.1108/IJOTB-03-2018-002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Avery D. R., McKay P. F. (2006). Target practice: an organizational impression management approach to attracting minority and female job applicants . Pers. Psychol. 59 , 157–187. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00807.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baron R. A. (1993). Interviewers' moods and evaluations of job applicants: the role of applicant qualifications . J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 23 , 253–271. 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1993.tb01086.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barrick M. R., Shaffer J. A., DeGrassi S. W. (2009). What you see may not be what you get: relationships among self-presentation tactics and ratings of interview and job performance . J. Appl. Psychol. 94 , 1394–1411. 10.1037/a0016532 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barsness Z. I., Diekmann K. A., Seidel M. L. (2005). Motivation and opportunity: the role of remote work, demographic dissimilarity, and social network centrality in impression management . Acad. Manag. J 48 , 401–419. 10.5465/amj.2005.17407906 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baumeister R. F., Leary M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews . Rev. Gen. Psychol. 1 , 311–320. 10.1037/1089-2680.1.3.311 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhaskar S., Nurtazina A., Mittoo S., Banach M., Weissert R. (2021). Editorial: telemedicine during and beyond COVID-19 . Front. Public Health 9 :662617. 10.3389/fpubh.2021.662617 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bolino M. C., Kacmar K. M., Turnley W. H., Gilstrap J. B. (2008). A multilevel review of impression management motives and behaviors . J. Manag. 34 , 1080–1109. 10.1177/0149206308324325 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bolino M. C., Long D., Turnley W. (2016). Impression management in organizations: critical questions, answers, and areas for future research . Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 3 , 377–406. 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062337 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bolino M. C., Turnley W. H. (2003). More than one way to make an impression: exploring profiles of impression management . J. Manag. 29 , 141–160. 10.1177/014920630302900202 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Borrego M., Foster M. J., Froyd J. E. (2014). Systematic literature reviews in engineering education and other developing interdisciplinary fields . J. Eng. Educ. 103 , 45–76. 10.1002/jee.20038 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bourdage J. S., Roulin N., Levashina J. (2017). Editorial: impression management and faking in job interviews . Front. Psychol. 8 :1294. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01294 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bozeman D. P., Kacmar K. (1997). A cybernetic model of impression management processes in organizations . Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 69 , 9–30. 10.1006/obhd.1996.2669 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Briner R. B., Denyer D. (2012). “Systematic review and evidence synthesis as a practice and scholarship tool,” in Handbook of Evidence-Based Management: Companies, Classrooms, and Research , ed Rousseau D. M. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press; ), 17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brocke J. V., Simons A., Riemer K., Niehaves B., Plattfaut R., Cleven A. (2015). Standing on the shoulders of giants: challenges and recommendations of literature search in information systems research . Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 31 , 205–224. 10.17705/1CAIS.03709 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brouer R. L., Gallagher V. C., Badawy R. L. (2016). Ability to manage resources in the impression management process: the mediating effects of resources on job performance . J. Bus. Psychol. 31 , 515–531. 10.1007/s10869-015-9426-5 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Callahan J. L. (2010). Constructing a manuscript: distinguishing integrative literature reviews and conceptual and theory articles . Hum. Resour. Dev. Rev. 9 , 300–304. 10.1177/1534484310371492 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen C.-C., Yang I. W.-F., Lin W.-C. (2010). Applicant impression management in job interview: the moderating role of interviewer affectivity . J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 83 , 739–757. 10.1348/096317909X473895 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheng J.-W., Chiu W.-L., Chang Y.-Y., Johnstone S. (2014). Do you put your best foot forward? interactive effects of task performance and impression management tactics on career outcomes . J. Psychol. Interdiscip. Appl. 146 , 621–640. 10.1080/00223980.2013.818929 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cialdini R. B. (1989). “Indirect tactics of image management: beyond basking,” in Impression Management in the Organization , eds Giacolone R. A., Rosenfeld P. (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; ), 45–56. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cialdini R. B., de Nicholas M. E. (1989). Self-presentation by association . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 57 , 626–631. 10.1037/0022-3514.57.4.626 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cialdini R. B., Richardson K. D. (1980). Two indirect tactics of impression management: basking and blasting . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 39 , 406–415. 10.1037/0022-3514.39.3.406 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Denyer D., Tranfield D. (2006). Using qualitative research synthesis to build an actionable knowledge base . Manag. Decis. 44 , 213–227. 10.1108/00251740610650201 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dwivedi Y. K., Ismagilova E., Hughes D. L., Carlson J., Filieri R., Jacobson J., et al.. (2020). Setting the future of digital and social media marketing research: perspectives and research propositions . Int. J. Inf. Manag. 59 :102168. 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102168 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• El Ouirdi M., Segers J., El Ouirdi A., Pais I. (2015). Predictors of job seekers' self-disclosure on social media . Comput. Hum. Behav. 53 , 1–12. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.039 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ellis A. P. J., West B. J., Ryan A. M., DeShon R. P. (2002). The use of impression management tactics in structured interviews: a function of question type? J. Appl. Psychol. 87 , 1200–1208. 10.1037/0021-9010.87.6.1200 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Felson R. B. (1978). Aggression as impression management . Soc. Psychol. Q. 41 , 205–213. 10.2307/3033557 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferris G. R., Judge T. A., Rowland K. M., Fitzgibbons D. E. (1994). Subordinate influence and the performance evaluation process: test of a model . Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 58 , 101–135. 10.1006/obhd.1994.1030 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fieseler C., Ranzini G. (2015). The networked communications manager . Corp. Commun. Int. J. 20 , 500–517. 10.1108/CCIJ-02-2015-0009 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Finch J. F., Cialdini R. B. (1989). Another indirect tactic of (self-) image management . Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 15 , 222–232. 10.1177/0146167289152009 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Foldes H. J., Ones D. S., Sinangil H. K. (2006). Neither here, nor there: impression management does not predict expatriate adjustment and job performance . Psychol. Sci. 48 , 357–368. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/26669028.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Gilmore D. C., Ferris G. R. (1989). The effects of applicant impression management tactics on interviewer judgments . J. Manag. 15 , 557–564. 10.1177/014920638901500405 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gioaba I., Krings F. (2017). Impression management in the job interview: an effective way of mitigating discrimination against older applicants? Front. Psychol. 8 , 1–12. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00770 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goffman E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life . New York, NY: Anchor Books. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harris K. J., Gallagher V. C., Rossi A. M. (2013). Impression management (IM) behaviors, IM culture, and job outcomes . J. Manag. Issues 25 , 154–171. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harris K. J., Kacmar K. M., Zivnuska S., Shaw J. D. (2007). The impact of political skill on impression management effectiveness . J. Appl. Psychol. 92 , 278–285. 10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.278 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Harrison J. A., Budworth M. (2015). Unintended consequences of a digital presence . Career Dev. Int. 20 , 294–314. 10.1108/CDI-06-2014-0080 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heider F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations . New York, NY: Wiley. [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins C. A., Judge T. A. (2004). The effect of applicant influence tactics on recruiter perceptions of fit and hiring recommendations: a field study . J. Appl. Psychol. 89 , 622–632. 10.1037/0021-9010.89.4.622 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins C. A., Judge T. A., Ferris G. R. (2003). Influence tactics and work outcomes: a meta-analysis . J. Organ. Behav. 24 , 89–106. 10.1002/job.181 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Higgins J., Green S. (2008). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions . London: The Cochrane Collaboration. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hogan B. (2010). The presentation of self in the age of social media: distinguishing performances and exhibitions online . Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 30 , 377–386. 10.1177/0270467610385893 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ingold P. V., Kleinmann M., König C. J., Melchers K. G. (2015). Shall we continue or stop disapproving of self-presentation? evidence on impression management and faking in a selection context and their relation to job performance . Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 24 , 420–432. 10.1080/1359432X.2014.915215 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ispas D., Iliescu D., Ilie A., Sulea C., Askew K., Rohlfs J. T., et al.. (2014). Revisiting the relationship between impression management and job performance . J. Res. Pers. 51 , 47–53. 10.1016/j.jrp.2014.04.010 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Judge T. A., Bretz R. D. (1994). Political influence behavior and career success . J. Manag. 20 , 43–65. 10.1177/014920639402000103 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kacmar K. M., Bachrach D. G., Harris K. J., Shaw J. D., Noble D. (2011). The moderating effect of impression management on the organizational citizenship behaviour-voluntary turnover relationship . J. Appl. Manag. Entrep. 16 , 4–26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kacmar K. M., Carlson D. S. (1994). Using impression management in women's job search process . Am. Behav. Sci. 37 , 1–15. 10.1177/0002764294037005008 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kacmar K. M., Carlson D. S. (1999). Effectiveness of impression management tactics across human resource situations1 . J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 29 , 1293–1315. 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb02040.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kang D.-S., Gold J., Kim D. (2012). Responses to job insecurity the impact on discretionary extra-role and impression management behaviors and the moderating role of employability . Career Dev. Int. 17 , 314–332. 10.1108/13620431211255815 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaplan A., Haenlein M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! the challenges and opportunities of social media . Bus. Horiz. 53 , 59–68. 10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kraus S., Breier M., Dasí-Rodríguez S. (2020). The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research . Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 16 , 1023–1042. 10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kristof-Brown A., Barrick R. M., Franke M. (2002). Applicant impression management: dispositional influences and consequences for recruiter perceptions of fit and similarity . J. Manag. 28 , 27–46. 10.1177/014920630202800103 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Law K., Mobley W. H., Wong C.-S. (2002). Impression management and faking in biodata scores among Chinese jobseekers . Asia Pacific J. Manag. 19 , 541–556. 10.1023/A:1020521726390 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Leader-Chivée L., Cowan E. (2008). Networking the way to success: online social networks for workplace and competitive advantage . People Strategy 31 , 40–46. [ Google Scholar ]
• Leary M. R., Kowalski R. M. (1990). Impression management: a literature review and two-component model . Psychol. Bull. 107 , 34–47. 10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Levy Y., Ellis T. J. (2006). A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review in support of information systems research . Informing Sci. Int. J. Emerg. Transdiscipl. 9 , 181–212. 10.28945/479 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu F., Chow I. H., Huang M. (2019). Increasing compulsory citizenship behavior and Workload: Does impression management matter? Front. Psychol. 10 :1726. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01726 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McFarland L. A., Ryan A. M., Kriska S. D. (2003). Impression management use and effectiveness across assessment methods . J. Manag. 29 , 641–661. 10.1016/S0149-2063_03_00030-8 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement . BMJ 6 :e1000097. 10.1136/bmj.b2535 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nazir M., Tian J., Hussain I., Arshad A., Shad M. A. (2020). Examining the relationship of online social networking sites' activities, customers' brand choice, and brand perception in Health-related businesses . Front. Psychol. 11 :546087. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.546087 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nestler S., Back M. D. (2013). Applications and extensions of the lens model to understand interpersonal judgments at zero acquaintance . Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 22 , 374–379. 10.1177/0963721413486148 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nightingale A. (2009). A guide to systematic literature reviews . Surgery (Oxford) 27 , 381–384. 10.1016/j.mpsur.2009.07.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Noor M. S. N. F., Tab M. F., Kamarulzaman R. (2017). Exploring job interview skills of future engineers: application of appraisal analysis assessment and verbal impression management . J. Tech. Educ. Train. 9 , 87–99. [ Google Scholar ]
• O'Connell M. S., Kung M.-C., Tristan E. (2011). Beyond impression management: evaluating three measures of response distortion and their relationship to job performance . Int. J. Sel. Assess. 19 , 340–351. 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00563.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paliszkiewicz J., Madra-Sawicka M. (2016). Impression management in social media: the example of LinkedIn . Management 11 , 203–212. [ Google Scholar ]
• Peck J. A., Levashina J. (2017). Impression management and interview and job performance ratings: a meta-analysis of research design with tactics in mind . Front. Psychol. 8 :201. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00201 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Probst T. M., Jiang L., Bohle S. A. L. (2019). Job insecurity and impression management Which is the horse and which is the cart when it comes to job performance? Career Dev. Int. 25 , 306–324. 10.1108/CDI-04-2018-0119 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosenberg J., Egbert N. (2011). Online impression management: personality traits and concerns for secondary goals as predictors of self-presentation tactics on Facebook . J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 17 , 1–18. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01560.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roulin N., Bourdage J. S. (2017). Once an impression manager, always an impression manager? antecedents of honest and deceptive impression management use and variability across multiple job interviews . Front. Psychol. 8 :29. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00029 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rowell E. (2010). Didn't Get Hired Because of Facebook? You're Not Alone . Available online at: https://ezinearticles.com/?Didnt-Get-Hired-Because-of-Facebook?-Youre-Not-Aloneandid=3669704 (accessed August 17, 2019).
• Schivinski B., Brzozowska-Woś M., Stansbury E., Satel J., Montag C., Pontes H. M. (2020). Exploring the role of social media use motives, psychological well-being, self-esteem, and affect in problematic social media use . Front. Psychol. 11 :617140. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.617140 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stevens C. K., Kristof A. L. (1995). Making the right impression: a field study of applicant impression management during job interviews . J. Appl. Psychol. 80 , 587–606. 10.1037/0021-9010.80.5.587 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stopfer J. M., Egloff B., Nestler S., Back M. D. (2013). Being popular in online social networks: how agentic, communal, and creativity traits relate to judgments of status and liking . J. Res. Pers. 47 , 592–598. 10.1016/j.jrp.2013.05.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Swann R. F., Bolton D. M., Lawrentschuk N. (2015). The career medical interview: solid selector or just ‘impression management? BJU Int. 116 , 1–4. 10.1111/bju.13269 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tal-Or N., Drukman D. (2010). Third-person perception as an impression management tactic . Media Psychol. 13 , 301–322. 10.1080/15213269.2010.503516 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong S. T., Van Der Heide B., Langwell L., Walther J. B. (2008). Too much of a good thing? the relationship between number of friends and interpersonal impressions on Facebook . J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 13 , 531–549. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.00409.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Torraco R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: guidelines and examples . Hum. Resour. Dev. Rev. 4 , 356–367. 10.1177/1534484305278283 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tranfield D., Denyer D., Smart P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review . Br. J. Manag. 14 , 207–222. 10.1111/1467-8551.00375 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Treadway D. C., Ferris G. R., Duke A. B., Adams G. L., Thatcher J. B. (2007). The moderating role of subordinate political skill on supervisors' impressions of subordinate ingratiation and ratings of subordinate interpersonal facilitation . J. Appl. Psychol. 92 , 848–855. 10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.848 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tsai W., Chen C., Chiu S. (2005). Exploring boundaries of the effects of applicant impression management tactics in job interviews . J. Manag. 31 , 108–125. 10.1177/0149206304271384 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tsai W.-C., Huang T.-C., Wu C.-Y., Lo I.-H. (2010). Disentangling the effects of applicant defensive impression management tactics in job interviews . Int. J. Sel. Assess. 18 , 131–140. 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00495.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Iddekinge C., Lanivich S., Roth P., Junco E. (2016). Social media for selection? validity and adverse impact potential of a facebook-based assessment . J. Manag. 42 , 1811–1835. 10.1177/0149206313515524 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Villeda M., McCamey R. (2019). Use of social networking sites for recruiting and selecting in the hiring process . Int. Bus. Res. 12 , 66–78. 10.5539/ibr.v12n3p66 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Viswesvaran C., Ones D. S., Hough L. M. (2001). Do impression management scales in personality inventories predict managerial job performance ratings? Int. J. Sel. Assess. 9 , 277–289. 10.1111/1468-2389.00180 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Von Baeyer C. L., Sherk D. L., Zanna M. P. (1981). Impression management in the bob interview: when the female applicant meets the male (chauvinist) interviewer . Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 7 , 45–51. 10.1177/014616728171008 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wayne S. J., Ferris G. R. (1990). Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisor-subordinate interactions: A laboratory experiment and field study . J. Appl. Psychol. 75 , 487–499. 10.1037/0021-9010.75.5.487 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wayne S. J., Kacmar K. (1991). The effects of impression management on the performance appraisal process . Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 48 , 70–88. 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90006-F [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wayne S. J., Liden R. C. (1995). Effects of impression management on performance ratings: a longitudinal study . Acad. Manag. J. 38 , 232–260. 10.2307/256734 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wayne S. J., Liden R. C., Graf I. K., Ferris G. R. (1997). The role of upward influence tactics in human resource decisions . Pers. Psychol. 50 , 979–1006. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb01491.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Weiss B., Feldman R. S. (2006). Looking good and lying to do it: deception as an impression management strategy in job interviews . J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 36 , 1070–1086. 10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00055.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Westphal J. D. (2010). An impression management perspective on job design: the case of corporate directors . J. Organ. Behav. 31 , 319–327. 10.1002/job.643 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yang H., Zhang L., Wu Y. J., Shi H., Xie S. (2021). Influence of entrepreneurial orientation on venture capitalists' initial trust . Front. Psychol . 12 :633771. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.633771 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhao S., Grasmuck S., Martin J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: digital empowerment in anchored relationships . Comput. Hum. Behav. 24 , 1816–1836. 10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.012 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zide J., Elman B., Shahani-Denning C. (2014). LinkedIn and recruitment: how profiles differ across occupations . Empl. Relat. 36 , 583–604. 10.1108/ER-07-2013-0086 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zivnuska S., Kacmar K. M., Witt L. A., Carlson D. S., Bratton V. K. (2004). Interactive effects of impression management and organizational politics on job performance . J. Organ. Behav. 25 , 627–640. 10.1002/job.262 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

HYPOTHESIS AND THEORY article

Impression management and interview and job performance ratings: a meta-analysis of research design with tactics in mind.

• Department of Management and Information Systems, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA

Impression management (IM) is pervasive in interview and job performance settings. We meta-analytically examine IM by self- and other-focused tactics to establish base rates of tactic usage, to understand the impact of tactics on interview and job performance ratings, and to examine the moderating effects of research design. Our results suggest IM is used more frequently in the interview rather than job performance settings. Self-focused tactics are more effective in the interview rather than in job performance settings, and other-focused tactics are more effective in job performance settings rather than in the interview. We explore several research design moderators including research fidelity, rater, and participants. IM has a somewhat stronger impact on interview ratings in lab settings than field settings. IM also has a stronger impact on interview ratings when the target of IM is also the rater of performance than when the rater of performance is an observer. Finally, labor market participants use IM more frequently and more effectively than students in interview settings. Our research has implications for understanding how different IM tactics function in interview and job performance settings and the effects of research design on IM frequency and impact.

Introduction

Impression management (IM) is ubiquitous throughout the interview and during employment. Candidates and employees strive to put their best foot forward to impress employers (e.g., Barrick et al., 2009 ). IM is defined as conscious or unconscious, deceptive or authentic, goal directed behavior. Individuals behave or display props in an attempt to control the impressions others form of them in social interactions (e.g., Schlenker, 1980 ; Gardner and Martinko, 1988 ; Leary and Kowalski, 1990 ; Bozeman and Kacmar, 1997 ; Bolino et al., 2008 , 2016 ). Researchers are examining a variety of experimental designs. However, single studies cannot assess the full magnitude of the relationship between IM tactics and ratings. Thus, the current paper positions a meta-analytical investigation of IM on interview and job performance ratings.

There are a few meta-analyses on IM and interview and performance outcomes ( Higgins et al., 2003 ; Barrick et al., 2009 ; Levashina et al., 2014 ), but these studies each approach the IM and rating relationship from a specific lens leaving a gap in our overall understanding of IM. The most recent study by Levashina et al. (2014) examines these relationships in the context of the structured employment interview. They find self-promotion ( r = 0.26) and other-focused ( r = 0.13) tactics both impact structured interview ratings ( Levashina et al., 2014 ). Higgins et al. (2003) analyze IM tactics through the lens of influence tactics and in many cases the dependent variable reflects a work outcome measure that includes combined interview ratings, performance ratings, and extrinsic measures of success. They find ingratiation has a stronger impact on ratings in lab studies ( r = 0.33) than in field studies ( r = 0.21) ( Higgins et al., 2003 ). Barrick et al. (2009) meta-analytically examine self-presentation tactics of appearance, IM, and nonverbal and verbal behavior and the relationship with interview and performance outcomes. They find IM more strongly impacts interview ratings ( r = 0.47) than job performance ( r = 0.15) ratings. They also conclude self-presentation has a comparable impact on ratings in both the lab and the field. Yet, the impact of IM on ratings is slightly higher for field studies ( r = 0.36) than lab studies ( r = 0.30) and the impact of nonverbal and verbal behavior is higher for lab studies ( r = 0.41) than field studies ( r = 0.32) ( Barrick et al., 2009 ). Each of these studies provide important information to advance the field forward, but the proliferation of IM research using various research design techniques necessitates an updated meta-analysis. The study herein establishes a base rate of IM in interview and job performance settings, explores the impact of self- and other-focused tactics on ratings, and examines research design factors that moderate the relationship between IM and interview and job performance outcomes.

Theoretical Background and Hypothesis Development

IM is a social influence process involving interactions between an actor, target, and environment ( Goffman, 1959 ). Social influence theory suggests every social interaction involves one party trying to influence the other ( Levy et al., 1998 ). Such motives are particularly invoked during situations in which an individual has the opportunity to develop an identity and obtain social and material outcomes. Social and material outcomes include obtaining a job in the case of an interview or obtaining a raise in the case of performance appraisal ( Leary and Kowalski, 1990 ).

IM is most commonly categorized into self-focused (e.g., self-promotion) and other-focused (e.g., ingratiation) tactics. Self-focused tactics involve the applicant trying to promote perceptions of competence ( Ellis et al., 2002 ). Interviewers form perceptions of the candidate during the interview and make attributions of competence. Self-focused tactics positively influence perceptions because the tactics limit the cognitive effort raters must go through to assess competence and instead directly provide attributional evidence for the individual's competence.

Hypothesis 1a: Self-focused tactics will be positively related to interview ratings.

Hypothesis 1b: Self-focused tactics will be positively related to job performance ratings.

Other-focused tactics are often used to elicit attraction, interpersonal liking, or perceptions of similarity ( Ellis et al., 2002 ; Kristof-Brown et al., 2002 ), which are important influences on rating outcomes ( Wayne et al., 1997 ).

Hypothesis 2a: Other-focused tactics will be positively related to interviewer ratings.

Hypothesis 2b: Other-focused tactics will be positively related to job performance ratings.

Interviews and job performance present unique situations for IM to occur. Interviews are shorter in nature and require less time for an individual to keep up impressions compared to ratings over a longer period of job performance. Also, asymmetric information during an interview allows candidates to engage in substantial IM because the interviewer does not have prior experience or knowledge of the candidate other than what is presented during the interview and in other selection measures (e.g., resumes, personality tests, etc.). However, supervisors have access to the candidate's history of behavior and can base ratings on job performance throughout the period rather than short term IM tactics. Further, interviews typically involve engaging with strangers, and job performance typically involves engaging with familiar people.

We posit that these situational differences between interviews and job performance lead to different impacts for self-promotion and ingratiation on interview and job performance ratings. Individuals are more prone to self-enhancement with strangers ( Tice et al., 1995 ), and interviews typically take place between strangers rather than familiar others. IM as a goal directed behavior is desirable when it is beneficial to the actor and viewed as believable by the target ( Schlenker, 2011 ). Self-focused tactics are beneficial in creating images of competence and believable if the interviewer is only relying on other selection measures and the current interview. Yet, these same self-focused tactics are not as believable or beneficial in generating positive job performance ratings. Supervisors are familiar with their employee's level of competence after exposure to performance over time, so self-promotion claims promoting competence are less beneficial and may even be unbelievable if such claims differ from the supervisor's own perceptions. Further, people generally become more modest over time as they get to know others, so the use of repeated self-promotive behaviors risks arrogance and can potentially damage relationships causing dislike ( Schlenker, 2011 ). Prior research suggests self-promotion strategies have a negligible effect on supervisor liking ( Wayne and Ferris, 1990 ) and in some cases a negative effect on supervisor liking, a precursor to career success ( Judge and Bretz, 1994 ). On the other hand, ingratiatory tactics are suggested as more situationally appropriate in job performance settings than self-promotion tactics ( Ferris et al., 1994 ). Prior research suggests other-focused tactics increase manager liking of subordinate and perceptions of similarity to the subordinate leading to increased performance ratings ( Wayne et al., 1997 ). Researchers examining the effects of self-focused vs. other-focused tactics on interviews and job performance find other-focused tactics to have a greater impact on ratings during performance appraisals than during interviews ( Kacmar and Carlson, 1999 ). In conclusion, we posit self-focused IM will more strongly impact interview rather than performance ratings. We also posit other-focused IM will more strongly impact performance ratings than interview ratings.

Hypothesis 3a: Self-focused tactics will be more strongly related to interview ratings than job performance ratings.

Hypothesis 3b: Other-focused tactics will be more strongly related to job performance ratings than to interview ratings.

Research Design Moderators

We expect several important moderators related to research design to influence the relationship between IM and ratings. These moderators include fidelity of the research setting, whether the target of IM or an observer rates performance, and whether the participants are current labor market participants or students.

Researchers offer different opinions on the validity of experimental lab studies compared to high fidelity employment situations. Lab studies have similar levels of external validity to field studies if participants are placed in authentic situations that ensure psychological realism ( Colquitt, 2008 ). Anderson et al. (1999) analyze meta-analyses of psychological research conducted in the lab vs. the field to determine the similarity between lab and field effect sizes. They correlate the effect sizes of the lab and field research for the same constructs and find a 0.73 correlation between effect sizes ( Anderson et al., 1999 ). This relatively strong correlation is evidence of similar generalizability for lab and field studies in psychological research ( Colquitt, 2008 ). However, the nature of the relationship between lab and field studies varies across particular literatures ( Colquitt, 2008 ), which is the case for employment research.

Employment interview researchers often call into question the external validity of experimental lab studies compared to field studies, particularly due to the high-stakes nature of employment interviews and consequences of the rating ( Jelf, 1999 ; Posthuma et al., 2002 ). The resulting experimental research on the impact of IM in lab and field studies has varying results. Higgins et al. (2003) find ingratiation has a higher impact on interview and job performance assessments in the lab rather than in the field. Barrick et al. (2009) find IM has a slightly higher impact on interview ratings in the field than in the lab, though they deem this difference insignificant. Barrick et al. (2009) also find verbal and non-verbal behavior has a higher impact in the lab than in the field. Despite these differing results, we expect IM has a higher impact on ratings in the lab rather than in the field based on the difference in accountability between lab and field settings.

Interviewers in high-stakes environments are accountable for the rating provided to the candidate as it often leads to employment. Interviewers in lab settings do not have the same level of accountability as the outcome of the rating generally has no consequences. Accountability research suggests individuals who are accountable make more accurate and consistent judgments ( Ashton, 1992 ; Lerner and Tetlock, 1999 ). Raters who are judged based on ratee performance show higher levels of judgmental accuracy ( Mero and Motowidlo, 1995 ). Therefore, interviewers in the field who are responsible for hiring a quality employee are more likely to focus on answers provided by the candidate rather than IM. This is true if other employees are aware of who is responsible for hiring the new employee and the interviewer is held accountable for the quality of the new hire. Individuals participating in lab settings are not responsible for the performance of the person who is fictitiously “hired” because this decision to “hire” has no actual consequences. Further, experimental research participants may assume any information is relevant to the experimental situation and the rating to be generated, so they are more likely to consider the effects of extraneous IM on interview ratings ( Barrick et al., 2009 ). Therefore, we expect IM tactics to be more strongly related to interview ratings in lab settings than in field settings.

Hypothesis 4: IM tactics will be more strongly related to interview ratings in lab settings than in field settings.

The interviewer may both conduct the interview by asking the candidate questions and provide ratings of the candidate. Alternatively, there may be multiple individuals present in an interview with one person conducting the interview and another separate observer providing the ratings. Therefore, the target of IM may not always be the same person providing the rating of the individual. Therefore, this impacts the saturation of IM on interview ratings.

We view the moderating effect of the performance rater from two different perspectives. Limitations in human ability to cognitively process information suggests it is more difficult for individuals to go through the memory process of retrieving, transforming, and storing information with greater levels of information present ( Wyer and Srull, 1981 ). Cognitive processing occurs sequentially and immediately during an interview evaluation so the more information necessary to transform, the higher the probability of information overload ( Morgeson and Campion, 1997 ). Further, evidence from assessment center research suggests that as task complexity increases, rating accuracy decreases ( Gaugler and Thornton, 1989 ). Therefore, interviewers actively asking questions, engaging with the individual, and providing an immediate rating are tasked with cognitively processing much more complex information than the observer who is just rating the individual. As such, it is more challenging for the target to separate out IM from job-related requirements, and we propose IM will be included in the ratings of the individual.

Hypothesis 5a: IM will be more strongly related to interview ratings when the target of IM has provided the rating than when an observer has provided the rating.

Alternatively, an active listener is able to perceive and eliminate extraneous IM that influences ratings more effectively than the observer. Active listening is conceptualized as having three elements including nonverbal involvement and communication, paraphrasing, and asking questions (e.g., Weger et al., 2010 ). Thus, an active listener is involved in the discussion, perceiving nonverbal and verbal signals and sending those same signals back to the candidate to show understanding and positive or negative acceptance of the communication. Brain connectivity patterns in active-response vs. passive-listening results show that active listening engages additional network connectivity elements of the brain associated with working memory and maintenance of attention ( Wang and Holland, 2014 ). Such research indicates active listeners are more engaged in the conversation both cognitively and physiologically thus allowing them to perceive verbal and nonverbal IM information cues from the individual, send signals back to the individual about the acceptability of such information, and sort that information from actual candidate ratings to produce a rating that is less saturated with IM. Therefore, we propose active listeners will be able to filter IM from ratings whereas observers will not, making observer ratings of performance more saturated with IM.

Hypothesis 5b: IM will be more strongly related to interview ratings when the observer has provided the rating than when the target of IM has provided the rating.

Another research design factor previously unexplored is the impact of IM on ratings for research participants who are students compared to current labor market participants. We view this moderating effect from two separate theoretical perspectives.

First, we posit that IM is more strongly related to interview ratings for students than current labor market participants. Base rates for student faking behaviors, a form of deceptive IM, are established by Levashina and Campion (2007) across three studies. They find 85–99% of students engage in slight image creation, which is faking behavior they define as “to make an image of a good candidate for a job” (p. 1654). Also, 77–99% of students engage in ingratiation, which is faking behavior they define as “to gain favor with the interviewer to improve the appearance of a good candidate for the job.” This evidence suggests the use of such deceptive IM tactics is pervasive across student research participants, therefore the use of honest IM tactics used to convey an individual's actual qualifications is also likely pervasive.

Students are generally younger in age and have less work experience than current labor market participants. We draw from corporate fraud research that suggests younger individuals are more likely than older executives to engage in unethical or fraudulent activity ( Daboub et al., 1995 ; Zahra et al., 2005 ). Further, there is an increased propensity to engage in illegal activities for more mobile executives with less work experiences compared to longer-tenured executives ( Clinard, 1983 ), making length of work experience an important consideration. Also, it is possible that longer-tenured employees such as current labor market participants have more relevant work experience and skills, thus decreasing the need to use IM compared to students. Therefore, we posit that IM will be more strongly related to interview ratings for students than for current labor market participants.

Hypothesis 6a: IM will be more strongly related to interview ratings for students rather than current labor market participants.

Alternatively, current labor market participants are motivated to use IM techniques because the value of a job typically increases with more work experience and increased financial obligations. Current employees are, also, attuned to the perceived requirements of getting a new job, which is often advocated as “selling yourself” by career specialists ( Ryan, 2016 ). There is also evidence that within organizations, longer-tenured employees engage in more IM. Women at senior levels of an organization engage in self-focused IM 70% of the time compared to junior women who engage in this behavior 30% of the time, according to a study focused on gender, age, and IM ( Singh et al., 2002 ). In addition, most studies that involve current labor market participants are high-stakes situations that may lead to getting hired or receiving a positive performance review, so the current labor market participant is more motivated to engage in IM. Based on this notion, we argue that the relationship between IM tactics and ratings will be stronger for those currently engaged in the labor market rather than students.

Hypothesis 6b: IM will be more strongly related to interview ratings for current labor market participants than students.

Literature Search

We reviewed articles over a 25 year period from 1990 to 2015. We chose this timeframe because several critical theoretical frameworks of IM were published around 1990 ( Gardner and Martinko, 1988 ; Leary and Kowalski, 1990 ; Schlenker and Weigold, 1992 ), thus we expected IM research to proliferate after this time. We used the keyword search “ impression management ” to locate articles in the following journals: Administrative Science Quarterly, Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management Review, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, Personnel Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, and Strategic Management Journal .

Inclusion Criteria

Articles were included that contained an empirical analysis of IM tactics and either interview or job performance ratings with sample sizes and r -correlations or d -values that were used to convert the effect sizes into correlations. The resulting meta-analysis included 18 articles and 42 unique effect sizes that encompassed a sample size of 8,635.

Description of Variables

Impression management.

Self-focused tactics included tactics such as exemplification, internal attributions, intimidation, professionalism, self-promotion, and supplication. Other-focused tactics included bargaining, favor rendering, appealing to higher authority, opinion conformity, other enhancement, ingratiation, and supervisor-focused tactics.

Interview Rating

Interview rating was operationalized as an overall rating of interview performance. In a limited number of cases, interview rating was operationalized as person-job fit, hiring recommendation, post interview job beliefs and job offer expectancy.

Job Performance

Job performance rating was operationalized as an evaluation of the employee's performance denoted as either task performance or promotability assessments. We pooled task performance and promotability assessments for sample size purposes after we analyzed means and correlations for each separately and determined they were similar.

Rating Source

We separated studies according to whether ratings of interview or job performance were given by the target of the IM (interviewer or supervisor) or a third-party observer (colleague or observer).

Research Fidelity

We separated studies into field vs. lab studies. We categorized studies as field studies if the study took place between an actual interviewer and job candidate or employee and supervisor and a job was at stake. We categorized studies as lab studies if no job was at stake and the study included a mock interview or experiment.

Research Participants

Research participants were separated by whether the candidate was a student vs. already employed in the labor market.

Meta-Analytic Procedures and Artifact Corrections

Non-independence of data.

We followed Schmidt and Hunter (2014) recommendations for handling non-independence of data. Correlations between IM tactics and interview and job performance outcomes were recorded for each primary study. We converted d -values to r -correlations for studies that did not report r -correlations. After categorizing the studies by higher level groupings (i.e., other-focused, self-focused, etc.), many studies had multiple measures of the independent variable related to the dependent variable. In these cases, we computed composite correlations for the independent-dependent variable relationship to retain the independence of the sample. For studies that had IM outcomes with multiple measures of the interview or performance outcome variables, we selected the correlations that best represented the outcome variable of importance.

Unreliability Corrections

We used Schmidt and Hunter (2014) artifact correction procedures for reliability. It was critical to correct for unreliability as it introduced measurement error that attenuated correlations ( Schmidt and Hunter, 2014 ). Reliability was corrected individually per study using coefficient alpha values as this was the most commonly provided reliability information available from the primary study. We used the Spearman-Brown formula to compute composite reliabilities and used this reliability as the artifact correction for the composite ( Schmidt and Hunter, 2014 ). The resulting corrected correlation was slightly overstated since Spearman-Brown reliability corrections assumed the components of each composite were orthogonal in their relationship to the outcome variable, which we knew with IM tactics and interview and job performance outcomes was likely not the case. In addition to correcting for unreliability in IM tactics, we also corrected for unreliability in interview and performance rating outcomes using reliabilities reported for each job and interview outcome measure in the primary study, which was an improvement over prior meta-analyses that did not correct the criterion using reliabilities reported by study.

Table 1 contains base rates of IM in interview and performance settings. IM is used more frequently overall in interviews ( M = 4.42, SDm = 0.62) than performance settings ( M = 3.80, SDm = 0.97). Other-focused tactics are used more frequently in interviews ( M = 4.66, SDm = 0.68) than in performance settings ( M = 2.68, SDm = 0.20), and self-focused tactics are used slightly more frequently in performance ( M = 4.38, SDm = 0.66) than in interview settings ( M = 4.30, SDm = 0.55).

Table 1. Base rate of IM .

Table 2 contains the effects of IM tactics on ratings. Hypothesis 1 states self-focused tactics are positively related to (1a) interview ratings and (1b) performance ratings. We find support for hypothesis 1a as self-focused tactics are significantly related to interview ratings ( r c = 0.24, p < 0.05). We do not find support for hypothesis 1b as the relationship between self-focused tactics and performance ratings is not significant ( r c = 0.18, n.s .). Hypothesis 2 states other-focused tactics are positively related to (2a) interview ratings and (2b) performance ratings. We find support for both hypotheses 2a and 2b as other-focused tactics are significantly related to interview ratings ( r c = 0.17, p < 0.05) and job performance ratings ( r c = 0.25, p < 0.05).

Table 2. Effects of IM on ratings .

Hypothesis 3a states that self-focused IM is more strongly related to interview ratings than performance ratings. We find support for hypothesis 3a as self-focused tactics have a significant impact on interview ratings ( r c = 0.24, p < 0.05) and no significant impact on performance ratings ( r c = 0.18, n.s.) . Hypothesis 3b states that other-focused tactics are more strongly related to performance ratings than interview ratings. We find support for hypothesis 3b as other-focused tactics have a stronger impact on performance ratings ( r c = 0.25, p < 0.05) than interview ratings ( r c = 0.17, p < 0.05). Other-focused tactics are used more frequently in interview settings but more effectively in performance settings and self-focused tactics are used more frequently in performance settings but more effectively in interview settings. Results are presented in Tables 1 , 2 .

Hypothesis 4 states that IM is more strongly related to interview ratings in the lab than in the field. We find support for hypothesis 4. IM is used more frequently and is more strongly related to interview ratings in the lab ( M = 4.48, SDm = 0.71, r c = 0.24) vs. in the field ( M = 4.36, SDm = 0.51, r c = 0.18). However, the type of tactics used differs between the lab and the field. Self-focused tactics are used more frequently with more impact in the lab ( M = 4.41, SDm = 0.72, r c = 0.28) than the field ( M = 4.19, SDm = 0.28, r c = 0.16), yet other-focused tactics are used more frequently and with more impact in the field ( M = 4.73, SDm = 0.67, r c = 0.20) than in the lab ( M = 4.59, SDm = 0.68, r c = 0.15). Results are presented in Tables 3 , 4 .

Table 3. Base rate of IM by research fidelity .

Table 4. Effects of IM on ratings by research fidelity .

Hypothesis 5a states that there is a stronger relationship between IM tactics and interview ratings when the target of IM is also the rater of performance, while hypothesis 5b states that there is a stronger relationship between IM tactics and ratings when performance is rated by an observer rather than the target of IM. We find support for hypothesis 5a and not 5b. IM has a significant impact on ratings when the target of IM is also the rater of performance ( M = 4.63, SDm = 0.54, r c = 0.27). IM has no significant impact on ratings when the rater of performance is an observer, despite the frequency of IM use ( M = 3.84, SDm = 0.58, r c = 0.11). Results are presented in Tables 5 , 6 .

Table 5. Base rate of IM by rater of performance and target of IM .

Table 6. Effects of IM on ratings by rater of performance and target of IM .

Hypothesis 6a states that there is a stronger relationship between IM tactics and ratings when the research participants are students rather than current labor market participants. On the other hand, hypothesis 6b states that there is a stronger relationship between IM tactics and ratings when current labor market participants are research participants rather than students. We find support for hypothesis 6b and not 6a. There is a stronger relationship between IM tactics and ratings for current labor market participants than students. IM tactics were used slightly more frequently by current labor market participants ( M = 4.37, SDm = 0.18, r c = 0.36) than students ( M = 4.31, SDm = 0.68, r c = 0.15) and considerably more effectively. Results are presented in Tables 7 , 8 .

Table 7. Base rate of IM by research participant .

Table 8. Effects of IM on ratings by research participant .

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to establish base rates of IM in interview and job performance settings, explore the impact of self- and other-focused tactics on ratings, and examine research design factors that moderate the relationship between IM and interview ratings. We found strong evidence overall that IM saturated interview and performance ratings. Further, research design proved to be an important consideration. IM was used slightly more frequently and with slightly more impact in the lab than in the field. However, these results differed substantially when examining the specific IM tactic. In particular, self-focused tactics had a much higher impact on ratings in the lab than in the field while other-focused tactics had a slightly stronger impact on ratings in the field than in the lab. Therefore, researchers should be cognizant of the type of IM under investigation and how the research design may affect the frequency and impact of IM on their ratings.

Targets of IM who also provided performance ratings had stronger IM-rating relationships than observers who provided performance ratings. This result supported the notion that individuals who actively asked questions, engaged with the individual, and provided an immediate rating were tasked with high levels of cognitive processing that made it challenging for the target to separate out IM from job-related rating requirements. Therefore, IM was included in the ratings of the individual.

Future research should examine whether IM is considered to be a contamination variable or job-related. If IM is assumed to be a contamination variable, then the accuracy of ratings may be improved by having one person directly ask questions and another responsible for providing a performance assessment. If IM is assumed to be job-related, then it may be appropriate that the interviewer is including the IM in ratings.

We also found support for the notion that current labor market participants used IM slightly more frequently and significantly more effectively than students. This suggested that perhaps IM was a learned skill. More experienced workers were better able to identify when IM use was appropriate and applied it with relatively similar frequency as students but yielded more effective results. Although not hypothesized, this result coincided with results in Tables 1 , 2 that suggested IM was used less frequently overall in job performance than interviews but had a stronger impact on ratings. Current labor market participants rated on job performance were able to use IM tactics more adeptly and effectively.

Researchers should be mindful of these differences between current labor market participants and students. Further, employers interviewing entry-level employees vs. long-tenured employees may want to consider the differential impact of various IM tactics.

Limitations

Our study is not without limitations despite the interesting results. First, we are not able to perform moderation analysis on research design and job performance due to the lack of primary studies of IM in a job performance setting. We encourage additional primary studies focused on IM tactics and job performance. We know the effects of IM tactics on ratings outcomes differ between interviews and job performance settings, so there may be additional differences in how the impact of IM on ratings is altered by research design in job performance settings that cannot be assumed just by looking at the impact on interview ratings.

Second, there are certain methodological limitations based on availability of information from primary studies. Despite our rigorous use of individual level study artifact corrections, we use coefficient alpha as our reliability estimate, which does not include transient error and thus under corrects for measurement error if transient error is present ( Schmidt and Hunter, 2014 ). Also, we use Spearman-Brown as our composite reliability correction, which may overestimate reliability estimates ( Schmidt and Hunter, 2014 ).

Third, several of our credibility intervals are quite large indicating substantial variation in parameter estimates across primary studies. These intervals suggest moderators of the relationships. We address many critical moderators in this study by looking at interview and performance settings separately, splitting IM tactics into self- and other-focused, and analyzing research design factors, but other moderators of these relationships should be explored in the future.

This study helps further elucidate the frequency and impact of IM on interview and performance ratings. Further, research design factors such as research fidelity, rater, and research participants have important effects on the impact of IM on ratings. Therefore, adjustments to these factors may strengthen or attenuate the relationship between IM and ratings, which is useful to future researchers and practitioners.

Author Contributions

JP, JL were both engaged in substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work, drafting and revising the work for important intellectual content, final approval of the version to be published, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Anderson, C. A., Lindsay, J. J., and Bushman, B. J. (1999). Research in the psychological laboratory: truth or triviality? Curr. Direct. Psychol. Sci. 8, 3–9. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00002

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ashton, R. H. (1992). Effects of justification and a mechanical aid on judgment performance. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 52, 292–306. doi: 10.1016/0749-5978(92)90040-E

Barrick, M., Shaffer, J., and DeGrassi, S. (2009). What you see may not be what you get: relationships among self-presentation tactics and ratings of interview and job performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 94, 1394–1411. doi: 10.1037/a0016532

Bolino, M., Kacmar, K. M., Turnley, W., and Gilstrap, B. (2008). A multi-level review of impression management motives and behaviors. J. Manag. 34, 1080–1109. doi: 10.1177/0149206308324325

Bolino, M., Long, D., and Turnley, W. (2016). Impression management in organizations: critical questions, answers, and areas for future research. Ann. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 3, 377–406. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062337

Bozeman, S., and Kacmar, M. (1997). A cybernetic model of impression management processes in organizations. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 69, 9–30. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1996.2669

* Cable, D. M., and Kay, V. S. (2012). Striving for self-verification during organizational entry. Acad. Manag. J. 55, 360–380. doi: 10.5465/amj.2010.0397

* Chen, C. C., Huang, Y. M., Huang, T. C., and Liu, I. (2011). The mediating processes linking applicant personality traits and interviewer evaluation. Int. J. Select. Assess. 19, 287–300. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2011.00558.x

* Chen, C. H., Lee, H. M., and Yeh, Y. J. (2008). The antecedent and consequence of person-organization fit: ingratiation, similarly, hiring recommendations and job offer. Int. J. Select. Assess. 16, 210–219. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2008.00427.x

Clinard, M. B. (1983). Corporate Ethics and Crime: The Role of Middle Management . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Google Scholar

Colquitt, J. A. (2008). From the editors publishing laboratory research in AMJ: a question of when, not if. Acad. Manag. J. 51, 616–620. doi: 10.5465/amr.2008.33664717

Daboub, A., Rasheed, A. M., Priem, R. L., and Gray, D. A. (1995). Top management team characteristics and corporate illegal activity. Acad. Manag. Rev. 20, 138–170. doi: 10.2307/258890

* Ellis, A. P., West, B. J., Ryan, A. M., and DeShon, R. P. (2002). The use of impression management tactics in structured interviews: a function of question type? J. Appl. Psychol. 87, 1275–1288. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.87.6.1200

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Ferris, G. R., Judge, T. A., Rowland, K. M., and Fitzgibbons, D. E. (1994). Subordinate influence and the performance evaluation process: test of a model. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 58, 101–135. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1994.1030

Gardner, W., and Martinko, M. (1988). Impression Management in Organizations. J. Manage. 14, 321–338. doi: 10.1177/014920638801400210

Gaugler, B. B., and Thornton, G. C. III (1989). Number of assessment center dimensions as a determinant of assessor accuracy. J. Appl. Psychol . 74, 611–618.

Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life . New York, NY: Random House.

* Higgins, C., Judge, T., and Ferris, G. (2003). Influence tactics and work outcomes: a meta-analysis. J. Organ. Behav. 24, 89–106. doi: 10.1002/job.181

* Ingold, P. V., Kleinmann, M., König, C. J., and Melchers, K. G. (2016). Transparency of assessment centers: lower criterion-related validity but greater opportunity to perform? Person. Psychol . 69, 467–497. doi: 10.1111/peps.12105

Jelf, G. (1999). A narrative review of post-1989 employment interview research. J. Bus. Psychol. 14, 25–58. doi: 10.1023/A:1022954316857

Judge, T. A., and Bretz, R. D. Jr. (1994). Political influence behavior and career success. J. Manage. 20, 43–65. doi: 10.1177/014920639402000103

Kacmar, K., and Carlson, S. (1999). Effectiveness of impression management tactics across human resource situations. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 29, 1293–1311. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb02040.x

* Kristof-Brown, A., Barrick, M. R., and Franke, M. (2002). Applicant impression management: dispositional influences and consequences for recruiter perceptions of fit and similarity. J. Manage. 28, 27–46. doi: 10.1177/014920630202800103

Leary, M., and Kowalski, R. (1990). Impression management: a literature review and two-component model. Psychol. Bull. 107, 34–47. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34

Lerner, J. S., and Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychol. Bull. 125:255. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255

Levashina, J., and Campion, M. A. (2007). Measuring faking in the employment interview: development and validation of an Interview Faking Behavior Scale. J. Appl. Psychol. 92, 1638–1656. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1638

Levashina, J., Hartwell, C. J., Morgeson, F. P., and Campion, M. A. (2014). The structured employment interview: narrative and quantitative review of the research literature. Pers. Psychol. 67, 241–293. doi: 10.1111/peps.12052

Levy, D., Collins, B., and Nail, P. (1998). A new model of interpersonal influence characteristics. J. Soc. Behav. Pers. 13, 715–733.

* Liu, Y., Loi, R., and Lam, L. (2013). Exemplification and supervisor-rated performance: the moderating role of ethical leadership. Int. J. Select. Assess. 21, 144–154. doi: 10.1111/ijsa.12025

* McFarland, L., Yun, G., Harold, C., Viera, L., and Moore, L. (2005). An examination of impression management use and effectiveness across assessment center exercises: the role of competency demands. Pers. Psychol. 58, 949–980. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00374.x

Mero, N. P., and Motowidlo, S. J. (1995). Effects of rater accountability on the accuracy and the favorability of performance ratings. J. Appl. Psychol. 80, 517. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.80.4.517

Morgeson, F. P., and Campion, M. A. (1997). Social and cognitive sources of potential inaccuracy in job analysis. J. Appl. Psychol . 82, 627–655.

Posthuma, R., Morgeson, F., and Campion, M. (2002). Beyond employment interview validity: a comprehensive narrative review of recent research and trends over time. Pers. Psychol. 55, 1–81. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2002.tb00103.x

* Roulin, N., Bangerter, A., and Levashina, J. (2015). Honest and deceptive impression management in the employment interview: can it be detected and how does it impact evaluations. Pers. Psychol. 68, 395–444. doi: 10.1111/peps.12079

Ryan, L. (2016). Leadership. Available online at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/lizryan/2016/03/22/how-to-sell-yourself-and-get-the-job/2/#286abfdd474a

Schlenker, B. (1980). Impression Management: The Self-Concept, Social Identity, and Interpersonal Relations . Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Schlenker, B. R., and Weigold, M. F. (1992). Interpersonal processes involving impression regulation and management. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 43, 133–168. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ps.43.020192.001025

Schlenker, B. (2011). “Self presentation,” in Handbook of Self and Identity , eds M. Leary and J. Tangney (New York: NY: Guilford Press), 542–570.

Schmidt, F. L., and Hunter, J. E. (2014). Methods of Meta-Analysis, 3rd Edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd.

* Schneider, L., Powell, D., and Roulin, N. (2015). Cues to deception in the employment interview. Int. J. Select. Assess. 23, 182–190. doi: 10.1111/ijsa.12106

Singh, V., Kumra, S., and Vinnicombe, S. (2002). Gender and impression management: playing the promotion game. J. Bus. Ethics 37, 77–89. doi: 10.1023/A:1014782118902

* Stevens, C. (1997). Effects of preinterview beliefs on applicants reactions to campus interviews. Acad. Manag. J. 40, 947–966. doi: 10.2307/256954

* Swider, B., Barrick, M., Harris, T. B., and Stoverink, A. C. (2011). Managing and creating an image in the interview: the role of interviewee initial impressions. J. Appl. Psychol. 98, 1275–1288. doi: 10.1037/a0024005

Tice, D., Butler, J., Muraven, M., and Stillwell, A. (1995). When modesty prevails: differential favorability of self-presentation to friends and strangers. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69, 1120. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.69.6.1120

* Tsai, W. C., Chen, C. C., and Chiu, S. F. (2005). Exploring boundaries of the effects of applicant impression management tactics in job interviews. J. Manage. 31, 108–125. doi: 10.1177/0149206304271384

* Tsai, W. C., Huang, W., Wu, C., and Lo, I. (2010). Disentangling the effects of applicant defensive impression management tactics in job interviews. Int. J. Select. Assess. 18, 131–140. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00495.x

* Van Iddekinge, C., McFarland, L., and Raymark, P. (2007). Antecedents of impression management use and effectiveness in a structured interview. J. Manage. 33, 752–773. doi: 10.1177/0149206307305563

Wang, Y., and Holland, S. (2014). Comparison of functional network connectivity for passive-listening and active-response narrative comprehension in adolescents. Brain Connect. 4, 273–285. doi: 10.1089/brain.2013.0190

Wayne, S., and Ferris, G. (1990). Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisor-subordinate interactions: a laboratory experiment and field study. J. Appl. Psychol. 75, 487. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.75.5.487

* Wayne, S., and Liden, R. (1995). Effects of impression management on performance ratings. A longitudinal study. Acad. Manag. J. 38, 232–260. doi: 10.2307/256734

* Wayne, S., Liden, R., Graf, I., and Ferris, G. (1997). The role of upward influence tactics in human resource decisions. Pers. Psychol. 50, 979–1006. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb01491.x

Weger, H., Castle, G. R., and Emmett, M. C. (2010). Active listening in peer interviews: the influence of message paraphrasing on perceptions of listening skill. Int. J. Listen. 24, 34–49. doi: 10.1080/10904010903466311

Wyer, R. S., and Srull, T. K. (1981). “Category accessibility: some theoretical and empirical issues concerning the processing of social stimulus information,” in Social Cognition: The Ontario Symposium , eds E. T. Higgins, C. P. Herman, and M. P. Zanna (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum), 161–197.

Zahra, S. A., Priem, R. L., and Rasheed, A. A. (2005). The antecedents and consequences of top management fraud. J. Manage. 31, 803–828. doi: 10.1177/0149206305279598

* ^ References marked with an asterisk indicate the study was included in the meta-analysis.

Keywords: impression management, employment interview, job performance, meta-analysis, research design

Citation: Peck JA and Levashina J (2017) Impression Management and Interview and Job Performance Ratings: A Meta-Analysis of Research Design with Tactics in Mind. Front. Psychol. 8:201. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00201

Received: 15 September 2016; Accepted: 31 January 2017; Published: 15 February 2017.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2017 Peck and Levashina. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Jessica A. Peck, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Skip to main content
• Accessibility information

• Enlighten Enlighten

Enlighten Theses

• Latest Additions
• Browse by Year
• Browse by Subject
• Browse by College/School
• Browse by Author
• Browse by Funder
• Login (Library staff only)

In this section

Designing to support impression management

Sherwood, Scott (2009) Designing to support impression management. PhD thesis, University of Glasgow.

This work investigates impression management and in particular impression management using ubiquitous technology. Generally impression management is the process through which people try to influence the impressions that others have about them. In particular, impression management focuses on the flow of information between a performer and his/her audience, with control over what is presented to whom being of the utmost importance when trying to create the appropriate impression. Ubiquitous technology has provided opportunities for individuals to present themselves to others. However, the disconnection between presenter and audience over both time and space can result in individuals being misrepresented. This thesis outlines two important areas when trying to control the impression one gives namely, hiding and revealing, and accountability. By exploring these two themes the continuous evolution and dynamic nature of controlling the impression one gives is explored. While this ongoing adaptation is recognised by designers they do not always create technology that is sufficiently dynamic to support this process. As a result, this work attempts to answer three research questions: RQ1: How do users of ubicomp systems appropriate recorded data from their everyday activity and make it into a resource for expressing themselves to others in ways that are dynamically tailored to their ongoing social context and audience? RQ2: What technology can be built to support ubicomp system developers to design and develop systems to support appropriation as a central part of a useful or enjoyable user experience? RQ3: What software architectures best suit this type of appropriated interaction and developers’ designing to support such interaction? Through a thorough review of existing literature, and the extensive study of several large ubicomp systems, the issues when presenting oneself through technology are identified. The main issues identified are hiding and revealing, and accountability. These are built into a framework that acts as a reference for designers wishing to support impression management. An architecture for supporting impression management has also been developed that conforms to this framework and its evolution is documented later in the thesis. A demonstration of this architecture in a multi-player mobile experience is subsequently presented.

Actions (login required)

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics

The University of Glasgow is a registered Scottish charity: Registration Number SC004401

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Pedagogy in Basic and Higher Education - Current Developments and Challenges

The Power of Appearance: Students’ Impression Management within Class

Reviewed: 26 July 2019 Published: 28 September 2019

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.88850

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Pedagogy in Basic and Higher Education - Current Developments and Challenges

Edited by Kirsi Tirri and Auli Toom

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

1,044 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

Although educational research acknowledges that social perception processes are relevant for understanding but also evaluating situations, the topic of impression management (IM) has achieved only little attention so far. Individuals have discussed rather as passively exposed to the mechanism of social interaction and perception processes. This contribution changes perspectives and addresses the question of conscious impression management within classes. The chapter asks whether students use self-presentation tactics in order to deliberately navigate the impression their teachers should have of them. By means of an empirical study, country- and gender-specific differences with regard to impression management were found. Likewise, students with a high educational aspiration and good school grades scored higher or at least differently on impression management than students with a low educational aspiration level and low school grades. And students with a high educational aspiration but low grades try to overcome this discrepancy by means of personally adapting to the teachers’ expectations. Even though the influence mechanism of impression management on school success cannot conclusively be answered, this paper opens new perspectives on the scientific discourse of social inequality as well as teaching quality and discusses implications for teacher education.

• impression management
• self-presentation tactics
• social interaction processes
• teacher-student relationship
• student engagement

Author Information

Sarah forster-heinzer *.

• Institute of Education, University of Zurich, Switzerland

Arvid Nagel

• University of Teacher Education, Switzerland

Horst Biedermann

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

Teaching can be understood as a form of pedagogical action and communication (cf. [ 1 ]). Teachers meet a group of students, and only through the effort of all involved, successful teaching and learning is possible (cf. [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]). Social interaction between teacher and students but also between students themselves is a necessary but also momentous fact. In contrast to fleeting everyday encounters, students and teachers work together over a longer period of time. Within the framework of teaching and class organisation, they (compulsorily) enter into a long-term relationship (cf. [ 1 ]). As numerous social-psychological studies have shown (cf. [ 4 , 5 ]), mutual perception is (socially) constructed and dependent on attitudes, expectations and experiences. Such expectations, norms and rules also exist at school, as the following quote illustrates: “At school, teachers and students interact. Their actions are linked to social expectations and roles. […] If expectations are met, recognition and reward follow, if they are not met, rejection, punishment or even sanction follow. […] The better students adapt to teachers’ expectations and ideas and the better they succeed in camouflaging themselves by integrating both curricula [official and secret curriculum, authors’ note], the greater the chance for a successful school career” ([ 6 ], pp. 101 and 109, translated from German by the authors). Empirical studies confirmed that on the one hand, students are able to influence teachers’ perception and assessment (cf. [ 7 , 8 ]) and on the other hand that the teachers’ perception has consequences for students. Thus, as, for instance, the following references [ 9 , 10 ] emphasised, students, who are perceived as more committed by their teacher often have better grades than those who are perceived as less committed, with the same school performance. In this context, Reichenbach [ 11 ] speaks of privileged students and means that those students who know and understand how to present themselves according to expectations and norms have a higher chance of success at school. Impression management (IM) therefore plays an important role not only in everyday life (cf. [ 12 , 13 ]) but also in school careers (cf. [ 11 , 14 , 15 , 16 ]). The aim of this contribution is to elaborate conceptually as well as empirically students’ IM within class. Thus, despite its obvious significance, IM of students has received little interest from educational research so far.

2. Impression management

2.1 the presentation of the self.

The topic of IM has gained some attention within sociology (cf. [ 13 ]) as well as social psychology (cf. [ 17 ]). Commonly, impression management is defined as an individual’s active efforts to cast himself/herself in a certain light, to present, create and maintain a specific image in public (social situation) with a particular purpose (cf. [ 9 , 13 , 18 ]). Since IM is concerned with the image a person tries to convey to another person, on the one hand, IM expresses itself in self-presentation. On the other hand, self-presentation tactics serve the purpose of IM. Self-presentation therefore is a process “by which people [try to] convey to others that they are a certain kind of person or possess certain characteristics” ([ 17 ], p. 3). Consequently, the self has an inherent role in IM and can be defined as a cognitive structure that allows a person to think consciously about himself/herself and allows interpretation which are directed towards understanding one’s own inner world (cf. [ 17 , 19 ]). Although one could argue that self-presentation is involved in every social encounter whether conscious or not, in literature, it is often used as synonym to impression management, which describes a conscious process of managing the self-presentation. With regard to the school context, a student might be more or less concerned about the image the teacher has of him/her and therefore invests more or less in IM. If the student is more concerned and provided, he/she understands the expectations and norms of the teacher; he/she will probably invest more in presenting the self as being committed, motivated and interested within class. In other words, to care about the impression one leaves in a situation requires that students are aware of social perceptual processes and the fact that one always leaves an impression, whether intentional or not. Leary [ 17 ] distinguished between four levels of impression monitoring. On the level of impression oblivion , a person is unaware “even of the possibility that others are forming impressions of him or her” ([ 17 ], p. 49). This level is, however, relatively rare [ 17 ]. Nevertheless, students who are at this level of oblivion may be at a disadvantage because, as mentioned earlier, grades are also influenced by how teachers perceive their students’ commitment. On the second level, the pre-attentive impression scanning , a person manages the impression at a rather unconscious or pre-attentive level while focussing on other things. If a person is “consciously aware that others may be forming impressions of him or he” ([ 17 ], p. 49), he/she is at the level of impression awareness . On the level of impression focus , a person is consciously aware of the impression he/she makes, and all the person’s thoughts are concentrated on this impression and the consequences. This level might be very stressful, as a person has no room for other things or foci. Leary [ 17 ] highlighted: “ironically, then people may be so consumed by thoughts of the impressions they are making that they end up making undesired impressions.” In the context of school, a student might be so focused on how he/she appears during an oral speech that he/she will not be able to focus on the speech’s content. Most of the time, students probably move between levels 2 and 3 as the line between consciousness and unconsciousness is often very blurred. When managing the impression one wants to leave in a situation, however, impression awareness is required. Nevertheless, not everyone seems to be equally successful in self-presentation. Goffman [ 13 ] stressed that for successful self-presentation, the public (i.e., the teacher) must be convinced of the sincerity of the presentation. For this to succeed, even the impressionist must have a clear idea of what his audience expects; he must know how judgements come about and possess sensitivity for what the respective social situation demands (cf. [ 20 ]). Meaning, the successful handling of school demands and expectations requires that newly entering children quickly understand the role they have to play, the position they have to fill and the rules they have to follow. They need to recognise how an institution works, and they need to acquire the necessary organisational knowledge (cf. [ 16 ]). Some students might intuitively know how to make a good impression. From a sociological perspective, knowing how to behave appropriately can be explained with the concept of frame (cf. [ 21 ]). Frames are cultural specifications providing guidelines as to how to engage in situations (cf. [ 22 ]). It is to assume that students, familiar with a cultural context, usually know that it is beneficial to show interest in the learning subject during class (and not only to be interested) and to demonstratively show their own motivation (and not only to be motivated). Moreover, it is beneficial if motivation and interest is missing in a situation, to present the self at least as if interested and motivated (cf. [ 13 ]). Even though IM can be related to pretending and deceiving, it does not necessarily have to be false and untrue. A positive IM is likewise important independently of the presence or absence of motivation and interest in the given situation. Motivation, however, to present the self in correspondence with the teacher’s expectations is needed.

2.2 Motivation and function of impression management

Presenting the self is an inherent part of every social situation regardless of whether the individual is aware of it. Thus, individuals involved in social encounters constantly seek information from each other in order to define the situation, formulate expectations and align their own behaviour accordingly (cf. [ 13 , 17 , 22 ]). Motivation to regulate how they are perceived by others might result from the belief that the impressions others form of them are relevant to achieve a certain goal which is valuable or important to them or to overcome a discrepancy between the impressions they desire others to have of them (presented self [ 19 ]) and the image they think others actually hold of them (appearing self [ 19 ]; see also [ 1 , 17 ]). In the context of school, a student might wish to enter university and therefore is interested in good grades. If this student understands that grades are influenced not only by performance but also by the impression he/she makes in terms of commitment, interest and motivation, he/she is likely to invest more in IM. Likewise if a student experiences a discrepancy between actual school grades and educational aspiration, he/she might invest more in IM (cf. [ 1 ]) or if the student wants his/her teacher to have a certain (good) impression of him/her, but does not yet think to appear as such (cf. [ 19 ]). IM and self-presentation tactics are, however, not only influenced by the person’s goals and attributed value but also by norms and roles. Norms specify how people should act and what images they should or should not convey in particular situations and are gender-, context- and culture-specific (cf. [ 17 ]). For instance, boys are encouraged to act independent, powerful and competent, whereas girls are encouraged to be expressive, interpersonal and nurturant [ 17 ]. These different expectations result consequently in different self-presentation tactics. Beside influencing other people’s behaviour and attitudes, IM serves the individual for constructing and maintaining the self-esteem as well as emotional regulation. But it has also an interpersonal function as a certain degree of concern of one’s public impression is considered essential for smooth and successful social interaction (cf. [ 13 , 17 ]). With regard to school, students’ are being concerned about a good impression contribute to a more smoothly running teaching with less disturbances (cf. [ 1 , 16 ]). Managing a good impression in social situations (i.e., during teaching) is therefore also linked to courtesy and respect for the other(s) (cf. [ 1 , 11 , 13 ]). To teachers this means that it should be important to them that all students understand the expectations, norms and cultural frames of schools and classrooms. Teachers can thus support their students in presenting themselves in a good light by discussing such norms and expectations as well as successful impression management.

2.3 Students’ impression management within class

Empirical studies such as the self-fulfilling prophecy [ 23 ], the halo effect [ 4 , 5 ] as well as the Matthew effect [ 24 ] confirmed the significance of a positive perception of the student for school success. These studies, however, took a rather unidirectional perspective on the teacher-student relationship and the social interaction process, picturing the students as rather passively exposed to the teachers’ expectations. Attributing the students as an active part in the social interaction process and attesting them the power to be able to influence the teachers’ perception has not been the focus of research so far. Nevertheless, there are a few studies reporting that students are actually able to self-verify and to influence the teachers’ perception (cf. [ 7 , 8 ]). In the 1980s, some researchers asked students for advice they would give their younger siblings to succeed at school, implicitly addressing students’ self-presentation tactics (cf. [ 14 , 25 , 26 ]). Eder [ 14 ] identified nine different categories of advices, recommended to younger siblings: (1) cooperation and learning, (2) demonstrative engagement, (3) identification, (4) integration, (5) situational adaptation, (6) personal adaptation, (7) ingratiation, (8) resistance and (9) distance and withdrawal. An analysis of the nine categories showed that four categories (2, 5, 6 and 7) represent self-presentation tactics which consciously aim at conveying to the teacher the image of a motivated, interested and competent student [ 27 ]. Maschke and Stecher [ 16 ] operationalised these nine categories of students’ advices and assigned them to three dimensions: (1) learning work, (2) relationship cultivation and (3) self-assertion. The dimensions learning work and relationship cultivation were also related to IM. The amount of quantitative studies on students’ impression strategies is very small. By means of qualitative studies, however, the students’ awareness of IM’s importance as well as their conscious employment of IM strategies was confirmed (cf. [ 1 , 28 ]). Woods [ 28 ] found that students use different strategies and tactics in order to meet the teachers’ expectation and to attract positive attention—for example, through a positive positioning within question-answer teaching. In our own study [ 15 , 27 ], student’s IM within German teaching was studied. The study’s focus was on the students’ self-presentation tactics that deliberately try to convey a positive image of the self as being interested, motivated and competent. Based on the self-presentation tactics of Eder [ 14 ], five different dimensions of IM could be extracted: demonstrative engagement, self-promotion, situational adaptation, personal adaptation and ingratiation (see Section 4.2). While demonstrative engagement describes the active effort to appear as interested and committed through participation, situational adaption tactics are used not to let demotivation or disinterest show. Personal adaptation and ingratiation describe tactics that rather invest in relationship work with the teacher. Self-promotion takes somehow a special position as it refers to showing one’s own competence in situation in which one does not entirely understand what the teacher tries to explain. It was found that those students who experience a discrepancy in the sense that they perceive themselves more positively (real self) 1 than they think they are perceived (appearing self) or that they want to be perceived more positively (presented self) than they think they are perceived seem to invest more in their relationship work with their German class teacher through conscious impression management [ 15 ]. These results confirm the hypothesis that experienced discrepancy is a motivator for IM [ 17 ].

3. Research questions

Are there any country-specific differences with regard to IM in math teaching?

Are there any gender-specific differences with regard to IM in math teaching?

Is there a correlation and interactional effect of aspiration and school grades with IM?

In order to answer the research questions (see Section 3) a paper-pencil questionnaire study with foremost closed items on IM was conducted. Data collection took place during a school lesson (class wise), and it took the students about 30 minutes to complete the questionnaire. Trained test administrators ensured a standardised survey process. The survey was conducted by class. All items were related to math teaching and its belonging teacher. 2 The sample is an occasional sample, not randomly drawn.

4.1 Participants

A total of 293 students at the secondary II level (seventh-tenth grade) responded to the questionnaire. In order to test for country-specific differences, 202 students were at Austrian grammar schools (69%) and 91 at Swiss grammar schools. About 46% were female (135) and 154 students were male (4 missing answers). The average age was about 14.5 years (SD = 1.6 years). Since all students questioned were at a grammar school which prepares them for university entrance, it is not surprising that 65% of the respondents are aiming for an education at university. However, 35% of the students did not mention at the time of survey that they aspire to enter university but had other perspectives or more immediate goals such as obtaining the graduation certificate of grammar school. About 5% of the students reported to have insufficient math grades, about 38% of the students had sufficient math grades, and about 32% had good and another 24% very good math grades. Table 1 gives an overview of the sample characteristics.

Sample characteristics.

The items on impression management were directed to the math teaching and its teacher.

4 cases missing.

4.2 Scales and measures

Besides some socio-demographic variables such as gender, country and age, the newly developed questionnaire included questions on educational aspiration and school grades in math as well as items on IM (adapted for math teaching). The scales, dimensions and items as well as some scale characteristics will be described in more detail.

4.2.1 Scale: impression management

Demonstrative engagement describes a conscious tactic of students to present themselves as motivated, interested and committed through active cooperation: During math lessons I often get in touch with my teacher so that he/she thinks I am motivated . (Three items)

Self-promotion describes a students’ tactic to present themselves as competent (knowing and understanding) even if one does not fully understand the subject of teaching: In math lessons, even if I do not know the right solution, I try to behave as if I knew it . (Three items)

Situational adaptation is a rather adaptive tactic with the aim of not letting one’s own noncommitment be noticed: I will not let you tell me if I’m not interested in math lessons . (Five items)

Personal adaptation describes students adapting to the teacher’s expectation of showing interest and motivation (relationship management): In math lessons I sometimes fake motivation in order to leave a positive impression . (Four items)

Ingratiation is an active relationship management, with the aim of signalising recognition, respect and obedience to the teacher: I pretend to meet the math teacher’s expectations . (Three items)

In order to analyse the reliability of IM dimensions, the extracted factor solutions were compared to the one of the German teaching sample (reference sample), and Cronbach’s alphas were calculated. Table 2 presents the scale characteristics for the math teaching sample. It shows that Cronbach’s alphas of the different IM dimensions were ranging between 0.63 and 0.87, 5 which can be considered satisfactory for social science studies [ 30 ]. Furthermore, Table 2 shows that the average scores of the five dimensions of IM were semantically between somewhat does not apply and somewhat applies .

Scale characteristics on IM for math teaching sample.

4.3 Hypotheses

Hypothesis 1 : Students from Austrian grammar schools differ in their IM from students from Swiss grammar schools.

Hypothesis 2 : Due to gender-specific norms, it is expected that on the one hand, male students score higher on self-promotion (demonstrating competence, Hypothesis 2a) and on the other hand, that female students score higher on personal adaptation (Hypothesis 2b) and ingratiation (Hypothesis 2c), both aiming at conscious teacher-student relationship management.

Hypothesis 3 : Students who aim at entering university (high aspiration level) score higher in the IM dimensions than students with a lower aspiration level.

Hypothesis 4 : Students with good grades are expected to score higher on IM than students with lower grades.

Hypothesis 5 : Students with a high aspiration level but low school grades (discrepancy experience) score higher on IM than students with low grades and low educational aspiration level.

The methods used in order to test these hypotheses are discussed directly when presenting the corresponding results (see Section 5).

5. Results and discussion

5.1 mean differences in impression management between countries.

In order to test Hypothesis 1 that students from Austrian grammar schools differ in their average on IM in math teaching from students from Swiss grammar schools, t-tests for independent groups were calculated by means of the statistical program SPSS (Version 24). Significant country differences were found on four of the five dimensions on IM in math teaching. Only with regard to situational adaptation was no country-specific difference found. Generally, students from Austrian schools achieved higher mean scores on the dimensions of IM. Consequently, students from Austrian schools seem more involved in active impression management conveying the image of a competent, motivated and interested student that respects the teacher. The effect sizes 6 were, however, rather small between 0.36 and 0.40 (see Table 3 ). This study is not able to conclusively clarify these differences between countries, as there is a lack of information on different norms and expectations of students. Studies including school culture characteristics of different countries would be valuable for further understanding how context characteristics influence IM and self-presentation tactics.

Mean differences in impression management between students of Swiss and Austrian schools.

5.2 Mean differences in impression management between genders

Hypothesis 2a–c assumed that male students score higher on self-promotion but less on personal adaptation and ingratiation than females do. Results showed, however, that—according to expectation—gender only differed significantly in the mean score of ingratiation and additionally on situational adaptation (method of analysis: independent sample t-test, SPSS; Version 24). Female students had higher average scores on both dimensions and seem to try more not to show disinterest or demotivation during class and try to ingratiate more than male students do. The effect sizes were, however, rather small with 0.26 and 0.40, respectively (see Table 4 ). The hypothesis that female students invest more into relationship management was therefore only partially confirmed. In order to analyse whether these findings result from different gender-specific expectations that influence self-presentation tactics, it would be beneficial to include in a further study also information on such expectations.

Mean differences in impression management between female and male students.

5.3 Relationship between grades and educational aspiration with IM

In order to test Hypotheses 3 and 4, the educational aspiration as well as the math grades were dichotomised. Students who already knew they want to enter university were assigned to the group aspiration high which correspond to 65% of the participants. The others were allocated to the group aspiration low . Students (56%) reporting a math grade that means semantically “good” or “very good” were allocated to the group high grades , the others to the group low grades . By means of a 2 × 2 factorial ANOVA, it was tested for main and interaction effects of educational aspiration and math grades (independent variables). The dependent variables (DV) were the five dimensions of IM. For each DV a separate ANOVA was calculated. Table 5 summarises the results of the ANOVA. With regard to Hypothesis 3, it was found that the educational aspiration level had an influence on self-promotion (F(1, 277) = 4.482; p < 0.01 ) as well as on ingratiation (F(1, 273) = 4.61; p < 0.05 ). In alignment with expectations, students in the group high aspiration scored on average higher on self-promotion (mean = 2.21, SD = 0.85), than the group low aspiration (mean = 2.02, SD = 0.73) as well as on ingratiation (mean = 2.70, SD = 0.66), than the group low aspiration (mean = 2.52, SD = 0.73). Effect sizes of these main effects were, however, rather low ranging between 0.265 and 0.271. With regard to Hypothesis 4, school grades were found to have an influence (main effect) on demonstrative engagement (F(1, 272) = 7.661 p < 0.01 ), self-promotion (F(1, 277) = 6.523; p < 0.01 ) as well as situational adaptation (F (1, 274) = 4.526; p < 0.05 ). The two dimensions of IM aiming more at relationship work seem not to be affected by student’s school grades. Put differently, independent of the math grades, students tried more or less to ingratiate and personally adapt to the image of a good student. In accordance with Hypothesis 4, students in the group high grades scored on average higher on the IM dimension of demonstrative engagement (mean = 2.76, SD = 0.86) than the group low grade (mean = 2.49, SD = 0.85). Likewise, students with high grades scored on average higher on the dimension situational adaptation (mean = 2.92, SD = 0.66) than the group low grade (mean = 2.77, SD = 0.66). There are at least two possible explanations for these results: (1) investing more into demonstrative engagement of commitment and effort as well as investing more in not letting demotivation and disinterest show leads to better grades, and (2) understanding teaching as a trade, students with better grades trade for them with demonstrative engagement and situational adaptation. Contrary to expectation, students with high grades had lower mean score on self-promotion (mean = 2.01, SD = 0.79) than the group low grade (mean = 2.31, SD = 0.82). Again, there are at least two explanations possible: (1) there is no need for good students to show competence as their school performance already shows, and (2) good students are more aware of the “risks” of faking competence and understanding. Thus, if self-presentation is successful, the teacher is convinced that the students understood the content and proceeds to the next topic/step. Teachers may not recognise students’ incomprehension and erroneous concepts. Due to the fact that there was only one measurement point (cross-sectional study), these various possible explanations cannot be conclusively clarified. Consequently, longitudinal studies are needed. Effect sizes of these main effects were, however, rather low ranging between 0.259 and 0.338.

Tests of 2 × 2 factorial ANOVA: Statistics for main effects and interactions between grades and aspiration on IM.

*p < .05, **p <.01, ns = nonsignificant.

Although Hypothesis 5 which states that students with a high aspiration level but low school grades (discrepancy experience) score higher on IM than students with low grades and low aspiration level was apparently true comparing the mean scores of these two groups, only one significant interaction effect was found, namely, with regard to personal adaptation (F(1, 272) = 5.501; p < 0.05 ), with a medium effect size of 0.54. As Figure 1 shows, students with a high educational aspiration but low math grades scored on average the highest on personal adaptation (mean = 2.80, SD = 0.64), students with low math grades and low aspiration the lowest (mean = 2.43, SD = 0.65). Students with a low educational aspiration but good math grades (mean = 2.54, SD = 0.67) scored similar like the students with a high aspiration level but low math grades (mean = 2.50, SD = 0.71). Students who want to start at university, but currently do not have good math grades, might hope to achieve better math grades when pretending and faking motivation and interest in order to leave a good impression. This would, however, require that students regard grades as influenceable by other factors than mere school performance (assessed through math exams).

Interaction effect of grade and aspiration regarding personal adaptation.

6. Conclusion

Educational justice and equal opportunities : IM could be discussed in addition to primary and secondary effects as another, tertiary, effect of social origin which shows to be important for school success. As [ 36 ] pointed out, these tertiary effects result from socially biased expectations, efforts and evaluations of the counterpart. Bourdieu [ 37 ] already stressed the importance of social capital and highlighted that “even manners (behaviour, ways of speaking, etc.) can be classified as social capital” (p. 191). This would mean that social origin would influence students’ social understanding of social expectations and thus their IM which would not only affect teachers’ perceptions and expectations but also their success at school.

Another perspective on successful teaching : Success of teaching and any social interaction is also a question of whether the participants succeed in structurally coordinating their (subjective) situations and perspectives. Cultural guidelines such as school or class rules and rituals help to avoid constantly falling out of one’s role and to save one’s own face [ 13 ]. In this respect, it is important that all students know how to interpret these cultural guidelines and can adapt their behaviour accordingly. This is also linked to the question of educational justice and equal opportunities (see first point). Students understanding expectations and adapting to them in a positive way probably lead to less disturbances and disruptions of teaching and enhance teaching quality. Because teachers who constantly need to address students’ behaviour have less time to focus on and deepen content of subjects.

Consequently, there are several important reasons why IM should be a topic that is integrated to teacher education. One the one hand, good teachers should strive to create equal opportunities for all students. It is, however, known that teachers’ perceptions are influenced by factors not fully determined by students’ performance and that these perceptions have an influence on students’ school success. Successful IM may impair the diagnostic quality of the teacher’s judgement and undermine the ideal of equal opportunities, especially if not all students are equally aware of the importance of IM and not equally competent in managing the impression to present the self in a good light. Teachers should therefore be able to reflect not only their own perceptions and expectations they have of different students but also the students’ impression management. Engaging into the topic of IM might also help teachers to identify students who are considered as non-privileged, who, for example, do not understand socially demanded expectations and do not know how they can adequately meet these expectations. It becomes possible to promote their social-emotional abilities in order to enable them to successfully manage their impression. Teachers can support students to learn to care about the impression they make and to help them understanding social expectations and rules in diverse settings. This is also important for individuals later in life, when they, for example, apply for positions and need to present themselves in a job interview. Reflecting on impression management during teacher education thus supports teachers in their pedagogical effort to create equal opportunities. On the other hand, impression management of students might, as discussed above, also contribute to teaching quality and has direct use not only for the teacher but the whole class. Understanding successful teaching as a “product” of all involved (see introductory remarks) points to the importance of IM. IM—as it was outlined in this paper—describes the effort to cast the self in a positive light. Students who aim to leave a good impression will therefore not involve themselves in disruptive behaviour. With regard to this other perspective on successful teaching, every teacher should care to have in his/her class as many students which are concerned about conveying a good impression (namely of being interested and motivated) as possible. In this context, it would also be important for teachers to address students’ demotivation to present the self in a good light. Leary [ 17 ] emphasised that IM also serves emotional regulation, and Woods [ 28 ] highlighted that students usually know social rules and expectations. If students’ consciously decide against a positive impression management, one reason could also be that students are addressed inappropriately by the teacher. Gao [ 38 ] speaks in this context of the student’s decision to resist from learning from a teacher for reasons of self-protection. The knowledge and reflection about the impression management of students thus helps teachers to gain a greater understanding of social interaction processes in the classroom and supports them in reacting appropriately to (un)desired processes.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Prof. Dr. Roland Reichenbach, who through his ideas and reflection contributed significantly to the concept of impression management at school and supported us with both the development of the theoretical considerations and the questionnaire.

See Table 6 .

Item characteristic of the five IM dimensions.

Abbreviations

• 1. Reichenbach R. Für die Schule lernen wir [For the School We Learn]. Seelze: Klett/Kallmeyer; 2013
• 2. Luhmann N. Das Erziehungssystem der Gesellschaft [The Educational System of Society]. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp; 2002
• 3. Goffman E. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing; 1967
• 4. Aronson E, Wilson TD, Akert RM. Sozialpsychologie [Social Psychology]. 4th ed. München: Pearson Studium; 2004
• 5. Forgas JP, Richard J. Interpersonal Behaviour: The Psychology of Social Interaction. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press; 1985
• 6. Niederbacher A, Zimmermann P. Grundwissen Sozialisation. Einführung zur Soziallisation im Kindes- und Jugendalter [Basic Socialization. Introduction to Socialisation in Childhood and Adolescence]. 4th ed. VS Verlag: Wiesbaden; 2011
• 7. Eder F, Bergmann C. Der Einfluss von Interessen auf die Lehrer-Wahrnehmung von Schülerinnen und Schülern [The influence of interests on teacher perceptions of students]. Empirische Pädagogik. 2004; 18 (4):410-431
• 8. Madon S, Smith A, Jusim L, Russell DW, Eccles JS, Palumbo P, et al. Am I as you see me or do you see me as I am? Self-fulfilling prophecies and self-verification. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2001; 27 (9):1214-1224
• 9. Matteucci MC. Social utility versus social desirability of students’ attributional self-presentation strategies. Social Psychology of Education. 2014; 17 :541-563
• 10. Neuenschwander M. Selektionsprozess beim Übergang von der Primarschule in die Berufsbildung [Selection process in the transition from primary school to vocational education and training]. In: Neuenschwander M, Grunder HU, editors. Schulübergang und Selektion. Forschungsbefunde—Praxisbeispiele—Umsetzungsperspektiven [School Transition and Selection. Research Findings - Practical Examples - Implementation Perspectives]. Zürich: Rüegger; 2010. pp. 15-34
• 11. Reichenbach R. Führen und sich führen lassen: Zur Qualität schulischer Austauschprozesse [Leading and being led: On the quality of school exchange processes]. In: Benner D editor. Bildungsstandards. Instrumente zur Qualitätssicherung im Bildungswesen. Chancen und Grenzen—Beispiele und Perspektiven [Educational Standards. Instruments for Quality Assurance in Education. Opportunities and Limits - Examples and Perspectives]. Paderborn, München: Ferdinand Schöningh; 2007. pp. 239-252
• 12. Forgas JP, Bower GH, Krantz SE. The influence of mood on perceptions of social interactions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. 1984; 20 :497-513
• 13. Goffman E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books; 1971
• 14. Eder F. Schulische Umwelt und Strategien zur Bewältigung von Schule [School environment and strategies for coping with school]. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht. 1987; 34 :100-110
• 15. Forster-Heinzer S. Eindruckssteuerung am Gymnasium. Wer hat sie nötig? [Impression management at grammar school. Who needs it?]. In: Holtsch D, Oepke M, Schumann S, editors. Lehren und Lernen auf der Sekundarstufe II. Gymnasial und wirtschaftspädagogische Perspektiven. [Teaching and Learning at Upper Secondary Level. Grammar School and Economic-Pedagogical Perspectives]. Bern: hep Verlag; 2019. pp. 199-213
• 16. Maschke S, Stecher L. Strategie und Struktur, oder: wie kommen SchülerInnen gut durch die Schule? [Strategy and structure, or: How do students get through school well?] Diskurs Kindheits- und Jugendforschung. 2006; 1 (4):497-516
• 17. Leary MR. Self-Presentation: Impression Management and Interpersonal Behavior. Colorado: Westview Press; 1996
• 18. Baumeister RF. The Self in Social Psychology. Hove: Psychology Press; 1999
• 19. Fend H. Die Entdeckung des Selbst und die Verarbeitung der Pubertät. Entwicklungspsychologie der Adoleszenz in der Moderne [The Discovery of the Self and the Processing of Puberty. Developmental Psychology of Adolescence in Modernity]. Bern: Huber; 1994
• 20. Forgas JP. Soziale Interaktion und Kommunikation. Eine Einführung in die Sozialpsychologie [Social Interaction and Communication. An Introduction to Social Psychology]. 4th ed. Weinheim: Beltz Psychologie Verlags Union; 1999
• 21. Goffman E. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row; 1974
• 22. Strauss K. Masken, Lügen, Demaskierung—Zur Ethnographie des Alltags [Masks, Lies, Demasking - On the Ethnography of Everyday Life]. Dr. Kovac: Hamburg; 2005
• 23. Rosenthal R, Jacobson L. Pygmalion in the Classroom. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston; 1968
• 24. Merton RK. The Matthew effect in science. Science. 1968; 159 :56-63
• 25. Hoferichter HU. Schülerrezepte. Strategien zum Umgang mit Schule und Lehrern [Student recipes. Strategies for dealing with school and teachers]. Westermanns pädagogische Beiträge. 1980; 32 (10):416-421
• 26. Heinze T. Schülertaktiken [Tactics of Students]. München: U & S Pädagogik; 1980
• 27. Forster-Heinzer S, Nagel A, Reichenbach R, Biedermann H. Students’ in-class impression management: Comparing models for measuring student strategies of self-presentation; submitted in Social Psychology of Education
• 28. Woods P. L’ethnographie de l’école [Ethnography of School]. Paris: Armand Colin Editeur; 1990
• 29. Lozano LM, Garcìa-Cueto E, Muñiz J. Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales. Methodology European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. 2008; 4 (2):73-79
• 30. Field A. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. 3rd ed. California, London: Sage; 2009
• 31. Lenhard W, Lenhard A. Berechnung von Effektstärken [Calculation of effect sizes]. Psychometrica. 2016. Available from: https://www.psychometrica.de/effektstaerke.html [Accessed: 21 June 2019]
• 32. Ohle A, Elvany NM. Teachers’ diagnostic competence and their practical relevance. Journal for Educational Research Online. 2015; 7 (2):5-10
• 33. Pielmeier M, Huber S, Seidel T. Is teacher judgment accuracy of students’ characteristics beneficial for verbal teacher-student interactions in classroom? Teaching and Teacher Education. 2018; 76 :255-266
• 34. Spinath B. Akkuratheit der Einschätzung von Schülermerkmalen durch Lehrer und das Konstrukt der diagnostischen Kompetenz [Accuracy of teacher assessment of student characteristics and the construct of diagnostic competence]. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik. 2005; 19 :85-95
• 35. Delpit L. Other People’s Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom. New York: The New Press; 2006
• 36. Esser H. Sorting and (much) more: Prior ability, school effects and the impact of ability tracking on educational inequalities in achievement. In: Hadjar A, Gross C, editors. Education Systems and Inequalities: International Comparisons. Bristol, UK: Policy Press; 2016. p. 95
• 37. Bourdieu P. Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital [Economic capital, cultural capital, social capital]. In: Kreckel R editor. Soziale Ungleichheiten [Social Inequalities]. Göttingen: Schwarz & Company; 1983. pp. 183-198
• 38. Gao P. I love to learn, but I hate to be taught. Journal of Education and Training Studies. 2014; 2 (3):104-107
• The distinction between real, ideal, appearing and presented self was made by Fend [19]. The real self describes the way I see myself; the ideal self is the self I would like to be/become. The self I think others attribute to me is the appearing self (as I think to appear/be perceived by others), and the self I wish others would attribute to me is called presented self.
• It is to assume that students adapt their IM depending on the school subject but especially its belonging teacher. Therefore, the items of IM were formulated with reference to math teaching.
• The sample of validation consisted of 201 students at Austrian grammar schools [27].
• There has been some methodological discussion about whether an even or odd number of response categories should be used when constructing a questionnaire with closed answer format [29]. The central argument for collecting and measuring a construct with a straight response category (with four or six levels) is that the participants questioned are deprived of the opportunity to position themselves indifferently or (only) in the middle of the item [29]. From a conceptual point of view, it would not make sense to have a neutral answer response when asking students about their deliberative effort for IM. Therefore, an even number of four-answer categories was chosen as it is also often applied in the PISA study when questioning attitudes or behaviour.
• The Cronbach’s alphas are comparable to the German teaching sample in which they varied between 0.66 and 0.86. Furthermore it showed that students answering the items with reference to math teaching and its belonging teacher did not differ in their mean score on IM dimensions compared to the students who answered the questions with reference to German teaching (reference sample).
• Effect sizes were calculated using the formula Hedges’ g in order to correct for unequal group sizes [31]. As Hedges’ g is often used similar to Cohen’s d, the abbreviation effect size d is used.

© 2019 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Pedagogy in basic and higher education.

Edited by Kirsi Tirri

Published: 19 February 2020

By Anthony Sayster and Duncan Mhakure

1347 downloads

By Carolina Zambrano-Matamala, Darío Rojas-Diaz, Pedr...

1016 downloads

By Allison Freed, Aerin Benavides and Lacey Huffling

1047 downloads

IntechOpen Author/Editor? To get your discount, log in .

Discounts available on purchase of multiple copies. View rates

Local taxes (VAT) are calculated in later steps, if applicable.

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

Thesis support: managing your research.

• Understand the importance of using citation management tools and strategies 
• Compare EndNote and Zotero to best serve your thesis needs
• Identify and locate citation export options in major databases
• Use “cite while you write” features

A Pragmatic Study of Manipulation

• January 2018

• University of Thi-Qar

• Islamic University/ Babel Affiliation

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Teun A. van Dijk

• Christopher W. Tindale
• Virginia LoCastro

• Eddo Rigotti
• Jenny Thomas
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Tesla's Disappointing Earnings Combine With Unfocused Management

• Tesla, Inc. reported tough Q2 earnings with declining margins and profits, struggling with weak vehicle demand.
• The company's hubris is evident in overinvestment in capacity and side projects, such as AI, with uncertain returns.
• Tesla's valuation is not justified by its financial performance, market potential, or competition in the self-driving industry, making it a poor investment choice.
• The Retirement Forum members get exclusive access to our real-world portfolio. See all our investments here »

Richard Drury

Tesla, Inc. ( NASDAQ: TSLA ) recently reported tough Q2 earnings , which put strong pressure on the company's share price. The timeline of the company's earnings lined up with CEO Elon Musk kicking off a poll on X about whether Tesla should invest $5 billion in xAI. Of course, the platform for the poll, Tesla, and xAI are all Elon Musk companies.

As we'll see throughout this article, the company's tough earnings combine with a management that cannot focus on the company's vehicle business, which makes the company a poor investment.

Tesla Financial Summary

Tesla had a tough quarter financially as revenues increased by less than inflation in relation to a lofty valuation.

Tesla Investor Presentation

The company's quarterly revenue was just over $25 billion, with GAAP gross margins decreasing by 0.23% annually. The company is struggling to continue increasing its margins, not surprising given the tough nature of the vehicle industry. The company's operating margin declined by a much more significant 3% to just over 6% and its EBITDA margin declined by more than 4%.

At the end of the day, the company's EPS, both GAAP and non-GAAP, declined by more than 40%. The company's revenue continues to be supported by businesses such as energy generation and storage, which doubled over the past year. This is a reasonable business and one of the company's more exciting, but it won't dwarf the company's automotive business.

The company's FCF was positive, but relatively weak, at more than $5 billion annualized. That gives the company a FCF yield of ~0.8%. The company needs to increase FCF by an order of magnitude to justify its valuation, something that 2% annual YoY revenue growth as margins decline won't justify.

Tesla Operational Results

From an operational perspective, the company has continued to struggle with weak demand for its vehicles.

The company's production has now declined for 2 quarters in a row, and its Model 3 production has gone down by 16% YoY. The company has seen some strength in its other models, supported by Cyber Truck deliveries ramping up, but quarterly Cyber Truck sales now seem to be ~10k. The company's deliveries remain higher than production but also down YoY.

Overall, the company's total deliveries YoY are down 5%, a massive hit for a company where lofty growth expectations are 40-50% annual vehicle sale growth. The company is also seeing lease vehicle counts remain fairly hefty with global inventory, as days of supply are also up YoY for the company.

The company has continued to deploy large amounts of storage, which is a bright spot for its portfolio. However, there's a cap to the market potential here. The company deployed 9.4 GWh in storage, earning ~$300 million / GWh in deployment. It's worth noting that this is also a sign of weak vehicle demand, given the company deploys battery capacity to vehicles preferentially.

Energy storage remains a growing market, however, total added demand is expected to be roughly 1 TWh going into 2030. The company's current production rate will be ~250 GWh of that, indicating that even if it takes over the entire market, there is a limit to revenue growth. That's not enough to justify a $700+ billion valuation.

Tesla's Hubris

Tesla's hubris is evidenced through its continued building of capacity as the company expands its lineup and spends large amounts of capital.

By the company's own admission, its annual capacity is roughly 2.4 million vehicles annually. However, the company's deliveries have been trending down, and demand for its vehicles is roughly 1.8 million vehicles annually. That's only 75% of its vehicle capacity. The company's market share in numerous key markets seems to be flattening out.

The issue for the company is continuing massive investments that might not see the demand for the long term. The company said it expects an increase, but without growth in market share, that remains to be seen. That's especially true given that EV buyers around the world want to return to gas vehicles . EV demand remains weak across all markets by most estimations, and ASP continues to decline.

All of these things are signs of Tesla's continued over-confidence and overinvestment in relation to its valuation.

Tesla Overspending

Tesla at the same time, is chasing various side pursuits, with massive spending that might not pan out.

The company is planning to add roughly 60k H100 equivalent GPUs by year-end. At roughly $25k per GPU , that's roughly $1.5 billion in new GPUs that the company is adding by year-end. This is on a business that's driving no profits at all to the company's bottom line. The company is not an AI player but is arbitrarily attempting to be one.

That's versus multi-trillion companies such as Google, Meta, and Amazon that have much more capacity than Tesla to invest and compete. That's tough given that Tesla's FSD is still nowhere near its goal to build a self-driving taxi fleet. The self-driving fleet is a key part of investors, such as Cathie Wood's thesis.

However, even in its home base of the Bay Area, Tesla is being outcompeted by Waymo, backed by Google, which is actually earning revenue. We've taken a ride on Waymo in San Francisco, and it's a phenomenal experience. However, it's worth noting that leader Waymo's valuation is ~$30 billion , meaning that the entire business is <5% of Tesla's market cap even if it has an equivalent valuation.

Thesis Risk

The largest risk to our thesis is that Tesla is effectively a company filled with moonshot investments. Any of these investments could hypothetically pan out tomorrow. While we don't see a path to that happening, betting against a company is risky, and could hurt the ability to generate shareholder returns in your portfolio.

Tesla recently announced tough earnings, as the company that's supposed to have double-digit growth to justify its valuation saw revenue grow less than inflation. That was combined with a massive impact on profits as the company's profit margins continued to face strong pressure. The company's core vehicle demand remains weak.

There are some bright spots in the company's portfolio. These include areas such as energy storage. However, the market isn't big enough to justify Tesla's valuation, and the company has previously said it'd redirect battery capacity here from cars when the market is weak since cars are more profitable.

All this combines with Tesla losing the self-driving race to Waymo and a distracted management spending billions on artificial intelligence. Elon Musk, the CEO, is using Tesla billions to invest in other hobbies and projects. Putting this all together, Tesla is an overvalued company that can't justify its valuation, making it a poor investment.

You Only Get 1 Chance To Retire, Join The #1 Retirement Service

The Retirement Forum provides actionable ideals, a high-yield safe retirement portfolio, and macroeconomic outlooks, all to help you maximize your capital and your income. We search the entire market to help you maximize returns. 

Recommendations from a top 0.2% TipRanks author!

Retirement is complicated and you only get once chance to do it right. Don't miss out because you didn't know what was out there.

We provide:

• Model portfolios to generate high retirement cash flow. 
• Deep-dive actionable research.
• Recommendation spreadsheets and option strategies.  

Click for our discounted 2-week free trial!

This article was written by

The Value Portfolio specializes in building retirement portfolios and utilizes a fact-based research strategy to identify investments. This includes extensive readings of 10Ks, analyst commentary, market reports, and investor presentations. He invests real money in the stocks he recommends.

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial short position in the shares of TSLA either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Recommended For You

About tsla stock.

More on TSLA

Related stocks.

Trending Analysis

Trending news.