Limitations and future research directions
Our study has several limitations that should be considered by readers as they interpret our findings. First, our study involved a hypothetical reference check. We believe this approach was necessary for the ethical reasons we described earlier; namely, that manipulating the reference checking process for actual job applicants could influence their ability to secure employment. In addition, our instructions did induce a moderate level of fear of adverse legal and interpersonal consequences and reports of applicant workplace incivility compared to a pilot sample. However, future research may attempt to study these variables in an actual high-stakes selection context, if such a possibility became available. Researchers may find that the effects we observed may become stronger if studied in a high-stakes context wherein a job applicant’s future employment depends on the input of the reference provider.Second, although we investigated the impacts of three reminders that may be sent to reference providers on their reports of applicant workplace incivility, our study is limited insofar as we did not account for any additional explanations for the uncivil behavior of the applicant, as perceived by the prospective reference provider. Research suggests that people engage in instigated incivility as a result of various situational and personal explanations [Third, because our data were collected via an online survey, all participants essentially completed a web-based reference check. Web-based reference checking is commonly used [Fourth, our analysis of the effectiveness of our manipulation checks suggested that participants who were sent the reminders of applicant consent, confidentiality, and qualified privilege tended to receive the reminders, which attests to their observability as signals [Fifth, the composition of our sample also represents a potential limitation of our research. In particular, our sample was comprised primarily of white female supervisors. We acknowledge the possibility that our results may not generalize to more diverse samples. Future research should seek to gather data from more demographically diverse groups in order to investigate the generalizability of our findings.Sixth, our data were cross-sectional. We believe that this approach is justifiable as it represents the way reference checks are actually conducted, such that providers respond at a single time, and it is consistent with prior research on reference checks [One such possibility is a potential causal relation between reference provider’s fear of adverse consequences and their reports of applicant workplace incivility, because the direction of that relation is unclear. Interestingly, fear of adverse legal and interpersonal consequences and applicant incivility as reported by reference providers were positively correlated in our study. Research shows that fearful individuals attempt to minimize risk in their decision making [