Abstract
Personnel professionals and college undergraduates evaluated the credentials of job candidates whose résumés had been reproduced under four distinct conditions: professionally typeset and printed on tan paper; professionally printed on high-quality white paper but taken from a camera-ready typed original; photocopied on a high quality, clean machine; and photocopied on a poor quality, somewhat dirty machine. Professionals judged an individual more negatively when a poor photocopy was presented and showed modest preferences for the professionally prepared résumés over the good photocopy. Students' evaluations, how ever, did not differ reliably as a function of the four methods of reproduction. Implications of this difference in the reactions of students and professionals are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
