The exact text we saved

This is the version exactly as it was saved, character for character. The SHA-256 hash below is a 64-character code worked out from that text. Run the same text through SHA-256 and you get the same code; change a single letter and the code comes out completely different. Each version also stores the previous version’s hash, which chains them together so no version can be swapped out quietly.

TRUVACE RECORD VERSION
record: TRV-2026-2562
version: 1
kind: certified
reason: Certified into the record
timestamp: 2026-11-12T07:54:50.369194Z
status: published
lens: p_space
sector: labor
headline: The impact of algorithmic resume screening on applicants’ perceptions: the role of organisational dehumanisation
dek: Purpose This paper aims to examine how algorithmic versus human resume screening shapes applicants’ perceptions of organisational dehumanisation (OD) and its consequences (i.e. intentions to pursue employment, organisational attractiveness and negative word-of-mouth). It explores one potential boundary condition of this relationship (i.e. negative attitudes towards artificial intelligence). Design/methodology/approach Three experimental studies were conducted on social media (Studies 1–2) and prolific academic (…
gain_title: (none)
problem_title: In three online experiments with 249, 210 and 392 participants, applicants whose resumes were screened by an algorithm rather than a person felt the employer treated them as less than human, and reported lower interest in the job, lower employer appeal and more negative word-of-mouth.
trace_subject: (none)
gain_reading: (none)
gain_evidence: (none)
problem_reading: In three online experiments with 249, 210 and 392 participants, applicants whose resumes were screened by an algorithm rather than a person felt the employer treated them as less than human, and reported lower interest in the job, lower employer appeal and more negative word-of-mouth.
problem_evidence: algorithmic resume screening increased OD, which was associated with lower intentions to pursue employment, reduced organisational attractiveness and more negative word-of-mouth
quick_read: Three experiments compared algorithmic and human resume screening and found that algorithmic screening made applicants perceive higher organisational dehumanisation. In Study 1, with 249 participants, that perception was linked to lower intentions to pursue employment, reduced organisational attractiveness and more negative word-of-mouth.

Studies 2a (210 participants) and 2b (392 participants) replicated the effects whether the applicant was accepted or rejected, and while controlling for perceptions of justice. The pattern therefore did not depend only on getting a bad outcome or on seeing the process as unfair.

Whether applicants' attitudes toward AI change the effect is less clear. Study 2a found stronger effects among people with negative attitudes toward artificial intelligence, but Study 2b did not replicate that interaction.
limitation: The moderating role of negative attitudes toward AI appeared in Study 2a but did not replicate in Study 2b, so that boundary condition remains unresolved.
tag: Evidence-backed problem
key_points: Study 1 was a vignette experiment with 249 participants that varied whether a resume was screened by an algorithm or a human. | Algorithmic screening increased perceived organisational dehumanisation, which was linked to lower intentions to pursue employment. | The same perception was tied to reduced organisational attractiveness and more negative word-of-mouth about the employer. | Studies 2a (n = 210) and 2b (n = 392) used a 2 × 2 design crossing screening type with acceptance or rejection. | The effects held regardless of decision favourability and after controlling for justice perceptions. | Study 2a found stronger effects among applicants with negative attitudes toward AI; Study 2b did not replicate this. | Participants were recruited through social media (Studies 1 and 2) and Prolific Academic (Study 3).
rundown: The research tested how algorithmic versus human resume screening shapes applicants' perceptions of organisational dehumanisation and its downstream consequences. These were intentions to pursue employment, organisational attractiveness and negative word-of-mouth.

Study 1 (n = 249) used a vignette experiment manipulating the type of screening. Studies 2a (n = 210) and 2b (n = 392) used a 2 × 2 between-subjects design crossing screening type with decision favourability, and controlled for justice perceptions.

Across the studies, algorithmic screening raised dehumanisation perceptions and worsened the three employer outcomes, including when applicants were accepted. The role of negative attitudes toward AI as a boundary condition was inconsistent between Studies 2a and 2b.
sources:
- peer_reviewed | International Journal of Organizational Analysis | https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoa-11-2025-6220 | 2026-06-23
prev: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

SHA-256 hash

c5f5b513d6cef7454dd727e8e0f661c9e8a0fb578c630a1de72803224a8804d1

Previous version’s hash

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000