THE EFFECT OF ETHICAL SIGNALS ON RECRUITMENT ...

attractiveness (1.39). Means, standard deviations, and correlations among study
variables can be found in Table 8. Socially desirable responding (the control variable)
was not significantly correlated with attraction to the organization (r = -.06, p > .10), and
thus, was not included in further analysis.
Manipulation Check
Analyses
A manipulation check was utilized in order to validate the manipulations. The
performance manipulation consisted of three items (alpha = .96). A sample
manipulation check item for the performance manipulation is: “While researching this
organization before the interview, I found they have had high firm performance over the
past several years.” Participants answered on a 5-point Likert scale the degree to which
they agree or disagree with the above statement. ANOVA was used to test for
significant differences across the groups. Mean for low performance was 1.55, while the
mean for the high performance firms was 4.53 (p< .01).
The organizational practices manipulation check was a 6-item scale with an alpha
of .77. A sample item is “According to the above news reports, this organization has
behaved unethically” (reverse scored). The mean score for the unethical manipulation
was 2.32, the neutral was 3.10, and the ethical was 4.17. All were significantly different
from each other (p< .01).
Finally, the recruitment practices manipulation was verified with a 4-item scale
(alpha=.81). A sample item is: “During the interview, the recruiter did or said something
69