AI Selection Procedural Justice
HR & WorkReliability: alpha 0.893 sample items
About this scale
An adaptation of selection-procedural-justice items to AI-driven selection — capturing perceptions of fairness, opportunity to perform, two-way communication, and consistency in AI-mediated hiring.
Sample item(s)
“The AI selection tool gave me a fair chance to demonstrate my abilities”
“The AI selection tool used the same rules for all candidates”
“I had the opportunity to provide context to the AI selection tool”
Reliability
Reported internal consistency: alpha 0.89. As a rule of thumb, Cronbach’s α ≥ .70 is considered acceptable, ≥ .80 good, and ≥ .90 excellent for established measures.
Notes
Fits within Bauer et al. (2001) selection-procedural-justice tradition adapted to AI.
Source & citation
Langer, M., König, C. J., & Hemsing, V. (2020): Is anybody listening? The impact of automatically evaluated job interviews on impression management and applicant reactions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 271–284.
Langer, König & Hemsing (2020): Automated job interview reactions. JMP, 35(4), 271–284.
Source. Scale details are summarised from the publication cited above. Always consult the original source for the full item set, scoring, and permission to use.
Use it in your research
Need to check the reliability or psychometrics of this scale in your own data? Use the free DrAIStudio research tools:
Cronbach’s alpha calculator
All statistical calculators
Search the full Scale Atlas
Academic writing humanizer