1

Best Practices in Preparing Students for Mock Interviews

5,505 words with tables/target word count = 4,000

Katharine Hansen

Creative Director

EmpoweringSites.com

1250 Valley View Lane, DeLand, FL 32720-2364

khansen@stetson.edu, 386-740-8872, Fax: 386-740-9764

Submitted: Feb. XX, 2008

Gary C. Oliphant

Associate Professor of Information Sciences

Stetson University

DeLand, FL

Becky J. Oliphant

Associate Professor of Marketing

Stetson University

DeLand, FL

Randall S. Hansen

Professor of Marketing

Stetson University

DeLand, FL

2

Abstract

Previous studies have show the importance of employment-interview preparation in boosting the

confidence of students and job-seekers when they interview. What is not known – and is the focus of this

study – is which interview-preparation techniques best prepare interviewees. Results and implications

from a survey of 9 business communication classes are discussed.

3

Introduction

College instructors seeking to prepare their students for success in employment interviews use various

methods, including, for example, mock interviews. In this study, we asked students which activities within and

simultaneous with a business communication class had best prepared them for the class’s mock-interview activity.

In addition, we offer descriptions of activities used to prepare students for mock interviews, as well as details

about the mock-interview activity.

Review of the Literature

This literature review examines employment interviews, employment-interview preparation techniques,

the relationship between preparation techniques (including training and coaching interventions), and the practice

of using mock interviews in the curriculum of business communication and related classes.

The employment interview, which according to Posthuma, Morgeson, and Campion, “continues to be one

of the most popular selection and recruiting devices in organizations” (2002), and which is intended to “predict

the future job success of applicants” (Dipboye & Gauglar, 1993, p. 136) is the subject of increasing research

interest (Posthuma, Morgeson, & Campion, 2002); in fact, Gilmore, Stevens, Harrell-Cook, and Ferris (1999, p.

321) assert that the employment interview is “one of the most thoroughly researched topics in human resource

management.”

Interview Preparation

Palmer, Campion, and Green (1999) note that a great deal of proprietary training information is extant on

interviewing preparation but is not available to the public (p. 338). Research by Perry and Goldberg (1998)

suggests that interview preparation is important because their study showed that when recruiters were asked about

college students they interviewed, interviewing skills surpassed the students’ background or experience in

recruiter assessments of the likelihood that their companies would consider hiring a given student. We can then

speculate that students who have better interview skills than others may have dedicated more effort to interview

preparation than others.

Most scholarly research on employment-interview preparation has been limited to narrowly defined and

limited populations (Palmer, Campion, & Green, 1999). These authors also point out that a great portion of the

4

scholarly research discusses improving various interview behaviors without empirically testing whether these

improved behaviors result in successful interview outcomes. Outside of scholarly literature, numerous popular-

press volumes on job-interviewing and general job-hunting offer advice on interview preparation. Palmer,

Campion, and Green (1999) observe that many job-seekers rely on these “how-to” books to prepare themselves

for interviews.

Most popular-press authors (e.g., Medley, 1993, Martin, 2004) agree that few interviewees prepare

adequately for interviews. Barone and Switzer (1995) go so far as to note that, while college students spend in

excess of 4,000 hours studying and attending class to prepare for their career, the average interviewee spends less

than an hour preparing for a job interview. Authors of popular-press books also agree on the reason for the lack of

preparation – job-seekers have no idea what questions will be asked in interviews, so they assume there is no way

to prepare. Finally, popular-press authors agree that this typical job-seeker rationale for lack of preparation is

faulty because interview questions – or at least general areas of interview questions – actually can be predicted to

some degree, and lists of frequently asked interview questions are available in any number of books, articles, and

on numerous Web sites. Richard Bolles (2007), author of job-hunting perennial bestseller, What Color is Your

Parachute?, in fact, asserts that all interview questions spin off from just five basic areas of inquiry.

Agreeing that it is impossible to predict exactly what questions a given interviewer will ask of a job-

seeker, Carole Martin (2004, p. 121) nevertheless notes that “the secret to success in any interview is

preparation.” Barone and Switzer agree that “preparation is essential in order to interview effectively” (1995, p.

213). Washington (1995) points out that since so few job-seekers prepare for interviews, those who do will “gain

a real edge over others through preparation” (p. 109).

Numerous authors, both scholarly and popular press (e.g., Levine, n.d.; Barone & Switzer, 1995), suggest

that job-seekers review lists of typical questions to gain an idea of what types of information the interviewer

likely seeks. Barone and Switzer further suggest that would-be interviewees “organize their thoughts about what

information is important to share” (1995, p. 224). The authors then recommend that the candidate “consider

possible answers to possible questions.” Washington (1995, p. 7) advises the job-seeker to “jot down” the points

he or she wishes to make in response to typical questions. Similarly, Barbour et al (1995, p. 55) suggest

5

developing a list of what characteristics might be needed for success in the position for which the job-seeker is

interviewing.

Both the scholarly literature and popular-press work contain examples of advice that prospective

interviewees should engage in writing exercises to prepare for job interviews. Among these is the

recommendation of H. Anthony Medley (1993, p. 19), author of one of the earliest popular-press books devoted

solely to interviewing, who suggests that the job-seeker prior to interviewing write an autobiography, which can

provide insight into the candidate, as well as reveal areas that he or she may not wish to discuss with an

interviewer. Crosby (2000) similarly suggests that that candidates practice describing themselves, citing

professional characteristics with examples from school and work experience.

Karl Smart (2004) describes a technique in which college students are assigned to write “detailed proof

statements” (p. 202) about themselves. Equating these statements to “30-second commercials about themselves”

(p. 202), Smart describes them as statements that provide specific examples that demonstrate that students possess

the skills needed to perform jobs they would consider applying for. Smart suggests that polished “proof

statements” can provide potent fodder for such typical interview questions as “Tell me about yourself” and “Tell

me about one of your strengths” (p. 204).

Washington (1995) suggests as preparation for interviewing some detailed writing exercises – involving

identifying about 30 accomplishments and writing 100-400 words on the top 12 of these, and then isolating skills

demonstrated by each accomplishment (p. 198-202).

Rehearsal, Practice, and Mock Interviews

Rehearsal is frequently mentioned in advice about employment-interview preparation, particularly in

support of rehearsal’s positive effect on the interviewee’s self-assurance. Crosby (2000) notes that interviewers

themselves suggest that prospective interviewees rehearse interviews with a career counselor or friend “to gain

confidence and poise.” Seitz and Cohen (1992) write that “through mental rehearsal, job seekers can practice

interviews with a successful outcome until the unconscious mind believes it has already happened.” The

anonymous article, “Winning the battle of the nerves” (2003), also notes the confidence-boosting effect of

rehearsal: “… if you practice responses to interview questions you think you’ll be asked, you’ll feel more secure

during the real interview.” Washington (1995, p. 7) similarly suggests that practicing responses will help the job-

6

seeker feel “confident and relaxed.” Research on memory (Guest & Murphy, 2000) has stressed the role of

rehearsal and repetition.

Barone and Switzer (1995, p. 224) recommend “practicing interview answers aloud,” a process that

“provides the opportunity to actually hear how they sound.” Barbour et al (1995) also suggest rehearsing,

especially with someone who doesn’t know much about the position the job-seeker plans to interview for. In their

study of the extent to which interview-preparation techniques impact interview performance, Maurer, Solamon,

Andrews, and Troxtel (2001) used role-playing, a form of rehearsal, with their study participants, using five

sample questions. Rehearsal as a technique for successful interview preparation is the entire premise behind

Gottesman’s and Mauro’s popular-press The Interview Rehearsal Book (1999).

The literature reveals several instances of interview-preparatory activities and mock interviews in

business schools, communication classes, and business communication classes. Clark (2005) reports on co-

curricular program at Xavier University in which interview-preparation activities, including optional mock

interviews, are offered over a three-year period. Graded mock interviews are a component of communications

courses that served as the basis for a study by Young, Behnke, and Mann (2004), who suggest that instructors

whose curricula include job interviewing may want to provide activities that reduce interview anxiety. Lundelius

and Poon (1997) describe a mock-interview assignment in a business communication class in which students

interviewed members of other class sections based on the assumption that students interviewing peers in their own

sections would take the interviews less seriously. Marks and O’Connor (2006) detail a mock-interview

assignment that takes just one class session, preceded by one class period spent discussing preparation techniques.

We speculate that in some classes, mock interviews are seen as an end unto themselves; they are conducted

without preparation opportunities, with students expected to learn intrinsically about interviewing skills from the

mock interviews themselves, as was the case in research by Thompson and Williams (1987).

Links among Preparation Techniques, Interview Performance, and Perceived Level of Preparation

Research is limited on the relationship between job-interview preparation and interview performance. In

an early study, Harrison (1973) found that job applicants received more job offers after a one-day training session

than they had before the training but he concluded that too many other variables precluded declaring the training

the reason the applicants garnered more offers.

7

Campion and Campion (1987) conducted a study that found no difference in performance between groups

that underwent a half-day training program and those who had not participated in the study, nor did they identify a

performance difference between those who had attended the training and those who had employed self-study

techniques.

Maurer, Solamon, Andrews, and Troxtel (2001), replicating and extending the work of Maurer, Solamon,

and Troxtel (1998), found that “voluntary attendance at an coaching session was positively related to situational

interview performance” (p. 709). The authors describe coaching sessions of up to 2 hours in which activities

included “modeling, behavioral rehearsal, role-playing, lecture, discussion, programmed materials, videotape, and

verbal feedback” (p. 709).

Largely missing in the literature is research on how well interviewees feel various employment-interview

preparation techniques in fact prepare them for job interviews, although 78% of training participants in the 1987

study by Campion and Campion reacted positively to the program and indicated that it had enhanced their

interviewing skills and effectiveness. Further, Maurer and Solamon (2006) conducted a study showing that

interview coaching sessions of up to 2 hours assisted in preparing public-safety candidates for interviews in which

they sought promotions, and the coaching also played a role in interview performance.

Study Objectives

The objective of this study was to survey students on which activities they participated in during or

simultaneous with a business-communication class and which activities they found helpful in preparing them for

the class’s mock interview exercise. Participants were further asked to identify the single most helpful activity in

preparing them for the mock interviews.

Methodology

Three semesters of a junior-level business communication class were surveyed for this study. Each

semester consisted of three sections of the class, with roughly 24 students in each section. The sample consisted

mainly of college juniors, though a small number of sophomores and seniors also participated. The survey was

administered after students had completed the mock-interview activity; they knew their grades and had received

8

feedback from the instructor, so they had a sense of how well they had performed in the interviews. In all, 201

students were surveyed.

The survey presented the following options that students could choose as having been activities in which

they participated and found helpful in preparing them for the mock interview. Explanations of the preparatory

activities follow:

Actual job interviews(s)

Informational interview(s)

20 interview questions assignment

Perfect Interview simulation in Career Services

Partner interviewing

Class lecture/discussion

Class texts

Quintessential Careers Job Interviewing Tutorial

Playing the game “Pitch a Story”

Other

Explanation of Preparatory Activities

Approximately six 75-minute class sessions and several out-of-class assignments prior to the mock

interview activity were devoted to preparing students for these interviews. Of the activities that surveyed students

could cite as having helped them prepare for the mock interviews, most were required elements of the class.

Given that the literature (Campion & Campion, 1987; Maurer & Solamon, 2006) points out that most interview-

preparation interventions comprise multiple techniques (lecture, discussion, role-playing, practice, feedback,

modeling), a variety of preparatory activities was offered. A description of each activity follows:

Actual job interviews(s): Actual job interviews, of course, were ancillary to preparation provided by the

instructor and out of the instructor’s control. Some students happened to undergo interviews for jobs or

internships during the time they were enrolled in the class or up to a year before.

Informational interview(s): All students were required to conduct at least one informational interview

during the semester; they could also conduct two additional informational interviews as one of the options for

9

their final project. Informational interviews were not framed as a preparatory activity for mock interviews except

to the extent that the format of the interviews bore some resemblance to employment interviews. Students were

advised to dress and act professionally. They were assigned to find out more about a job that they might be

interested in pursuing and thus, in some cases, interviewed individuals with hiring power. Unlike in an

employment interview, however, the students were the interviewers, not the interviewees. The informational

interview assignment took place outside the month during which students prepared for mock interviews. The

technique aligns with an assignment described by Sincoff (2004) in which students interviewed professionals to

practice communication skills.

20 interview questions assignment: Students were assigned to compose written responses to frequently

asked interview questions. They could choose one of two Web-based questionnaires through which to submit the

assignment: either a mix of traditional and behavioral job-interview questions aimed at college students and new

graduates at http://www.quintcareers.com/interview_question_database/college_student_mixed.html or a mix of

traditional and behavioral job-interview questions aimed at established job-seekers at

http://www.quintcareers.com/interview_question_database/jobseeker_mixed.html (for nontraditional students or

those with significant job experience).

Perfect Interview simulation: This commercial product is described on its vendor’s Web site as a

“multimedia software package complete with over 1,500 interview questions, answers, and hints, which have all

been professionally produced on digital video.” Students had the option of participating in the Perfect Interview

simulation, which is housed in the university’s Career Services office. Students were offered bonus points toward

their final grade if they chose to participate in Perfect Interview.

Partner interviewing: One class session during the month-long preparatory period was dedicated to an

activity in which students were randomly paired with a partner and asked to interview each other outside the

classroom. They were given a list of frequently asked interview questions and were also free to pose other

questions. Students were also encouraged to give each other feedback on their interview performances. The

partner interviews took place the same day that students were required to submit the 20 questions assignment.

Class lecture/discussion: Class lecture and discussion periods in the month preceding the mock interviews

consisted of the following:

10

A session on interview preparation and nonverbal behaviors, presented in a game-show format.

A session on traditional interview questions in which each student was asked to research a given

questions or genre of questions and report to the class: (a) employers’ motivation for asking this

type of question (b) strategies for responding to this type of question.

A session in which students were assigned to prepare five “success stories” about their

accomplishments and then asked to draw from those stories while responding to behavior-based

interview questions in round-robin fashion. This technique aligns with research by Ralston,

Kirkwood, and Burant (2004) describing how to help interviewees tell their stories in response to

behavior-based questions, as well as Martin’s recommendation that job candidates write “success

stories” to prepare for interviews, particularly behavioral interviews (2004, p. 127).

A session with a human-resources professional as a guest speaker, offering pet peeves and advice

about interview content and behavior.

Class texts: Students were assigned to read the interviewing portions of How to Get a Job with Any Major

by Donald Asher, as well as an article on behavioral interviewing at

http://www.quintcareers.com/behavioral_interviewing.html.

Quintessential Careers Job Interviewing Tutorial: Another reading, the Quintessential Careers Job

Interviewing Tutorial at http://www.quintcareers.com/job_interviews/, was treated in the survey separately from

the other class readings because it was foundational to the month of mock interview preparations and was referred

to throughout the month.

Playing the game “Pitch a Story”: Students played this storytelling board game (described at

http://pitchastory.com/) during the class immediately before mock interviews began. The rationale for using the

game at this time was to loosen students up, spark their creativity, and encourage them to communicate

spontaneously. Although students played the game during all three of the semesters in which the survey was

administered, it was only in the latter two semesters that they played the game immediately before mock

interviews – with the intent of enhancing their interview preparation; thus, this item was not included in the

survey during the first semester.

11

The Mock Interview Activity

While the actual mock interviews were only peripherally a part of the methodology of the study, we

include a description of the activity to provide context for the subjects’ survey responses. In this business

communication class, the mock interview activity in which these preparatory activities culminated was conducted

over four 75-minute class sessions. Interviews were conducted in panel format, with 3-4 students comprising the

bulk of the panel. The other 2 panelists were the instructor and a guest human resources professional. Only the

student panelists asked questions, which were provided to them. To ensure that each student was evaluated based

on the same set of questions, no ad-libbed or follow-up questions were allowed. Some questions were taken from

the 20 questions assignment. About 8-9 questions were asked in each interview. The instructor (70%) and student

panelists (30%) all contributed to the student interviewees’ grade. The guest professional’s feedback was limited

to comments. Each student had the opportunity to serve as an interviewer on the panel and be an interviewee, so

each experienced the interviewing process from both sides. After grades were tallied, students got feedback in

one-on-one sessions with the instructor in which comments from all panelists were shared.

Findings

As shown in greater detail in Table 1, more than half the surveyed students participated in informational

interviews, the 20 questions assignment, partner interviews, class lectures/discussion, and the Quintessential

Careers tutorial and found those activities useful in preparing them for the mock interviews. A quarter to a third of

respondents participated in actual job interviews, the optional Perfect Interview simulation, assigned texts, and the

Pitch-a-Story game and found these activities useful in preparing them for the mock interviews. The “other”

category for preparatory activities was cited by 11% of respondents as activities they participated in and found

useful; responses in this category usually comprised practice interviewing with a friend; additional responses

included interviewing oneself, undergoing interviews for campus organizations, participating in career-related

activities in another class, preparing a resume, and talking to friends who had previously taken the class.

Asked to identify the single most helpful activity for preparing them for mock interviews, students by a

wide margin (52%) cited the 20 questions assignment. Distantly trailing among activities singled out as most

helpful in preparing were the partner interviews (13%) and class lectures/discussions (11%).

12

No significant differences were seen in responses among responses from students at the sophomore,

junior, or senior level.

While 66% of respondents had undergone at least one actual job interview (and some had undergone

significantly more) in the year preceding the mock interviews, only 5% of those who had undergone them cited

real interviews as the most helpful preparation activity for mock interviews. Some students who said they had

undergone real interviews did not even cite the interviews as having been at all helpful in preparing them for

mock interviews.

No students singled out assigned texts as the most helpful preparation activity. We should note, however,

that in this class, students were not tested on this reading material and thus may not have been motivated to do the

reading.

Although we did not directly intend to gather qualitative data, the open-ended nature of some of the

survey questions prompted students to offer comments, the most salient of which appear in Table 2.

[Insert Table 1 about here]

[Insert Table 2 about here]

Discussion

Why the 20 Questions Assignment Prevailed

The literature may provide clues as to why students so overwhelmingly selected the written 20 questions

assignment as the most helpful in preparing them. While the type of mock/practice interviewing and rehearsal that

Gottesman and Mauro (date) tout can be helpful to interview preparation, Emig (1981) points out that “writing

tends to be a more responsible and committed act than talking” (p. 72).

In studying the extent to which interview-preparation techniques impact interview performance, Maurer,

Solamon, Andrews, and Troxtel (2001) determined that a preparation behavior that correlated with high-scoring

interviews was “organization,” in which participants described such activities as: “Used the pencil and paper

provided to write notes before giving my answers,” and “Organized my answers in a chronological, logical, and

13

easy-to-follow manner.” Demonstrating thoughtfulness and organized thinking was positively associated with

interview performance, the authors assert (similarly, Maurer & Troxtel, 2006).

Although this organization behavior took place during the interview itself and not beforehand, it is not too

great a leap to extrapolate that the advantages of composing written responses to typical interview questions

before an interview may be similar to the benefits of jotting down organizational notes during the interview. “By

using the organization strategy, the interviewee can think carefully about all of the behaviors that he or she would

engage in given a specific situation and then organize them in a manner that makes the most sense given the

hypothetical scenario,” write Maurer, Solamon, Andrews, and Troxtel (2001). “By outlining his or her thoughts

before speaking, his or her answer can be of higher quality than if he or she just begins to freely spout thoughts

and behaviors as they come to mind.”

Gottesman and Mauro (1999) emphasize writing as a form of rehearsal and a way to organize one’s

thoughts in advance of a job interview. “The simple act of getting some thoughts down on paper,” the authors

write (p. 4-5), “… will help you to think more clearly and specifically about what you have to offer potential

employers.” Gottesman and Mauro provide numerous writing exercises in the book and stress that simply

thinking about the answers to these exercises is not sufficient; to remember good ideas, writing is highly

recommended.

Research by Hansen and Hansen (2006) explored the exercise of composing written responses to

frequently asked job-interview questions. Attempting to connect this practice with Writing-to-Learn theory, the

authors found trend-indicative results, though not statistically significant outcomes, when comparing interview

performance (as evaluated by an impartial human-resources professional) of participants who had composed

written responses to commonly asked interviews questions to subjects who had not done so.

Support for the Partner Interviewing Activity

The literature also mentions activities similar to the partner interviews that 13% of students cited as most

helpful. These interviews align with an interview-prep activity that Young, Behnke, and Mann (2004) describe

and also bear a relationship with Maurer’s and Troxtel’s 2006 results in which preparing by observing others

performing mock interviews was associated with higher performance.

14

Limitations of the Research

This study looked at techniques that might be effective in preparing students for mock interviews. It did

not, of course, demonstrate that methods that students perceive as preparing them well for mock interviews also

prepare them for actual job interviews. The study also did not examine how effective the preparation methods

were in aiding participants’ performance, only which method the students felt had prepared them the best. The

sample size of the study was relatively small (201), and limited to just one university.

Conclusions and Suggestions for Further Research

In this study, students significantly cited an exercise in which they composed written responses to

interview questions as the most helpful activity for preparing them for the class mock-interview assignment. We

speculate that the extensive amount of time dedicated to preparing students for mock interviews in this class was

unusual. Since many instructors do not have the luxury of that much time, it may be useful to identify activities

that are most helpful in preparing students for mock interviews.

The study raises questions that could be explored with future research: How do the preparation methods

correlate with performance, as rated by grades or by a professional observer? What differences in student ratings

of the preparation methods might be uncovered if students were asked before the mock interviews which method

helped them feel most prepared (results that could be compared with post-mock-interview data)? Would any one

of the cited methods have been as effective if not bolstered with all the other methods? And, importantly, how

well do these preparation methods apply to real interviews? The fact that so few of this study’s participants who

had participated in real interviews singled out those interviews as helpful in preparing them for mock interviews

raises cautions that mock interviews in an academic setting may be significantly different from actual job

interviews. We might also speculate that the students’ real job-interview experiences were negative or that since

they may not have undergone the same level of preparation for the real interviews that they did for the mock

interviews, the real interviews did not prepare them for their mock counterparts.

15

Table 1

Activities participated in that may have helped prepare for class mock interviews

N = 201

Actual job interviews

Informational interviews

20 questions assignment

Perfect interview

Partner interviews

Class lecture/disc

TextsPitch a Story*

QuintCareers interviewingtutorial

Other

30% 59% 95% 25% 71% 72% 34% 37% 63% 11%*Data collected for 2 of the 3 semesters for which other data was collected

16

Table 2

Qualitative comments by students

20 Questions Class lecture/discussion

“…was the best because it simulated on-the-spot thinking.” (citing 5 Success Stories activity) “My nervousness is usually what holds me back, and that definitely made the interview less stressful.”“good to practice responding and the see examples of an ideal response.”

“… it gave me a solid base to know what would be on the mock interview.”(citing 5 Success Stories activity) “It was good to see how others answered questions and think about how I would answer them differently based on my own experiences.”

“… by far the most beneficial because it gave me the opportunity to really think.”

“got me thinking ahead of time for good answers.” Partner Interviews

“I would have rather done this prior to the class discussion.” “… most helpful to begin preparing and thinking about a professional interview setting.”“They were a pain to do, but I found them most helpful.”

“… after you had given your answers, you had sample answers that you could review it with.”

“… because I received helpful feedback.”

“engaged my critical thinking the most.”“… [made me] aware of what was being done wrong.”

“… really helped you get in the mindset to answer behavioral interviewing questions.”

“… most rewarding because you got to sit and be interviewed by someone.”

“… it allowed me to record stories that I could incorporate in the interview.”“…matched up better [than informational interview] content-wise.”

“I had concrete questions and solid, visible answers.” “… it went through the possible questions and partners could work through to find an answer.”“… got me thinking in the right mindset.”

“…It gave me insight into what employers look for and how to answer correctly.”

Informational Interview(s)

“… made us think about our answers in advance.” “… trains me to use actual interviews informationally as well and show some initiative in seeking info.”“… because we had to write down our responses and really think about it.”

“…made me think about questions I would not have expected.” Actual Job Interviews

“…they were off-the-wall and different.” “… helped me know I was qualified.”

“… made me think of specific examples for the qualities I have.” Perfect Interview

“… helped me think of skills, experience, etc., that I could use to answer a variety of interview questions.”

“It was very similar and fun to do.”

“… helped me to organize my thoughts so I have a basic idea of how to respond.”

“… I could see where I need to perfect my weaknesses.”

“… forced me to look at my answers and see where I could improve.” “… I liked how realistic it was and how you could see yourself and go over many different responses to the same question.”“… because I like to prepare and write down my thoughts first.”

“… it gave me the chance to answer the kind of questions I would be asked.”

“because you could view yourself.”

17

References

Barbour, K., Berg, F., Ennance, M., Greene, J. R., Hessig, M. J., Papworth, M., Radin, C., Renzy, E., & Suarez, J.

(1991). The quest: A guide to the job interview. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt

Barone, J. T. & Switzer, J. Y. (1995). Interviewing: Art and skill. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Bolles, R. N. (2007). What color is your parachute? Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press.

Campion, M. A., & Campion, J. E. (1987). Evaluation of an interview skills training program in a natural field

experiment. Personnel Psychology, 40(4), 675-691.

Clark, T. (2005). The business profession: A mandatory, noncredit, cocurricular career preparation program for

undergraduate business majors. Business Communication Quarterly, 68(3), 271-289.

Crosby, O. (2000). Employment interviewing, Occupational Outlook Quarterly, 44(2). 14-18, 20.

Dipboye, R. & Gaugler, B. B. (1993) Cognitive and behavioral processes on the selection interview. In N. Schmitt

& W. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations, (pp. 135-170). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gilmore, D. C., Stevens, C. K., Harrell-Cook, G., & Ferris, G. (1999). Impression management tactics. In Eder, R.

W. & Harris, M. M. (Eds.), The employment interview handbook (pp. 321-336). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.

Gottesman, D., & Mauro, B. (1999). The interview rehearsal book. New York: Berkley Books.

Guest, K. E., & Murphy, D. S. (2000). In support of memory retention: a cooperative oral final exam. Education.

121(2), 350.

Hansen, R. S. & Hansen, K. (March 2006). Employment Interview Preparation: Assessing the Writing-to-Learn

Approach. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning. Association for Business

Simulation and Experiential Learning (ABSEL), San Francisco, CA.

Harrison, R. (1973, July). Interview training for job applicants. Industrial & Commercial Training, 5(7), 337-338.

Levine, T. (n.d.). The top 10 questions most often asked by interviewers. Retrieved Oct. 9, 2004, from

http://www.net-temps.com/careerdev/index.htm?type=topics&topic=interviewing&id=184

Lundelius, J., & Poon, E. (1997). Cross-sectioning mock job interviews for peer evaluation. Business

Communication Quarterly, 60(1), 165-170.

18

Marks, M., & O’Connor, A. H. (2006, September). The round-robin interview. Business Communication

Quarterly, 69(04), 264-275.

Martin, C. (2004). Boost your interview I.Q. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Maurer, T. J., & Solamon. (2006). The science and practice of a structured employment interview coaching

program. Personnel Psychology, 59(2), 433-456.

Maurer, T. J., Solamon, J. M., Andrews, K. D., & Troxtel, D. D. (2001). Interviewee coaching, preparation

strategies, and response strategies in relation to performance in situational employment interviews: An

extension of Maurer, Solamon, and Troxtel (1998). Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 0021-9010.

Maurer, T. J., Solamon, J. M., & Troxtel, D. D. (1998). Relationship of coaching with performance in situational

employment interviews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(1), 128-136.

Medley, H. A. (1992). Sweaty palms: The neglected art of being interviewed. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press.

Palmer, D. K., Campion, M. A, & Green, P. C. (1999). Interviewing training for both applicant and interviewer.

In Eder, R. W. & Harris, M. M. (Eds.). The employment interview handbook (pp. 337-351). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Perry, A. & Goldberg, C. (1998, Jan.). Who gets hired: Interviewing skills are a prehire variable. Journal of

Career Planning & Employment, 58(2), 47-55. Retrieved Oct. 15. 2004, from ProQuest database.

Posthuma, R. A., Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2002). Beyond employment interview validity: A

comprehensive narrative review of recent research and trends over time. Personnel Psychology, 55(1), 1+.

Ralston, S. M., Kirkwood, W. G., & Burant, P. A. (2003). Helping interviewees tell their stories. Business

Communication Quarterly, 66(3), 8-22.

Sincoff, M. Z. (2004). The dyadic interview project. Business Communication Quarterly, 67(2), 206-213.

Smart, K. (2004, June). Articulating skills in the job search. Business Communication Quarterly, 67(2), 198-205.

Thompson, V. & Williams, K. (1987, Autumn). Mock interviews help to prepare for the real thing. Journalism

Educator, 42(3), 36-37.

Washington, T. (1995). Interview power: Selling yourself face to face. Bellevue, WA: Mount Vernon Press.

Winning the battle of the nerves. (2003). CareerBuilder Employment Classified Advertising Section, Orlando

Sentinel, Nov. 30, 2003.