A rationality analysis of applicants’ responses in AI-assisted, asynchronous job interviews using lie detection methods

Purpose This paper aims to examine the rationality/irrationality of responses in asynchronous videotaped job interviews and the use of artificial intelligence to detect lies in such interviews. It is focused on rational choice, heuristics and objective rule-based rationality in job interview answers. In addition, it questions whether lying can be considered a form of rationality, as well as whether novel lie detection methods undermine the right to lie in connection with inadmissible questions. Design/methodology/approach Based on research of the relevant literature dealing with asynchronous video interviews and novel lie detection, this paper is grounded in both rational choice theory as well as bounded and objective rule-based rationality. The methodological starting point is a conceptual analysis and clarification of the different concepts of rationality in combination with elements of lying. Findings First, this paper addresses a gap in the literature by focusing on a candidate-centered perspective, exploring whether lying in asynchronous video job interviews may be rational/irrational rather than merely whether and how lies can be detected. The resultant conclusions could only be drawn in the context of the respective understanding of rationality, had to be differentiated and show partial gaps. Second, missing heuristics regarding an applicant’s perspective and lacking criteria for determining and reconstructing rules of thumb can nevertheless build a bridge to objective rule-based rationality. Third, in rare cases of inadmissible questions in asynchronous interviews, an untruthful answer – in accordance with the right to lie – becomes irrational because of lie detection. Practical implications While there is no general right to lie in interviews, several European countries’ legal systems allow interviewees some leeway with regard to truthfully answering inappropriate questions, although this varies by legal systems and contexts. The significance of this topic for countries lacking such regulations is evident, as the absence of a response to such questions can constitute an implicit answer, thereby potentially laying the foundation for discriminatory decisions or actions. An analysis of the interviewees’ responses from the perspective of rationality reveals that the possibility of lying was not sufficiently taken into account or incorporated into the respective understanding of rationality. This examination has the capacity to raise awareness among employers and prospective employees, because the application of candidates and their subsequent selection, especially in asynchronous video-interviews, takes place in a global market subject to different legal regulations that may permit untruthful responses to inappropriate questions. Finally, the contradictions, created by the latest lie detector technology, is also highlighted, suggesting that HR departments should reevaluate their use. Originality/value Beyond legal issues, this paper is one of the first to analyze novel lie detection methods versus a right to lie combined with social-philosophical questions of rationality.