AI Will Evaluate Your Job Application. Do You Still Want to Apply?

If job seekers knew companies were using artificial intelligence to fill open positions, would it stop them from applying for the job?

The answer, according to a recent study, is yes—sometimes.

The researchers found that in certain instances, like the screening of applications, study participants usually accepted some degree of automation. But in other instances, like interviews, the study suggests, automation could deter job seekers from applying for a position.

Companies contending with recent labor shortages are increasingly turning to AI as a way to facilitate and speed up the hiring process. AI can be used in such tasks as screening job applicants for basic qualifications, checking for professional credentials and licenses, evaluating video statements, interviewing candidates and conducting competency assessments.

The new research underscores when using AI in hiring could be counterproductive. For instance, in one part of the study participants were shown fictional job postings and then asked if they intended to apply for the position. The researchers found that if the job posting said AI was used to both screen applicants and conduct interviews, participants’ intention to apply to the position averaged 2.77 on a six-point scale, with 6 reflecting the highest intention to apply. If AI was used only for the screening process, participants’ intention to apply averaged 3.73.

In another experiment, the authors also found that study participants saw pros as well as cons in the use of AI in interviewing.

Participants who saw a job posting stating that AI was used to both screen applicants and conduct interviews expected the hiring process to be more consistent in its judgments than those who saw postings with less AI involvement, ranking the process at an average of 3.66 for consistency on a five-point scale, with 5 being most consistent. Participants where AI was to be used to screen applicants but not interview them ranked the process at 3.48 for consistency, and participants where the posting made no mention of automation ranked the process at 3.16 for consistency.

On the other hand, participants who were told the hiring would be fully automated tended to believe more than others that they had less agency or voice in the final outcome. Overall, the study results suggest this concern tends to outweigh the appreciation of AI’s lack of bias at the interviewing stage.

“A hybrid approach where companies use AI in some tasks but not others may be a way to get the best of both worlds,” says Jenny Wesche, a co-author of the study and a postdoctoral research fellow at the Free University of Berlin. Participants may have been more open to automation earlier in the hiring process because they had little expectation of direct interaction at that stage and could see some benefits from using AI—such as less-biased decisions and the avoidance of problems like nepotism, she says. But during the later stages, she suggests, applicants expect personal interaction, to give them an opportunity to sell themselves and to learn more about the company.

“AI is not inherently good or bad,” Dr. Wesche says. “It just very much depends on the context it’s used.”

The idea of wallpaper elicits so much apprehension in homeowners, New York designer Francis Toumbakaris purposely uses the term “wallcovering” when speaking to clients about it. Yet decorating websites and media accounts teem with instances of the stuff. “It transforms a room and gives it personality,” said Casey Keasler, founder of design studio Casework, in Portland, Ore.

So what keeps folks from hanging the gorgeous material, and how do homeowners get over these wallpaper willies? Here, some case studies of conversions.

Hangup: It’s too pricey.

Budget concerns can hamstring homeowners. Home-services company Angi estimates that wallpaper can cost as much as $12 a square foot for labor and materials, while painting tops out at $6. “If the wall surface needs work beforehand, prices go up,” said Bethany Adams, an interior designer in Louisville, Ky. And Keasler notes that paper can cost as much as $400 a roll.

Antidote: Baby steps

New York designer Tara McCauley says homeowners can get more hang for their buck by using paper strategically. In an apartment in Brooklyn whose homeowners sweated the bottom line, she coated only the hallway with a dark-blue pattern inspired by Portuguese tiles. “It added so much impact,” McCauley said of the modest use. The designer adds that another way to save money is by hanging what she calls the gateway drug to wallpaper: patternless grass cloth. With no need to align a motif, the material goes up quickly and costs less to install, she says, “but it adds visual depth in a way plain paint never could.”

Hangup: I’ll get sick of it

A fear of commitment stops many would-be wall paperers, who worry about having a change of heart later. Erik Perez, a design publicist with his own firm in Los Angeles, campaigned hard for what he thought was the perfect old-Hollywood look for his and his husband’s dining room—a maximalist, leafy green wallpaper made famous by the mid-20th-century decoration of the Beverly Hills Hotel. His husband, Paul Hardoin, a voice-over actor, resisted. “Is it going to go out of style? Will I tire of it? Will it affect resale value?” he worried.

Erik Perez, right, and his husband, Paul Hardoin, in their Los Angeles dining room, clad in CW Stockwell’s Martinique paper. Photo: Julie Goldstone for WSJ

Antidote: Low-use spaces

Infrequently used rooms can carry a bold choice long-term. Of the Brooklyn hallway she wrapped in blue, McCauley noted, “It’s a pass-through, so you don’t get overwhelmed by a bold pattern.” Ditto powder and dining rooms, like that of Perez, who said, “We only used that room when we were entertaining and it was too cold to be outside.”

It took three years, but Hardoin caved when the banana-leaf pattern became available in blue. “I thought it looked cool,” Hardoin said. He took the leap, knowing his sister Annette Moran (a wallpaper enthusiast) would be their DIY installer. “Now it’s the happiest room in the house,” he said.

Hangup: It’s dated

When Sarah and Nate Simon bought a historic home in Louisville, Ky., the walls sported oppressively dark patterns, including big, repeating medallions set in a grid. Sarah recalls thinking, “ ‘Not this! What’s the opposite of this?’ In my mind that would be paint.” Even for folks who haven’t pulled down awful examples, “the word ‘wallpaper’ can take them back to flowery patterns of the ’50s and ’60s that feel very dated,” said Toumbakaris.

Antidote: Modernity

“Wallpaper does not mean what it used to. It can be meandering, abstract, ombre or sisal,” said Simon’s interior designer, Bethany Adams. She suggested a sophisticated Chinoiserie that New York designer Miles Redd, in a collaboration with Schumacher, updated with an aqua colorway. Adams explains that like most Chinoiseries, this pattern doesn’t repeat for more than 8 feet. “You get a peripatetic design that keeps the eye engaged,” she said. “It’s looser.” Said Simon of her dining room today, “It’s a complete transformation, like art on my walls.”

Stereotypes of fusty florals and pitiless patterns fall away when designers present homeowners with contemporary picks. Still, sometimes the conversion takes time. One of Keasler’s clients, gun-shy after removing old paper, came back a year later, ready. “We chose a clean classic style that was graphic and minimal for a modern edge in the bathroom,” said the designer.