Beyond Efficiency: Understanding Job Candidates' Acceptance of AI-enabled Recruitment: A Socio-Technical Perspective

Bilal Hmoud; Ola Alhadid; George Sammour

doi:10.23762/FSO_VOL13_NO3_4

Published : 2025-09-30

Vol. 13 No. 3 (2025)

Beyond Efficiency: Understanding Job Candidates' Acceptance of AI-enabled Recruitment: A Socio-Technical Perspective

Bilal Hmoud

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1685-7941

Ola Alhadid

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3631-9657

George Sammour

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5080-8292

DOI: https://doi.org/10.23762/FSO_VOL13_NO3_4

Abstract

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly reshaping recruitment processes by automating candidate screening, interviews, and hiring decisions. Despite its growing adoption, AI-enabled recruitment tools raise significant ethical and psychological concerns among job candidates, particularly regarding fairness, transparency, risk, and trust. Addressing a notable research gap concerning candidate perspectives, this study aims to investigate job candidates’ acceptance of AI-enabled recruitment tools, examining how perceived usefulness, ease of use, fairness, transparency, and risk influence their attitudes, mediated by trust and moderated by AI experience. Drawing on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), and the Fairness, Accountability, Transparency, and Explainability (FATE) framework, the study introduces a socio-technical conceptual model to address the identified research gap. A quantitative survey was conducted with 143 job applicants in Jordan’s pharmaceutical sector. The data were analysed using SPSS multiple regression analysis to assess the relationships among the variables. The findings show that perceived fairness, transparency, usefulness, and trust significantly shape positive attitudes toward AI-enabled hiring. Whereas ease of use and risk perceptions are less influential, trust proved to be a vital mediator, particularly between job applicants' perceptions of fairness and transparency and their attitudes toward AI-enabled recruitment tools, while prior AI experience moderates the influence of transparency and risk perceptions. The study concludes that respondents placed greater importance on AI's ethical and relational characteristics than technical functionality, highlighting the importance of designing functionally efficient, but also ethically responsible, fair, trustworthy, and transparent AI-enabled recruitment tools to promote candidates’ acceptance and enhance responsible AI adoption in emerging labour markets.

Keywords:

IT adoption, AI in recruitment, trust in AI, ethical AI adoption.

Details

References

Statistics

Authors

Download files

pdf

Citation rules

Hmoud, B., Alhadid, O., & Sammour, G. (2025). Beyond Efficiency: Understanding Job Candidates’ Acceptance of AI-enabled Recruitment: A Socio-Technical Perspective. Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, 13(3), 89–113. https://doi.org/10.23762/FSO_VOL13_NO3_4

Altmetric indicators

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

References

AbdulKareem, A. K., Oladimeji, K. A., Ishola, A. A., Bello, M. L., Umar, A. Y., & Adejumo, A. (2024). Investigating ICT adoption and public value of e-recruitment in the public sector: the role of social media use. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 37(2), 284–304. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-10-2023-0307.

Ali, I., Warraich, N. F., & Butt, K. (2025). Acceptance and use of artificial intelligence and AI-based applications in education: A meta-analysis and future direction. Information Development, 41(3), 859-874. https://doi.org/10.1177/02666669241257206.

Allal-Chérif, O., Aránega, A. Y., & Sánchez, R. C. (2021). Intelligent recruitment: How to identify, select, and retain talents from around the world using artificial intelligence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 169, Article 120822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120822.

Angerschmid, A., Zhou, J., Theuermann, K., Chen, F., & Holzinger, A. (2022). Fairness and explanation in AI-informed decision making. Machine Learning and Knowledge Extraction, 4(2), 556–579. https://doi.org/10.3390/make4020026.

Araujo, T., Helberger, N., Kruikemeier, S., & De Vreese, C. H. (2020). In AI we trust? Perceptions about automated decision-making by artificial intelligence. AI & society, 35(3), 611–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-019-00931-w.

Bedué, P., & Fritzsche, A. (2022). Can we trust AI? An empirical investigation of trust requirements and guide to successful AI adoption. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 35(2), 530–549. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-06-2020-0233.

Binns, R. (2018, January). Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. In S. Venkatasubramanian, K. Fukumizu, C. Ling, & J. Z. Kolter (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency (pp. 149–159). PMLR. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3287560.3287598.

Bringsjord, S. (2011). Psychometric artificial intelligence. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 23(3), 271–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/0952813X.2010.502314.

Chaudhary, G. (2024). Unveiling the black box: Bringing algorithmic transparency to AI. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 18(1), 93–122. https://doi.org/10.5817/MUJLT2024-1-4.

Chin, W. W. (1998). Commentary: Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1), vii–xvi. http://www.jstor.org/stable/249674.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008.

Dastin, J. (2022). Amazon scraps secret AI recruiting tool that showed bias against women. In Ethics of data and analytics (pp. 296-299). Auerbach Publications.

Deepa, R., Sekar, S., Malik, A., Kumar, J., & Attri, R. (2024). Impact of AI-focussed technologies on social and technical competencies for HR managers–A systematic review and research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 202, Article 123301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123301.

De Visser, E. J., Pak, R., & Shaw, T. H. (2018). From ‘automation’to ‘autonomy’: the importance of trust repair in human–machine interaction. Ergonomics, 61(10), 1409–1427.https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2018.1457725.

Felzmann, H., Villaronga, E. F., Lutz, C., & Tamò-Larrieux, A. (2019). Transparency you can trust: Transparency requirements for artificial intelligence between legal norms and contextual concerns. Big Data & Society, 6(1), Article 2053951719860542. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951719860542.

Figueroa-Armijos, M., Clark, B. B., & da Motta Veiga, S. P. (2023). Ethical perceptions of AI in hiring and organizational trust: The role of performance expectancy and social influence. Journal of Business Ethics, 186(1), 179–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05166-2

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104.

Glikson, E., & Woolley, A. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of management annals, 14(2), 627–660. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0057.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis.

Haque, A. B., Islam, A. N., & Mikalef, P. (2023). Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) from a user perspective: A synthesis of prior literature and problematizing avenues for future research. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 186, Article 122120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122120.

Herzallah, A. M., & Makaldy, R. (2025). Technological Self-Efficacy and Sense of Coherence: Key Drivers in Teachers' AI Acceptance and Adoption. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, Article 100377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100377.

Hilliard, A., Guenole, N., & Leutner, F. (2022). Robots are judging me: Perceived fairness of algorithmic recruitment tools. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 940456. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.940456.

Hofeditz, L., Clausen, S., Rieß, A., Mirbabaie, M., & Stieglitz, S. (2022). Applying XAI to an AI-based system for candidate management to mitigate bias and discrimination in hiring. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 2207–2233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00600-9.

Hu, J., Huang, G. I., Wong, I. A., & Wan, L. C. (2024). AI trust divide: How recruiter-candidate roles shape tourism personnel decision-making. Annals of Tourism Research, 109, Article 103860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2024.103860.

Hunkenschroer, A. L., & Luetge, C. (2022). Ethics of AI-enabled recruiting and selection: A review and research agenda. Journal of Business Ethics, 178(4), 977–1007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05049-6.

Ibrahim, F., Münscher, J. C., Daseking, M., & Telle, N. T. (2025). The technology acceptance model and adopter type analysis in the context of artificial intelligence. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 7, Article 1496518. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.1496518.

Ismatullaev, A., & Kim, S. (2022). Review of the factors affecting acceptance of AI-infused systems. Human Factors, 64(8), 1323–1340. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208211064707.

Kaplan, A., & Haenlein, M. (2019). Siri, Siri, in my hand: Who’s the fairest in the land? On the interpretations, illustrations, and implications of artificial intelligence. Business horizons, 62(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.08.004.

Kelly, S., Kaye, S. A., & Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. (2023). What factors contribute to the acceptance of artificial intelligence? A systematic review. Telematics and Informatics, 77, Article 101925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2022.101925.

Kim, J. Y., & Heo, W. (2021). Artificial intelligence video interviewing for employment: perspectives from applicants, companies, developer and academicians. Information Technology & People, 35(3), 861–878. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-04-2019-0173.

Langer, M., König, C. J., & Papathanasiou, M. (2021). Highly automated job interviews: Acceptance under the influence of stakes and performance feedback. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36, 707–726. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12246

Larsson, S., White, J. M., & Ingram Bogusz, C. (2024). The Artificial Recruiter: Risks of Discrimination in Employers' Use of AI and Automated Decision-Making. Social Inclusion, 12. https://doi.org/10.17645/si.7471.

Lashkari, M., & Cheng, J. (2023, April). “Finding the Magic Sauce”: Exploring Perspectives of Recruiters and Job Seekers on Recruitment Bias and Automated Tools. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-16). https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581548.

Lee, M. K. (2018). Understanding perception of algorithmic decisions: Fairness, trust, and emotion in response to algorithmic management. Big data & society, 5(1), Article 2053951718756684. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718756684.

Lee, M. K., Jain, A., Cha, H. J., Ojha, S., & Kusbit, D. (2019). Procedural justice in algorithmic fairness: Leveraging transparency and outcome control for fair algorithmic mediation. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 3(CSCW), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359284.

Li, W. (2025). A study on factors influencing designers’ behavioral intention in using AI-generated content for assisted design: Perceived anxiety, perceived risk, and UTAUT. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 41(2), 1064–1077. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2310354.

Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review, 20(3), 709–734. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080335.

McKnight, D. H., Choudhury, V., & Kacmar, C. (2002). Developing and validating trust measures for e-commerce: An integrative typology. Information systems research, 13(3), 334–359. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.13.3.334.81.

McLean, G., Osei-Frimpong, K., Wilson, A., & Pitardi, V. (2020). How live chat assistants drive travel consumers’ attitudes, trust and purchase intentions: the role of human touch. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32(5), 1795–1812. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-07-2019-0605.

Moravec, V., Hynek, N., Gavurova, B., & Kubak, M. (2024). Everyday artificial intelligence unveiled: Societal awareness of technological transformation. Oeconomia Copernicana, 15(2), 367–406. https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2961.

Mirowska, A., & Mesnet, L. (2022). Preferring the devil you know: Potential applicant reactions to artificial intelligence evaluation of interviews. Human Resource Management Journal, 32(2), 364–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12393.

Nørskov, S., Damholdt, M. F., Ulhøi, J. P., Jensen, M. B., Mathiasen, M. K., Ess, C. M., & Seibt, J. (2019, July 4–6). Fairness perceptions in job interviews: Using a teleoperated robot as a fair proxy. Paper presented at the 35th European Group for Organizational Studies (EGOS) Colloquium, University of Edinburgh Business School, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. https://pure.au.dk/portal/en/publications/fairness-perceptions-in-job-interviews-using-a-teleoperated-robot/

Ochmann, J., & Laumer, S. (2019). Fairness as a determinant of AI adoption in recruiting: An interview-based study.

Ochmann, J., Michels, L., Tiefenbeck, V., Maier, C., & Laumer, S. (2024). Perceived algorithmic fairness: An empirical study of transparency and anthropomorphism in algorithmic recruiting. Information Systems Journal, 34(2), 384-414. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12482.

Ogunniye, G., Legastelois, B., Rovatsos, M., Dowthwaite, L., Portillo, V., Vallejos, E. P., & Jirotka, M. (2021). Understanding user perceptions of trustworthiness in e-recruitment systems. IEEE Internet Computing, 25(6), 23–32. http://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2021.3115670.

Omohundro, S. (2014). Autonomous technology and the greater human good. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 26(3), 303–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/0952813X.2014.895111.

Ore, O., & Sposato, M. (2022). Opportunities and risks of artificial intelligence in recruitment and selection. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 30(6), 1771–1782. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-07-2020-2291.

Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International journal of electronic commerce, 7(3), 101–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2003.11044275.

Prikshat, V., Kumar, S., Patel, P., & Varma, A. (2025). Impact of organisational facilitators and perceived HR effectiveness on acceptance of AI-augmented HRM: an integrated TAM and TPB perspective. Personnel Review, 54(3), 879–912. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-04-2023-0303.

Qutaishat, F., Abushakra, A., Anaya, L., & Al-Omari, M. (2023). Investigating the factors affecting the intention to adopt cloud-based ERP systems during the COVID-19 era: evidence from Jordan. Business Process Management Journal, 29(3), 653–670. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-09-2022-0462.

Rigotti, C., & Fosch-Villaronga, E. (2024). Fairness, AI & recruitment. Computer Law & Security Review, 53, Article 105966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2024.105966.

Robert, L. P., Pierce, C., Marquis, L., Kim, S., & Alahmad, R. (2020). Designing fair AI for managing employees in organizations: a review, critique, and design agenda. Human–Computer Interaction, 35(5-6), 545–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2020.1735391.

Rukadikar, A., & Khandelwal, K. (2024). Navigating change: a qualitative exploration of chatbot adoption in recruitment. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), Article 2345759. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2345759.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. John Wiley & Sons.

Sheng, H., Nah, F. F.-H., & Siau, K. (2008). An experimental study on ubiquitous commerce adoption: Impact of personalization and privacy concerns. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 9(6), 367–391. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00161.

Shin, D. (2020). User perceptions of algorithmic decisions in the personalized AI system: Perceptual evaluation of fairness, accountability, transparency, and explainability. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 64(4), 541–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2020.1843357.

Shin, D. (2021). Shin, D. (2021). Shin, D. (2023). Embodying algorithms, enactive artificial intelligence and the extended cognition: You can see as much as you know about algorithm. Journal of Information Science, 49(1), 18–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551520985495.

Straub, D. W. (1989). Validating instruments in MIS research. MIS quarterly, 13(2), 147–169. https://doi.org/10.2307/248922.

Tambe, P., Cappelli, P., & Yakubovich, V. (2019). Artificial intelligence in human resources management: Challenges and a path forward. California Management Review, 61(4), 15-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619867910.

Tanantong, T., & Wongras, P. (2024). A UTAUT-based framework for analyzing users’ intention to adopt artificial intelligence in human resource recruitment: a case study of Thailand. Systems, 12(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12010028.

Teodorescu, M. H., Morse, L., Awwad, Y., & Kane, G. C. (2021). Teodorescu, M. H., Morse, L., Awwad, Y., & Kane, G. C. (2021). Failures of fairness in automation require a deeper understanding of human–ml augmentation. MIS quarterly, 45(3), 1483–1500. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2021/16535.

United Nations. (2015). Our common future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Upadhyay, A. K., & Khandelwal, K. (2018). Applying artificial intelligence: implications for recruitment. Strategic HR Review, 17(5), 255–258. https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-07-2018-0051.

Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management science, 46(2), 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.2.186.11926.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.

Wang, R., Harper, F. M., & Zhu, H. (2020, April). Factors influencing perceived fairness in algorithmic decision-making: Algorithm outcomes, development procedures, and individual differences. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1-14). https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.337681.

Wang, S. C. (2003). Artificial neural network. In Interdisciplinary computing in java programming (pp. 81-100). Boston, MA: Springer US.

Wanner, J., Herm, L. V., Heinrich, K., & Janiesch, C. (2022). The effect of transparency and trust on intelligent system acceptance: Evidence from a user-based study. Electronic Markets, 32(4), 2079–2102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00593-5.

Wongras, P., & Tanantong, T. (2023). An extended UTAUT model for analyzing users’ Acceptance factors for artificial Intelligence adoption in human resource recruitment: A case study of Thailand. Education and Information Technologies, 3(7), 13–27. http://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202311.1612.v1.

Xiong, Y., & Kim, J. K. (2025). Who wants to be hired by AI? How message frames and AI transparency impact individuals’ attitudes and behaviors toward companies using AI in hiring. Computers in Human Behavior: Artificial Humans, 3, Article 100120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbah.2025.100120.

Zerilli, J., Bhatt, U., & Weller, A. (2022). How transparency modulates trust in artificial intelligence. Patterns, 3(4), Article 100455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2022.100455.