The Initial Screening Order Problem
This addresses fairness and efficiency issues in candidate screening for hiring or selection processes, but it is incremental as it builds on existing fairness and bias concepts.
The paper tackles the problem of how the initial screening order (ISO) affects candidate selection, showing that under a human-like screener, ISO can hinder individual fairness and optimality due to position bias, with simulated experiments demonstrating these effects across parameters.
We investigate the role of the initial screening order (ISO) in candidate screening. The ISO refers to the order in which the screener searches the candidate pool when selecting $k$ candidates. Today, it is common for the ISO to be the product of an information access system, such as an online platform or a database query. The ISO has been largely overlooked in the literature, despite its impact on the optimality and fairness of the selected $k$ candidates, especially under a human screener. We define two problem formulations describing the search behavior of the screener given an ISO: the best-$k$, where it selects the top $k$ candidates; and the good-$k$, where it selects the first good-enough $k$ candidates. To study the impact of the ISO, we introduce a human-like screener and compare it to its algorithmic counterpart, where the human-like screener is conceived to be inconsistent over time. Our analysis, in particular, shows that the ISO, under a human-like screener solving for the good-$k$ problem, hinders individual fairness despite meeting group fairness, and hampers the optimality of the selected $k$ candidates. This is due to position bias, where a candidate's evaluation is affected by its position within the ISO. We report extensive simulated experiments exploring the parameters of the best-$k$ and good-$k$ problems for both screeners. Our simulation framework is flexible enough to account for multiple candidate screening tasks, being an alternative to running real-world procedures.