A quick take on findings from a recent study in the Journal of Applied Psychology written by Kevin Chandler, AbilityMap’s Chief Science Officer…
Are Applicants More Likely to Quit Longer Assessments? Examining the Effect of Assessment Length on Applicant Attrition Behavior
Study by Jay H. Hardy III, Carter Gibson, Matthew Sloan, and Alison Carr
View the original study
The Ongoing Debate on Assessment Length
When it comes to candidate assessments, faster isn’t always better. There’s a common belief in recruitment circles that long assessments drive candidates away — but is that really true?
Recent research challenges this assumption, revealing that applicant dropout is much more likely to occur in the first few minutes of an assessment, not as the assessment gets longer. In fact, longer and well-designed assessments may actually attract higher-quality candidates, signalling the seriousness of the opportunity and giving them a fair chance to demonstrate their abilities.
In this article, we’ll explore the study’s findings and what they mean for hiring teams weighing up the trade-offs between speed, reliability and candidate experience.
Understanding When Attrition Happens
Early Attrition vs. Late Attrition
The key to understanding applicant attrition lies in when it happens. The study proposes two models:
- Early attrition model: Attrition is highest at the start of the assessment and decreases as candidates progress.
- Late attrition model: Attrition increases the longer the assessment continues.
Research indicates that attrition risk is highest immediately after beginning the assessment but decreases rapidly after this initial phase. This suggests that assessment length may have minimal impact on overall attrition rates because most withdrawals happen early on.
Opportunity Cost and Applicant Motivation
Time spent on an assessment can be seen as an opportunity cost. However, once applicants invest time and effort, they are motivated to continue. This is explained through:
- Escalation of commitment/self-justification theory (Staw, 1981): Applicants feel compelled to continue to justify their initial decision to start.
- “Goal looms larger” effect (Förster, Higgins, & Idson, 1998): Motivation increases as applicants near completion.
Why Longer Assessments May Attract Higher Quality Applicants
Interestingly, longer assessments may appeal to top candidates for two reasons:
- Greater opportunity to perform: Longer assessments provide more chances to demonstrate skills (Ryan & Ployhart, 2000).
- Signalling seriousness: A comprehensive assessment signals that the organisation is serious about its hiring process (Rafaeli, 1999).
Candidates targeting prestigious roles are often motivated by more than speed — they value the opportunity to compete and succeed.
Study Findings: Is Shorter Really Better?
When Does Attrition Actually Occur?
The study, based on data from 200,000+ candidates, found:
- Most attrition occurred in the first 20 minutes.
- Attrition risk dropped dramatically after this period.
Even when controlling for content and job characteristics, assessment length did not meaningfully affect attrition rates.
The Pitfall of Over-Shortening Assessments
Reducing assessment length may sacrifice the reliability and validity of results. Unless existing assessments are highly inefficient, shortening them could result in poorer hiring decisions without significantly reducing attrition.
Practical Implications for Hiring Organisations
Focus on Reliability and Validity
The research supports a key recommendation:
Assessment length should be driven by the need for reliable and valid data — not by fears of applicant attrition.
Attrition is still a factor to consider, but shortening assessments is not necessarily the right solution.
Set Clear Time Expectations
One simple and effective tactic highlighted by the study is to:
- Slightly overestimate the time needed for the assessment.
Providing conservative estimates reduces attrition, as candidates can plan their time more effectively and are less likely to quit unexpectedly.
Conclusion: Designing Smarter Assessments
In summary, shortening assessments purely to prevent attrition may be misguided. Attrition risk is concentrated early and influenced more by candidate motivation and perceived value than assessment length.
For organisations committed to finding the right fit, longer assessments, such as the Ability Imprint — when properly designed and communicated — can support better hiring outcomes without driving candidates away.
References
- Jay H. Hardy III, Carter Gibson, Matthew Sloan, and Alison Carr. (2017). Are Applicants More Likely to Quit Longer Assessments? Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(7), 1148–1158.
- Lippman, S. A., & McCall, J. J. (1976). The Economics of Job Search: A Survey. Economic Inquiry, 14(2), 155–189.
- Staw, B. M. (1981). The Escalation of Commitment to a Course of Action. Academy of Management Review, 6(4), 577–587.
- Förster, J., Higgins, E. T., & Idson, L. C. (1998). Approach and Avoidance Strength During Goal Attainment: Regulatory Focus and the “Goal Looms Larger” Effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(5), 1115–1131.
- Ryan, A. M., & Ployhart, R. E. (2000). Applicants’ Perceptions of Selection Procedures and Decisions: A Critical Review and Agenda for the Future. Journal of Management, 26(3), 565–606.
- Rafaeli, A. (1999). The Cost of Appearance and the Value of Image. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 658–660.
- Jarrett, J. (2016). Streamlining Selection: Best Practices for Shortening Assessments Without Sacrificing Quality. HR Review.
- Ryan, A. M., & Huth, L. (2008). Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures. In International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 23, 197–245.
