Face-to-Face & Videoconference Interviews

Imagine being one of the 1.94 million Filipinos still unemployed as of February 2025.
According to the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), while 49.15 million Filipinos have jobs, nearly 5 million feel underemployed—needing more hours or additional jobs to make ends meet. Although sectors like food services and construction show promise, others such as agriculture and transport continue shedding thousands of jobs monthly. In a climate this tough, how applicants present themselves during interviews matters more than ever.

But here’s the challenge: not all applicants are equally prepared. Whether done face-to-face or via videoconference, the first impression often determines career prospects. With unstable internet access, lack of interview training, and outdated hiring systems still widespread, many qualified individuals risk being unfairly overlooked. In a job market where one conversation can change a life, it is critical to ask: are our current interview formats empowering or excluding Filipino workers?

Who Can Use These Topics

This research is ideal for students and professionals pursuing the following courses or strands:

College Programs:

• BS Psychology Major in Industrial-Organizational Psychology

• BS Human Resource Management

• BS Business Administration Major in Operations Management

• BA Communication (Organizational Communication Focus)

• BS Information Technology (HR Tech and Remote Work Solutions Focus)

Senior High School Strands:

• Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMSS)

• Accountancy, Business, and Management (ABM)

• General Academic Strand (GAS)

Why This Topic Needs Research

As employment systems evolve, ensuring fairness in job selection processes becomes critical. Several important research gaps must be addressed:

• Technological Configurations and Structured Interview Designs: There is limited understanding of how technology setup and interview design features jointly impact validity, fairness, and applicant experiences in face-to-face and videoconference settings (Langer et al., 2025).

• Cross-Cultural Interview Mode Preferences: Little research explores how diverse demographic groups experience and prefer different interview modes, affecting inclusivity in job selection and qualitative research practices (Johannessen et al., 2025).

• Predictive Validity Across Formats: The ability of virtual versus face-to-face assessment formats to predict long-term employee success across various job roles remains underexplored (Avni & Luria, 2025).

• Videoconferencing Design Enhancements: While videoconference interviews tend to receive lower performance ratings, platform-based solutions such as enhanced social presence and better eye contact features are not yet systematically developed or tested (Basch et al., 2021).

• Technology Access and Participant Diversity: Few studies address how technology access gaps and sociodemographic disparities influence data quality and participant representation across interview modes (Rowen et al., 2022).

• Ethical Standards in Videoconference Interviews: Videoconference interviews pose distinct privacy, rapport, and data quality challenges that current ethical frameworks do not fully address (Khan & MacEachen, 2022).

• Comparative Studies on Group Interview Dynamics: There is a lack of direct, systematic comparisons between face-to-face and online dyadic interviews and focus groups in terms of interaction quality and data richness (Lobe & Morgan, 2021).

Feasibility & Challenges by Target Group

Get Your Free Thesis Title

Finding a well-structured quantitative research topic can be challenging, but I am here to assist you.

✔ Expertly Curated Topics – Not AI-generated, but carefully developed based on existing academic studies and research trends.
✔ Comprehensive Research Support – Includes an existed and updated research gaps, explanation of variables as well as SDG relevance.
✔ Personalized for Your Field – Get a thesis title tailored to your academic requirements and research interests.

Prefer video content? Subscribe to my YouTube Channel for expert insights on research topics, methodologies, and academic writing strategies.

References

Avni, E., & Luria, G. (2025). Virtual assessment centres versus face-to-face assessment centres: psychometric properties. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 1-9.

Basch, J. M., Melchers, K. G., Kurz, A., Krieger, M., & Miller, L. (2021). It takes more than a good camera: which factors contribute to differences between face-to-face interviews and videoconference interviews regarding performance ratings and interviewee perceptions?. Journal of business and psychology, 36, 921-940.

Johannessen, L. E., Rasmussen, E. B., & Haldar, M. (2025). Five Misconceptions About Interview Modes or: How to Improve Our Thinking About Face-to-Face Versus Remote Interviewing. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 24, 16094069251317808.

Khan, T. H., & MacEachen, E. (2022). An alternative method of interviewing: Critical reflections on videoconference interviews for qualitative data collection. International journal of qualitative methods, 21, 16094069221090063.

Langer, M., Demetriou, A., Arvanitidis, A., Vanderveken, S., & Hiemstra, A. M. (2025). A quasi‐experimental investigation of differences between face‐to‐face and videoconference interviews in an actual selection process. Applied Psychology, 74(1), e12558.

Lobe, B., & Morgan, D. L. (2021). Assessing the effectiveness of video-based interviewing: A systematic comparison of video-conferencing based dyadic interviews and focus groups. International journal of social research methodology, 24(3), 301-312.

Rowen, D., Mukuria, C., Bray, N., Carlton, J., Longworth, L., Meads, D., ... & Yang, Y. (2022). Assessing the comparative feasibility, acceptability and equivalence of videoconference interviews and face-to-face interviews using the time trade-off technique. Social Science & Medicine, 309, 115227.

Be my Partner

realynmanalo117@gmail.com