Study debunks viral claim that AI filters out most job applicants
Enhancv has released a new study challenging the long-standing myth that Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) or AI automatically reject most resumes before a human review. According to its interviews with 25 U.S. recruiters and HR professionals, 92 percent said their systems do not auto-reject resumes based on formatting or content.
Instead, recruiters point to overwhelming application volume and the timing of submissions as the real reasons many candidates never make it as far as the interview stage.
The study, titled The ATS Rejection Myth, offers a clearer look at how hiring processes work in practice. It finds that modern ATS platforms act as organizational tools rather than gatekeepers, with only a small minority configured to automatically filter candidates. Enhancv’s researchers found that just two of the 25 recruiters -- just 8 percent -- used systems like Bullhorn and BambooHR to apply strict match thresholds or auto-reject based on missing skills.
The remaining 92 percent reported that resume reviews are manual, and that knockout questions are typically limited to eligibility checks such as work authorization or required licenses.
AI match scores, a newer feature in many hiring systems, also appear to have limited influence. While 44 percent of recruiters said their software includes such scoring tools, more than half either disable them or ignore the results. Only 8 percent of participants treat AI-generated scores as decisive. Most use them as rough sorting aids before conducting an actual human review.
Recruiters in the study cited sheer volume as their biggest challenge. Entry-level roles can attract 400 to 600 applications within days, and some customer service or tech positions reach 2,000. Under this pressure, many recruiters review resumes in order of arrival and often pause postings once thresholds are met.
More than half of participants said applying early improves visibility because screening frequently begins within three days of posting.
The research also examined why the myth persists. Sixty-eight percent of recruiters believe social media posts on platforms such as LinkedIn and TikTok are responsible for spreading misinformation, while others blame career blogs and unsourced headlines. Several participants said the narrative fuels sales for so-called “ATS-proof” services that capitalize on job seekers’ frustration.
When asked what truly matters, recruiters emphasized clear, skimmable formatting, relevant experience, and concise presentation. Overly stylized or AI-generated resumes were viewed negatively, while personalized submissions and LinkedIn outreach helped candidates stand out.
What do you think about the ATS rejection myth? Let us know in the comments.
Image credit: raywoo/depositphotos.com