This study explores (1) the effects that three kinds of applicant defensive impression management (IM) tactics (apologies, justifications, and excuses) have on interviewer evaluation and (2) the moderating effects that two types of interviewer negative concerns (competence-related and integrity-related concerns) have on the aforementioned relationship. Two hundred and one managers from Taiwan participated in this study by watching a simulated interview. Compared with the control group, applicants using defensive IM tactics received higher interviewer ratings when negative concerns surfaced. Moreover, the type of interviewer negative concern moderated the effects of defensive IM tactics. All three tactics had similar effects on interviewer evaluation when the concern was competence related. Apology was, however, the most effective tactic when the concern was integrity related.