4 ms·
This "study" seems flawed in so many ways (or the article describing it doesn't do it justice). According to the article, the people who did not get a job were
by VeryVito 11y ago
This "study" seems flawed in so many ways (or the article describing it doesn't do it justice).
According to the article, the people who did not get a job were the ones who "indicated on their resumes they were cancer survivors AND WORE A HAT that read 'cancer survivor' when applying for a job."
NEWS FLASH: Wearing a novelty baseball cap to a job interview may not be the best idea -- cancer or not.
- sixtypoundhound 11y agoYeah, I call "rigged science" on this one. Wearing any clothing other than professional apparel would bias an interview outcome regardless of the cause. The control either should have involved people wearing hats for another cause and/or they should have had a resume-mention only group in the test. Point of fact, I would not be suprised if discrimination exists. But no need to rig the test.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- pbnjay 11y ago> or the article describing it doesn't do it justice Yup, total linkbait writing here. I was able to find more info: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10533808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10533808
- daenz 11y ago> NEWS FLASH: Wearing a novelty baseball cap to a job interview may not be the best idea -- cancer or not. > In the control condition, the resume provided no extra information and participants wore a plain white hat. Finally, it is important to note that all confederates served as their own control—they entered some stores wearing the “Cancer Survivor” hat and other stores with the plain white hat.