4 ms·

[Edit] Retracting my comment below, after the parent comment was edited to provide more context. --- This quote doesn't seem representative of the whole story

by xbryanx 11y ago

[Edit] Retracting my comment below, after the parent comment was edited to provide more context. --- This quote doesn't seem representative of the whole story that is easily discoverable in the abstract. > Surprisingly, our results show that women's contributions tend to be accepted more often than men's. However, when a woman's gender is identifiable, they are rejected more often. Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists nonetheless.

jimrandomh 11y ago
This is indeed in their abstract, but it's misleading. Take a look at page 15 of the preprint. Their data shows that gendered profiles have lower acceptance rates for both genders; that is, pull requests from a gender-neutral profile are more likely to be accepted regardless of the gender of the person behind it. This paper gives the impression that the authors started out hoping to find evidence of discrimination in the form of a lower pull acceptance rate for women than men, they found the opposite, and then they data mined until they could find something they could use to argue there's an anti-woman bias.