4 ms·

"not to get the opportunity at all due to systemic discrimination in hiring" - this is not reality but only your imagination.

by xname2 9y ago

fatbird 9y ago
Your denial of reality is noted. Systemic discrimination against women in hiring has been exhaustively documented and studied, including in the tech industry.
- jorgemf 9y ago
  I think you should cite references. It will make your point stronger and I want to read them!
  - fatbird 9y ago
    I don't have a pile of references at hand since this isn't my area of study, but here's what I was able to google up: 1. http://www.uh.edu/~adkugler/Bertrand&Mullainathan.pdf http://www.uh.edu/~adkugler/Bertrand&Mullainathan.pdf This study was primarily aimed at identifying the impact of race, but incidentally showed that resumes with females names received a lower number of callbacks, in addition to the race based effect. 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970474/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970474/ "Without provision of information about candidates other than their appearance, men are twice more likely to be hired for a mathematical task than women." 3. http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.abstract "Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant." 4. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/ilrreview/vol65/iss1/5/ http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/ilrreview/vol65/iss1/5... "the authors show that [anonymous application procedure] increased the chances of both women and individuals of non-Western origin of advancing to the interview stage." 5. http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903 http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903 Anonymization in orchestra additions (blind screening) led to women advancing out of preliminary rounds 50% more often.
    - in3d 9y ago
      #1: I don't see any support for your summary. It says instead "Interestingly, females in sales jobs appear to receive more callbacks than males; however, this (reverse) gender gap is statistically insignificant and economically much smaller than any of the racial gaps discussed above." I can easily dig up studies showing opposite results: "Contrary to prevailing assumptions, men and women faculty members from all four fields preferred female applicants 2:1 over identically qualified males with matching lifestyles (single, married, divorced), with the exception of male economists, who showed no gender preference. " http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract "We found that the public servants engaged in positive (not negative) discrimination towards female and minority candidates: • Participants were 2.9% more likely to shortlist female candidates and 3.2% less likely to shortlist male applicants when they were identifiable, compared with when they were de-identified." https://pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/beta-unconscious-bias.pdf https://pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/beta-unc... "Teaching accreditation exams reveal grading biases favor women in male-dominated disciplines in France" http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6298/474 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6298/474
      - odbol_ 9y ago
        Those studies have tiny sample sizes, and aren't even in the tech industry.
        in3d 9y ago
        I was making a counterpoint to the parent post. Note the links there, nothing much to do with tech. And you're completely wrong about sample sizes: "Comparisons of oral non–gender-blind tests with written gender-blind tests for about 100,000 individuals " "Over 2,100 public servants" "validation studies were conducted on 873 tenure-track faculty"
    - gaius 9y ago
      But consider http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to-improve-gender-equality-failing-study/8664888 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-tria...
- xname2 9y ago
  So you lack basic reading skills. I quote "not to get the opportunity at all due to systemic discrimination in hiring", you read "systemic discrimination in hiring". Apparently, you lost "not to get the opportunity at all" and "due to". Don't you see that?

"not to get the opportunity at all due to systemic discrimination in hiring" - this is not reality but only your imagination.

by xname2 9y ago

"not to get the opportunity at all due to systemic discrimination in hiring" - this is not reality but only your imagination.

fatbird 9y ago

Your denial of reality is noted. Systemic discrimination against women in hiring has been exhaustively documented and studied, including in the tech industry.

jorgemf 9y ago
I think you should cite references. It will make your point stronger and I want to read them!
- fatbird 9y ago
  I don't have a pile of references at hand since this isn't my area of study, but here's what I was able to google up: 1. http://www.uh.edu/~adkugler/Bertrand&Mullainathan.pdf http://www.uh.edu/~adkugler/Bertrand&Mullainathan.pdf This study was primarily aimed at identifying the impact of race, but incidentally showed that resumes with females names received a lower number of callbacks, in addition to the race based effect. 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970474/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3970474/ "Without provision of information about candidates other than their appearance, men are twice more likely to be hired for a mathematical task than women." 3. http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.abstract "Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant." 4. http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/ilrreview/vol65/iss1/5/ http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/ilrreview/vol65/iss1/5... "the authors show that [anonymous application procedure] increased the chances of both women and individuals of non-Western origin of advancing to the interview stage." 5. http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903 http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903 Anonymization in orchestra additions (blind screening) led to women advancing out of preliminary rounds 50% more often.
  - in3d 9y ago
    #1: I don't see any support for your summary. It says instead "Interestingly, females in sales jobs appear to receive more callbacks than males; however, this (reverse) gender gap is statistically insignificant and economically much smaller than any of the racial gaps discussed above." I can easily dig up studies showing opposite results: "Contrary to prevailing assumptions, men and women faculty members from all four fields preferred female applicants 2:1 over identically qualified males with matching lifestyles (single, married, divorced), with the exception of male economists, who showed no gender preference. " http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360.abstract "We found that the public servants engaged in positive (not negative) discrimination towards female and minority candidates: • Participants were 2.9% more likely to shortlist female candidates and 3.2% less likely to shortlist male applicants when they were identifiable, compared with when they were de-identified." https://pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/beta-unconscious-bias.pdf https://pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/beta-unc... "Teaching accreditation exams reveal grading biases favor women in male-dominated disciplines in France" http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6298/474 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/353/6298/474
    - odbol_ 9y ago
      Those studies have tiny sample sizes, and aren't even in the tech industry.
      - in3d 9y ago
        I was making a counterpoint to the parent post. Note the links there, nothing much to do with tech. And you're completely wrong about sample sizes: "Comparisons of oral non–gender-blind tests with written gender-blind tests for about 100,000 individuals " "Over 2,100 public servants" "validation studies were conducted on 873 tenure-track faculty"
  - gaius 9y ago
    But consider http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to-improve-gender-equality-failing-study/8664888 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-tria...
xname2 9y ago
So you lack basic reading skills. I quote "not to get the opportunity at all due to systemic discrimination in hiring", you read "systemic discrimination in hiring". Apparently, you lost "not to get the opportunity at all" and "due to". Don't you see that?