5 ms·

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...
  - depressedpanda 9y ago
    I would like to see a similar study done in IT, though I suspect the outcome will be similar. I personally would like to have more women in tech, but it seems implausible that the current dearth is because of any systemic discrimination against women. I wonder why people are claiming that this is a reason for the problem?

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...
- depressedpanda 9y ago
  I would like to see a similar study done in IT, though I suspect the outcome will be similar. I personally would like to have more women in tech, but it seems implausible that the current dearth is because of any systemic discrimination against women. I wonder why people are claiming that this is a reason for the problem?