4 ms·

Note that men and women typically present themselves differently on CVs and in selection criteria, with men typically giving themselves credit for work done in

Note that men and women typically present themselves differently on CVs and in selection criteria, with men typically giving themselves credit for work done in teams while women typically talk about the teams they were part of. This would easily explain why blind resumes resulted in a larger proportion of men being selected. edit: to contrast with the orchestra scenario, a resume is not a skill test, while an audition for an orchestra is a skill test for exactly the type of skill that the candidate is being chosen for.

mpweiher 9y ago
Interesting hypothesis, but apparently not what happened: "The trial found assigning a male name to a candidate made them 3.2 per cent less likely to get a job interview. Adding a woman's name to a CV made the candidate 2.9 per cent more likely to get a foot in the door." http://abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to-improve-gender-equality-failing-study/8664888 http://abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to...
- aninhumer 9y ago
  It's an interesting result, but is it accurate to call this "blinding"? I feel like hiding demographics and actively deceiving people about demographics are different processes and should have different names?
  - depressedpanda 9y ago
    Calling it "blinding" might not be accurate but, if anything, using deception, the study showed that men were discriminated against, not women -- contrary to what the initial hypothesis suggested.
- cbr 9y ago
  Given "men typically giving themselves credit for work done in teams while women typically talk about the teams they were part of", then if you see a female CV it's more likely to be understated than if you see a male one. Which predicts two things: * People aware of this will prefer otherwise identical CVs with female names (expectation is the underlying candidate is stronger, just more modest) * Blind hiring will get you more men (because hiring managers can't correct for the male/female difference in self promotion anymore)
  - mpweiher 9y ago
    See, that is what is known as "sexism".

mpweiher 9y ago

Interesting hypothesis, but apparently not what happened: "The trial found assigning a male name to a candidate made them 3.2 per cent less likely to get a job interview. Adding a woman's name to a CV made the candidate 2.9 per cent more likely to get a foot in the door." http://abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to-improve-gender-equality-failing-study/8664888 http://abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to...

aninhumer 9y ago
It's an interesting result, but is it accurate to call this "blinding"? I feel like hiding demographics and actively deceiving people about demographics are different processes and should have different names?
- depressedpanda 9y ago
  Calling it "blinding" might not be accurate but, if anything, using deception, the study showed that men were discriminated against, not women -- contrary to what the initial hypothesis suggested.
cbr 9y ago
Given "men typically giving themselves credit for work done in teams while women typically talk about the teams they were part of", then if you see a female CV it's more likely to be understated than if you see a male one. Which predicts two things: * People aware of this will prefer otherwise identical CVs with female names (expectation is the underlying candidate is stronger, just more modest) * Blind hiring will get you more men (because hiring managers can't correct for the male/female difference in self promotion anymore)
- mpweiher 9y ago
  See, that is what is known as "sexism".