4 ms·

Ed Yong at the Atlantic looked into that: "These differences persisted even after the team accounted for factors like the doctors’ years of experience and the

Ed Yong at the Atlantic looked into that: "These differences persisted even after the team accounted for factors like the doctors’ years of experience and the patients’ age, ethnicity, other diseases, educational level, or the hospitals to which they were admitted." https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/women-more-likely-to-survive-heart-attacks-if-treated-by-female-doctors/566837/ https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/women-mo...

epicureanideal 8y ago
Years of experience isn't the only way to measure skill. There are software engineers with 20 years experience that aren't as good as one with 2 years experience. I'd like to see the skill levels of the doctors normalized by something else, like whether they can somehow be identified as part of a group that specializes in high risk cases.
- bduerst 8y ago
  Isn't this Ageism? There are tons of 20-year experience engineers who are better than 2-year experience engineers. Yes, there are outliers, as with any normalized population, but typically years of experience in a skilled field correlates with ability to do the job well.
  - nv-vn 8y ago
    It's just as ageist to assume that a young person doesn't know anything
    - meowface 8y ago
      Not really, since they had less time to learn and experience things.
      - slavik81 8y ago
        Many prejudices are justifiable as statistically likely. The problem is that even though you may be right most of the time, you will unfairly disadvantage the people you were wrong about.
  - na85 8y ago
    How is that ageism? Being experienced simply does not equate to being skilled. It is correlated but some people, irrespective of age or experience, just aren't as good at $task than other people.
  - gammateam 8y ago
    The person above wrote that there exists in a subset of engineers that have 20 years of experience, a group of engineers that are not better than engineers in a subset that have 2 years of experience It was offering perspective, not a blanket statement about the entire set That isn't ageism.
    - bduerst 8y ago
      Again, there are outliers in a normalized population. Assuming that it's an entire subset without evidence is bias, i.e. ageism. Simply being a perspective doesn't shield it from being biased.
      - gammateam 8y ago
        What form of evidence would you like? I don't see the difference with the exact opposite of the statement (ie. that some engineers with more work experience are in fact better than others with less work experience), aside from the potential novelty. How would you prove that statement, so that someone else could prove the opposite. Are you saying that in outliers shouldn't be considered at all, when they are in fact a subset of a population? If so then you missed the point that someone above was talking about outliers and that was the only observation made. Alternatively, is your stance that there is no difference to claim something is ageism if it is directed at an older population or a younger population? that noticing that older experienced engineers would also fit the criteria for ageism against a younger population making this whole conversation moot?

epicureanideal 8y ago

Years of experience isn't the only way to measure skill. There are software engineers with 20 years experience that aren't as good as one with 2 years experience. I'd like to see the skill levels of the doctors normalized by something else, like whether they can somehow be identified as part of a group that specializes in high risk cases.

bduerst 8y ago
Isn't this Ageism? There are tons of 20-year experience engineers who are better than 2-year experience engineers. Yes, there are outliers, as with any normalized population, but typically years of experience in a skilled field correlates with ability to do the job well.
- nv-vn 8y ago
  It's just as ageist to assume that a young person doesn't know anything
  - meowface 8y ago
    Not really, since they had less time to learn and experience things.
    - slavik81 8y ago
      Many prejudices are justifiable as statistically likely. The problem is that even though you may be right most of the time, you will unfairly disadvantage the people you were wrong about.
- na85 8y ago
  How is that ageism? Being experienced simply does not equate to being skilled. It is correlated but some people, irrespective of age or experience, just aren't as good at $task than other people.
- gammateam 8y ago
  The person above wrote that there exists in a subset of engineers that have 20 years of experience, a group of engineers that are not better than engineers in a subset that have 2 years of experience It was offering perspective, not a blanket statement about the entire set That isn't ageism.
  - bduerst 8y ago
    Again, there are outliers in a normalized population. Assuming that it's an entire subset without evidence is bias, i.e. ageism. Simply being a perspective doesn't shield it from being biased.
    - gammateam 8y ago
      What form of evidence would you like? I don't see the difference with the exact opposite of the statement (ie. that some engineers with more work experience are in fact better than others with less work experience), aside from the potential novelty. How would you prove that statement, so that someone else could prove the opposite. Are you saying that in outliers shouldn't be considered at all, when they are in fact a subset of a population? If so then you missed the point that someone above was talking about outliers and that was the only observation made. Alternatively, is your stance that there is no difference to claim something is ageism if it is directed at an older population or a younger population? that noticing that older experienced engineers would also fit the criteria for ageism against a younger population making this whole conversation moot?