4 ms·

>> Having female A.I. assistants perpetuates the gender wage gap by creating the idea that assistant jobs are a women's role. is there any proof of this or doe

by ffggvv 5y ago

>> Having female A.I. assistants perpetuates the gender wage gap by creating the idea that assistant jobs are a women's role. is there any proof of this or does it just sound true therefore its true? Specifically theres two claims here that i don't see any data backing up: 1. Female voices of AI creates the idea that assistants jobs are a women's role. 2. Assistants jobs being perceived as a woman's role somehow makes the (nonexistent) wage gap worse. Despite the fact that assistants tend to make more money than garbagemen. (a field dominated by men)

robotresearcher 5y ago
There is human factors work on the gender of voice interfaces. A notable real world example is the voice that firmly proposes 'Pull up!' if you're about to fly into the ground in many aircraft. Wikipedia is missing refs, but here's the entry on choosing the gender of this voice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_warning_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_warning_system [edit] originally quoted the first part of the section that cited early work finding women's voices to be more effective, but later work challenges this finding. I removed the quote to avoid implying I believe either way.
- ffggvv 5y ago
  thats interesting but nonetheless has no bearing on these specific claims. if anything it counters the claims as it says a female voice is more authoritative whereas the original poster said it makes them seem like an assistant or submissive and somehow affects their wages. also your example is one where they shaped the assistant based on the humans perception. whereas the poster is claiming the assistant shapes the humans perception.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
upwardbound 5y ago
Both of these topics are covered extensively in the long-form version of the UNESCO report. The link I posted was just a summary; here is the long form: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000367416.page=85 https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000367416.page=85
- ffggvv 5y ago
  that doesnt really have any real sources for the two assertions. it references this: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6334/183/ https://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6334/183/ which doesnt really have anything to do with the point. Just vaguely related to biases inferred from NLP. It also just quotes a few sociology professors who themselves dont provide proof behind their assertions. And then also points to: https://wappp.hks.harvard.edu/publications/psychology-implicit-intergroup-bias-and-prospect-change https://wappp.hks.harvard.edu/publications/psychology-implic... which itself just talks about biases in general and doesnt have anything to do with the voices of AI assistants.
  - upwardbound 5y ago
    If you're interested you can also look at more sources in the first two pages of this Google Scholar search: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=voice+gender+ai&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=voic... By the way, what makes you say the gender wage gap isn't real? To many people that comes across as if you were denying climate change, and decreases your credibility overall. Just trying to engage as best I can.
    - ffggvv 5y ago
      because the widely quoted figure of 79 cents to a dollar is only if you blindly compare incomes without adjusting for hours, experience, education, or even role. obviously a part time elementary school teacher with two years experience will make less than a full time investmenet banker that works 80 hours a week and has 10 years experience. Once you adjust for all the relevant factors the effect completely disappears and there isnt a gap. (with some studies find maybe 1-2% within the margin of error). so at the very least its very misleading to say they get paid less for the same role and same expereince. if you want to go into why they may go into different fields or work less hours and how that reflects on society thats fine. But its grossly misleading to take those nunmbers and blindly compare them and say its "sexism". Actually indian and asian woman make more than white men. So white men must systemically be oppressed. Or maybe they choose different jobs. (i still remember when google had to adjust their L4 software engineer pay to raise mens pay, because women actually made more!)

by ffggvv 5y ago

robotresearcher 5y ago

There is human factors work on the gender of voice interfaces. A notable real world example is the voice that firmly proposes 'Pull up!' if you're about to fly into the ground in many aircraft. Wikipedia is missing refs, but here's the entry on choosing the gender of this voice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_warning_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_warning_system [edit] originally quoted the first part of the section that cited early work finding women's voices to be more effective, but later work challenges this finding. I removed the quote to avoid implying I believe either way.

ffggvv 5y ago
thats interesting but nonetheless has no bearing on these specific claims. if anything it counters the claims as it says a female voice is more authoritative whereas the original poster said it makes them seem like an assistant or submissive and somehow affects their wages. also your example is one where they shaped the assistant based on the humans perception. whereas the poster is claiming the assistant shapes the humans perception.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

upwardbound 5y ago

Both of these topics are covered extensively in the long-form version of the UNESCO report. The link I posted was just a summary; here is the long form: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000367416.page=85 https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000367416.page=85

ffggvv 5y ago
that doesnt really have any real sources for the two assertions. it references this: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6334/183/ https://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6334/183/ which doesnt really have anything to do with the point. Just vaguely related to biases inferred from NLP. It also just quotes a few sociology professors who themselves dont provide proof behind their assertions. And then also points to: https://wappp.hks.harvard.edu/publications/psychology-implicit-intergroup-bias-and-prospect-change https://wappp.hks.harvard.edu/publications/psychology-implic... which itself just talks about biases in general and doesnt have anything to do with the voices of AI assistants.
- upwardbound 5y ago
  If you're interested you can also look at more sources in the first two pages of this Google Scholar search: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=voice+gender+ai&btnG= https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=voic... By the way, what makes you say the gender wage gap isn't real? To many people that comes across as if you were denying climate change, and decreases your credibility overall. Just trying to engage as best I can.
  - ffggvv 5y ago
    because the widely quoted figure of 79 cents to a dollar is only if you blindly compare incomes without adjusting for hours, experience, education, or even role. obviously a part time elementary school teacher with two years experience will make less than a full time investmenet banker that works 80 hours a week and has 10 years experience. Once you adjust for all the relevant factors the effect completely disappears and there isnt a gap. (with some studies find maybe 1-2% within the margin of error). so at the very least its very misleading to say they get paid less for the same role and same expereince. if you want to go into why they may go into different fields or work less hours and how that reflects on society thats fine. But its grossly misleading to take those nunmbers and blindly compare them and say its "sexism". Actually indian and asian woman make more than white men. So white men must systemically be oppressed. Or maybe they choose different jobs. (i still remember when google had to adjust their L4 software engineer pay to raise mens pay, because women actually made more!)