3 ms·

What it does reveal is a specific area of bias. Whether there are checks against it, and whether there ought to be, are different questions.

brudgers 12y ago
What it shows is that if all things are equal then there is bias. Of course if the premise of a material implication is false, the entire proposition always evaluates true. That hiring processes in US academic institutions are subject to sex gender bias doesn't require more than looking at the diversity among the highest paid employees in US higher education, coaches.
- pervycreeper 12y ago
  >What it shows is that if all things are equal then there is bias. Not quite, in a scientific study, it is preferable to control for a single variable, which in this case was gender. The bias in faculty member's decision making is shown clearly (as evidenced by the consistency of the effect size across groups). Whether or not men and women are on a level playing field in the first place is irrelevant to the question of whether faculty members are biased against one or the other. >That hiring processes in US academic institutions are subject to sex gender bias doesn't require more than looking at the diversity among the highest paid employees in US higher education, coaches. I'm not sure what argument you're making. "hiring in academic institutions" seems to be too broad a category for making useful generalizations, and I'm not sure how coaches' salaries relate to gender discrimination.
  - brudgers 12y ago
    The study is here: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/04/08/1418878112.full.pdf http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/04/08/1418878112.full... The claim that it was controlled for a single variable indicates a general misconception of statistical methods and miscomprehension or nonreading of the study itself. The study did not just present candidates qualifications, it was explicitly designed to include "lifestyle" factors such as marital status, number and ages of children, and spouse's occupation. To ensure this information unrelated to qualification was included, the study used summaries rather than CV's. The portion of the study which used CV's in lieu of the summaries was only 35 professors in a discipline (engineering) where women tend to be significantly under-represented. The broader studies looked at economics (a dubious member of STEM in much the same way political or sports science would be) psychology, biology and engineering.

brudgers 12y ago

What it shows is that if all things are equal then there is bias. Of course if the premise of a material implication is false, the entire proposition always evaluates true. That hiring processes in US academic institutions are subject to sex gender bias doesn't require more than looking at the diversity among the highest paid employees in US higher education, coaches.

pervycreeper 12y ago
>What it shows is that if all things are equal then there is bias. Not quite, in a scientific study, it is preferable to control for a single variable, which in this case was gender. The bias in faculty member's decision making is shown clearly (as evidenced by the consistency of the effect size across groups). Whether or not men and women are on a level playing field in the first place is irrelevant to the question of whether faculty members are biased against one or the other. >That hiring processes in US academic institutions are subject to sex gender bias doesn't require more than looking at the diversity among the highest paid employees in US higher education, coaches. I'm not sure what argument you're making. "hiring in academic institutions" seems to be too broad a category for making useful generalizations, and I'm not sure how coaches' salaries relate to gender discrimination.
- brudgers 12y ago
  The study is here: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/04/08/1418878112.full.pdf http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/04/08/1418878112.full... The claim that it was controlled for a single variable indicates a general misconception of statistical methods and miscomprehension or nonreading of the study itself. The study did not just present candidates qualifications, it was explicitly designed to include "lifestyle" factors such as marital status, number and ages of children, and spouse's occupation. To ensure this information unrelated to qualification was included, the study used summaries rather than CV's. The portion of the study which used CV's in lieu of the summaries was only 35 professors in a discipline (engineering) where women tend to be significantly under-represented. The broader studies looked at economics (a dubious member of STEM in much the same way political or sports science would be) psychology, biology and engineering.