Re:Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
by aninhumer on Thursday August 10, 2017 @07:59AM
(#14978766)
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?
Re:Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
by depressedpanda on Thursday August 10, 2017 @12:54PM
(#14981648)
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.
Re:Outraged about the Google diversity memo?
by cbr on Thursday August 10, 2017 @08:09AM
(#14978812)
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)
"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...