Re:Why are boys academically underperforming? [audio]
by runarberg on Thursday December 31, 2020 @12:52PM
(#25595052)
If I remember correctly names on applications that are traditionally more likely to be given to a black person is still considered less qualified on an identical resume than a name that is traditionally given to a white person. I don’t know if sending photos with your resume is still practiced in the USA (I think it is illegal in the UK) but if that is still the case than gender and ethnicity are still very much on the average job application.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Why are boys academically underperforming? [audio]
by monoideism on Thursday December 31, 2020 @02:18PM
(#25596071)
That hasn't been shown in a study for over 2 decades. Every recent study (past ~decade) that I'm aware of has shown no effect.
Here's an article that discusses one recent study:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-bias-hiring-0504-...
The problem with the original study was that it used names that denoted socio-economic status as much as race (ie, "Dahntay Smith" or "Shaniqua Thomas"). That's a problem, too, but I suspect a similar effect for professional job applicants can be shown using "lower" socio-economic status white names (ie, "Bobby Lee Jones" or "Tommy Ray Brown").
Regardless, I would be strongly in favor of anonymized job applications, since that would eliminate any suggestion of such bias in whichever direction.
Re:Why are boys academically underperforming? [audio]
by runarberg on Thursday December 31, 2020 @05:54PM
(#25598148)
Ok, that is good news. It has been a while since I read up on the literature. And it is always nice to see findings revised by better studies.
Re:Why are boys academically underperforming? [audio]
by afuchs on Thursday December 31, 2020 @01:01PM
(#25595155)
Yep: https://hbr.org/2020/03/research-to-reduce-gender-bias-anony...
Evey beyond names people tend to assign class, gender, and race to surprisingly mundane things that are found on resumes.