Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

0 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Gender composition predicts gender bias: A meta-reanalysis of hiring discrimination audit experiments.

ABSTRACT: Since 1983, more than 70 employment audit experiments, carried out in more than 26 countries across five continents, have randomized the gender of fictitious applicants to measure the extent of hiring discrimination on the basis of gender. The results are mixed: Some studies find discrimination against men, and others find discrimination against women. We reconcile these heterogeneous findings through a "meta-reanalysis" of the average effects of being described as a woman (versus a man), conditional on occupation. We find a strongly positive gender gradient. In (relatively better paying) occupations dominated by men, the effect of being a woman is negative, while in the (relatively lower paying) occupations dominated by women, the effect is positive. In this way, heterogeneous employment discrimination on the basis of gender preserves status quo gender distributions and earnings gaps. These patterns hold among both minority and majority status applicants.

SUBMITTER: Galos DR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC11326032 | biostudies-literature | 2023 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Publications

Gender composition predicts gender bias: A meta-reanalysis of hiring discrimination audit experiments.

Galos Diana Roxana DR Coppock Alexander A

Science advances 20230505 18

Since 1983, more than 70 employment audit experiments, carried out in more than 26 countries across five continents, have randomized the gender of fictitious applicants to measure the extent of hiring discrimination on the basis of gender. The results are mixed: Some studies find discrimination against men, and others find discrimination against women. We reconcile these heterogeneous findings through a "meta-reanalysis" of the average effects of being described as a woman (versus a man), condit ...[more]

PMID: 37146136

Similar Datasets

Meta-analysis of field experiments shows no change in racial discrimination in hiring over time.

Project description:This study investigates change over time in the level of hiring discrimination in US labor markets. We perform a meta-analysis of every available field experiment of hiring discrimination against African Americans or Latinos (n = 28). Together, these studies represent 55,842 applications submitted for 26,326 positions. We focus on trends since 1989 (n = 24 studies), when field experiments became more common and improved methodologically. Since 1989, whites receive on average 36% more callbacks than African Americans, and 24% more callbacks than Latinos. We observe no change in the level of hiring discrimination against African Americans over the past 25 years, although we find modest evidence of a decline in discrimination against Latinos. Accounting for applicant education, applicant gender, study method, occupational groups, and local labor market conditions does little to alter this result. Contrary to claims of declining discrimination in American society, our estimates suggest that levels of discrimination remain largely unchanged, at least at the point of hire.

| S-EPMC5642692 | biostudies-literature

Interventions that affect gender bias in hiring: a systematic review.

Project description:PurposeTo systematically review experimental evidence for interventions mitigating gender bias in employment. Unconscious endorsement of gender stereotypes can undermine academic medicine's commitment to gender equity.MethodThe authors performed electronic and hand searches for randomized controlled studies since 1973 of interventions that affect gender differences in evaluation of job applicants. Twenty-seven studies met all inclusion criteria. Interventions fell into three categories: application information, applicant features, and rating conditions.ResultsThe studies identified gender bias as the difference in ratings or perceptions of men and women with identical qualifications. Studies reaffirmed negative bias against women being evaluated for positions traditionally or predominantly held by men (male sex-typed jobs). The assessments of male and female raters rarely differed. Interventions that provided raters with clear evidence of job-relevant competencies were effective. However, clearly competent women were rated lower than equivalent men for male sex-typed jobs unless evidence of communal qualities was also provided. A commitment to the value of credentials before review of applicants and women's presence at above 25% of the applicant pool eliminated bias against women. Two studies found unconscious resistance to "antibias" training, which could be overcome with distraction or an intervening task. Explicit employment equity policies and an attractive appearance benefited men more than women, whereas repeated employment gaps were more detrimental to men. Masculine-scented perfume favored the hiring of both sexes. Negative bias occurred against women who expressed anger or who were perceived as self-promoting.ConclusionsHigh-level evidence exists for strategies to mitigate gender bias in hiring.

| S-EPMC4554714 | biostudies-literature

Gender discrimination in hiring: An experimental reexamination of the Swedish case.

Project description:We estimated the degree of gender discrimination in Sweden across occupations using a correspondence study design. Our analysis of employer responses to more than 3,200 fictitious job applications across 15 occupations revealed that overall positive employer response rates were higher for women than men by almost 5 percentage points. We found that this gap was driven by employer responses in female-dominated occupations. Male applicants were about half as likely as female applicants to receive a positive employer response in female-dominated occupations. For male-dominated and mixed occupations we found no significant differences in positive employer responses between male and female applicants.

| S-EPMC7845993 | biostudies-literature

Gender differences in under-reporting hiring discrimination in Korea: a machine learning approach.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study was conducted to examine gender differences in under-reporting hiring discrimination by building a prediction model for workers who responded "not applicable (NA)" to a question about hiring discrimination despite being eligible to answer.MethodsUsing data from 3,576 wage workers in the seventh wave (2004) of the Korea Labor and Income Panel Study, we trained and tested 9 machine learning algorithms using "yes" or "no" responses regarding the lifetime experience of hiring discrimination. We then applied the best-performing model to estimate the prevalence of experiencing hiring discrimination among those who answered "NA." Under-reporting of hiring discrimination was calculated by comparing the prevalence of hiring discrimination between the "yes" or "no" group and the "NA" group.ResultsBased on the predictions from the random forest model, we found that 58.8% of the "NA" group were predicted to have experienced hiring discrimination, while 19.7% of the "yes" or "no" group reported hiring discrimination. Among the "NA" group, the predicted prevalence of hiring discrimination for men and women was 45.3% and 84.8%, respectively.ConclusionsThis study introduces a methodological strategy for epidemiologic studies to address the under-reporting of discrimination by applying machine learning algorithms.

| S-EPMC8920741 | biostudies-literature

Applying XAI to an AI-based system for candidate management to mitigate bias and discrimination in hiring.

Project description:Assuming that potential biases of Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based systems can be identified and controlled for (e.g., by providing high quality training data), employing such systems to augment human resource (HR)-decision makers in candidate selection provides an opportunity to make selection processes more objective. However, as the final hiring decision is likely to remain with humans, prevalent human biases could still cause discrimination. This work investigates the impact of an AI-based system's candidate recommendations on humans' hiring decisions and how this relation could be moderated by an Explainable AI (XAI) approach. We used a self-developed platform and conducted an online experiment with 194 participants. Our quantitative and qualitative findings suggest that the recommendations of an AI-based system can reduce discrimination against older and female candidates but appear to cause fewer selections of foreign-race candidates. Contrary to our expectations, the same XAI approach moderated these effects differently depending on the context.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12525-022-00600-9.

| S-EPMC9764302 | biostudies-literature

The deficit bias: Candidate gender differences in the relative importance of facial stereotypic qualities to leadership hiring.

Project description:Recent findings highlight two facets of the two fundamental stereotype content dimensions of agency (i.e., 'dominance' and 'competence') and communality (i.e., 'morality' and 'sociability'; e.g., Abele et al., 2016) with implications for understanding gender inequality in the workplace (e.g., Prati et al., 2019). Extending this research and contributing to the facial first impressions literature, we examined how these facets of agency and communality when inferred from White men's and women's faces, along with attractiveness, influence their leadership suitability. In three studies in the United Kingdom (total N = 424), using student and working samples and two managerial descriptions, we found an unexpected pattern of results, supported by an internal meta-analysis: attractiveness and competence were the most important predictors of hirability for all candidates. For women, dominance was the next most important predictor; for men, morality and sociability were more important than dominance. Moreover, morality and sociability were more important in evaluating men than women, while dominance was more important in evaluating women than men. Findings are discussed in terms of a 'deficit bias', whereby the qualities women and men are considered to lack - dominance for women, morality, and sociability for men - may be given more weight when evaluating their leadership suitability.

| S-EPMC9293180 | biostudies-literature

Interview with an avatar: Comparing online and virtual reality perspective taking for gender bias in STEM hiring decisions.

Project description:Virtual perspective taking can reduce unconscious bias and increase empathy and prosocial behavior toward individuals who are marginalized based on group stereotypes such as age, race, or socioeconomic status. However, the question remains whether this approach might reduce implicit gender bias, and the degree to which virtual immersion contributes to behavioral modulation following perspective taking tasks is unknown. Accordingly, we investigate the role of virtual perspective taking for binary gender using an online platform (Study 1) and immersive virtual reality (Study 2). Female and male undergraduates performed a simulated interview while virtually represented by an avatar that was either congruent or incongruent with their own gender. All participants rated a male and a female candidate on competence, hireability, likeability, empathy, and interpersonal closeness and then chose one of these two equivalently qualified candidates to hire for a laboratory assistant position in the male dominated industry of information technology. Online perspective taking did not reveal a significant influence of avatar gender on candidate ratings or candidate choice, whereas virtual reality perspective taking resulted in significant changes to participant behavior following exposure to a gender-incongruent avatar (e.g., male embodied as female), such that men showed preference for the female candidate and women showed preference for the male candidate. Although between-group differences in candidate ratings were subtle, rating trends were consistent with substantial differences in candidate choice, and this effect was greater for men. Compared to an online approach, virtual reality perspective taking appears to exert greater influence on acute behavioral modulation for gender bias due to its ability to fully immerse participants in the experience of (temporarily) becoming someone else, with empathy as a potential mechanism underlying this phenomenon.

| S-EPMC9173647 | biostudies-literature

Implicit Age Cues in Resumes: Subtle Effects on Hiring Discrimination.

Project description:Anonymous resume screening, as assumed, does not dissuade age discriminatory effects. Building on job market signaling theory, this study investigated whether older applicants may benefit from concealing explicitly mentioned age signals on their resumes (date of birth) or whether more implicit/subtle age cues on resumes (older-sounding names/old-fashioned extracurricular activities) may lower older applicants' hirability ratings. An experimental study among 610 HR professionals using a mixed factorial design showed hiring discrimination of older applicants based on implicit age cues in resumes. This effect was more pronounced for older raters. Concealing one's date of birth led to overall lower ratings. Study findings add to the limited knowledge on the effects of implicit age cues on hiring discrimination in resume screening and the usefulness of anonymous resume screening in the context of age. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

| S-EPMC5554369 | biostudies-literature

Gender and Racial Discrimination in Hiring Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from a Field Experiment of Accountants, 2018–2020

Project description:In this article, we ask whether macro-level changes during the first year of the

| S-EPMC9047608 | biostudies-literature

Incarceration history and ethnic bias in hiring perceptions: An experimental test of intersectional bias & psychological mechanisms.

Project description:This study seeks to better understand mechanisms of bias against formerly incarcerated and ethnically minoritized job applicants as well as the interactive effects of those two identities. In a sample of 358 hiring managers in the United States, the 2 (incarceration history) x 4 (ethnicity) experiment will manipulate incarceration history and ethnicity through job application materials, and measure hireability, and perception of job applicants along dimensions of sociability/warmth, competence, and morality. We will use a moderated mediation model to test hypotheses regarding a main effect of prior incarceration and an interaction effect of incarceration history and ethnicity on judgments of hireability, as well as whether such effects are mediated through perception of job applicants. We expect results to inform both research and practice related to employment practices.

| S-EPMC9844837 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data