Dating site based on mbti assessment to browse dating sites
There is a similar drop for men, but the effect is not as strong.” In other words, they conclude there is gender bias among outsiders because obvious-women do worse than gender-anonymized-women.They admit that obvious-men also do worse than gender-anonymized men, but they ignore this effect because it’s smaller.The study does not provide enough information to determine whether this is statistically significant.Eyeballing it it looks like it might be, just barely. The study describes its main finding as being that women have fewer requests approved when their gender is known.Among outsiders, women do the same as/better than men when gender is hidden, and the same as/worse than men when gender is revealed.I can’t be more specific than this because the study doesn’t give numbers and I’m trying to eyeball confidence intervals on graphs.Most of this analysis is not original to me – Hacker News had figured a lot of it out before I even woke up this morning – but I think it’ll at least be helpful to collect all the information in one easily linkable place.
So the big question is whether this changes based on obviousness of gender.It hides on page 16 that men also have fewer requests approved when their gender is known.It describes the effect for women as larger, but does not report the size of the male effects, nor whether the difference is statistically significant.The study itself say that women do worse than men when gender is revealed, so since the researchers presumably have access to their real numbers data, that might mean the confidence intervals don’t overlap.From eyeballing the graph, it looks like the difference is 1% – ie, men get their requests approved 64% of the time, and women 63% of the time.
Because Git Hub is big and their study is automated, they manage to get a really nice sample size – about 2.5 million pull requests by men and 150,000 by women. ) requests accepted than men for all of the top ten programming languages.