Our results show that women’s contributions tend to be accepted more often than men’s [when their gender is hidden]. However, when a woman’s gender is identifiable, they are rejected more often. Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists nonetheless.

  • rbn@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    7 months ago

    Anyone found the specific numbers of acceptance rate with in comparison to no knowledge of the gender?

    On researchgate I only found the abstract and a chart that doesn’t indicate exactly which numbers are shown.

    • wewbull@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      …or the research is flawed. Gender identity was gained from social media accounts. So maybe it’s a general bias against social media users (half joking).

      • A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I think (unless I misunderstood the paper), they only included people who had a Google+ profile with a gender specified in the study at all (this is from 2016 when Google were still trying to make Google+ a thing).

    • Rimu@piefed.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      Thanks for grabbing the chart.

      My Stats 101 alarm bells go off whenever I see a graph that does not start with 0 on the Y axis. It makes the differences look bigger than they are.

      The ‘outsiders, gendered’ which is the headline stat, shows a 1% difference between women and men. When their gender is unknown there is a 3% difference in the other direction (I’m just eyeballing the graph here as they did not provide their underlying data, lol wtf ). So, overall, the sexism effect seems to be about 4%.

      That’s a bit crap but does not blow my hair back. I was expecting more, considering what we know about gender pay gaps, etc.