6 ms·

I am not obliged to defend every statement I make with a study for my thoughts and experiences to be worth sharing. Also, anecdotal evidence is evidence. Not as

by lyaa 4y ago

I am not obliged to defend every statement I make with a study for my thoughts and experiences to be worth sharing. Also, anecdotal evidence is evidence. Not as generalizable as controlled studies but not as worthless as you seem to think. In any case, I have done the five minutes of googling you seem to want. Biases in evaluating resumes based on gender and other such factors are not new nor unknown: here is an early study from 1986[1], 1988[2], 1999[3], 2001[4], 2007[5]. Feel free to visit google scholar and look more studies by yourself. [1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022103186900466 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022103186... [2] https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0022-3514.55.2.178 https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0022-3514.5... [3] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018839203698 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018839203698 [4] https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/0022-4537.00239 https://spssi.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/0022-4... [5] https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-23339-007 https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-23339-007

walkhour 4y ago
You can sure share your thoughts, and I can share my thoughts on whether you're correct, I'm just pointing out it's not proven your personal experience proves discrimination is part of the explanation. None of those studies support your original claim. They support the more broader claim that women are discriminated in the job market. > Not as generalizable as controlled studies but not as worthless as you seem to think. Sorry, a single data point, by itself, when you share it attempting to generalize, is worse than worthless, since it can be terribly misleading.
- lyaa 4y ago
  Do you not see the logical link by which these more general studies contextualize and support my earlier statements?
  - walkhour 4y ago
    I see why you may think that way, but I don't think you're right. I guess for you it's a given QA jobs are "inferior" to SWE jobs. I guess you believe the articles you linked proof women tend to get "inferior" jobs just because they're women? (I haven't read the articles, although I believe this to be true). I just can't make the jump that this applies to QA jobs (granting they are "inferior"). That would imply "inferior" jobs are always overrepresented by women, and there are counterexamples to this, by almost any definition of "inferior".
    - cycomanic 4y ago
      So talking about generalities, there are plenty of statistics that show that women have lower paying jobs and get paid less even for the same jobs. We can argue about the reasons but the fact that they are paid less has been shown many times, so if you are disputing it you should be provide some compelling evidence. So the the question is are QA jobs lower paid or not. That's easy to check and is a pretty good (though not perfect) indicator of status. A quick Google would have shown you that this is generally the case. Funnily enough you will also find lots of dismissive posts which shows that at least some people think QA jobs are inferior, because "they don't code, but just use the software".
      - walkhour 4y ago
        > We can argue about the reasons but the fact that they are paid less has been shown many times, so if you are disputing it you should be provide some compelling evidence I state I believe this is true in one of my previous comments. > So the the question is are QA jobs lower paid or not. That's easy to check and is a pretty good (though not perfect) indicator of status. A quick Google would have shown you that this is generally the case. Funnily enough you will also find lots of dismissive posts which shows that at least some people think QA jobs are inferior, because "they don't code, but just use the software". This could be, but you need something else to prove it, otherwise lower paying jobs with different distributions than the job market distribution are always root caused in discrimination, is this your argument? There are many high paying jobs that result in a huge selection bias with respect to employees, just because many people simply don't want to put the hours. And thus discrimination is not the whole story in these cases. It may be the case in QA teams though (or part of the story), I'm simply saying it needs more research. Nevertheless this hasn't been my point, my point is simply a single data point by itself can't be used to account for part of the explanation.
Manuel_D 4y ago
Interestingly, when those resume studies are more narrowly focused on Silicon Valley tech firms women experience a significant bonus relative to men [1]. 1. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Gender-and-Race-Preferences-in-Hiring-in-the-Age-of-Parasurama-Ghose/5f3c8f003d150e2bba7316df1a19ed54a186ece6 https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Gender-and-Race-Prefer...

by lyaa 4y ago

walkhour 4y ago

You can sure share your thoughts, and I can share my thoughts on whether you're correct, I'm just pointing out it's not proven your personal experience proves discrimination is part of the explanation. None of those studies support your original claim. They support the more broader claim that women are discriminated in the job market. > Not as generalizable as controlled studies but not as worthless as you seem to think. Sorry, a single data point, by itself, when you share it attempting to generalize, is worse than worthless, since it can be terribly misleading.

lyaa 4y ago
Do you not see the logical link by which these more general studies contextualize and support my earlier statements?
- walkhour 4y ago
  I see why you may think that way, but I don't think you're right. I guess for you it's a given QA jobs are "inferior" to SWE jobs. I guess you believe the articles you linked proof women tend to get "inferior" jobs just because they're women? (I haven't read the articles, although I believe this to be true). I just can't make the jump that this applies to QA jobs (granting they are "inferior"). That would imply "inferior" jobs are always overrepresented by women, and there are counterexamples to this, by almost any definition of "inferior".
  - cycomanic 4y ago
    So talking about generalities, there are plenty of statistics that show that women have lower paying jobs and get paid less even for the same jobs. We can argue about the reasons but the fact that they are paid less has been shown many times, so if you are disputing it you should be provide some compelling evidence. So the the question is are QA jobs lower paid or not. That's easy to check and is a pretty good (though not perfect) indicator of status. A quick Google would have shown you that this is generally the case. Funnily enough you will also find lots of dismissive posts which shows that at least some people think QA jobs are inferior, because "they don't code, but just use the software".
    - walkhour 4y ago
      > We can argue about the reasons but the fact that they are paid less has been shown many times, so if you are disputing it you should be provide some compelling evidence I state I believe this is true in one of my previous comments. > So the the question is are QA jobs lower paid or not. That's easy to check and is a pretty good (though not perfect) indicator of status. A quick Google would have shown you that this is generally the case. Funnily enough you will also find lots of dismissive posts which shows that at least some people think QA jobs are inferior, because "they don't code, but just use the software". This could be, but you need something else to prove it, otherwise lower paying jobs with different distributions than the job market distribution are always root caused in discrimination, is this your argument? There are many high paying jobs that result in a huge selection bias with respect to employees, just because many people simply don't want to put the hours. And thus discrimination is not the whole story in these cases. It may be the case in QA teams though (or part of the story), I'm simply saying it needs more research. Nevertheless this hasn't been my point, my point is simply a single data point by itself can't be used to account for part of the explanation.

Manuel_D 4y ago

Interestingly, when those resume studies are more narrowly focused on Silicon Valley tech firms women experience a significant bonus relative to men [1]. 1. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Gender-and-Race-Preferences-in-Hiring-in-the-Age-of-Parasurama-Ghose/5f3c8f003d150e2bba7316df1a19ed54a186ece6 https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Gender-and-Race-Prefer...