Message from @Deleted User
Discord ID: 391734295460315156
No stay at home mums here
@meratrix individual human error is factored out when you repeat the process multiple times
dude
this is science class 5th grade
it's fucking 125 Choose 1
wait
what was the sample size?
125?
👀
lmao
125
125 people, choosing 2 results
there's a possible 7750 combinations
and a very poor margin of error
"The results were surprising—they show that the decision makers did not evaluate the resume purely on its merits. Despite having the exact same qualifications and experience as John"
you know everytime they say that
I want to know what the resume was
Also @méep, to have any inling of reliability in this study they would not only need multiple resumes but multiple fields as well
"Because they perceived the female candidate as less competent, the scientists in the study were less willing to mentor Jennifer or to hire her as a lab manager"
probably because girls won't take that extra step and go futher beyond
Link to the paper: http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.full.pdf
they'll do lagom and stop
@Deleted User Oh no now the whole "genders dont have natural tendencies" is going to come up
so the question is:
why the fuck would I hire someone who would do lagom, vs a person who would go above and beyond and do that extra crunch of work?
^
@méep doesn't know shit about economics and has never worked a day in its life
@Durtle02 yeah exactly, the "MUH genders dont have natural tendencies"
kek ~~They do tho :p~~
So one thing I noticed, Female faculty are less likely to recommend hiring more females.
And they don't want to mentor female hires.
I wonder why?
<:think_woke:378717098681171988>
Well, you have to wonder, because it's not been investigated.
how fucking deceving
because "MUH power politics" ^4
it's only a difference of $4000 yet it looks huge in the graph
Look at that huge differ... oh, where's the zero?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
basic graph manipulation
it's like that stunt nvida pulled