= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gjm comments on Link: quotas-microaggression-and-meritocracy - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (163)
Obviously not. Equally obviously, said likelihood has no bearing on the applicant's competence, which was rated substantially and significantly lower by the faculty in the study when the application bore a female rather than a male name.
(Good statistics on this seem hard to come by, but it looks like the average age at first birth for college graduates in the US is about 30 nowadays; I'd say the probability of an imminent maternity leave for a 22-year-old with a new job as a lab manager in a university is pretty damn small, even if she happens to be called Jennifer rather than John.)
Competence in research might mean: "Likelihood that this person has the chance of making a valuable contribution to their scientific field."
I don't think that there anything wrong when a science faculty defines competence that way.
I'm too lazy to search for data on education-based cohorts, but only 57.5% of US women are childless by the age of 25.
The source I found showed a really drastic difference between college-educated and not-college-educated women.