Hi RO,
Thanks for sharing.
The post highlights distinctions between gender bias against insiders
versus outsiders. It has implications for projects that are predicated
on addressing this kind of systemic bias, such as Blind Code Reviews. I
would encourage anyone with an interest in the topic to read the piece
you linked to, it seems to offer a more rigorous reading of the study
than other coverage I've seen.
We can still assert that women are under-represented in open source
projects compared to the rest of the industry (see my last post) and
that there are systemic factors behind that. The Mozilla team working
on D&I in community is already deeply engaged with them [0].
Patrick
0. https://opensource.com/article/17/9/diversity-and-inclusion-innovation
On 5/26/18 7:35 PM, recalcitrantowl via governance wrote:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/think-open-source-is-a-meritocracy-it-is-but-only-if-no-one-knows-youre-a-woman/
Study has been called into question.
The paper concludes that “for insiders…we see little evidence of bias…for
outsiders, we see evidence of gender bias: women’s acceptance rates are 71.8%
when they use gender neutral profiles, but drop to 62.5% when their gender is
identifiable. 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. They do not report doing a test of statistical
significance on whether it is really smaller or not.
http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/02/12/before-you-get-too-excited-about-that-github-study/
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
