Live data from Hacker News

We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

blog.interviewing.io

251–260 of 369 posts

Re: We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

#251

This is ridiculous. At some point we need to face up to the reality that most women in the US are just not interested in working in technology. There is no evil conspiracy to keep women out of tech. Maybe high school guidance counselors and parents don't encourage women to go into tech. Maybe there is someone to blame, but it's not the tech industry's fault.

I'd like you to read this.

https://medium.com/tech-diversity-files/if-you-think-women-i...

The gender gap in the workforce is wider than the gender gap in computer science as a major. Particularly at senior and management levels, we see a severe underrepresentation of women. To me, that suggests either a hiring bias or an attrition problem, not a pipeline problem.

Re: We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

#252
In the intro you say that data from >1000 interviews shows:

> men were getting advanced to the next round 1.4 times more than women

> men [...] had an average technical score of 3 out of 4, as compared to a 2.5 out of 4 for women

The conclusion of your experiment was

> masking gender had no effect on interview performance

So the question is: why do women perform worse (by the above metrics) even if the interviewer does not know they are a women?

Unfortunately you spend the remainder of the article showing that women are more likely to quit after bad interviews, and hypothesise that this is due to lower self confidence. This is interesting and all, but it does nothing towards explaining the discrepancy you described in the introduction!

Re: We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

#254
I guess the results here would surprise you if you assumed that hiring bias was primarily the result of an explicit bias against {gender, race, etc.}. While there is certainly this class of bias, I personally haven't found as much of it in the technology field as there is purported to be in general society.

What I have found, instead, is a more subtle bias that goes something like this: "I view myself (or that guy over there) as the model employee. I'm looking for someone who thinks and acts like we do -- not just on our level, but views problems the same way, is likely to arrive at the same solutions, has the same energy level, etc.". I believe this attitude forms the fundamental underpinning of both company culture and hiring bias. I've seen it work successfully over the short term (particularly in startups where you're trying to build a small team of really smart people that can build something quickly), but I think it is counter-productive over the longer term.

When I'm hiring, I simultaneously try to answer three questions: (1) Is this person capable of doing the job I'm hiring them for? (or grow into being capable), (2) Is this someone I could work with and who could work with my team?, and (3) What unique life experiences or perspectives does this person have that they could bring to the team and improve our culture or decision making?

What I've found is that some folks over-focus on (1) and sometimes (2) without adequately recognizing the value of (3). I personally believe that you don't remove bias by trying to legislate against it - you remove it by getting people to desire the alternative - diversity.

Re: We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

#255
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is evidence to the contrary, where they have run this experiment in the real world. This is for Orchestras. As late as 1970, the top five orchestras in the U.S. had fewer than 5% women. It wasn’t until 1980 that any of these top orchestras had 10% female musicians. But by 1997, they were up to 25% and today some of them are well into the 30s. In the 1970s and 1980s, orchestras began using blind auditions. Candi…

It's a nice correlation, but are you sure there aren't important confounding variables? Primarily: the youngest person auditioning for a top orchestra in 1970 was a teenager in the late 50's, when the female role model was the stay-at-home mother. A person first auditioning ten years later was a teenager in the late '60s, when the female role model was going through a revolution.

The original research accounted for the effect of the audition year. http://www.nber.org/papers/w5903.pdf

Re: We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The supply of women with related degrees from uni is too low. If only 20% of the candidates qualified on paper are women, then a perfectly blind hiring process would result in 20% women. Expecting something else implies some fundamental misunderstanding of math.

You're not the first person to think about this.

I'm pretty sure most of the points made in this thread have been made before. That doesn't mean everyone here has heard them.

Re: We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

#257
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is evidence to the contrary, where they have run this experiment in the real world. This is for Orchestras. As late as 1970, the top five orchestras in the U.S. had fewer than 5% women. It wasn’t until 1980 that any of these top orchestras had 10% female musicians. But by 1997, they were up to 25% and today some of them are well into the 30s. In the 1970s and 1980s, orchestras began using blind auditions. Candi…

The supply of women with related degrees from uni is too low. If only 20% of the candidates qualified on paper are women, then a perfectly blind hiring process would result in 20% women. Expecting something else implies some fundamental misunderstanding of math.

Yes, you're absolutely right. But that's also a terrible excuse: "Oh, the problem is before the candidates reach me, so there's no need for me to do anything to fix the problem myself." Everyone at all stages -- from folks who bully nerds in primary school, to toymakers who promote scientific fields as 'for boys', to college admissions offices, to CS professors, to CS classmates, to hiring processes -- can work together to remove bias everywhere. Just because you think the problem is someone else's fault doesn't mean you can't help solve it.

Re: We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

#258
post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should "we" also try to figure out why large amounts of women have less speed compared to men, and work on that, too?

Sorry, I went back and edited my comment but you had already posted. The reason we need to figure out the confidence gender gap issue is because it leads to less opportunities for women. Anyone who is less confident is going to have less opportunities. But for various reasons, women tend to have a lot less confidence than men. Yes, that's something that is partially internal to each person. But the fact that large gr…

It is just as hard, or harder, for men who are not confident to just say 'well, be more confident', so again, not a gendered issue.

Re: We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

#259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The supply of women with related degrees from uni is too low. If only 20% of the candidates qualified on paper are women, then a perfectly blind hiring process would result in 20% women. Expecting something else implies some fundamental misunderstanding of math.

But something is driving women out of CS programs (unless you buy the argument that women just aren't interested in programming). Steps that make the profession as a whole less biased against women, might also help to encourage more women to major in CS.

If most are like mine was, they are awful.

High stakes testing, unrealistic workloads, research professors who don't grok humans and incredibly cliquey ethnic divisions exaggerated by lots of foreign students.

Re: We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

#260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The supply of women with related degrees from uni is too low. If only 20% of the candidates qualified on paper are women, then a perfectly blind hiring process would result in 20% women. Expecting something else implies some fundamental misunderstanding of math.

But something is driving women out of CS programs (unless you buy the argument that women just aren't interested in programming). Steps that make the profession as a whole less biased against women, might also help to encourage more women to major in CS.

Why do you find that 'argument' hard to buy? I find it trivially true from observation and all empirical data I can find (if you remove the absolute)
Post reply on HN