Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

blog.interviewing.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 369 posts

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

#291

Post by nathanasmith »

etjossem wrote: post #268
omginternets wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're the one introducing a 50% number, I haven't seen anyone make that assertion. "Gender gap" is a fancy way of saying "not 50%". More to the point, assumptions are often unstated, as I'm sure you know. I agree with you insofar as the mechanisms you point out are likely contributers to this so-called gap. Rather, I'm highlighting that -- unpopular though this notion may be in certain circles -- part of this effe…

> "Gender gap" is a fancy way of saying "not 50%". No. Gender gap is underrepresentation relative to the qualified labor market. Right now the gender ratio in entry-level software engineering jobs does not represent the segment that would be interested in and qualified for them (CS grads). The 10% difference between grads and junior developers is on us to fix.

You keep bringing this point up in the comments and you've been answered but I'm curious about something.

You say elsewhere that while 20 percent (the actual number is around 18) of CS grads are women, only 10 percent of junior devs are in fact female. Others have mentioned that maybe the women went on to graduate school or are working some CS related job that doesn't fit the definition of "junior dev".

The latter points seem reasonable to me but you keep bringing it up though so here's my question, where do you think 50 percent of female grads are ending up? The unemployment line? That would seem like a very large number of people, such a large number that it would have been recorded somewhere. Do you have any actual statistical data beyond the raw numbers you keep bringing up?

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

#292

Post by hueving »

phasmantistes wrote: post #257
hueving wrote: post #211

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.

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 toget…

There is nothing you can do that isn't blatant sexism if you want your ratio of female employees to be higher than the candidate pool ratio.

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

#293

Post by hueving »

etjossem wrote: post #289
teamfrizz wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have some hiring power, and I went to uni as well, and both in a liberal state (NY). We see hundreds of applications. I can tell you that ~30% percent of my colleagues at uni were female. Exactly 0% of our applicants are female. I have no idea where these women are, but were not turning them down!

It sounds like you might have a problem at the sourcing stage. How do you get leads on candidates?

Ads on urinal cakes.

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

#294

Post by cauterized »

generalledger wrote: post #223
cauterized wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of enculturation reasons too. Doesn't need to have an evolutionary or biological basis.

I don't know if this is true, but intuitively it seems that something is more likely to be ingrained in a culture if there is already a biological basis for the behavior.

I still strongly question that. For instance, it could be that our double-standard expectations of women create more cognitive dissonance - which might impact confidence or give women a sense that whichever choice they make will be judged as "wrong". Or perhaps girls are less likely to be given the benefit of the doubt when they make mistakes in childhood - teaching them to be less resilient or risk-taking - without there being any biological reason to judge them more harshly.

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

#295

Post by tropo »

dragonwriter wrote: post #286
mpweiher wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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)

> Why do you find that 'argument' hard to buy? I find it insufficient to answer the question of whether sexism is the problem. Computer programming used to have a lot more women -- why did that change? If it was changing interest, what is the source of the gender imbalance in the change in interest? Certainly, the perception that there was gender bias in the field arose while the rate at which women were participatin…

That's backwards. We got rid of the gender bias.

Very long ago, computer programming was seen as being like typing and/or secretarial work. It was seen as being unmanly. Compare with nursing and kindergarten teaching.

A woman might get assigned to invent COBOL instead of being in charge of an aircraft carrier.

Well, we got rid of the sexism. Happy now? Hmmm, guess not.

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

#296

Post by tropo »

MaysonL wrote: post #279
mpweiher wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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)

Ada Lovelace, Grace Hopper, and App Camp for Girls refute your bs.

Grace Hopper might have rather been in charge of an aircraft carrier. Ada Lovelace might also have wanted to do other things.

Opportunities were limited for women. Don't assume that computing was the first choice career for those women.

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

#297

Post by etjossem »

nathanasmith wrote: post #291
etjossem wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Gender gap" is a fancy way of saying "not 50%". No. Gender gap is underrepresentation relative to the qualified labor market. Right now the gender ratio in entry-level software engineering jobs does not represent the segment that would be interested in and qualified for them (CS grads). The 10% difference between grads and junior developers is on us to fix.

You keep bringing this point up in the comments and you've been answered but I'm curious about something. You say elsewhere that while 20 percent (the actual number is around 18) of CS grads are women, only 10 percent of junior devs are in fact female. Others have mentioned that maybe the women went on to graduate school or are working some CS related job that doesn't fit the definition of "junior dev". The latter po…

Unemployment rates are double for women (vs. men) in computer/mathematical occupations as of last month, so "the unemployment line" is not a completely wild guess. [1]

But that's not the point. A supply of women with both the qualifications and the interest exists. We ought to be seeing a representative sample of that supply, and we should do what we can to avert bias within our organizations.

[1] http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea30.htm

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

#298

Post by etjossem »

extra88 wrote: post #284
etjossem wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

20% of CS degrees are awarded to women, but they get only 10% of entry-level software jobs. Please stop blaming the pipeline for the difference. Interested, qualified women are being pushed away from the field by bias and attrition, and that's a problem we should be trying to solve.

I'm sure there are problems with many hiring process and work environments that result in fewer women in those positions, However, where do the other 50% of CS degree-holding women end up if not in entry-level software jobs? If they have a greater tendency to go to graduate school or to take jobs that make use of their degree but don't fit the cookie-cutter definition of a software job, that's not a bad outcome. My i…

I agree. Work/life balance is absolutely part of the problem - just like maternity leave and other work environment factors. All of this leads to attrition and a chilling effect on sourcing. But we should still be solving for bias at the interviewing stage.

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

#299

Post by tropo »

etjossem wrote: post #266
omginternets wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm always surprised by the strong underlying assumption that removing interviewer/managerial bias will result in a gender ratio of 50%. There's research to suggest that this assumption is flawed: [0] Moreover, the idea that anatomy and physiology don't condition preferences or behaviors flies in the face of everything we know about human biology and (embodied) cognition. Let's recognize gender/feminist theory for wh…

20% of CS degrees are awarded to women, but they get only 10% of entry-level software jobs. Please stop blaming the pipeline for the difference. Interested, qualified women are being pushed away from the field by bias and attrition, and that's a problem we should be trying to solve.

"pushed away" is so negative.

How about "pulled away"? Maybe it isn't politically correct to desire being a stay-at-home mom, but it happens rather often. Sometimes this is an unexpected turn of events, with changing life priorities. Sometimes it is the goal right from the start.

I met a woman in college who literally said she was getting her MRS degree. That is, she went to college to meet a suitable husband and become a "Mrs.", as in "Mrs. Doe". It happens. This is real.

It's not a problem to be solved unless you have a negative attitude toward homemakers. People choose their own path in life. This might not meet your standard, but your standard might not maximize life satisfaction for everybody.

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

#300

Post by dragonwriter »

tropo wrote: post #296
MaysonL wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ada Lovelace, Grace Hopper, and App Camp for Girls refute your bs.

Grace Hopper might have rather been in charge of an aircraft carrier. Ada Lovelace might also have wanted to do other things. Opportunities were limited for women. Don't assume that computing was the first choice career for those women.

> Grace Hopper might have rather been in charge of an aircraft carrier. [...] Opportunities were limited for women.

Even had the Navy not had gender-restricted roles, the only reason Dr. Hopper got an exemption from physical requirements she did not meet was her strong background in math and physics that qualified her to fill the need for the computation project.

Gender bias aside, she would never have gotten to command an aircraft carrier.

Post reply on HN