[jeremiahwv]

Precisely the question. Why indeed?

Would you be more likely to hire a man than a women for an engineering role? Take the harvard implicit gender bias test for one answer: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/selectatest.html

[Smaug123]

Implicit association tests probably don't work. Sources may be found at https://slatestarcodex.com/2016/08/25/devoodooifying-psychol...

[disgruntledphd2]

Well, it's a little more complicated than that. They have extremely high state-specific variance, so it's difficult to show predictive validity. They have definitely been associated with particular sets of outcomes in non-gendered/racial contexts, where you would expect the studies to be easier to run.

Source: I did a bunch of them for my PhD, but my reading of the literature stopped in 2014.

[flukus]

Can you do an implicit test when it's nature is made explicit?

[ar15saveslives]

> Would you be more likely to hire a man than a women for an engineering role?

If they are equally good, there's a good chance I'll choose the cheaper one.

[jeremiahwv]

Indeed, that's what we like to tell ourselves. But is that actually what's happening? Did you take the test?

[ar15saveslives]

Happening what? 100% equal candidates that differ only by gender? No, it's never happening.