Sending Resumes While Being Black

[Jawge]

should be ear instead of hear. See this is where AI (artificial Intelligence) comes in. To understand grammar. Hear was spelt correctly but used incorrectly; thus eluding spell check. There are ways to set your resume to elude these efilters too

[Mosiah]

Can the computer filter out the Laquishas?

[Don1]

D1 give the man a listening hear and don't just rush to discredit. I know for a fact that the computers filters resumes based on the words of the resume. For instance if the job is asking for a masters and you have only Bachelor's HR will never see it to give to hiring managers. Then when if you manage to get pass the electronic filters and reach the humans you are down to stereotypes. No matter what we do, we make snap judgments (basic stereotypes) this is based on studies (will cite source later).

Educated black Americans will not name their children Laquishia and Jayvanhn. They would be more inclined to research and dole out an African name based on some language in West Africa. Now names have meaning behind them and most of the time the Ebonic sounding denotes people from a lower and uneducated income group. Even English names can denote peasantry (like it or not) Have you ever read Freakanomics?

Check what these psychologist are saying

scroll to secret messages. The only thing that might bring a Laquisha Brown to the interview with the hiring manager (of large corp. that deals with diversity) is if she satisfies education requirements. Other than that Laquisha will not get a response.

I listen to data if it makes sense to me.

The study isolated only ONE variable in the resumes i. e. Names...and found a hugely disparate response in callbacks disadvantageous to "African-American" sounding names. It has nothing to do with parsing by software...unless the software is doctored to punish African-Americans.

This stuff about people with certain names being less educated is itself Orwellian...and should be dumped. Even if that were to be true it's irrelevant to the argument since ALL the resumes had the identical education profile...ONLY names were changed.

I'm at a loss in seeing what you guys are arguing about. And I'm putting it mildly

[Stonigut]

Very simple, I don't even have to see the data, any decent social scientist would be concerned about bias in the data and want to make sure you are really measuring apples to apples and not apples to jackfruit so if this assertion were to be tested properly then you would take two sets of the data from the groups you are concerned with and try to equalize them in terms of the issue you are seeking to separate them on that one set faces a higher bias than another in terms of job screenings, so to do that you would try to make sure they are relatively equal in terms of education and experience and then run the numbers again, that is real science bro, not that junk that they are peddling.

Your advance thanks is much appreciated.

[Don1]

Very simple, I don't even have to see the data, any decent social scientist would be concerned about bias in the data and want to make sure you are really measuring apples to apples and not apples to jackfruit so if this assertion were to be tested properly then you would take two sets of the data from the groups you are concerned with and try to equalize them in terms of the issue you are seeking to separate them on that one set faces a higher bias than another in terms of job screenings, so to do that you would try to make sure they are relatively equal in terms of education and experience and then run the numbers again, that is real science bro, not that junk that they are peddling.

Your advance thanks is much appreciated.

Sorry Stoni...but this is a huge word jumble...comprising one sentence in a weird & incomprehensible way

I can neither read it nor understand your point. My best guess from the jumble is that you do not understand sociological research techniques....but I can't be sure so I'll grant you the benefit of the doubt

Kindly reformulate your thoughts using standard English sentence structure so your views can be comprehensible. Here is a handy guide

[Assasin]

Maybe he needs to speak to some HR personnel.

There is still a lot of bias and a lot in the interview process and how the Job description is written sometimes. But the factor you talk about with the electronic filter is also real especially in companies who employ a lot of people.

[Don1]

Johnny what you state is 100% correct but also 100% irrelevant

Have you folks even read the methodology of the study??? If you have...do you understand it?????????

ALL the resumes have the IDENTICAL qualifications! The ONLY variable is the fcuking names!!!!!!

So why all this insane yappin about who has good or bad education, ebonics, computer programs and...worst of all.... people with unusual names being automatically poor & uneducated?????????

O Lawd...This is a quite amazing insight into unnu thought processing

[Don1]

This Prof aint no SillyCon Valley Economist

Very simple, I don't even have to see the data, any decent social scientist would be concerned about bias in the data and want to make sure you are really measuring apples to apples and not apples to jackfruit so if this assertion were to be tested properly then you would take two sets of the data from the groups you are concerned with and try to equalize them in terms of the issue you are seeking to separate them on that one set faces a higher bias than another in terms of job screenings, so to do that you would try to make sure they are relatively equal in terms of education and experience and then run the numbers again, that is real science bro, not that junk that they are peddling.

Your advance thanks is much appreciated.

Stoni please send your recommendations on how to revise this study to Professor Bertrand. I'm sure she'll welcome your insights and use them to improve her shoddy methodology. You may also wish to advise her professional connections below that they missed the huge deficiencies in her work that you discovered within a few seconds of review

She can pass your gems along to her distinguished co-author Prof Sendhil Muillainathan so he can be up to speed with your instructions as well

Just keep your sentences short please

Marianne Bertrand
Chris P. Dialynas Professor of Economics
Phone: (773) 834-5943
Fax: (773) 702-0458

E-Mail: Marianne.Bertrandchicagobooth.edu

The University of Chicago
Booth School of Business, Room 509
5807 South Woodlawn Avenue
Chicago, IL 60637

ABOUT

Marianne Bertrand is the Chris P. Dialynas Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. She is a Research Fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research, the Center for Economic Policy Research, and the Institute for the Study of Labor.

Professor Bertrand is an applied micro-economist whose research covers the fields of labor economics, corporate finance, and development economics. Her research in these areas has been published widely , including numerous research articles in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, the Journal of Political Economy the American Economic Review and the Journal of Finance.

Professor Bertrand is a Co-Director of Chicago Booth’s Social Enterprise Initiative. She is the Director of the Poverty Lab at the UChicago Urban Labs as well as on the Board of Directors for the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab. Professor Bertrand also serves as co-editor of the American Economic Review.

She has received several awards and honors, including the 2004 Elaine Bennett Research Prize, awarded by the American Economic Association to recognize and honor outstanding research in any field of economics by a woman at the beginning of her career, and the 2012 Society of Labor Economists’ Rosen Prize for Outstanding Contributions to Labor Economics. She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

Born in Belgium, Professor Bertrand received a Bachelor's Degree in economics from Belgium's Université Libre de Bruxelles in 1991, followed by a Master's Degree in econometrics from the same institution the next year. She moved to the United States in 1993 and earned a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University in 1998. She was a faculty member in the Department of Economics at Princeton University for two years before joining Chicago Booth in 2000.


Prof Sendhil Muillainathan

Fields economics, behavioral economics
Institutions Harvard University 2004–
MIT 1999-2004
Alma mater Harvard University Ph.D, 1998
Cornell University B.A., 1993

Known for Behavioral Economics
Development Economics
Corporate Finance
Notable awards MacArthur Fellow

Sendhil Mullainathan pronunciation (help·info)) (born c. 1972) is a Professor of Economics at Harvard University , and the author of Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much[1] (with Eldar Shafir). He was hired with tenure by Harvard in 2004 after having spent six years at MIT. He is a recipient of a MacArthur Foundation "genius grant" and conducts research on development economics, behavioral economics, and corporate finance. He is co-founder of ideas42, a non-profit organization that uses behavioral science to help solve social problems, and the MIT Poverty Action Lab. He has made extensive academic contributions with the including the National Bureau for Economic Research (NBER), and has also worked in government with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CPFB).

[Stonigut]

Submit, concede defeat, it is inevitable, you cannot fight logic!!!

Just read, one word after another, you will get it, irrefutable truth Donny!!

Don't be afraid to view reality without the rose colored lens, what pill are you eating now!!

[Stonigut]

What, you Mr Don hiding behind a Babylon prof from Harvard that has nothing to do with anything!!!???

How bizarre!!! I guess what John Maxwell say is true Jc full of nothing but wannabe Euros!!!

[Don1]

LOL! Nothing to do with anything??
Stoni....these eminent labor economists are the leaders of this acclaimed and widely published study.

Now let's see: The ignorant opinions of Stoni a mere Rum Bar Yapper vs The research of eminent & widely published labor economists

Sorry Stoni.. it's no contest

As to your puerile JC fixation...That's just the typical bad mind ..with a healthy dose of the usual inferiority complex

We've seen this complex in action for many decades....Doan tap atall StoniMan!

[Don1]

Requiem on the sad decline of a once respectable poster

Stoni yuh receive nuff kick to yuh cranium from mi Steel Toe Tims lately...suh mi nuh surprise seh yuh get bummy

You started out on this issue as being merely Misguided. Not satisfied with that you've gradually transitioned to being Illogical, Confused in Reasoning...Now to being Intellectually Dishonest at best or a Complete Idiot at worst

You should have quit at the Misguided stage

[Stonigut]

Again regardless of where she come from it is still filled with fundamental bias. The key question has not been addressed, which us when we take similar background and experience and run the numbers does the same gap appear.

Simple, simple stuff, anybody can understand.

[Stonigut]

But you is really a Babylon man fi true, so you can't use your own common sense and evaluate what I am saying versus what the study is claiming and see the inherent gap. Wow, shocking, I really thought you were more discerning than that.

Let me tell you a lot of these studies are pure trash. If you want to keep your eyes closed and believe trash versus a clear, logical gap that I have pointed out then go ahead and follow along.

[Stonigut]

Ha-ha, you have been measured and found wanting on multiple counts.

Count 1 - no ability to independently assess data and offer a real opinion and accept a silly study from a Harvard professor.
Count 2 - ability to fabricate evidence with no foundation, that blue mountain is in the west and hellshire is to the east.
count 3 - related to count two, no understanding of direction
Count 4 - inability to concede when clearly you are wrong.

Four counts. Can't help you.