Pull Requests Are Accepted At About The Same Rate, Regardless of Gender (techinasia.com) 94
An anonymous reader writes:
Remember that story about how women "get pull requests accepted more (except when you know they're women)." The study actually showed that men also had their code accepted more often when their gender wasn't known, according to Tech In Asia -- and more importantly, the lower acceptance rates (for both men and women) applied mostly to code submitters from outside the GitHub community. "Among insiders, there's no evidence of discrimination against women. In fact, the reverse is true: women who are on the inside and whose genders are easy to discern get more of their code approved, and to a statistically significant degree."
Eight months after the story ran, the BBC finally re-wrote their original headline ("Women write better code, study suggests") and added the crucial detail that acceptance rates for women fell "if they were not regulars on the service and were identified by their gender."
Eight months after the story ran, the BBC finally re-wrote their original headline ("Women write better code, study suggests") and added the crucial detail that acceptance rates for women fell "if they were not regulars on the service and were identified by their gender."
Relationship (Score:4, Interesting)
Since both men and women have their code accepted at higher rates when you know their gender, I wonder if there is a relationship between knowing more about a person and accepting their code. Does knowing someone better mean you are more accepting of their work? If Beth is a working mother of 5 and you know this, does that knowledge make you more or less likely to approve of her code opposed to only knowing that someone made a merge request?
Re:Relationship (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, it's more like an uncanny valley. The first part was that for people outside the community (where you don't really know much about them), if you know nothing about the submitter, you're more likely to accept the code than if you know just a little bit about the submitter. But if you actually know them IRL, you're more likely to accept their code.
Re:Relationship (Score:5, Interesting)
And that is exactly what you would expect. People tend to be open minded when they don't know anything about a person. Once they know enough to categorize them, all the biases creep in. Then as they get to know them, they start to see them as individuals again.
Re:Relationship (Score:4, Informative)
It must be raining frogs: I agree with AmiMoJo. This is how the human mind works - we are pattern engines. We fit what we see to the patterns we've internalized, even when we see very little. Usually, that works quite well: even our vision is mostly synthesized from minimal data (other than the very center of our field of view, the rest is mostly fake detail), but it works so well we don't notice. But sometimes it doesn't quite work out, from biases that aren't accurate to optical illusions. Helps to be aware of it all.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Because it's flamebait. It's got everything - gender, hipsters and millennials, wise older workers, leftists, claiming other people's issues aren't real... It could easily have been copy/pasted from the /. troll playbook.
I hope it's a sign that people are finally getting fed up with the denials and moaning about it all being a non-issue, and are actually interested in commenting on the story. There is an interesting story here, but the GP completely ignores it.
Re: (Score:2)
Talk about a woosh moment
BTW The truth is an absolute defense against libel or slander in the real world
Re: (Score:2)
Yeaaaaaaah, No.
Re: (Score:2)
BTW The truth is an absolute defense against libel or slander in the real world
"I really believe this I promise and my opinion is worth more" isn't quite the definition of "truth" that is also the one that is an absolute defense against anything.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Flamebait? Do you even remember life before internet? We loved it because only your mind mattered. No one cared if you were an adult or a kid, only which of the two you acted like. People would collaborate based on code.
Then political people started up, like you. You have an agenda and you push it every single time, all agenda, no code. That's toxic to building a community and you end up destroying those you join. You eventually wind up with projects that are more politics than code, nothing gets don
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
If that sounds a bit vague, well, you complained about terms to clarify being flamebait... so fuck off.
I'm sorry, was this sentence meant to convey something? Because it is incomprehensible.
Re: (Score:1)
Anymore bullshit buzzword bingo you'd like to play.
Are you human or a Markov chainer built on pure crap and anger?
What the fuck are you on about "Leftism"? If you mean "Not Rightism" I'm not sure what the fuck that is either.
I'm about as left as they come without veering into communism. Big state? Tick. State healthcare? Tick. State owned essential industries and utilities? Tick.
Do I or any of my 'leftist' friends buy into this "equality is a leftish plot' crap? NO! Maybe 'cos we'll all 40+ and, as you say,
Re:People of all genders should team up ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not a hipster, a millennial or a leftist. But I do see gender issues in tech, for both men and women. It's not about dividing people and games, it's about making things better for everyone.
For example, there was a guy who had his first child at one place I worked. The boss was very upset when he said he wanted to take his full paternity leave allowance, and implied he would never have hired him if he had known. He then spent the next six months berating him for not being a "real man" and not making "his woman" bring up the child.
He ended up quitting before the child was born in the end (long story). If you don't think it's a problem then fine, you are entitled to that, but don't be a dick by moaning about other people trying to address it. It's not a conspiracy against you, unless you think the manager was right.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like the boss was flirting with a constructive dismissal case.
Re: (Score:2)
It might have ended up that way if he hasn't emigrated to New Zealand first.
Re: (Score:2)
It's an example. It's not subject to availability bias.
Re:Relationship (Score:5, Insightful)
Since both men and women have their code accepted at higher rates when you know their gender, I wonder if there is a relationship between knowing more about a person and accepting their code. Does knowing someone better mean you are more accepting of their work? If Beth is a working mother of 5 and you know this, does that knowledge make you more or less likely to approve of her code opposed to only knowing that someone made a merge request?
I don't know, but surely there is something we can be outraged about. We must look harder.
Re: (Score:1)
May I suggest:
- Why are these studies even being funded? Someone is looking for the answer they paid for!
- The Mainstream Media issued a correction! It's all 100% fake news!
- My scroll wheel is broken so I was forced to read and comment on this story I have no interest in!
- SJWs!
Re:Relationship (Score:5, Insightful)
Why are these studies even being funded?
The original crappy study, that TFA debunked, was funded by the National Science Foundation under grant number 1252995. So your tax dollars paid for it.
I am not totally opposed to all research related to gender discrimination, but when researchers publish statistically invalid garbage, they should be banned from future grants.
Re: (Score:2)
Not my tax dollars... But anyway, what part of the study is statistically invalid garbage?
Re: (Score:2)
Ooh I like squirrels!
Re: (Score:2)
what part of the study is statistically invalid garbage?
The conclusions.
Re: (Score:2)
The study doesn't actually draw the conclusions mentioned in TFA though, that's kind of the point. It's much more conservative.
Re: (Score:2)
"had their code ACCEPTED MORE often when their gender WASN'T KNOWN"
Re: (Score:1)
Since both men and women have their code accepted at higher rates when you know their gender
Why was this modded up? The summary says the opposite, both men and women have their code accepted at higher rates when their gender is not known.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I believe the correlation goes in the reverse direction. People who write high quality code, also fill their profiles more thoroughly and are more likely to reveal their gender as result.
The article makes it seem like the choice of accepting or rejecting a push request is an arbitrary decision based solely on factors associated with perception of the accepter of the personality of the submitter and has nothing in common with actual code quality. No. GOOD push requests are accepted. BAD push requ
Re:Misleading title (Score:5, Informative)
The actual complaint [bbc.co.uk] to the BBC is quite insightful:
Complaint
A reader complained that the headline of this article was misleading, that the study on which it was based was so flawed as not to merit reporting, and that the terms of the report were not duly impartial in relation to the question of the benefits or otherwise of workforce diversity in particular fields of employment.
Much of it is a standard anti-feminist argument, but the bit about the headline was found to have merit:
Outcome
Whether the study should have been reported was a matter of legitimate editorial discretion and, in the ECUâ(TM)s view, the article did not deal with matters which were controversial in the sense which would require a balance of views. However, there were no grounds for believing that the women among the cohort selected by the study were representative of women in general, and thus no basis for generalising about womenâ(TM)s relative ability. To that extent, the headline was inaccurate.
Partly upheld
Note that they are saying the research itself and the idea that there might be gender bias is not wrong or controversial, just that you can't infer from the study, which only looked at women on Github, that all women experience this bias.
The Slashdot summary is actually worse than the BBC article. It inaccurately summarises both the original article, the correction and the study.
Paper's got Issues (Score:3)
You've done the exact same thing you've accused BBC of, claiming that overall pull requests are accepted at the same rate when this is not true. Women were statistically significantly less likely to have their code accepted than men as outsiders and statistically more likely to have their code accepted as insiders.
Citation please? From the way the entry here is (horribly) written, it looks like gender is less of a factor than being a known coder to the group--which means that if you're going to do the statistical comparison properly you're going to have to be careful to make sure you break it apart on both the gender variable (unknown vs known woman vs known man) and on 'known to community' variable, being careful to make sure the numbers you're comparing match across the board.
Doing a bit of work to find the paper
Obviouskily (Score:1)
We men write more bullshit, and we are proud of it. Until Linus puts us to our place.
In other research... (Score:1, Insightful)
We found that in modern times, misandry is apparently totally acceptable.
What is a "pull-request"? (Score:1)
Is it git-specific terminology for asking someone to merge back some branch to the main release?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Among git-specific terminology there's also forking someone's repository. Watch out where you say that, you might get fired [wired.com] over it.
Noooooooo! (Score:1, Troll)
But my preconceived notions! My social justice! ;)
it is STILL discrimination (Score:1, Interesting)
This is a huge misunderstanding of discrimination:
"no evidence of discrimination against women. In fact, the reverse is true: women who are on the inside and whose genders are easy to discern get more of their code approved, and to a statistically significant degree"
It is still unjust to give them preferential treatment. This is a common misconception from the early days of chivalry: putting a woman on a pedestal just because she is a woman is still discriminating against her.
If there were no discrimination
Re:it is STILL discrimination (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm against discrimination in my organization. Not for some thing about right and wrong but simply because I feel the best should rise to the top. Gender be damned. It doesn't make sense to decide anything on the gender or sexual preference or color or religion or much of anything else about the person who does the work except for the quality of their work. Most people where I work feel this way too. We have very few women (it's aircraft repair and modification) but those we have are mostly excellent at their jobs and respected by their male coworkers. They constantly try to hire more women but I've seen women show up for an interview, take one look at the work environment, and just walk out. Somehow though, it's alway spun that it's our fault women don't work here.
Re: (Score:1)
They constantly try to hire more women but I've seen women show up for an interview, take one look at the work environment, and just walk out. Somehow though, it's alway spun that it's our fault women don't work here.
Well that would be fair if you were doing something which made the environment unpleasant. Are you, and would you know if you were?
Re: (Score:2)
The environment I speak of is physical. It's unbelievably loud to the point I often wear earplugs plus ear muffs for protection. It's very hot most of the year and it's a lot of very physical work.
That is not preferential, it is skill-based (Score:2)
In fact, the reverse is true: women who are on the inside and whose genders are easy to discern get more of their code approved, and to a statistically significant degree
This could mean any number of things, it could mean that the sample is skewed. It could also easily mean simply that in those cases the women had better code.
That is not discrimination, that is pure skill-based result. I see no reason to expect actual discrimination based on gender over code quality, because in this realm where you are ac
Re: That is not preferential, it is skill-based (Score:1)
It could also mean that women submitted more PRs for non-code related items like Docs and such that would be more likely to get approved. Just sayin'.
Careful, your slip is showing (Score:5, Insightful)
When it seems like men are getting preferential treatment, the story is portrayed as discrimination against women.
When it seems like women are getting preferential treatment, the story is portrayed as women being superior.
I propose journalists be forced to write these stories without knowing ahead of time which gender came out on top in a study. After the story has been written, the editor can go back and insert the proper gender-specific word or pronoun.
Re: (Score:2)
I propose journalists be forced to write these stories without knowing ahead of time which gender came out on top in a study. After the story has been written, the editor can go back and insert the proper gender-specific word or pronoun.
That won't happen in a world where the goal of the article (and headline) is to get page-views (or newspaper purchases).
Win-win either way (Score:1)
Women get their code submissions accepted more = women are better coders
Women get their code submissions accepted less = women are discriminated against
We live in a post-truth society where the above is all the a) data and b) conclusion people need to drive action and policy.
Of course, writers will spend 1% of their text giving some kind of token acknowledgement to "it is hard to know for sure" and 99% to "the conclusion is very clear"
I concur (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder why (Score:2)