How big are your samples, if the likelihoods are 0%, 50%, and 67%?
With Only 1 Woman in Your Candidate Pool, There’s Statistically No Chance She’ll Be Hired https://t.co/i5ZpUGKaLh pic.twitter.com/spZsAXvlwx
— Jennifer Lee (@JLeeSoc) April 26, 2016
The above tweet links to this article discussing a study of hiring outcomes for 598 job finalists in finalist groups of 3 to 11 members.
The finalist groups in the sample ranged from 3 to 11 members, but the data in the figure are restricted to an unreported number of groups with exactly 4 members. The likelihoods in the figure of 0%, 50%, and 67% did not suggest large samples, so I emailed the faculty authors at Stefanie.Johnson [at] colorado.edu (on April 26) and david.hekman [at] colorado.edu (on May 2) asking for the data or for information on the sample sizes for the figure likelihoods. I also asked whether a woman was hired from a pool of any size in which only one finalist was a woman. I later tweeted a question to the faculty author who I found on Twitter.
I have not yet received a reply from either of these faculty authors.
I acknowledge researchers who provide data, code, and/or information upon request, so I thought it would be a good idea to note the researchers who don't.
Just wanted to drop by and say that I enjoy your blog and get excited whenever I see new posts. Thanks for your efforts.
Besides, I think, encouraging intellectual honesty in general, they have also encouraged me to go ahead and take a statistics course or two, so it doesn't take hours to understand each post!
Wow. Thank you very much for the kind words, Will.
(I'm hoping to release a new post this week or next.)
Best,
L.J