Are Black Applicants Discriminated Against?

This video looks at the MIT/UofC study by Bertrand and Mullainathan (2004), which concluded that job applicants with black-sounding names are called back less than applicants with white sounding names. The study is titled "Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal?" and has such a flawed methodology that it demonstrates just how biased social research into discrimination is.

The study: http://hvrd.me/8Ry5lJ

Blog entry that examined the study: http://arward.net/?p=208

Jonathan Haidt survey:http://bit.ly/gGXgCM

Fryer Study: http://bit.ly/gYizmI

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• black racism
• black supremacy
• racial discrimination
• employer discrimination
• black sounding names
• Bertrand and Mullainathan
• lakisha and jamal

[peepo9000]

WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

[peepo9000]

Why didn't they do more well known black names and less known white names? Why didn't they do names that could be considered either/or? Like Don and put that they were white on some and black on some? Why did they only do a test on names and then based on that, put such a heavy accusation?

[peepo9000]

Also why didn't they make some of the white names as black. You have to put your race on an application so why didn't they do studies with black people named "Matt" or "Emily" and white people named "Jamaal". They exist so why didn't they really dig in to see if it was actually race? Cause all they have proven is that there's a chance foreign names might have less a chance than well known names. That has very little to do with race.

[peepo9000]

HEY they should've done a study with "White American Names, Black American Names, and White Norweigan Names" I guarentee one hundred percent there is a strong possiblity that the results were based on the names and not the race. Something tells me "Sigurd" wouldn't get as many calls as "Matthew". I don't really think it was about race...

[altonhare]

@kkilo34 The conclusion that blacks are discriminated against in callbacks because of their race can be genuinely called into question, as we've done here, based on the idea that there are alternative explanations consistent with the data. Not, however, for any of the reasons you gave in the video.

[altonhare]

@kkilo34 Yes, there are potentially other explanations for systematically lower callback rates for "black sounding" names. I skimmed the study and they discuss some of them. They recognize the one big flaw in the study is obviously that names are being used as a proxy for race. Therefore, you can never rule out biases based on the names themselves, independent of racial implication.

[altonhare]

@kkilo34 Yes, that speculation is also possible.

[kkilo34]

@altonhare Thank you. No, no it doesn't. So, black sounding names may receive a slightly lower rate of callbacks that have nothing to do with racial discrimination. Would you agree?

[kkilo34]

@altonhare "my best explanation" So you're just guessing here, right? Can we be clear that this is pure speculation? You're doing a lot of that. So, can I speculate that black names might have a slightly lower callback rate because employers assume that someone with a black sounding name might be really into their race and therefore perceive any lack of promotion or hiring as a sign of racism resulting in a lawsuit. So, no one hates blacks. They just don't want to get sued. Is that possible?

[altonhare]

@kkilo34 No, they do not clearly have a "systematic" opposition to Todds. You have to actually perform a calculation to determine whether the difference between Todd and Brad is statistically significant.