@antimule @Oliver_S_Curry I think you're using the unreviewed version. The raw data is available with the published, peer-reviewed version as supplemental info.
The drop for women between gender-neutral and gendered contributions is 12%. For men, it's 4%.
@BryanLunduke Sure, but shouldn't these groups be able to decide for themselves whether it's offensive? Our open community is evidently (https://t.co/N1mqzpQMNy) not as open to the contributions of women. Let's change that.
@soniagupta504 1/2 There's data to support your claim of perceived competence. This research suggests that a pull request is less likely to be accepted if the gender of the developer is identifiable as female. https://t.co/d88Gk74TCB
@florianederer Really interesting paper. Would be great to see dynamics, what happens conditional on being hired.
Paper here suggests code written by women more likely to get accepted conditional on being part of project. https://t.co/4PJ3mcPsYR
Gender differences and bias in open source: pull request acceptance of women versus men - one of the most viewed articles in PeerJ this year https://t.co/enOmkE2jhD
PeerJ in 2017: A year in scientific review https://t.co/Rh31VUZo8v #PeerJStats2017 https://t.co/ebk7u1ny65
@teejir @fractality @jilliancyork @BiellaColeman Here's one that I remember well about github pull requests: https://t.co/SwCOqt9JkS
Blind auditions eliminate gender bias: https://t.co/woV1F8rJzv
Conferenses also report more equal gender distribution when reviewing proposals blind
An unfortunate, but not too suprising conclusion: "Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists nonetheless." https://t.co/Wt826mTVAt @ruhiyakris