<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Are women discriminated against in graduate admissions? Simpson&#8217;s paradox via R in three easy steps!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/</link>
	<description>cognition, language, social systems; statistics, visualization, computation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 13:11:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: It&#8217;s Not Always Discrimination &#124; Wheat and Tares</title>
		<link>http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/#comment-393592</link>
		<dc:creator>It&#8217;s Not Always Discrimination &#124; Wheat and Tares</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2013 07:01:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.anyall.org/?p=116#comment-393592</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...]  (If you would like to learn how to perform the calculation using a free stats package called R, here is a tutorial.)  Women cited as fact that they were being admitted at a lower rate than men.  However, when [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]  (If you would like to learn how to perform the calculation using a free stats package called R, here is a tutorial.)  Women cited as fact that they were being admitted at a lower rate than men.  However, when [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: It&#8217;s Not Always Discrimination &#124; Mormon Heretic</title>
		<link>http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/#comment-393078</link>
		<dc:creator>It&#8217;s Not Always Discrimination &#124; Mormon Heretic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 28 Jul 2013 16:35:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.anyall.org/?p=116#comment-393078</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...]  (If you would like to learn how to perform the calculation using a free stats package called R, here is a tutorial.)  Women cited as fact that they were being admitted at a lower rate than men.  However, when [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]  (If you would like to learn how to perform the calculation using a free stats package called R, here is a tutorial.)  Women cited as fact that they were being admitted at a lower rate than men.  However, when [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gio</title>
		<link>http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/#comment-54630</link>
		<dc:creator>gio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2011 11:40:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.anyall.org/?p=116#comment-54630</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#039;s clear that you don&#039;t know anything about Marxism and femminism. Why are so stupid to let everybody know? In any case, you are not alone. In every blog there always is a daft ignorant nationalist racist american who feels the need to show off his stupidity.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s clear that you don&#8217;t know anything about Marxism and femminism. Why are so stupid to let everybody know? In any case, you are not alone. In every blog there always is a daft ignorant nationalist racist american who feels the need to show off his stupidity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brendan O'Connor</title>
		<link>http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/#comment-10044</link>
		<dc:creator>Brendan O'Connor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:26:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.anyall.org/?p=116#comment-10044</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[B-Con, that&#039;s a pretty angry way to put it.

Here&#039;s the abstract from that Science paper.  I think it best lays out the situation.

&lt;blockquote&gt;Examination of aggregate data on graduate admissions to the University of California, Berkeley, for fall 1973 shows a clear but misleading pattern of bias against female applicants. Examination of the disaggregated data reveals few decision-making units that show statistically significant departures from expected frequencies of female admissions, and about as many units appear to favor women as to favor men. If the data are properly pooled, taking into account the autonomy of departmental decision making, thus correcting for the tendency of women to apply to graduate departments that are more difficult for applicants of either sex to enter, there is a small but statistically significant bias in favor of women. The graduate departments that are easier to enter tend to be those that require more mathematics in the undergraduate preparatory curriculum. The bias in the aggregated data stems not from any pattern of discrimination on the part of admissions committees, which seem quite fair on the whole, but apparently from prior screening at earlier levels of the educational system. Women are shunted by their socialization and education toward fields of graduate study that are generally more crowded, less productive of completed degrees, and less well funded, and that frequently offer poorer professional employment prospects.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

 Bickel, P. J., Hammel, E. A., and O&#039;Connell, J. W. (1975) Sex bias in graduate admissions: Data from Berkeley. Science, 187, 398–403.  &lt;a href=&quot;http://anyall.org/science_1975_sex_bias_graduate_admissions_data_berkeley.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;[PDF]&lt;/a&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>B-Con, that&#8217;s a pretty angry way to put it.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the abstract from that Science paper.  I think it best lays out the situation.</p>
<blockquote><p>Examination of aggregate data on graduate admissions to the University of California, Berkeley, for fall 1973 shows a clear but misleading pattern of bias against female applicants. Examination of the disaggregated data reveals few decision-making units that show statistically significant departures from expected frequencies of female admissions, and about as many units appear to favor women as to favor men. If the data are properly pooled, taking into account the autonomy of departmental decision making, thus correcting for the tendency of women to apply to graduate departments that are more difficult for applicants of either sex to enter, there is a small but statistically significant bias in favor of women. The graduate departments that are easier to enter tend to be those that require more mathematics in the undergraduate preparatory curriculum. The bias in the aggregated data stems not from any pattern of discrimination on the part of admissions committees, which seem quite fair on the whole, but apparently from prior screening at earlier levels of the educational system. Women are shunted by their socialization and education toward fields of graduate study that are generally more crowded, less productive of completed degrees, and less well funded, and that frequently offer poorer professional employment prospects.
</p></blockquote>
<p> Bickel, P. J., Hammel, E. A., and O&#8217;Connell, J. W. (1975) Sex bias in graduate admissions: Data from Berkeley. Science, 187, 398–403.  <a href="http://anyall.org/science_1975_sex_bias_graduate_admissions_data_berkeley.pdf" rel="nofollow">[PDF]</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Edward</title>
		<link>http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/#comment-10022</link>
		<dc:creator>Edward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 07:55:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.anyall.org/?p=116#comment-10022</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[it&#039;s called feminism, and it is rooted in marxism.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>it&#8217;s called feminism, and it is rooted in marxism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: B-Con</title>
		<link>http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/#comment-9998</link>
		<dc:creator>B-Con</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 17:28:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.anyall.org/?p=116#comment-9998</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&gt; Selective departments have more female applicants. It’s easy to see since the departments are ordered by selectiveness. Departments A and B let in many applicants, but they’re mostly male. The reverse is true for the rest. This means that the overall female population takes big admittance hits in departments C through F, while lots of males get in via departments A and B.

Note that &quot;selective&quot; also means &quot;popular&quot;, since departments with many applicants can pick and choose exactly who they want to admit. In other words, the departments where women dominate are the popular departments, like English, Psychology and Sociology. The departments where men tend to dominate are the less popular ones, like engineering, etc.

A much higher percentage of English, Psychology, and Sociology students apply to grad school than engineering, math, etc, students because once they graduate they realize that a B.A. in whatever they have is worthless, and they need a better degree. That and there are more of them as undergrads to apply. Couple that with the fact that there is a significant enrollment bias of women in English, Psychology, and Sociology compared to men. It is to be expected that more women are in the popular grad programs simply because more apply.

Also, none of this is surprising, since schools force their acceptance rates to be equal for each gender. They do not take the best (for example) 10% of their candidates, they just take the 10% best candidates for each gender, lest they be sued. It&#039;s quite sad that we can&#039;t just choose the best.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; Selective departments have more female applicants. It’s easy to see since the departments are ordered by selectiveness. Departments A and B let in many applicants, but they’re mostly male. The reverse is true for the rest. This means that the overall female population takes big admittance hits in departments C through F, while lots of males get in via departments A and B.</p>
<p>Note that &#8220;selective&#8221; also means &#8220;popular&#8221;, since departments with many applicants can pick and choose exactly who they want to admit. In other words, the departments where women dominate are the popular departments, like English, Psychology and Sociology. The departments where men tend to dominate are the less popular ones, like engineering, etc.</p>
<p>A much higher percentage of English, Psychology, and Sociology students apply to grad school than engineering, math, etc, students because once they graduate they realize that a B.A. in whatever they have is worthless, and they need a better degree. That and there are more of them as undergrads to apply. Couple that with the fact that there is a significant enrollment bias of women in English, Psychology, and Sociology compared to men. It is to be expected that more women are in the popular grad programs simply because more apply.</p>
<p>Also, none of this is surprising, since schools force their acceptance rates to be equal for each gender. They do not take the best (for example) 10% of their candidates, they just take the 10% best candidates for each gender, lest they be sued. It&#8217;s quite sad that we can&#8217;t just choose the best.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Porzak</title>
		<link>http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/#comment-6438</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Porzak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 May 2009 14:07:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.anyall.org/?p=116#comment-6438</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Brendan, Good stuff!

BTW, For many more cool mosaic plots, and others, see Michael Friendly&#039;s home page http://www.math.yorku.ca/SCS/friendly.html]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brendan, Good stuff!</p>
<p>BTW, For many more cool mosaic plots, and others, see Michael Friendly&#8217;s home page <a href="http://www.math.yorku.ca/SCS/friendly.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.math.yorku.ca/SCS/friendly.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Love it and hate it, R has come of age - Brendan O'Connor's Blog</title>
		<link>http://brenocon.com/blog/2008/04/are-women-discriminated-against-in-graduate-admissions-simpsons-paradox-via-r-in-three-easy-steps/#comment-1717</link>
		<dc:creator>Love it and hate it, R has come of age - Brendan O'Connor's Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 06:04:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.anyall.org/?p=116#comment-1717</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Are women discriminated against in graduate admissions? Simpson&#8217;s paradox via R in three easy ... [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Are women discriminated against in graduate admissions? Simpson&#8217;s paradox via R in three easy &#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
