IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v221y2022ics0165176522003664.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Your resume is your gatekeeper: Automated resume screening as a strategy to reduce gender gaps in hiring

Author

Listed:
  • Pisanelli, Elena

Abstract

Firms increasingly rely on artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms for hiring. The literature prompts concerns about such AI algorithms hindering gender equality in employment outcomes. Using a unique field study, I find human recruiters’ gender stereotypes lead to women having 69% lower chances of being interviewed for a gender-neutral job, compared to equally qualified men. Introducing automated resume screening shrinks such a gender gap by 43 percentage points.

Suggested Citation

  • Pisanelli, Elena, 2022. "Your resume is your gatekeeper: Automated resume screening as a strategy to reduce gender gaps in hiring," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:221:y:2022:i:c:s0165176522003664
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2022.110892
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176522003664
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2022.110892?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heather Sarsons & Klarita Gërxhani & Ernesto Reuben & Arthur Schram, 2021. "Gender Differences in Recognition for Group Work," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(1), pages 101-147.
    2. Danielle Li & Lindsey R. Raymond & Peter Bergman, 2020. "Hiring as Exploration," NBER Working Papers 27736, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fumagalli, Elena & Rezaei, Sarah & Salomons, Anna, 2022. "OK computer: Worker perceptions of algorithmic recruitment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    2. Fischbacher, Urs & Kübler, Dorothea & Stüber, Robert, 2022. "Betting on diversity: Occupational segregation and gender stereotypes," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2022-207, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    3. Jonas Radbruch & Amelie Schiprowski, 2023. "Committee Deliberation and Gender Differences in Influences," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 398, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    4. Kwiek, Marek & Roszka, Wojciech, 2021. "Gender-based homophily in research: A large-scale study of man-woman collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    5. Diana Moreira & Santiago Pérez, 2022. "Who Benefits from Meritocracy?," NBER Working Papers 30113, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Kai Barron & Ruth Ditlmann & Stefan Gehrig & Sebastian Schweighofer-Kodritsch, 2025. "Explicit and Implicit Belief-Based Gender Discrimination: A Hiring Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(2), pages 1600-1622, February.
    7. Jonas Radbruch & Amelie Schiprowski, 2020. "Interview Sequences and the Formation of Subjective Assessments," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 045, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    8. Ayllón, Sara, 2022. "Online teaching and gender bias," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    9. Biermann, Marcus, 2024. "Remote talks: Changes to economics seminars during COVID-19," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    10. Coraggio, Luca & Pagano, Marco & Scognamiglio, Annalisa & Tåg, Joacim, 2025. "JAQ of all trades: Job mismatch, firm productivity and managerial quality," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    11. David Card & Stefano DellaVigna & Patricia Funk & Nagore Iriberri, 2022. "Gender Differences in Peer Recognition by Economists," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(5), pages 1937-1971, September.
    12. Lorenzo Ductor & Sanjeev Goyal & Anja Prummer, 2023. "Gender and Collaboration," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(6), pages 1366-1378, November.
    13. Deepa Dhume Datta & Nitzan Tzur-Ilan, 2024. "Gender Gaps in the Federal Reserve System," Working Papers 2417, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    14. Baltrunaite, Audinga & Casarico, Alessandra & Rizzica, Lucia, 2022. "Women in economics: the role of gendered references at entry in the profession," CEPR Discussion Papers 17474, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Paula Onuchic & Debraj Ray, 2023. "Signaling and Discrimination in Collaborative Projects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(1), pages 210-252, January.
    16. Kinnl, Klara & Möller, Jakob & Walter, Anna, 2023. "Borrowed Plumes:: The Gender Gap in Claiming Credit for Teamwork," Department of Economics Working Paper Series 345, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    17. Joshua Angrist & Marc Diederichs, 2024. "Dissertation Paths: Advisors and Students in the Economics Research Production Function," NBER Working Papers 33281, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Richard T. Carson & Joshua Graff Zivin & Jordan J. Louviere & Sally Sadoff & Jeffrey G. Shrader, 2022. "The Risk of Caution: Evidence from an Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 9042-9060, December.
    19. Jeffrey Wagner, 2021. "Concrete Strategies for Economics Tenure-Track Faculty and Their Mentors," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 47(3), pages 449-459, June.
    20. Davies, Benjamin, 2022. "Gender sorting among economists: Evidence from the NBER," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Artificial intelligence; Gender; Hiring; Inequality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J71 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor Discrimination - - - Hiring and Firing
    • J63 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Turnover; Vacancies; Layoffs
    • M51 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Firm Employment Decisions; Promotions

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:221:y:2022:i:c:s0165176522003664. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.