The Resume Paradox: Greater Language Differences, Smaller Pay Gaps
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Over the past decade, the gender pay gap has remained steady with women earning 84 cents for every dollar earned by men on average. Many studies explain this gap through demand-side bias in the labor market represented through employers' job postings. However, few studies analyze potential bias from the worker supply-side. Here, we analyze the language in millions of US workers' resumes to investigate how differences in workers' self-representation by gender compare to differences in earnings. Across US occupations, language differences between male and female resumes correspond to 11% of the variation in gender pay gap. This suggests that females' resumes that are semantically similar to males' resumes may have greater wage parity. However, surprisingly, occupations with greater language differences between male and female resumes have lower gender pay gaps. A doubling of the language difference between female and male resumes results in an annual wage increase of 2,797 for the average female worker. This result holds with controls for gender-biases of resume text and we find that per-word bias poorly describes the variance in wage gap. The results demonstrate that textual data and self-representation are valuable factors for improving worker representations and understanding employment inequities.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 60 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jul 2023.
Builds on
16 of 60 references.
References · 16
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
- 2013Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Spacecited by 4,346
- 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,304
- 2020MPNet: Masked and Permuted Pre-training for Language Understandingcited by 973
- 2020Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLPcited by 951
- 2016Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biasescited by 894
- 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
- 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolution: Evaluation and Debiasing Methodscited by 657
- 2019The Woman Worked as a Babysitter: On Biases in Language Generationcited by 540
- 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolutioncited by 438
- 2019Lipstick on a Pig: Debiasing Methods Cover up Systematic Gender Biases in Word Embeddings But do not Remove Themcited by 268
- 2017Word Embeddings Quantify 100 Years of Gender and Ethnic Stereotypescited by 251
4 more
- 2021Bias Out-of-the-Box: An Empirical Analysis of Intersectional Occupational Biases in Popular Generative Language Modelscited by 141
- 2019What does it mean to solve the problem of discrimination in hiring? Social, technical and legal perspectives from the UK on automated hiring systemscited by 38
- 2020Generalized Word Shift Graphs: A Method for Visualizing and Explaining Pairwise Comparisons Between Textscited by 21
- 2018Socioeconomic Dependencies of Linguistic Patterns in Twitter: A Multivariate Analysiscited by 9
Built on by
Not cited yet.