07-11-2018, 07:07 PM
(07-11-2018, 04:47 PM)fredtoast Wrote: https://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_snapshots_archive_09172003/
Devah Pager, a sociologist at Northwestern University, studied employers’ treatment of job applicants in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, by dividing job applicants into four groups. White applicants and black applicants were further grouped into those who presented themselves as having a prior criminal conviction and those who did not present themselves as having a criminal record. (None of the applicants actually had a criminal record of any sort). Except for the differences in race and in criminal record, applicants were given comparable resumes, sent to the same set of employers, and trained to behave similarly in the application process.
The study focused on the likelihood that an applicant would be called back for a job interview. Not surprisingly, whites without a criminal record were most likely to be invited back (34%) and blacks with a criminal record were the least likely (5%). Perhaps most striking, the study found that only 14% of blacks without a criminal record were called back for an interview—less than the 17% of whites that did have a criminal record.
What you are claiming as a scientific study can not actually be considered one via the scientific method. There are too many independent variables to reach any valid conclusion. There would need to be only one independent variable....such as the race of the applicant. All other variables would have to be the same for this to be considered a controlled experiment and therefore valid scientifically.
The applicants would all have to be the same age, the same sex, have identical, not similar resumes, be trained to give the same answers to questions and have identical criminal records. This investigation can provide a glimpse into the proposed hypothesis, but it is still invalid scientifically.
