The question was about whether women are genuinely more likely to be passed over for a job offer if they ask for as much pay as a man would ask for, or if (as you described), or both. A broken clock is right twice a day, and it’s missing the point of the question if you go and explain why you can’t rely on said broken clock.
Are hiring managers actually less likely to hire women if they ask for market-rate pay, as opposed to men when they do the same?
.
I can’t believe we should ever say this. No, the chat machine is the problem.
.
Absolutely, so who is building a study that uses it for the wrong thing and then publishing articles about it
deleted by creator
the society is also the problem
That’s not the question.
It wasn’t about whether the LLM was well reasoned, it was about whether the conclusion was (pragmatically speaking) correct.
.
Again, that wasn’t the original question.
The question was about whether women are genuinely more likely to be passed over for a job offer if they ask for as much pay as a man would ask for, or if (as you described), or both. A broken clock is right twice a day, and it’s missing the point of the question if you go and explain why you can’t rely on said broken clock.
Are hiring managers actually less likely to hire women if they ask for market-rate pay, as opposed to men when they do the same?
.