MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401404493 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v26i3.7138

Are Madison and Jacob (Still) More Employable than Aaliyah and Xavier (in Public Accounting Firms)?

2024· article· en· W4401404493 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark A. Nickerson, Lisa Walters, So-Jin Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNames, Identity, and Discrimination Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity (politics)CertificationCallbackAccountingQuality (philosophy)Public accountingPopulationPolitical sciencePublic relationsPsychologyBusinessSociologyAuditDemographyLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To embrace diversity, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) has launched initiatives to enroll a more diverse population into the accounting profession. This study investigates if racial disparity currently exists despite these initiatives by conducting a blind study of callbacks for eight fictitious applicants of various races, genders, and resume quality. The study found that although no difference in callbacks existed in general between Blacks and Whites, when quality of resumes is considered Whites have the advantage. Further, the study offers practical solutions for CPA firms and higher education to consider in their efforts to achieve more diversity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicNames, Identity, and Discrimination ResearchFrench-language works237,207