I had chosen a study, but self deleted because it would have taken too long to make my point.
Look at this based on names alone
The Old Boys’ club appears a long way from extinction in academic science. That’s the disturbing finding of five Yale University researchers who, a few days back, published a study spotlighting the university world’s stubborn gender gap on hiring.
The study’s most embarrassing finding showed that a group of biology, chemistry, and physics professors favored a male job candidate “John” over a female “Jennifer” with identical qualifications for a fictitious science lab manager position. The professors’ bias cut across both gender lines and field of study, with women just as likely as men, and biology professors as likely as their physics or chemistry counterparts to favor the male.
“We are not suggesting that these biases are intentional or stem from a conscious desire to impede the progress of women in science,” the study’s co-authors concluded in “Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students,” published online September 24 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
Past research indicates that the behavior reflects repeated exposure to pervasive cultural stereotypes that cause subtle gender biases to linger in even the most egalitarian individuals despite decreases in overt sexism over the past few decades, especially among those with the highest education levels.
http://www.genengnews.com/insight-and-intelligence/women-still-have-to-prove-themselves-in-academic-hiring/77899695/Now one could argue inherent sexism here right? But trust has a lot to do with even ingrained perceptions. Why would a modern science institution prefer a male name over a female one?
= new reply since forum marked as read