AI-generated identical résumés for a man and woman: Her’s received more ‘weak’ labels, while his achieved 97% approval rating

(SeaPRwire) –   If you’re using AI for professional work and wondering whether your gender affects how your use is judged, the answer may be yes.

A new study aimed to determine if women—especially young women—are held to a higher standard than men when using artificial intelligence in job applications. Zehra Chatoo, a former Meta strategist and founder of thinktank Code For Good Now, used AI to generate identical résumés with one key difference: one was for Emily Clarke, the other for James Clarke.

The résumés were shared with two groups, both told they had been created with AI assistance.

Reviewers evaluating Emily’s résumé were 22% more likely to doubt her trustworthiness compared to James. Her CV was also twice as likely to raise concerns about her competence and ability to perform the job. Some feedback on Emily’s résumé read, “She can’t even write a CV herself—not sure she has the skills to carry out the job.” In contrast, responses to James’s résumé justified his use of AI, with one noting, “He just needed a bit of help putting it together.”

“When men use AI, we question their effort. When women use AI, we question their integrity. That difference changes how the perceived risk of using AI is viewed,” said Chatoo.

This finding adds to growing concerns about an AI gender gap. According to a working paper published last year by Harvard Business School Associate Professor Rembrand Koning, the adoption rate of AI differs by about 25% between men and women.

Koning identified the concern reflected in Chatoo’s study, explaining that women are often judged more harshly for lacking expertise in certain fields. “Women might worry that even if they arrive at the right answer, someone will assume they ‘cheated’ by using tools like ChatGPT,” said Koning, a Professor of Business Administration.

It’s perhaps no surprise, then, that women tend to be more cautious about adopting AI, a pattern also observed in areas such as investing. A January study from Caltech, which surveyed 3,000 people, found that women consistently expressed greater skepticism than men about whether AI’s benefits outweigh its risks. They were also less convinced that the technology would improve their professional lives.

These concerns may be well-founded: a Brookings Institute study released this year found that among roles with high exposure to AI but low capacity to adapt to technological change, 86% are held by women.

Gen Z are the harshest critics

A generational divide also emerged in Chatoo’s study, which surveyed 1,000 British adults: Gen Z men, who have grown up alongside AI, gave some of the most negative evaluations of Emily’s résumé.

Among their responses, Gen Z men were 3.5 times more likely to describe Emily’s résumé as “weak” compared to James’s, which received a 97% approval rating. By contrast, 76% of respondents rated Emily’s résumé as strong despite identical content.

“If people believe they will be judged more harshly for using AI, they are less likely to adopt it—even if they are fully capable of doing so,” added Chatoo. “Closing the AI adoption gap requires addressing not only how people use AI, but how that use is evaluated.”