Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the impact of algorithmic monoculture in hiring, where a single vendor's algorithms screen a large pool of job applicants. By analyzing a dataset of 4 million applications screened by the same vendor, the study reveals significant racial disparities in applicant outcomes, with Asian and Black applicants disproportionately applying to positions where they face adverse impact. Furthermore, the research demonstrates that individuals experience homogeneous outcomes, often facing systematic rejection across multiple positions, highlighting the limitations of relying on a single algorithmic filter.
Algorithmic hiring tools from a single vendor can create "monocultures" that systematically disadvantage certain racial groups and lead to homogenous rejection outcomes for individual applicants.
Many employers screen job applicants with algorithms built by the same few algorithm vendors. We hypothesize that algorithmic monoculture leads to the same individuals and members of the same racial groups facing rejection. We acquire and analyze a novel dataset of 3 million applicants submitting 4 million applications where all the applications are screened by algorithms built by the same vendor. We find clear racial disparities in applicant outcomes. Of all applications submitted by Asian and Black applicants, 14.74% and 25.87% are submitted to positions that adversely impact Asian and Black applicants, respectively, according to U.S. employment discrimination standards. Individuals also receive homogeneous outcomes: 4% of all applicants who apply to 10 positions are recommended for rejection from all positions, a rate higher than expected by chance. To better understand this homogeneity, we leverage the deterministic replicability of hiring algorithms to generate the outcomes applicants would have received if they applied to all positions. We show that applicants would need to apply widely in order to ensure their applications are considered by a human