…ook at the most distinctive language used in the public job posts of ten prominent tech companies.* Each one showed distinct language patterns that showed up in statistically anomalous ways. The distinct phrases used by each company showed up in their jobs much more often than they did fo…
That is nice to say but can you please clarify what you mean by “statistically anomalous?” Using what statistical analysis? Depending on the analysis, what p-value? what confidence interval? and were outliers included or excluded? Who is “we” when you say “we’ used textio? How many different people did independent analysis and did their results agree? What does it mean that the frequency was compared to the “next closest company?” closest in what? number of employees, revenue, geographically, something else? The phrase “statistically results in” makes no sense. I assume you meant that the use of some particular phrase resulted in a statistically significant increase in applications from men or women. The definition of statistically significant would also need to be defined in this case
Also, Who paid for this work? Why? Were the results published in a peer reviewed journal or will they be?
I understand not wanting to complicate the article unnecessarily for a non-technical audience but could you at least provide a link to more information for those of us who want that level of detail? That said, there has to be a better middle ground between the level of detail I am looking for and zero.