{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023191094619666047, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012987012987012988, 'mean_word_length': 5.4226190476190474, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Uniform Guidelines: Better the Devil You Know

We agree with McDaniel, Kepes, and Banks’ (2011) conclusions that the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Civil Service Commission, Department of Labor, & Department of Justice, 1978) is inconsistent with scientific knowledge and professional practice. We also agree that findings based upon a quantitative analysis of disparate impact should not trigger legal action. We do not agree, however, that the Uniform Guidelines should be extensively revised as a response to scientific inconsistencies. We would argue that (a) the Uniform Guidelines was meant to assist federal agencies with the investigation of firms to ensure proportional representation among protected groups and was not intended as a representation of the state of knowledge today or in the mid-1970s, (b) the real problem with the Uniform Guidelines is the disparate impact theory of discrimination, which over the past 30 plus years has been endorsed by the courts and by the legislature in the Civil