Paper detail

Ethical considerations for data involving human gender and sex variables

The inclusion of human sex and gender data in statistical analysis invokes multiple considerations for data collection, combination, analysis, and interpretation. These considerations are not unique to variables representing sex and gender. However, considering the relevance of the ethical practice standards for statistics and data science to sex and gender variables is timely, with results that can be applied to other sociocultural variables. Historically, human gender and sex have been categorized with a binary system. This tradition persists mainly because it is easy, and not because it produces the best scientific information. Binary classification simplifies combinations of older and newer data sets. However, this classification system eliminates the ability for respondents to articulate their gender identity, conflates gender and sex, and also obscures potentially important differences by collapsing across valid and authentic categories. This approach perpetuates historical inaccuracy, simplicity, and bias, while also limiting the information that emerges from analyses of human data. The approach also violates multiple elements in the American Statistical Association (ASA) Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice. Information that would be captured with a nonbinary classification could be relevant to decisions about analysis methods and to decisions based on otherwise expert statistical work. Statistical practitioners are increasingly concerned with inconsistent, uninformative, and even unethical data collection and analysis practices. This paper presents a historical introduction to the collection and analysis of human gender and sex data, offers a critique of a few common survey questioning methods based on alignment with the ASA Ethical Guidelines, and considers the scope of ethical considerations for human gender and sex data from design through analysis and interpretation.

preprint2024arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.