🔗 Share this article

Do your LinkedIn followers recognizing you as a thought leader? Are hordes of respondents praising your advice on expanding your venture? Are headhunters making contact to discuss collaborations?

Should that not be the case, the reason could be that you're not male.

The Test: Changing Profile Gender for Better Visibility

Dozens of women participated in a collective professional network test this week following viral posts suggested that switching their gender to "male" boosted their platform visibility.

Other testers rewrote their profiles to incorporate what they termed "masculine-oriented" language - inserting results-driven business buzzwords like "propel", "revolutionize" and "accelerate". Anecdotally, their visibility also improved.

Algorithmic Bias Concerns Raised

The improved metrics has caused some to wonder whether a built-in sexism in the platform's system favors male users who use professional networking terminology.

Like most major social media platforms, LinkedIn employs a computerized system to decide which posts appear to which users - boosting some while suppressing others.

Platform Response

Through a company announcement, LinkedIn recognized the phenomenon but claimed it does not factor in "personal characteristics" when deciding content distribution. Instead, the company mentioned that "hundreds of signals" influence how posts perform.

Modifying profile gender in your settings does not affect how your posts shows up in results or timelines.

Personal Experiences

Simone Bonnett, who changed her gender identifiers to "he/him" and her profile name to "a masculine version", described extraordinary results.

"The statistics I'm observing indicate a 1,600% increase in profile views and a 1,300% increase in content views," she noted.

Another professional, a communications strategist, began experimenting after observing her audience decrease substantially.

The Process

• First, she changed her gender to "man"
• Subsequently, she used artificial intelligence to rewrite her professional summary using "male-coded" language
• Lastly, she recycled previous content with comparable "assertive" style

The result was immediate: a 415% increase in reach within one week.

The Downside

Although the positive results, Cornish expressed unhappiness with the method.

"Before, my posts were more personal - brief and clever, but also warm and human," she explained. "Currently, the bro-coded version was assertive and confident - like a white male swaggering around."

She abandoned the test after seven days, stating "Each day I persisted, and results got better, I became angrier."

Varying Outcomes

Not all participants encountered positive results. One writer who changed both her profile gender to "male" and her race to "Caucasian" described a decrease in reach and engagement.

"We know there's algorithmic bias, but it's extremely difficult to understand how it operates in specific cases or why," she remarked.

Broader Implications

These experiments coincide with ongoing discussions about LinkedIn's distinctive position as both a professional network and community site.

Recent changes in the past few months have apparently resulted in female creators experiencing significantly reduced exposure, resulting in unofficial tests where the same content by male and female users received vastly different reach.

Technical Explanation

Per LinkedIn, the network uses artificial intelligence to classify and spread posts based on multiple factors, including post content and the member's career profile.

The company claims it frequently assesses its algorithms, including "examinations of inequalities based on gender."

A spokesperson proposed that recent declines in certain members' visibility might stem from increased competition due to additional posts on the network.

Changing Landscape

As one participant observed, "bro-coding" appears to be growing on the network.

"People often view LinkedIn as more professional and refined," she remarked. "This is evolving. It's turning into increasingly competitive and less controlled."