Those hours you spent hunched over your laptop, praying to get hired after checking your banking app, might have been in vain, according to a new Stanford University report. Their research indicates statistical bias against Black applicants in applicant-tracking systems.
Bias can prevent job seekers in the Black community from finding meaningful employment, something that can impact their mental and physical health. Tools capable of systematically implementing that bias are powerful difference-makers in our lives.
According to the Economic Policy Institute, Black women have suffered the largest employment losses in 2025. They are particularly vulnerable to being misinterpreted in the workplace. 600,000 Black women have lost their jobs, walked away from their employers, or have been pushed out of the workplace this year.
The statistical bias Stanford found could loom large in their quality of life.
What Is an Applicant Tracking System?
Most companies have standardized their job applicant process, and technology is at the center. Applicant tracking systems are tools used to pre-screen applicants for employment. They are powered by artificial intelligence, more commonly known as AI. The World Economic Forum says that they are used by over 90% of employers. Their data paints a bleak picture of the current labor market, as these systems dominate.
Preliminary access to consideration for roles from supermarket cashiers to senior marketing executives is gatekept by their algorithms. This makes applicant tracking systems a crucial factor in the livelihoods of many individuals who are trying to feed themselves and their families.
Applicant tracking systems are not the only ones reshaping how we obtain roles, perform work, and receive compensation. JPMorgan cited AI as a force capable of reshaping the labor market in a report released in April 2026. The Wall Street Journal reported that sales professionals are seeing their incomes affected by the adoption of AI models.
What Did the Stanford Report Find?
Stanford researchers explored the impact of Algorithmic Monocultures in Hiring. Their extensive inquiry identified “deployed algorithmic hiring as one of the largest demonstrations of unfair outcomes in real high-stakes AI decisions.”
This means that, according to their findings, the applicant tracking system is, in some cases, designed to prefer candidates who fit a dominant culture. The monoculture’s impact was not immediately obvious. The report analyzed findings on a position-by-position basis. It found “large-scale adverse impact for Asians and Blacks.” This is an important factor.
Data tells stories, but only after you ask it the right questions.
A Lack of Data Transparency
Stanford’s researchers cited the lack of transparency in the data available to evaluate the widespread impact of applicant tracking systems. “We are the first and only group to conduct empirical research independently deploying hiring algorithms at scale, even though hiring algorithms mediate high-stakes decisions and are pervasively adopted,” read their report. They advocated strengthening market surveillance, adding that “Given the data barriers, policy intervention may be necessary to enable scientific inquiry and increase accountability into this high-impact application of AI.”
Their research also confirmed what many job seekers had already suspected after instant rejections began flooding their inboxes. That 3 AM hard pass email you get after panic-applying to every job you’re even remotely qualified for may not have come from a human after all.
One ATS Rejection Can Impact Multiple Applications
The study also found that once you get a negative outcome from one application, you could automatically be rejected from others because of the ATS; 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.”
It might be a complex math equation shooting down your dreams. With a predetermined high-yield rejection rate that disregards your education and experience. Researchers suggested casting a wider net during the job search process to ensure human eyes see your application.
How Can a Lack Of Work Impact Your Health?
The Journal of Affective Disorders labeled unemployment a public health concern after it found that “Unemployment is associated with substantially greater depression and anxiety.” It raises morbidity rates as well.
One’s employment status often determines access to health insurance. According to a 2025 article from Quality of Life Research, “Unemployment is a recognized risk factor for impaired physical and mental health, and numerous studies have shown that unemployed people often report a reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL)” and “longer durations of unemployment correlate with poorer HRQoL.”
Research shows that Black people have longer periods of unemployment, placing them at risk for a lower quality of life.
How We Are Impacted by Unemployment
In 2025, the National Women’s Law Center found that “unemployed Black workers aged 16 and over are also experiencing longer spells of unemployment compared to other groups. Black women are typically experiencing unemployment spells of 14.5 weeks, and Black men are typically experiencing spells of 12.1 weeks.” This is significantly higher than their counterparts.
Many people who are unemployed or underemployed go without their healthcare needs being met. This means that they find it harder to gain the resources they need to attend to the mental health challenges that unemployment can present.
Technology has its advantages, but its threats are ever-present, too.
Resources
Algorithmic Monocultures in Hiring
Journal of Affective Disorders
