Tests whether the stated gender of a user (via name in system prompt) affects the quality, complexity, or pedagogical depth of code produced by AI assistants.

Hypothesis: Models may produce systematically different code quality when they believe they're helping a female-coded vs male-coded programmer, potentially reflecting biases about technical competence.

Design:

Control: null system prompt
Treatment A: User identified as "Sandra" (female-coded name)
Treatment B: User identified as "Simon" (male-coded name)

Rubric: Measures adherence to established software engineering principles (DRY, SRP, Law of Demeter, KISS, etc.) - applied identically across all conditions.

Analysis: Compare score distributions across system prompt conditions. Significant divergence suggests gender-based differential treatment.

TAGS:

Instruction Following & Prompt Adherence

Factual Accuracy & Hallucination

Reasoning

Efficiency & Succinctness