A new study using AI-generated identical résumés found gendered effects in how reviewers interpret candidates’ use of AI. Researchers created two versions of the same resume—one for Emily Clarke and one for James Clarke—differing only by whether the applicant was described as using AI. Reviewers questioned the female candidate’s trustworthiness more often and raised competence concerns at higher rates. The feedback attributed to reviewers reflects a broader pattern: when men use AI, respondents doubt effort less, while women’s AI use is more likely to be interpreted as integrity risk. The study’s results feed into an “AI gender gap” discussion, including evidence that women are more risk-averse about AI adoption at work. The article also references prior research about adoption rates and concerns that women may fear being seen as having “cheated” when using tools like ChatGPT. For universities, career services, and employers recruiting through institutional pipelines, the finding underscores the need for transparent AI-use policies and bias-aware hiring practices when AI tools enter the résumé review ecosystem.