You mean those "peer-reviewed scientific papers" based on glassdoors data where none have mentioned that glassdoors are unreliable?

I say this because glassdoors data are anonymous. Not all people preport there. So the sample is not representative. Not just that, data are anonymous, that means that people can go there and just lie. They might claim that their are a woman and make a high wage and there would be no way for the researchers to know it is a lie unless the wage is far from the range they already have.

So I think it is normal that real scientist prefer the studies by the government, who use tax data for the whole population and where people who lie about their wages might face severe punishment. I do know which ones to find more reliable.

But I guess that you assign more value to the studies that say what you want to hear from sources you like.

By the way, your original post illustrated perfectly the beliefs that lead to the wage gap. But you are free to think that we are the ones with cognitive dissonance by looking at tax data instead your "trusted sources" XD