I read the study. The participant group included both men and women. They both paid the bots-with-faces more than plain chatbots, BUT, men paid plain chatbots more than women did, whereas women paid bots-with-faces more than men did.
In terms of paying the male bot more than the female bot, BOTH men AND women paid the male bot more. This echoes results that have been found in past studies about managerial preference, as I recall. The male-favoring bias was shared equally by men and women alike. The common narrative that the gender pay gap is an event of “men holding women back” is not supported by these findings. The better-fitting narrative is that the gap stems from an unconscious bias that everyone shares, regardless of their own gender.
Based on the interviews, the participants didn’t realize they were paying the male bot more. They all said gender didn’t matter to them. This suggests the bias is unconscious.
This was just one study, of course. Conclusions like this need many more studies with variations in methodology in an attempt to eliminate or control for various non-obvious factors that might skew the results. For example, the people chosen in this study were all working adults (18-65) with knowledge-work jobs. Maybe a similar study in a different field would get different results? Questions like that DO need more studies to answer.