The traditional concept is that diversity of opinions and ideas is what creates better problem solving. I'm not sure if this study actually looks at that part... But it's noteworthy that polite society has substituted in diversity of identity as the moral good to claim why companies need things like DEI. At the most charitable the argument is made that diverse identities bring in diverse ideas because the people all have different lives up until the point that they are hired for a project. In reality what tends to happen is the DEI type programs explicitly exclude diversity of opinions and ideas. They want to hire people with obscure racial, ethnic, sexual, or gender backgrounds but if you are a super "diverse" person applying for a job with a government agency & they check your social media history to find you've made some incredibly tame comments about thinking the US government should stop overthrowing every government on earth which tries to nationalize their natural resources... Then you are not getting that job. Same goes for any corporation like Google who will end up putting out an AI which refuses to show images of white people and actually creates black Nazis which is far more offensive than just showing the actual historically accurate information. Anyone who would have had diversity of opinions or ideas and who could have spotted the problem ahead of time was preselected as unhirable.

Basically I'm wondering if all of this diversity they are studying is overlooking the actual diversity which might change the data.