“I’m concerned that adcoms are just rating down Asian applicants since there probably is an indirect and unwritten order to limit the number of Asians on campuses.”
Just a guess… although I agree the evidence suggests there is an issue of bias, it’s probably not that blatant or nefarious. If the AOs were being explicitly instructed to limit Asian applicants, it’s likely that this type of bombshell blatant discrimination would have leaked by now. The difference in assessment probably comes down to the same inherent bias issues that continue to dog women and minorities; most people aren’t even aware of their bias and even those that are struggle to overcome it. Similar to how the exact same behavior is perceived differently if a man vs a woman, the behaviors of an Asian applicant are perceived differently than the same behavior of a non-Asian applicant.
Examples -
The exact same resume from a person with a name implying he is a white male receives more interview requests than the resume with a minority or female name.
When young boys take charge to organize a playground scenario, they are viewed as being natural leaders and strong problem solvers. The exact same actions in young girls are often described as bossy or overbearing.
When a non-Asian applicant is captain of the Math team or a skilled violinist that plays concerts at retirement homes, s/he is viewed as a caring, intelligent leader. When an Asian applicant performs the same actions, s/he is viewed as the robotic product of tiger parents.
Plenty of studies highlight how people can view the exact same action yet assign different perceptions or labels to the action based on the gender or race of the person being evaluated.