http://www-2.rotman.utoronto.ca/facbios/file/Whitening%20MS%...
https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/19805/1/Cole%20et%20al.%2020...
https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/36436480/Gender_et_bia...
First study:
"Minorities may be particularly likely to experience disadvantage when they apply to ostensibly pro-diversity employers."
That doesn't quite fit the narrative. Also, the study examines the practice of "resume whitening" as something that some minority applicants (less than 50%, so a minority) do to combat their expectations of potential bias.
It does not say anything itself about whether such bias exists.
Second study:
"Male recruiters’ perceptions of applicants’ work experiences did not differ depending on applicant gender. However, female recruiters perceived male applicants’ resumes to re- port more work experiences than resumes of female applicants."
So female recruiters discriminate against females, male recruiters don't discriminate. Also doesn't fit the narrative.
Third link only got me an error message.
Anyway, I don't think any of these studies actually supports your assertion.
In the US, if you sent anonymized resumes to old, large companies in Industry X and then sent them to new, small companies in Industry Y, you are likely to get very different results.
Then your results become very dependent on how well you randomize those organizations, which is very difficult. If you get a few more "X" orgs instead of "Y" orgs, your results look totally different.