Advertisement

The Contingent Effects of Candidate Sex on Voter Choice

  • Yoshikuni OnoEmail author
  • Barry C. Burden
Original Paper

Abstract

A prominent explanation for why women are significantly underrepresented in public office in the U.S. is that stereotypes lead voters to favor male candidates over female candidates. Yet whether voters actually use a candidate’s sex as a voting heuristic in the presence of other common information about candidates remains a surprisingly unsettled question. Using a conjoint experiment that controls for stereotypes, we show that voters are biased against female candidates but in some unexpected ways. The average effect of a candidate’s sex on voter decisions is small in magnitude, is limited to presidential rather than congressional elections, and appears only among male voters. More importantly, independent voters display the greatest negative bias against female candidates. The results suggest that partisanship works as a kind of “insurance” for voters who can be sure that the party affiliation of the candidate will represent their views in office regardless of the sex of the candidate.

Keywords

Female candidates Gender stereotypes Candidate traits Vote choice Partisanship Conjoint experiment 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Michael DeCrescenzo, Sarah Khan, Spencer Piston, Eleanor Neff Powell, David P. Redlawsk, and seminar participants at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Boston University, the University of Chicago, Dartmouth College, and Keio University for their helpful comments on this research. We also appreciate Yusaku Horiuchi for sharing his R scripts, and Masahiro Yamada and Masahiro Zenkyo for their assistance in data collection. Earlier versions of this work were presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association and the Annual Meeting of the Society for Political Methodology. This research was financially supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (26285036; 26780078; 17K03523) and the Kwansei Gakuin University Research Grant. Yoshikuni Ono also received the JSPS postdoctoral fellowship for research abroad. Data and supporting materials necessary to reproduce the numeral results in the paper are available in the Political Behavior Dataverse ( https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IZKZET).

Supplementary material

11109_2018_9464_MOESM1_ESM.docx (374 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 375 kb)

References

  1. Alexander, D., & Andersen, K. (1993). Gender as a factor in the attribution of leadership traits. Political Research Quarterly, 46(3), 527–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anastasopoulos, L. (2016). Estimating the gender penalty in house of representatives elections using a regression discontinuity design. Electoral Studies, 43, 150–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, M. R., Lewis, C. J., & Baird, C. L. (2011). Punishment or reward? An experiment on the effects of sex and gender issues on candidate choice. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 32(2), 136–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anzia, S. F., & Berry, C. R. (2011). The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson effect: Why do congresswomen outperform Congressmen? American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 478–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Auspurg, K., Hinz, T., & Liebig, S. (2009). Complaxity, learning effects, and plausibility of vignettes in factorial surveys. Unpublished manisucript. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-150806.
  6. Bauer, N. M. (2015). Emotional, sensitive, and unfit for office? Gender stereotype activation and support female candidates. Political Psychology, 36(6), 691–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bauer, N. M. (2017). The effects of countersterotypic gender strategies on candidate evaluations. Political Psychology, 38(2), 279–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berinsky, A. J., Margolis, M. F., & Sances, M. W. (2014). Separating the shirkers from the workers? Making sure respondents pay attention on self-administered surveys. American Journal of Political Science, 58(3), 739–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brooks, D. J. (2013). He runs, she runs: Why gender stereotypes do not harm women candidates. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bullock, J. G. (2011). Elite influence on public opinion in an informed electorate. American Political Science Review, 105(3), 496–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burden, B. C., Ono, Y., & Yamada, M. (2017). Reassessing public support for a female president. Journal of Politics, 79(3), 1073–1078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Ditonto, T. M., Hamilton, A. J., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2014). Gender stereotypes, information search, and voting behavior in political campaigns. Political Behavior, 36(2), 335–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dolan, K. (2008). Is there a ‘gender affinity effect’ in american politics? Political Research Quarterly, 61(1), 79–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dolan, K. (2010). The impact of gender stereotyped evaluations on support for women candidates. Political Behavior, 32(1), 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dolan, K., & Sanbonmatsu, K. (2011). Candidate gender and experimental political science. In J. N. Druckman, D. P. Green, J. H. Kuklinski & A. Lupia (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of experimental political science (pp. 289–298). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dolan, K. (2014a). Gender stereotypes, candidate evaluations, and voting for women candidates: What really matters? Political Research Quarterly, 67(1), 96–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dolan, K. (2014b). When does gender matter? Women candidates and gender stereotypes in American elections. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dolan, J., Deckman, M., & Swers, M. (2015). Women and politics: Paths to power and political influence. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological Review, 109(3), 573–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ekstrand, L., & Eckert, W. A. (1981). The impact of candidate’s sex on voter choice. Western Political Quarterly, 34(1), 78–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Falk, E., & Kenski, K. (2006). Issue saliency and gender stereotypes: Support for women as presidents in times of war and terrorism. Social Science Quarterly, 87(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fox, R. L., & Lawless, J. L. (2010). If only they’d ask: Gender, recruitment, and political ambition. Journal of Politics, 72(2), 310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fridkin, K. L., & Kenney, P. J. (2011). The role of candidate traits in campaigns. Journal of Politics, 73(1), 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fridkin, K. L., Kenney, P. J., & Woodall, G. S. (2009). Bad for men, better for women: The impact of stereotypes during negative campaigns. Political Behavior, 31(1), 53–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Guryan, J., & Charles, K. K. (2013). Taste-based or statistical discrimination: The economics of discrimination returns to its roots. The Economic Journal, 123(November), F41–F432.Google Scholar
  27. Hainmueller, J., Hangartner, D., & Yamamoto, T. (2015). Validating vignette and conjoint survey experiments against real-world behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(8), 2395–2400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D. J., & Yamamoto, T. (2014). Causal inference in conjoint analysis: Understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments. Political Analysis, 22(1), 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hajnal, Z. L. (2003). Uncertainty, experience with black representation, and the White vote. In B. C. Burden (Ed.), Uncertainty in American politics (pp. 213–243). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hayes, D. (2011). When gender and party collide: Stereotyping in candidate trait attribution. Politics & Gender, 7(2), 133–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Higgle, E. D. B., Miller, P. M., Shields, T. G., & Johnson, M. M. S. (1997). Gender stereotypes and decision context in the evaluation of political candidates. Women & Politics, 17(3), 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huddy, L., & Terkildsen, N. (1993a). The consequences of gender stereotypes for women candidates at different levels and types of office. Political Research Quarterly, 46(3), 503–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Huddy, L., & Terkildsen, N. (1993b). Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37(1), 119–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Iyengar, S., Valentino, N. A., Ansolabehere, S., & Simon, A. F. (1996). Running as a woman: Gender stereotyping in women’s campaigns. In P. Norris (Ed.), Women, media, and politics (pp. 77–98). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Iyengar, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2015). Fear and loathing across party lines: New evidence on group polarization. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 690–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kahn, K. F. (1994). Does gender make a difference? An experimental examination of sex stereotypes and press patterns in statewide campaigns. American Journal of Political Science, 38(1), 162–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kahn, K. F. (1996). The political consequences of being a woman: How stereotypes influence the conduct and consequences of political campaigns. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Kam, C. D. (2012). Risk attitudes and political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 56(4), 817–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kanthak, K., & Woon, J. (2015). Women don’t run? Election aversion and candidate entry. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. King, D. C., & Matland, R. E. (2003). Sex and the grand old party: An experimental investigation of the effect of candidate sex on support for a Republican candidate. American Politics Research, 31(6), 595–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kirkland, P. A., & Coppock, A. (forthcoming). Candiate choice without party labels: New insights from conjoint survey experiments. Political Behavior.Google Scholar
  43. Koch, J. W. (2000). Do citizens apply gender stereotypes to infer candidates’ ideological orientations? Journal of Politics, 62(2), 414–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Koch, J. W. (2002). Gender stereotypes and citizens’ impressions of house candidates’ ideological orientations. American Journal of Political Science, 46(2), 453–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2006). How voters decide: Information processing in election campaigns. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lawless, J. L. (2004). Politics of presence? Congresswomen and symbolic representation. Political Research Quarterly, 57(1), 81–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lawless, J. L., & Fox, R. L. (2005). It takes a candidate: Why women don’t run for office. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lawless, J. L., & Pearson, K. (2008). The primary reason for women’s underrepresentation? Reevaluating the conventional wisdom. Journal of Politics, 70(1), 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lawless, J. L. (2012). Becoming a candidate: Political ambition and the decision to run for office. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Lawrence, R. G., & Rose, M. (2014). The race for the presidency: Hillary Rodham Clington. In S. Thomas & C. Wilcox (Eds.), Women and elective office (pp. 67–79). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lupia, A., & McCubbins, M. D. (1998). The democratic dilemma: Can citizens learn what they need to know?. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Lynch, T. R., & Dolan, K. (2014). Voter attitudes, behaviors, and women candidates. In S. Thomas & C. Wilcox (Eds.), Women and elective office (pp. 46–66). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Malhotra, N., Margalit, Y., & Mo, C. H. (2013). Economic explanations for opposition to immigration: Distinguishing between prevalence and conditional impact. American Journal of Political Science, 57(2), 391–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Matland, R., & King, D. (2002). Women as candidates in congressional elections. In C. S. Rosenthal (Ed.), Women transforming Congress (pp. 119–145). Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  55. McDermott, M. L. (1997). Voting cues in low-information elections: Candidate gender as a social information variable in contemporary United States elections. American Journal of Political Science, 41(1), 270–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pew Research Center. (2017). American’s views of women as political leaders differ by gender. Retrieved April 25, 2018, from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/05/19/americans-views-of-women-as-political-leaders-differ-by-gender/.
  57. Popkin, S. L. (1991). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  58. Rahn, W. M. (1993). The role of partisan stereotypes in information processing about pollitical candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 37(2), 472–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rose, M. (2013). Women & executive office: Pathways & performance. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.Google Scholar
  60. Rosenthal, C. S. (1995). The role of gender in representation descriptive representation. Political Research Quarterly, 48(3), 599–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sanbonmatsu, K. (2002). Gender stereotypes and vote choice. American Journal of Political Science, 46(1), 20–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sanbonmatsu, K. (2006). Where women run: Gender and party in the American States. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sanbonmatsu, K., & Dolan, K. (2009). Do gender stereotypes transcend party? Political Research Quarterly, 62(3), 485–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sapiro, V. (1981). If U.S. Senator Baker were a woman: An experimental study of candidate images. Political Psychology, 3(1/2), 61–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Schaffner, B. F. (2007). Priming gender: Campaigning on women’s issues in U.S. Senate Elections. American Journal of Political Science, 49(4), 803–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Schneider, M. C., & Bos, A. L. (2014). Measuring stereotypes of female politicians. Political Psychology, 35(2), 245–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Strezhnev, A., Berwick, E., Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D., & Yamamoto, T. (2016). Package “Cjoint” version 2.0.4.Google Scholar
  68. Swers, M. L. (2002). The difference women make: The policy impact of women in Congress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  69. Thompson, S., & Steckenrider, J. (1997). The relative irrelevance of candidate sex. Women & Politics, 17(4), 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of LawTohoku UniversitySendaiJapan
  2. 2.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations