Run, Jane, Run! Gendered Responses to Political Party Recruitment
- 1k Downloads
Many researchers point to gender inequities in party recruitment practices to explain women’s underrepresentation on the ballot. However, there has been little systematic research about how men and women respond to recruitment, so we do not know whether gender-balanced recruitment would actually lead to gender-balanced outcomes. We conduct two studies to address this question. First, in cooperation with a county Republican Party, we identically recruited 5510 male and 5506 female highly active party members to attend a free candidate training seminar. Republican women were half as likely to respond to the invitation as men. Second, we conducted a survey experiment of 3960 voters on the Utah Colleges Exit Poll. Republican men’s level of self-reported political ambition was increased by the prospect of elite recruitment significantly more than Republican women’s, thereby increasing the gender gap vis-à-vis the control. The gender gap in the effect of recruitment on political ambition among Democrats was much smaller. Together, these findings suggest that to fully understand the role recruitment plays in women’s underrepresentation, researchers must understand the ways in which men and women respond to recruitment, not just whether political elites engage in gendered recruitment practices.
KeywordsGender Women’s representation Recruitment Experiment
We would like to thank Utah County Republican Party chairmen David Acheson and Casey Voeks; David Magleby and Utah Colleges Exit Poll research assistants Alejandra Gimenez and Geoffrey Cannon; our research assistants, Kali Smith and Brandon Betz; and three very helpful anonymous reviewers. We are grateful for early feedback from Jen Lawless, Kira Sanbonmatsu, Kelly Patterson, and the members of Brigham Young University’s Politics, Economics, and Development Labs. We would like to acknowledge the research support of the Women’s Research Initiative, the Emmeline B. Wells Scholarly and Creative Works Grant, and a Mentored Environment Grant at Brigham Young University.
- Crowder-Meyer, M. (2011). The party’s still going: Local party strength and activity in 2008. In J. C. Green & D. J. Coffey (Eds.), The state of the parties: The changing role of contemporary American parties. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
- Hennings, V. M. 2011. Civic selves: Gender, candidate training programs, and envisioning political participation. Doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
- Huckshorn, R. J., & Spencer, R. C. (1971). The politics of defeat: Campaigning for congress. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
- Kanthak, K., & Woon, J. (2015). Women don’t run? Election aversion and candidate entry. American Journal of Political Science, 59(3), 595–612.Google Scholar
- Moncrief, G. F., Squire, P., & Jewell, M. E. (2001). Who runs for the legislature? Real politics in America. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Niven, D. (2006). Throwing your hat out of the ring: Negative recruitment and the gender imbalance in state legislative candidate. Politics and Gender, 2(4), 473–489.Google Scholar
- Republican National Committee. 2013. Growth and Opportunity Project. Retrieved July 16, 2013 from http://growthopp.gop.com/rnc_growth_opportunity_book_2013.pdf.
- Rozell, M. J. (2000). Helping women run and win: Feminist groups, candidate recruitment and training. Women & Politics, 12(3), 101–116.Google Scholar
- Sanbonmatsu, K. (2015). Electing women of color: The role of campaign trainings. Journal of Women, Politics & Policy, 36(2), 137–160.Google Scholar
- Sanbonmatsu, K., Carroll, S. J., & Walsh, D. (2009). Poised to run: Women’s pathways to the state legislatures. New Brunswick: Center for American Women and Politics.Google Scholar