Suchergebnisse

Introduction / Nichole M. Bauer -- Part I. Women's political participation women's and men's identities and 2018 vote choice / Mary-Kate Lizotte -- Can role models help increase women's desire to run? : evidence from political psychology / Monica C. Schneider and Mirya R. Holman -- Part II. Gender on the campaign trail -- Voting for multiracial women / Danielle Casarez Lemi -- On the money : assessing the campaign-finance networks of women congressional candidates / Rosalyn Cooperman -- Part III. Voting for women -- Using gender and partisan stereotypes to evaluate female candidates / Sylvia I. Gonzalez and Nichole M. Bauer -- Beyond the presidency, 2016 : women candidates in concurrent down-ballot races / Tessa Ditonto and David J. Andersen -- Part IV. Women in legislative institutions -- Gendered kegislative effectiveness in state legislatures : the case of Pennsylvania / Jennie Sweet-Cushman -- #Metoo in the state house / Anna Mitchell Mahoney, Meghan Kearney, and Carly Megan Shaffer.

Conventional wisdom suggests that women can face a punishment from voters for engaging in self-promotion. Self-promotion, highlighting your accomplishments, can be detrimental to women because such behavior violates feminine stereotypic expectations that women be modest and humble. I argue and show that voters do not punish women for engaging in self-promotion but there are different styles of self-promotion that are more beneficial to women than others. I argue that women will be most successful when they use a communal style of self-promotion that emphasizes feminine stereotypic qualities, such as compromise. Conversely, I argue that agentic forms of self-promotion, which draw on masculine qualities, will be less successful for women because agency violates feminine expectations for women. I test the effects of communal and agentic self-promotion using two experiments. The result shows two key findings. First, voters do not punish women incumbents for using agentic styles of self-promotion, but women receive more positive evaluations with communal self-promotion. Second, voters are slightly more likely to reward men for communal self-promotion relative to women legislators.

This article examines differences in news coverage of female candidates using a media sociology framework that examines the interplay between organizational, routine, and individual levels of influence. The analyses find that national and local newspapers are more likely to write about the political qualifications of female candidates relative to male candidates, and female journalists at local newspapers are most likely to write about women's political qualifications. Female candidates receive more feminine stereotypic coverage across newspapers, especially in all-women elections. These results uncover important differences across media organizations that affect how female candidates develop their campaign strategies and voter decision-making.

AbstractCurrent scholarship offers conflicting conclusions about whether female candidates have a feminine advantage or a disadvantage. Previous work does not consider whether voters respond similarly to all types of messages that might emphasize feminine stereotypes, such as feminine trait and feminine issue messages. I argue that voters will respond differently to trait-based feminine messages relative to issue-based feminine messages. I test the effects of trait-based and issue-based feminine messages through two survey experiments. The results consistently show that emphasizing feminine traits harms female candidates, whereas emphasizing feminine issues helps female candidates. I use role congruity theory to argue that feminine traits activate feminine stereotypes about women, and feminine issues do not activate these stereotypes. I also show that trait-based and issue-based feminine messages affect Democratic and Republican female candidates in very different ways. These results have implications for the ability of women to win elected office and reverse the pervasive underrepresentation of women in politics.

"Gender Stereotyping in Political Decision Making" published on by Oxford University Press.

An implicit assumption underlying the gender stereotyping literature is that female candidates have an advantage in local elections. Two factors motivate this assumption. First, some local issues, such as the provision of social services, fit into the stereotypic strengths of female politicians. Second, as the level of office increases, so too does the perceived masculinity of the office. Research on local policymaking, however, indicates that the tasks associated with local political offices, such as economic competition with other cites, require masculine rather than feminine qualities. I integrate research on local policymaking with the gender stereotyping literature to clarify the role of gender stereotypes in local elections. Using two national survey experiments, I find that female candidates, especially Republican female candidates, benefit from emphasizing masculine stereotypes and not feminine stereotypes.

Voters do not associate female candidates with feminine stereotypes, but voters also do not associate female candidates with the qualities most valued in political leaders such as experience and knowledge. Current research offers conflicting conclusions on whether female candidates benefit from breaking with feminine norms or face a backlash for being too aggressive and not likable enough. Using a series of experiments, I show how counterstereotypic gender strategies, including women emphasizing masculine trait competencies, improve evaluations of female candidates along both masculine and feminine leadership dimensions. These results offer novel insights into how female candidates can overcome perceptual deficits among voters that they lack critical masculine leadership qualities. I also show that female candidates can overcome these biases without losing on traditional feminine strengths such as warmth and likability. However, counterstereotypic female candidates can face a "likability" backlash from out‐partisan voters. These findings suggest counterstereotypes may be more beneficial for female candidates in a primary election context when voters are copartisans rather than general elections where candidates often need cross‐partisan support.