Public Perceptions of Women’s Inclusion and Feelings of Political Efficacy

Theoretical work argues that citizens gain important symbolic benefits when they are represented by gender-inclusive institutions. Despite the centrality of this claim in the literature, empirical evidence is mixed. In this article, I argue that these mixed findings are—in part—because many American...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American political science review 2021-11, Vol.115 (4), p.1226-1241
Main Author: STAUFFER, KATELYN E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitudes
Beliefs
Citizens
Congressional elections
Constituents
Efficacy
Election results
Females
Gender
Inferences
Legislatures
Panel data
Perceptions
Political Attitudes
Political science
Political systems
Politics
Polls & surveys
Public officials
Public opinion
Respondents
State legislatures
Women
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Theoretical work argues that citizens gain important symbolic benefits when they are represented by gender-inclusive institutions. Despite the centrality of this claim in the literature, empirical evidence is mixed. In this article, I argue that these mixed findings are—in part—because many Americans hold beliefs about women’s inclusion that are out of step with reality. Leveraging variation in survey respondents’ beliefs about women’s representation, I examine how these perceptions influence attitudes toward Congress and state legislatures. In both cases, I find that believing women are included is associated with higher levels of external efficacy among both men and women. Using panel data, I then show that when citizens’ underestimations (overestimations) are corrected, their levels of efficacy increase (decrease), shedding further light on this relationship. The findings presented in this research add new theoretical insights into when, and how, Americans consider descriptive representation when evaluating the institutions that represent them.
ISSN:0003-0554
1537-5943
DOI:10.1017/S0003055421000678