Loading…
Gender Stereotyping and the Electoral Success of Women Candidates: New Evidence from Local Elections in the United States
Research shows that voters often use gender stereotypes to evaluate candidates, which should help women in some electoral contexts and hurt them in others. Yet, most research examines a single context at a time—usually US national elections, where partisanship is strong—and employs surveys and exper...
Saved in:
Published in: | British journal of political science 2022-10, Vol.52 (4), p.1544-1563 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
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!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-de5a7e45c192050f960521b2a10dd8ff2938143685ca8da07b096dd53e7501413 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-de5a7e45c192050f960521b2a10dd8ff2938143685ca8da07b096dd53e7501413 |
container_end_page | 1563 |
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 1544 |
container_title | British journal of political science |
container_volume | 52 |
creator | Anzia, Sarah F. Bernhard, Rachel |
description | Research shows that voters often use gender stereotypes to evaluate candidates, which should help women in some electoral contexts and hurt them in others. Yet, most research examines a single context at a time—usually US national elections, where partisanship is strong—and employs surveys and experiments, raising concerns that citizens’ responses may not reflect how they actually vote. By analyzing returns from thousands of nonpartisan local elections, we test whether patterns of women's win rates relative to men's match expectations for how the electoral effects of gender stereotyping should vary by context. We find women have greater advantages over men in city council than mayoral races, still greater advantages in school board races, and decreasing advantages in more conservative constituencies. Thus, women fare better in stereotype-congruent contexts and worse in incongruent contexts. These effects are most pronounced during on-cycle elections, when voters tend to know less about local candidates. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0007123421000570 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2718819970</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0007123421000570</cupid><sourcerecordid>2718819970</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-de5a7e45c192050f960521b2a10dd8ff2938143685ca8da07b096dd53e7501413</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwFvA82om-ye73qTUKhQ91OJxSZPZmtJNarJV-u3NtgUP4mlmmPd7jxlCroHdAgNxN2OMCeBpxiF2uWAnZABZUSUcgJ-SQb9O-v05uQhhFccyLWFAdhO0Gj2ddejRdbuNsUsqrabdB9LxGlXnvFzT2VYpDIG6hr67Fi0dRY3RssNwT1_wm46_jEarkDbetXTqVIT2uHE2UGP3fnNrOtQxq-cuyVkj1wGvjnVI5o_jt9FTMn2dPI8epolKC9YlGnMpMMsVVJzlrKkKlnNYcAlM67JpeBXvyNKizJUstWRiwapC6zxFkTPIIB2Sm4PvxrvPLYauXrmttzGy5gLKEqpKsKiCg0p5F4LHpt5400q_q4HV_YfrPx-OTHpkZLvwRi_x1_p_6gfCBHxB</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2718819970</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Gender Stereotyping and the Electoral Success of Women Candidates: New Evidence from Local Elections in the United States</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>ABI/INFORM global</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><source>Politics Collection</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Cambridge University Press</source><creator>Anzia, Sarah F. ; Bernhard, Rachel</creator><creatorcontrib>Anzia, Sarah F. ; Bernhard, Rachel</creatorcontrib><description>Research shows that voters often use gender stereotypes to evaluate candidates, which should help women in some electoral contexts and hurt them in others. Yet, most research examines a single context at a time—usually US national elections, where partisanship is strong—and employs surveys and experiments, raising concerns that citizens’ responses may not reflect how they actually vote. By analyzing returns from thousands of nonpartisan local elections, we test whether patterns of women's win rates relative to men's match expectations for how the electoral effects of gender stereotyping should vary by context. We find women have greater advantages over men in city council than mayoral races, still greater advantages in school board races, and decreasing advantages in more conservative constituencies. Thus, women fare better in stereotype-congruent contexts and worse in incongruent contexts. These effects are most pronounced during on-cycle elections, when voters tend to know less about local candidates.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-1234</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-2112</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0007123421000570</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Advantages ; Candidates ; Cities ; Constituents ; Councils ; Experiments ; Gender ; Gender stereotypes ; Hypotheses ; Legislatures ; Local elections ; National elections ; Partisanship ; Political science ; Polls & surveys ; Sex discrimination ; Stereotypes ; Success ; Voters ; Women</subject><ispartof>British journal of political science, 2022-10, Vol.52 (4), p.1544-1563</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press</rights><rights>Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-de5a7e45c192050f960521b2a10dd8ff2938143685ca8da07b096dd53e7501413</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-de5a7e45c192050f960521b2a10dd8ff2938143685ca8da07b096dd53e7501413</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4104-0020</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2718819970/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2718819970?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,11667,12824,12826,21366,21373,27901,27902,33200,33588,33962,36037,43709,43924,44339,72703,73964,74211,74638</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Anzia, Sarah F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernhard, Rachel</creatorcontrib><title>Gender Stereotyping and the Electoral Success of Women Candidates: New Evidence from Local Elections in the United States</title><title>British journal of political science</title><addtitle>Brit. J. Polit. Sci</addtitle><description>Research shows that voters often use gender stereotypes to evaluate candidates, which should help women in some electoral contexts and hurt them in others. Yet, most research examines a single context at a time—usually US national elections, where partisanship is strong—and employs surveys and experiments, raising concerns that citizens’ responses may not reflect how they actually vote. By analyzing returns from thousands of nonpartisan local elections, we test whether patterns of women's win rates relative to men's match expectations for how the electoral effects of gender stereotyping should vary by context. We find women have greater advantages over men in city council than mayoral races, still greater advantages in school board races, and decreasing advantages in more conservative constituencies. Thus, women fare better in stereotype-congruent contexts and worse in incongruent contexts. These effects are most pronounced during on-cycle elections, when voters tend to know less about local candidates.</description><subject>Advantages</subject><subject>Candidates</subject><subject>Cities</subject><subject>Constituents</subject><subject>Councils</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Gender</subject><subject>Gender stereotypes</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Legislatures</subject><subject>Local elections</subject><subject>National elections</subject><subject>Partisanship</subject><subject>Political science</subject><subject>Polls & surveys</subject><subject>Sex discrimination</subject><subject>Stereotypes</subject><subject>Success</subject><subject>Voters</subject><subject>Women</subject><issn>0007-1234</issn><issn>1469-2112</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>DPSOV</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M2L</sourceid><sourceid>M2R</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwFvA82om-ye73qTUKhQ91OJxSZPZmtJNarJV-u3NtgUP4mlmmPd7jxlCroHdAgNxN2OMCeBpxiF2uWAnZABZUSUcgJ-SQb9O-v05uQhhFccyLWFAdhO0Gj2ddejRdbuNsUsqrabdB9LxGlXnvFzT2VYpDIG6hr67Fi0dRY3RssNwT1_wm46_jEarkDbetXTqVIT2uHE2UGP3fnNrOtQxq-cuyVkj1wGvjnVI5o_jt9FTMn2dPI8epolKC9YlGnMpMMsVVJzlrKkKlnNYcAlM67JpeBXvyNKizJUstWRiwapC6zxFkTPIIB2Sm4PvxrvPLYauXrmttzGy5gLKEqpKsKiCg0p5F4LHpt5400q_q4HV_YfrPx-OTHpkZLvwRi_x1_p_6gfCBHxB</recordid><startdate>20221001</startdate><enddate>20221001</enddate><creator>Anzia, Sarah F.</creator><creator>Bernhard, Rachel</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>IKXGN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQHSC</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4104-0020</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20221001</creationdate><title>Gender Stereotyping and the Electoral Success of Women Candidates: New Evidence from Local Elections in the United States</title><author>Anzia, Sarah F. ; Bernhard, Rachel</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-de5a7e45c192050f960521b2a10dd8ff2938143685ca8da07b096dd53e7501413</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Advantages</topic><topic>Candidates</topic><topic>Cities</topic><topic>Constituents</topic><topic>Councils</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Gender</topic><topic>Gender stereotypes</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Legislatures</topic><topic>Local elections</topic><topic>National elections</topic><topic>Partisanship</topic><topic>Political science</topic><topic>Polls & surveys</topic><topic>Sex discrimination</topic><topic>Stereotypes</topic><topic>Success</topic><topic>Voters</topic><topic>Women</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Anzia, Sarah F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bernhard, Rachel</creatorcontrib><collection>Cambridge Journals Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI-INFORM Complete</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM global</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>History Study Center</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>British journal of political science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Anzia, Sarah F.</au><au>Bernhard, Rachel</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Gender Stereotyping and the Electoral Success of Women Candidates: New Evidence from Local Elections in the United States</atitle><jtitle>British journal of political science</jtitle><addtitle>Brit. J. Polit. Sci</addtitle><date>2022-10-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>52</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>1544</spage><epage>1563</epage><pages>1544-1563</pages><issn>0007-1234</issn><eissn>1469-2112</eissn><abstract>Research shows that voters often use gender stereotypes to evaluate candidates, which should help women in some electoral contexts and hurt them in others. Yet, most research examines a single context at a time—usually US national elections, where partisanship is strong—and employs surveys and experiments, raising concerns that citizens’ responses may not reflect how they actually vote. By analyzing returns from thousands of nonpartisan local elections, we test whether patterns of women's win rates relative to men's match expectations for how the electoral effects of gender stereotyping should vary by context. We find women have greater advantages over men in city council than mayoral races, still greater advantages in school board races, and decreasing advantages in more conservative constituencies. Thus, women fare better in stereotype-congruent contexts and worse in incongruent contexts. These effects are most pronounced during on-cycle elections, when voters tend to know less about local candidates.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S0007123421000570</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4104-0020</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0007-1234 |
ispartof | British journal of political science, 2022-10, Vol.52 (4), p.1544-1563 |
issn | 0007-1234 1469-2112 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2718819970 |
source | International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); ABI/INFORM global; Social Science Premium Collection; Politics Collection; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Cambridge University Press |
subjects | Advantages Candidates Cities Constituents Councils Experiments Gender Gender stereotypes Hypotheses Legislatures Local elections National elections Partisanship Political science Polls & surveys Sex discrimination Stereotypes Success Voters Women |
title | Gender Stereotyping and the Electoral Success of Women Candidates: New Evidence from Local Elections in the United States |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T11%3A15%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Gender%20Stereotyping%20and%20the%20Electoral%20Success%20of%20Women%20Candidates:%20New%20Evidence%20from%20Local%20Elections%20in%20the%20United%20States&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20political%20science&rft.au=Anzia,%20Sarah%20F.&rft.date=2022-10-01&rft.volume=52&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=1544&rft.epage=1563&rft.pages=1544-1563&rft.issn=0007-1234&rft.eissn=1469-2112&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0007123421000570&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2718819970%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-de5a7e45c192050f960521b2a10dd8ff2938143685ca8da07b096dd53e7501413%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2718819970&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0007123421000570&rfr_iscdi=true |