Research Papers & Projects
The Masculine/Feminine Double Bind: A Survey Experiment of Gendered Elections
While most studies show no aggregate penalty against women in elections, recent scholarship on intra-party races has demonstrated that candidates—especially women—do face a“double-bind”with regard to their self-presentation; voters prefer women who fit traditional profiles (i.e.married/parent/caregiver) while preferring candidates who often fulfill different criteria. However, research has relied on 1) high level competition, which masks selection effects and perceived candidate competency and 2) text-heavy survey experiments lacking common audio/visual signals of gendered presentation. Because gender biases are not always or primarily explicit, experimental evaluations of candidates are more likely to reflect real world evaluations with the additional of these audio/visual cues than text-only cues. Therefore, existing findings of differences in candidate evaluations may be magnified (and/or extend to a wider range of voters) when treatments are more realistic and therefore have the chance to activate implicit biases. Building on the experimental vignettes in previous studies, I conduct a survey experiment using audio recordings of campaign positions with manipulation to create a more masculine or more feminine timbre. I also add candidate portraits and socio-demographic information with modifications to signal relative femininity and masculinity. In short, I am able to better test the validity of current research on voter biases against female and/or feminine candidates. Using a nationally diverse sample of verified voters, I find that across both parties, women face a penalty for feminine self-presentation, though evidence of the “double-bind” regarding likeability and competence is weaker than in previous work. I also find that among Republicans, this more feminine self-presentation puts women candidates at a significant disadvantage in intra-party elections. Link.
Recipient of APSA Elections, Public Opinion, and Voting Behavior Section John Sullivan Award for best paper by a graduate student at the previous APSA Annual Meeting, 2022
Funded by the Stanford Center for American Democracy and Institute for Research in the Social Sciences
All Else Equal? Gendered Election Outcomes in Early Stages of the Political Pipeline
Studies of women’s underrepresentation have largely focused on women’s low rates of candidacy, based primarily on the finding that women who run tend to win at similar rates as men (e.g., Kanthak & Woon 2013). However, recent work has begun to cast doubt on the assertion that “all else is equal” for women in political contests (Ashworth et al. 2023; Bucchianeri 2018; Teele et al. 2018). Other work has explored partisan differences (Schwarz & Coppock 2022; Thomsen 2019) and pipeline effects (Thomsen & King 2020). Furthermore, more gendered offices, particularly at the local level, may influence how well women perform at the lowest entry stage of the political pipeline (Anzia & Bernhard 2022). Because selection effects at one level can affect outcomes at subsequent levels, better understanding how women (and men) move along the political pipeline is crucial to our understanding of the gender gap in political representation.
To better understand gendered pipelines to power across levels of government, I run a candidate choice conjoint experiment in local context. Specifically, I explore how more feminine and masculine background characteristics, as well as often gendered roles as parent/spouse, influence vote choice across office type and respondent partisanship. While overall results show an advantage for women candidates, preferences for parenthood and more masculine background characteristics may impact women’s likelihood of winning. Furthermore, women appear to face a double bind among Republican voters for certain contests. I also include local California election data to track women’s progress across time at local levels of the candidate pipeline, finding little progress over time in women’s representation and evidence of partisan effects.
Funded by the Stanford Center for American Democracy and Institute for Research in the Social Sciences
Misperceptions, Falling in Line, or Status Threat? Reducing Negative Attitudes Toward Mail-In Voting
With Alena Smith
In the past two elections, many conservative Americans have expressed hostility toward votes cast by mail, typically citing concerns about election fraud. Other sources of concern might stem from the threat of losing more elections to the Democrats or falling in line with elite rhetoric, especially that of Donald Trump. Using summaries of previous work in political science, news reporting, and different remarks by Donald Trump as treatment conditions, we test whether hostility toward mail-in voting is reduced by a) correcting misperceptions about the security of election outcomes of mail-in voting procedures, b) establishing key elites' acceptance of mail-in voting in certain circumstances, c) limiting the perceive electoral threat of mail-in voting, or d) some combination of the above.
Funded by the Stanford Center for American Democracy and Institute for Research in the Social Sciences
The Elephant (Or Donkey) in the Bedroom: Political Influence Between Spouses
Parental party identification and ideology play a sizable role in determining a child’s later party identification and ideology. Researchers of political behavior begin with the knowledge that family matters for political socialization. Yet familial political influence in adulthood is understudied, particularly within marriage or similar long-term romantic relationships. Despite journalistic reports of political tensions and deliberations within such partnerships, relationships at this life stage receive comparatively little attention in social science. Political influence may occur asymmetrically by gender, which could have implications for the political socialization of children, support for public policy, and voting. To explore this issue, I will conduct 1) a survey experiment of married dyads and 2) lagged dependence regression analysis of married dyads in British Household panel data. In the survey experiment, coupled individuals will receive cues indicating the issue position of their spouse or another unknown respondent in the study, which are in fact computer-generated, randomly assigned positions. Comparing shifts in issue position relative to an individual’s intake survey responses by treatment condition, this survey experiment will test whether spouse’s positions have influence on an individual political positions.
Funded by the Stanford Center for American Democracy and Institute for Research in the Social Sciences