The Importance of Candidate Sex and Partisan Preference over Time: A Multiday Study of Voter Decision Making

被引:12
作者
Andersen, David J. [1 ]
Ditonto, Tessa [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Durham, Sch Govt & Int Affairs, Durham DH1 3TU, England
关键词
voter decision making; women candidates; experimental methods; candidate evaluation; Dynamic Process-Tracing Environment; GENDER STEREOTYPES; INFORMATION SEARCH; FEMALE CANDIDATES; WOMEN CANDIDATES; VOTING-BEHAVIOR; PARTY; COMPETENCE; INFERENCES; PREJUDICE; SUPPORT;
D O I
10.1086/708340
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
Women often face challenges when running for political office, but precisely when and how candidate sex affects voter decision making is unclear. Using a unique multiday, high-information experiment, we examine how the presence of women candidates in an election influences subjects' information search, candidate evaluations, and vote decisions. We focus on how the partisan alignment of women candidates (whether they run in the subject's preferred in-party vs. out-party) matters and at which point in the campaign gender is most influential. We find that subjects who see in-party women candidates are more open to considering the out-party candidate, seeking out more information about the candidates in the race. Out-party women candidates strengthen subjects' initial partisan preferences, however, leading to less search and higher in-party voting rates. We also find that candidate gender is most influential early in the campaign, and its effects diminish as the campaign progresses.
引用
收藏
页码:1337 / 1353
页数:17
相关论文
共 69 条
[1]  
Andersen David., 2018, J EXPT POLITICAL SCI, V5, P217, DOI [DOI 10.1017/XPS.2018, 10.1017/XPS.2018, DOI 10.1017/XPS.2018.7]
[2]   The Dynamic Process Tracing Environment (DPTE) as a Tool for Studying Political Communication [J].
Andersen, David J. ;
Redlawsk, David P. ;
Lau, Richard R. .
POLITICAL COMMUNICATION, 2019, 36 (02) :303-314
[3]   Information and its Presentation: Treatment Effects in Low-Information vs. High-Information Experiments [J].
Andersen, David J. ;
Ditonto, Tessa .
POLITICAL ANALYSIS, 2018, 26 (04) :379-398
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2002, POLIT ANAL, DOI DOI 10.1093/PAN/10.1.25
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1981, Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches
[6]  
[Anonymous], 1980, AM VOTER
[7]  
Bargh JA, 1999, DUAL-PROCESS THEORIES IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, P361
[8]   Partisanship and voting behavior, 1952-1996 [J].
Bartels, LM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2000, 44 (01) :35-50
[9]   Ambivalence, information, and electoral choice [J].
Basinger, SJ ;
Lavine, H .
AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, 2005, 99 (02) :169-184
[10]   The Effects of Counterstereotypic Gender Strategies on Candidate Evaluations [J].
Bauer, Nichole M. .
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 38 (02) :279-295