Women politicians in the United States who deviate from party expectations or views are judged more harshly than men by voters. That is according to the findings of a new study led by academics from our School of Government and International Affairs.
The study, led by Dr Tessa Ditonto, created a fictional congressional campaign and election. Participants were asked to learn about two made-up candidates, one Democrat and one Republican, and then ‘vote’ for the candidate of their choice.
The researchers switched up candidate gender and added fake scandals to test if voters would still back their preferred party’s candidate.
When candidates’ policies aligned with those of their party, and the fake scandal was the only transgression, it had minimal impact on voting choices.
However, when the fictious candidate’s policy positions deviated from party expectations, striking differences emerged.
Women candidates saw a sharp drop in voter preference, whilst male candidates did not.
The study also found that at the start of an election campaign, voters have more uncertainty about women candidates than men.
Women candidates are therefore subject to greater scrutiny from voters and must work harder to prove their ability to represent voters effectively.
The team also found a ‘tipping point’ for partisan voters – whereby too much negative information about a candidate could lead them to disengage or even flip their vote.
This tipping point arrived more quickly for women politicians.
The research team argue their findings show an ongoing gender bias in US politics, with women politicians held to narrower and higher standards than men.
Whilst for men a deviation from party position could be seen as bold leadership, for women it was considered disloyal.
/prod01/prodbucket01/media/durham-university/central-news-and-events-images/83431-1920X290.jpg)