[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/18039.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Voters Prefer Gender Stereotypic Candidates? Evidence from a conjoint survey experiment in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • ONO Yoshikuni
  • YAMADA Masahiro
Abstract
The striking under-representation of women in Japan has been partly attributed to gender stereotypes and prejudice toward female leadership among voters. We examine whether and to what extent candidates get rewarded or punished when they deviate from the behavioral expectations associated with their gender roles and images. Our conjoint experiment results in Japan demonstrate that not only are female candidates disadvantaged compared to their male counterparts, but also that they could lose support when they diverge from gender-based behavioral expectations. Our findings suggest that female candidates face a difficult dilemma in that they must weigh the cost of losing support for failing to conform to gender-based expectations, against the general loss of support they would incur for conforming to these expectations.

Suggested Citation

  • ONO Yoshikuni & YAMADA Masahiro, 2018. "Do Voters Prefer Gender Stereotypic Candidates? Evidence from a conjoint survey experiment in Japan," Discussion papers 18039, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:18039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/18e039.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brad Verhulst & Lindon J. Eaves & Peter K. Hatemi, 2012. "Correlation not Causation: The Relationship between Personality Traits and Political Ideologies," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(1), pages 34-51, January.
    2. Erika Falk & Kate Kenski, 2006. "Issue Saliency and Gender Stereotypes: Support for Women as Presidents in Times of War and Terrorism," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 87(1), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Mona Lena Krook, 2010. "Why Are Fewer Women than Men Elected? Gender and the Dynamics of Candidate Selection," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 8(2), pages 155-168, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nikola Erceg & Zvonimir Galic & Andreja Bubic, 2018. "The Psychology of Economic Attitudes - Moral Foundations Predict Economic Attitudes beyond Socio-Demographic Variables," Croatian Economic Survey, The Institute of Economics, Zagreb, vol. 20(1), pages 37-70, June.
    2. Salomon, Katja, 2020. "Dynamics of immigrant resentment in Europe," Discussion Papers, Presidential Department P 2020-002, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    3. Theresa Schroeder, 2017. "When Security Dominates the Agenda," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(3), pages 564-589, March.
    4. K Amber Curtis & Steven V Miller, 2021. "A (supra)nationalist personality? The Big Five’s effects on political-territorial identification," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(2), pages 202-226, June.
    5. Brennan Mary & Buckley Fiona, 2017. "The Irish legislative gender quota: The first election," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 65(2), pages 15-35, May.
    6. Niklas Harring & Sverker C. Jagers & Simon Matti, 2017. "Public Support for Pro-Environmental Policy Measures: Examining the Impact of Personal Values and Ideology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-14, April.
    7. Dimick, Matthew & Stegmueller, Daniel, 2015. "The Political Economy of Risk and Ideology," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 237, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    8. Michela Cella & Elena Manzoni & Francesco Scervini, 2023. "Issue salience and women's electoral performance: Theory and evidence from Google trends," Working Papers 527, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics.
    9. Hongzhou Chen & Xiaolin Duan & Abdulmotaleb El Saddik & Wei Cai, 2024. "Political Leanings in Web3 Betting: Decoding the Interplay of Political and Profitable Motives," Papers 2407.14844, arXiv.org.
    10. repec:eur:ejserj:521 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Thomas Aronsson & Clemens Hetschko & Ronnie Schöb, 2020. "Globalization, Time-Preferences, and Populist Voting," CESifo Working Paper Series 8466, CESifo.
    12. Aidt, T. S. & Rauh, C., 2017. "The Big Five personality traits and partisanship in England," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1745, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    13. Katherine Campbell & Cullen F. Goenner & Matthew Notbohm & Adam Smedema, 2022. "Political ideology and CEO performance under crisis," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 329-359, January.
    14. Buckley Fiona & Hofman Caroline, 2015. "Women in local government: Moving in from the margins," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 63(2), pages 79-99, August.
    15. Mirela Cristea & Graţiela Georgiana Noja & Cecilia-Nicoleta Jurcuţ & Constantin Ştefan Ponea & Elena Sorina Caragiani & Alin Viorel Istodor, 2021. "The Interplay between Public Health, Well-Being and Population Aging in Europe: An Advanced Structural Equation Modelling and Gaussian Network Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-20, February.
    16. Duong, Kiet Tuan & Banti, Chiara & Instefjord, Norvald, 2021. "Managerial conservatism and corporate policies," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    17. Zoltán Fazekas & Levente Littvay, 2012. "Choosing sides: The genetics of why we go with the loudest," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 24(3), pages 389-408, July.
    18. Achyuta Adhvaryu & James Fenske, 2014. "Conflict and the Formation of Political Beliefs in Africa," HiCN Working Papers 164, Households in Conflict Network.
    19. Paola Montilla & Magda Catalina Jiménez, 2020. "Elecciones 2018 en Colombia: la competencia política en un escenario de paz," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1176.
    20. Danny Hayes & Jennifer L. Lawless & Gail Baitinger, 2014. "Who Cares What They Wear? Media, Gender, and the Influence of Candidate Appearance," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1194-1212, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:18039. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.