How to translate text using browser tools
1 May 2015 When women attack
Bryan McLaughlin
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

The common assumption that female candidates on the campaign trail should not go on the attack, because such tactics contradict gender stereotypes, has not received consistent support. We argue that in some circumstances gender stereotypes will favor female politicians going negative. To test this proposition, this study examines how gender cues affect voter reactions to negative ads in the context of a political sex scandal, a context that should prime gender stereotypes that favor females. Using an online experiment involving a national sample of U.S. adults (N = 599), we manipulate the gender and partisan affiliation of a politician who attacks a male opponent caught in a sex scandal involving sexually suggestive texting to a female intern. Results show that in the context of a sex scandal, a female candidate going on the attack is evaluated more positively than a male. Moreover, while female participants viewed the female sponsor more favorably, sponsor gender had no effect on male participants. Partisanship also influenced candidate evaluations: the Democratic female candidate was evaluated more favorably than her Republican female counterpart.

Bryan McLaughlin "When women attack," Politics and the Life Sciences 34(1), 44-56, (1 May 2015). https://doi.org/10.1017/pls.2015.1
Published: 1 May 2015
JOURNAL ARTICLE
13 PAGES

This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.
+ SAVE TO MY LIBRARY

KEYWORDS
candidate evaluations
Gender cues
Gender stereotypes
partisanship
political attack ads
sex scandals
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top