Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Women Don't Run? Election Aversion and Candidate Entry

Women Don't Run? Election Aversion and Candidate Entry To study gender differences in candidate emergence, we conduct a laboratory experiment in which we control the incentives potential candidates face, manipulate features of the electoral environment, and measure beliefs and preferences. We find that men and women are equally likely to volunteer when the representative is chosen randomly, but that women are less likely to become candidates when the representative is chosen by an election. This difference does not arise from disparities in abilities, risk aversion, or beliefs, but rather from the specific competitive and strategic context of campaigns and elections. Thus, we find evidence that women are election averse, whereas men are not. Election aversion persists with variations in the electoral environment, disappearing only when campaigns are both costless and completely truthful. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Political Science Wiley

Women Don't Run? Election Aversion and Candidate Entry

Download PDF
18 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/women-don-t-run-election-aversion-and-candidate-entry-gOrUDWXjy9
Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
©2015 by the Midwest Political Science Association
ISSN
0092-5853
eISSN
1540-5907
DOI
10.1111/ajps.12158
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

To study gender differences in candidate emergence, we conduct a laboratory experiment in which we control the incentives potential candidates face, manipulate features of the electoral environment, and measure beliefs and preferences. We find that men and women are equally likely to volunteer when the representative is chosen randomly, but that women are less likely to become candidates when the representative is chosen by an election. This difference does not arise from disparities in abilities, risk aversion, or beliefs, but rather from the specific competitive and strategic context of campaigns and elections. Thus, we find evidence that women are election averse, whereas men are not. Election aversion persists with variations in the electoral environment, disappearing only when campaigns are both costless and completely truthful.

Journal

American Journal of Political Science – Wiley

Published: Jul 1, 2015

References

  • Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm‐Glow Giving
    Andreoni, Andreoni
  • Which Is the Fair Sex? Gender Differences in Altruism
    Andreoni, Andreoni; Vesterlund, Vesterlund
  • The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson Effect: Why Do Congresswomen Outperform Congressmen
    Anzia, Anzia; Berry, Berry
  • The Swing Voter's Curse in the Laboratory
    Battaglini, Battaglini; Morton, Morton; Palfrey, Palfrey
  • Social Incentives for Gender Differences in the Propensity to Initiate Negotiations: Sometimes It Does Hurt to Ask
    Bowles, Bowles; Babcock, Babcock; Lai, Lai
  • See Jane Run: Women Politicians as Role Models for Adolescents
    Campbell, Campbell; Wolbrecht, Wolbrecht
  • Gender Differences in Preferences
    Croson, Croson; Gneezy, Gneezy
  • Gender Differences in Deception
    Dreber, Dreber; Johannesson, Johannesson
  • Beliefs and Voting Decisions: A Test of the Pivotal Voter Model
    Duffy, Duffy; Tavits, Tavits
  • Are Women Less Selfish Than Men?: Evidence from Dictator Experiments
    Eckel, Eckel; Grossman, Grossman
  • Sex Differences and Statistical Stereotyping in Attitudes toward Financial Risk
    Eckel, Eckel; Grossman, Grossman
  • Moral Bias in Large Elections: Theory and Experimental Evidence
    Feddersen, Feddersen; Gailmard, Gailmard; Sandroni, Sandroni
  • z‐Tree: Zurich Toolbox for Ready‐Made Economics Experiments
    Fischbacher, Fischbacher
  • If Only They'd Ask: Gender, Recruitment, and Political Ambition
    Fox, Fox; Lawless, Lawless
  • Gendered Perceptions and Political Candidacies: A Central Barrier to Women's Equality in Electoral Politics
    Fox, Fox; Lawless, Lawless
  • The Sense of a Woman: Gender, Ambition, and the Decision to Run for Congress
    Fulton, Fulton; Maestas, Maestas; Maisel, Maisel; Stone, Stone
  • Minority Representation in Multimember Districts
    Gerber, Gerber; Morton, Morton; Rietz, Rietz
  • Measuring Trust
    Glaeser, Glaeser; Laibson, Laibson; Scheinkman, Scheinkman; Soutter, Soutter
  • Deception: The Role of Consequences
    Gneezy, Gneezy
  • Gender Differences in Competition: Evidence from a Matrilineal and a Patriarchal Society
    Gneezy, Gneezy; Leonard, Leonard; List, List
  • Performance in Competitive Environments: Gender Differences
    Gneezy, Gneezy; Niederle, Niederle; Rustichini, Rustichini
  • Neighborhood Information Exchange and Voter Participation: An Experimental Study
    Grosser, Grosser; Schram, Schram
  • Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects
    Holt, Holt; Laury, Laury
  • Gender Stereotypes and the Perception of Male and Female Candidates
    Huddy, Huddy; Terkildsen, Terkildsen
  • Intersectionality, Quotas, and Minority Women's Political Representation Worldwide
    Hughes, Hughes
  • The House as a Stepping Stone to the Senate: Why Do So Few African American House Members Run
    Johnson, Johnson; Oppenheimer, Oppenheimer; Selin, Selin
  • Wallflowers: Experimental Evidence of an Aversion to Standing Out
    Jones, Jones; Linardi, Linardi
  • Risk Attitudes and Political Participation
    Kam, Kam
  • Valuing Diversity in Political Organizations: Gender and Token Minorities in the U.S. House of Representatives
    Kanthak, Kanthak; Krause, Krause
  • Social Identity and the Nature of Electoral Representation
    Landa, Landa; Duell, Duell
  • Voting Correctly
    Lau, Lau; Redlawsk, Redlawsk
  • The Paradox of Voter Participation? A Laboratory Study
    Levine, Levine; Palfrey, Palfrey
  • When to Risk It? Institutions, Ambitions, and the Decision to Run for the U.S. House
    Maestas, Maestas; Fulton, Fulton; Maisel, Maisel; Stone, Stone
  • District Magnitude's Effect on Female Representation in U.S. State Legislatures
    Matland, Matland; Brown, Brown
  • The Contagion of Women Candidates in Single‐Member District and Proportional Representation Electoral Systems: Canada and Norway
    Matland, Matland; Studlar, Studlar
  • Sequential Elections with Limited Information
    McKelvey, McKelvey; Ordeshook, Ordeshook
  • Incomplete Information and Ideological Explanations of Platform Divergence
    Morton, Morton
  • Do Women Shy Away from Competition? Do Men Compete Too Much
    Niederle, Niederle; Vesterlund, Vesterlund
  • The Emergence of Male Leadership in Competitive Environments
    Reuben, Reuben; Rey‐Biel, Rey‐Biel; Sapienza, Sapienza; Zingales, Zingales
  • An Integrated Model of Women's Representation
    Schwindt‐Bayer, Schwindt‐Bayer; Mishler, Mishler
  • Stereotype Threat and Women's Math Performance
    Spencer, Spencer; Steele, Steele; Quinn, Quinn
  • Stereotype Threat and the Intellectual Test Performance of African Americans
    Steele, Steele; Aronson, Aronson
  • The Not‐So‐Simple Calculus of Winning: Potential U.S. House Candidates' Nomination and General Election Chances
    Stone, Stone; Maisel, Maisel
  • When Are Women More Effective Lawmakers Than Men
    Volden, Volden; Wiseman, Wiseman; Wittmer, Wittmer
  • A Domain‐Specific Risk‐Attitude Scale: Measuring Risk Perceptions and Risk Behaviors
    Weber, Weber; Blais, Blais; Betz, Betz
  • Evidence of a Collective Intelligence Factor in the Performance of Human Groups
    Woolley, Woolley; Chabris, Chabris; Pentland, Pentland; Hashmi, Hashmi; Malone, Malone
  • Democratic Accountability and Retrospective Voting: A Laboratory Experiment
    Woon, Woon