Although the United States spends more on health care than comparable nations, many Americans suffer from poor health. Many factors are emphasized as being important for improved health outcomes, including social and economic indicators, living and working conditions, and individual-level behavior. However, I argue the overwhelming attention to male health outcomes—compared to female health outcomes—and focus on factors that are “traditionally understood” as important in shaping health are two limitations of existing health-related research. I adopt an innovative approach that combines the theory of representative bureaucracy, gender concordance, and symbolic representation to argue that increase in female physicians contribute to improved female health outcomes. Using an originally collected dataset that contains information on female physicians, health outcomes, and state and individual-level factors, I study how female physicians influence the health outcomes of non-Hispanic White women, non-Hispanic Black women, and Latinas in the United States from 2000 to 2012. The findings suggest female physicians contribute to improved health outcomes for non-Hispanic White women and non-Hispanic Black women, but not Latinas. Supplemental Analysis bolsters confidence that the findings are not the result of increased access to health care professionals. This study highlights the importance of applying the theory of representative bureaucracy and symbolic representation to health care, the promise of greater female representation in health, and the insight gleaned from incorporating intersectionality in public administration research.
AgyapongE. (2018). Representative bureaucracy: Examining the effects of female teachers on girls education in Ghana. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 41(16), 1338–1350. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2017.1388255
2.
Alexander-FloydN. G. (2012). Disappearing acts: Reclaiming intersectionality in the social sciences in a post black feminist Era. Feminist Formations, 24(1), 1–25. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23275087
3.
AlyahyaG.AlmohannaH.AlyahyaA.AldosariM.MathkourL.AldhibaibA.Al-NamshanY.Al-MouslyN. (2019). Does physicians’ gender have any influence on patients’ choice of their treating physicians?Journal of Nature and Science of Medicine, 2(2), 29. https://doi.org/10.4103/JNSM.JNSM_28_18
4.
AsadaY.WhippA.KindigD.BillardB.RudolphB. (2014). Inequalities in multiple health outcomes by education, sex, and race in 93 US counties: Why we should measure them all. International Journal for Equity in Health, 13(1), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-13-47
5.
AtkinsD. N.WilkinsV. M. (2013). Going beyond reading, writing, and arithmetic: The effects of teacher representation on teen pregnancy rates. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(4), 771–790. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mut001
6.
BaumgartnerF. R.BellK.BeyerL.BoldrinT.DoyleL.GovanL.HalpertJ.HicksJ.KyriakoudesK.LeeC.LegerM.McAdonS.MichalakS.MurphyC.NealE.O’MalleyO.PayneE.SapirsteinA.StanleyK.ThackerK. (2019). Intersectional encounters, representative bureaucracy, and the routine traffic stop. Policy Studies Journal, 49(3), 860–886. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12382
7.
BearfieldD. A. (2009). Equity at the intersection: Public administration and the study of gender. Public Administration Review, 3(69), 383–386. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.01985.x
8.
BentonM. (2020). Representation is not enough: Symbolic representation and perceptions of the police. Administration & Society, 52(5), 794–822. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399720905368
9.
BradburyM.Edward KelloughJ. (2011). Representative bureaucracy: Assessing the evidence on active representation. The American Review of Public Administration, 41(2), 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074010367823
10.
BreslinR. A.PandeyS.RiccucciN. M. (2017). Intersectionality in public leadership research: A review and future research agenda. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 37(2), 160–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X17697118
ChaoG. T. (2012). Organizational socialization: Background, basics, and a blueprint for adjustment at work. In KozlowskiS. W. J. (Ed.), Oxford Handbook of organizational psychology, Volume 1 (pp. 579–614). Oxford University Press.
13.
Charatz-LittC. (1992). A chronicle of racism: The effects of the white medical community on black health. Journal of the National Medical Association, 84(8), 717–725.
14.
CollinsP. H. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Routledge.
15.
Cooper-PatrickL.GalloJ. J.GonzalesJ. J.VuH. T.PoweN. R.NelsonC.FordD. E. (1999). Race, gender, and partnership in the patient-physician relationship. Jama, 282(6), 583–589. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.6.583
16.
CrenshawK. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and Sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 139–167.
17.
de la RoseI. (2002). Perinatal outcomes among Mexican Americans: A review of an epidemiological paradox. Ethnicity & Disease, 12, 480–487.
18.
DelpechR.BloyG.PanjoH.FalcoH.RingaV.RigalL. (2020). Physicians’ preventive practices: More frequently performed for male patients and by female physicians. BMC Health Services Research, 20, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05136-2
19.
DolanJ. (2000). The senior executive service: Gender, attitudes, and representative bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(3), 513–530. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a024279
20.
FangR.DuffyM. K.ShawJ. D. (2011). The organizational socialization process: Review and development of a social capital model. Journal of Management, 37(1), 127–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310384630
21.
FayD. L.FryarA. H.MeierK. J.WilkinsV. (2020). Intersectionality and equity: Dynamic bureaucratic representation in higher education. Public Administration, 1, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12691
GadeD. M.WilkinsV. M. (2013). Where did you serve? Veteran identity, representative bureaucracy, and vocational rehabilitation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(2), 267–288. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus030
24.
GarciaJ. A.PaternitiD. A.RomanoP. S.KravitzR. L. (2003). Patient preferences for physician characteristics in university-based primary care clinics. Ethnicity and Disease, 13(2), 259–267.
25.
GreenwoodB. N.CarnahanS.HuangL. (2018). Patient physician gender concordance and increased mortality among female heart attack patients. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(34), 8569–8574. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1800097115
26.
GrissomJ. A.Nicholson-CrottyJ.Nicholson-CrottyS. (2009). Race, region, and representative bureaucracy. Public Administrative Review, 69(5), 911–919. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2009.02040.x
27.
HallJ. A.Blanch-HartiganD.RoterD. L. (2011). Patients’ satisfaction with male versus female physicians: A meta-analysis. Medical Care, 49(7), 611–617.
28.
HallJ. A.IrishJ. T.RoterD. L.EhrlichC. M.MillerL. H. (1994). Gender in medical encounters: An analysis of physician and patient communication in a primary care setting. Health Psychology, 13(5), 384–392. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.13.5.384
29.
HallJ. A.RoterD. L. (2002). Do patients talk differently to male and female physicians? A meta-analytic review. Patient Education and Counseling, 48(3), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00174-X
30.
HamidullahM. F.RiccucciN. M. (2016). Intersectionality and family-friendly policies in the federal government: Perceptions of women of color. Administration & Society, 49(1), 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399715623314
HancockA.-M. (2007b). When multiplication doesn't equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 5(1), 63–79. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592707070065
33.
HolmesM. D.SmithB. W. (2008). Race and police brutality: Roots of an urban dilemma. SUNY Press.
HongS. (2017). Black in blue: Racial profiling and representative bureaucracy in policing revisited. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(4), 547–561. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mux012
36.
JacksonJ. L.ChamberlinJ.KroenkeK. (2003). Gender and symptoms in primary care practices. Psychosomatics, 44(5), 1359–1366. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.psy.44.5.359
37.
JeffersonL.BloorK.BirksY.HewittC.BlandM. (2013). Effect of physicians gender on communication and consultation length: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Health Service Research & Policy, 18(4), 242–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/1355819613486465
38.
KaplanS. H.GreenfieldS.WareJ. E.Jr. (1989). Assessing the effects of physician-patient interactions on the outcomes of chronic disease. Medical Care, 27(3), S110–S127.
39.
KawachiI.KennedyB. P. (1999). Income inequality and health: Pathways and mechanisms. Health Services Research, 34(1), 215–227.
40.
KeiserL. R.WilkinsV. M.MeierK. J.HollandC. A. (2002). Lipstick and logarithms: Gender, institutional context, and representative bureaucracy. American Political Science Review, 96(3), 553–564. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055402000321
41.
KennedyA. R.BishuS. G.HecklerN. (2020). Feminism, masculinity, and active representation: A gender analysis of representative bureaucracy. Administration & Society, 52(7), 1101–1130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399719888470
42.
KingsleyJ. D. (1944). Representative bureaucracy. Antioch Press.
LiangR.DornanT.NestelD. (2019). Why do women leave surgical training? A qualitative and feminist study. Lancet (London, England), 393(10171), 541–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32612-6
45.
ManzoorF.RedelmeierD. A. (2020). Sexism in medical care: Nurse, can you get me another blanket?CMAJ, 192(5), E119–E120. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.191181
46.
MarschallM. J.RuhilA. V. S. (2007). Substantive symbols: The attitudinal dimension of black political incorporation in local government. American Journal of Political Science, 51(1), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00234.x
47.
MarvelJ. D.ReshW. G. (2015). Bureaucratic discretion, client demographics, and representative bureaucracy. The American Review of Public Administration, 45(3), 281–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074013492008
48.
MatthewP.BrodersenD. M. (2018). Income inequality and health outcomes in the United States: An empirical analysis. The Social Science Journal, 55(4), 432–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2018.05.001
McMurrayJ. E.LinzerM.KonradT. R.DouglasJ.ShugermanR.NelsonK. (2000). The work lives of women physicians: Results from the physician work life study. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 15(6), 372–380. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.9908009.x
52.
MeierK.StewartJ. (1994). The politics of hispanic education: Un paso pa'lante y dos pa'tras. SUNY Press.
53.
MeierK. J. (1984). Teachers, students, and discrimination: The policy impact of black representation. The Journal of Politics, 46(1), 252–263. https://doi.org/10.2307/2130443
54.
MeierK. J. (2019). Theoretical frontiers in representative bureaucracy: New directions for research. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/ppmgov/gvy004
55.
MeierK. J.BohteJ. (2001). Structure and discretion: Missing links in representative bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(4), 455–470. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a003511
56.
MeierK. J.Nicholson-CrottyJ. (2006). Gender, representative bureaucracy, and Law enforcement: The case of sexual assault. Public Administration Review, 66(6), 850–860. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00653.x
57.
MeierK. J.WrinkleR. D.PolinardJ. L. (1999). Representative bureaucracy and distributional equity: Addressing the hard question. Journal of Politics, 61(4), 1025–1039. https://doi.org/10.2307/2647552
58.
MonzaniD.VerganiL.PizzoliS. F. M.Giulia MartonK.MazzoccoL. B.MessoriC.PancaniL.CattelanM.PravettoniG. (2020). Sexism interacts with patient physician gender concordance in influencing patient control preferences: Findings from a vignette experimental design. Applied Psychology: Health and WellBeing, 12(2), 471–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12193
59.
MosherF. C. (1968). Democracy and the public service. Oxford University Press.
60.
Nicholson-CrottyS.GrissomJ. A.Nicholson-CrottyJ.ReddingC. (2016). Disentangling the causal mechanisms of representative bureaucracy: Evidence from assignment of students to gifted programs. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(4), 745–757. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muw024
61.
Nicholson-CrottyS.Nicholson-CrottyJ.FernandezS. (2017). Will more black cops matter? Officer race and police involved homicides of black citizens. Public Administration Review, 77(2), 206–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12734
62.
PardalV.AlgerM.LatuI. (2020). Implicit and explicit gender stereotypes at the bargaining table: Male Counterparts’ stereotypes predict Women's Lower performance in dyadic face-to-face negotiations. Sex Roles, 83, 289–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-019-01112-1
63.
PennerL. A.DovidioJ. F.WestT. V.GaertnerS. L.AlbrechtT. L.DaileyR. K.MarkovaT. (2010). Aversive racism and medical interactions with black patients: A field study. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(2), 436–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.11.004
PineaultR.Da SilvaR. B.ProvostS.FournierM.Prud'hommeA.LevesqueJ.-F. (2017). Do gender-predominant primary health care organizations have an impact on patient experience of care, Use of services, and unmet needs?INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing, 54, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0046958017709688
66.
PittsD. W. (2007). Representative bureaucracy, ethnicity, and public schools: Examining the link between representation and performance. Administration & Society, 39(4), 497–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399707303129
67.
ReingoldB.SmithA. R. (2012). Welfare policymaking and intersections of race, ethnicity, and gender in US state legislatures. American Journal of Political Science, 56(1), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00569.x
68.
RiccucciN. M.SaidelJ. R. (1997). The representativeness of state-level bureaucratic leaders: A missing piece of the representative bureaucracy puzzle. Public Administration Review, 57(5), 423–430. https://doi.org/10.2307/3109988
69.
RiccucciN. M.Van RyzinG. G. (2017). Representative bureaucracy: A lever to enhance social equity, coproduction, and democracy. Public Administration Review, 77(1), 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12649
70.
RiccucciN. M.Van RyzinG. G.JacksonK. (2018). Representative bureaucracy, Race, and Policing: A Survey Experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(4), 506–518. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy023
71.
RiccucciN. M.Van RyzinG. G.LavenaC. F. (2014). Representative bureaucracy in policing: Does It increase perceived legitimacy?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24(3), 537–551. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muu006
72.
RiccucciN. M.Van RyzinG. G.LiH. (2015). Representative bureaucracy and the willingness to coproduce: An experimental study. Public Administration Review, 76(1), 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12401
73.
RoterD. L.GellerG.BernhardtB. A.LarsonS. M.DoksumT. (1999). Effects of obstetrician gender on communication and patient satisfaction. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 93(5), 635–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00542-0
RoterD. L.HallJ. A.AokiY. (2002). Physician gender effects in medical communication: A meta-analytic review. Jama, 288(6), 756–764. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.288.6.756
76.
SeldenS. C. (1997). The promise of representative bureaucracy: Diversity and responsiveness in a government agency. M.E. Sharpe.
77.
SigelmanL. (1979). Presidential popularity and presidential elections. Public Opinion Quarterly, 43, 532–534. https://doi.org/10.1086/268549
78.
SimienE. M. (2007). Doing intersectionality research: From conceptual issues to practical examples. Politics and Gender, 3(2), 264–271. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X07000086
79.
SmedleyB. D.StithA. Y.NelsonA. R. (2009). Unequal treatment: Confronting racial and ethnic disparities in health care. National Academies Press.
80.
SowaJ. E.SeldenS. C. (2003). Administrative discretion and active representation: An expansion of the theory of representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 63(6), 700–710. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6210.00333
81.
StarrP. (2011). Remedy and reaction: The peculiar American struggle over health care reform. Yale University Press.
82.
TheobaldN. A.Haider-MarkelD. P. (2009). Race, bureaucracy, and symbolic representation: Interactions between citizens and police. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 19(2), 409–426. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mun006
83.
ThielemannG. S.StewartJ.Jr. (1996). A demand-side perspective on the importance of representative bureaucracy: AIDS, ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. Public Administration Review, 56(2), 168–173. https://doi.org/10.2307/977204
84.
ThompsonF. J. (1976). Minority groups in public bureaucracies: Are passive and active representation linked?Administration & Society, 8(2), 201–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/009539977600800206
85.
TreadwellH. M.RoM.SalladL.McCrayE.FranklinC. (2019). Discerning disparities: The data Gap. American Journal of Men's Health, 13(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988318807098
86.
TurabianJ. L.Minier-RodriguezL. E.Moreno-RuizS.Rodriguez-AlmonteF. E.Cucho-JoveR.Villarin-CastroA. (2017). Gender differences in verbal behavior style in interviews in family medicine: Mars and Venus, or north dakota and south dakota. Journal of Women's Health Care, 6(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0420.1000365
87.
TurshenM. (1993). The impact of sexism on Women's Health and health care. Journal of Public Health Policy, 14(2), 164–173. https://doi.org/10.2307/3342962
88.
Van MaanenJ. E.ScheinE. H. (1977). Toward a theory of organizational socialization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1–89.
89.
Van RynM.BurgessD. J.DovidioJ. F.PhelanS. M.SahaS.MalatJ.GriffinJ. M.FuS. S.PerryS. (2011). The impact of racism on clinician cognition, behavior, and clinical decision making. Du Bois Review, 8(1), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X11000191
90.
Van RyzinG. G.RiccucciN. M.LiH. (2016). Representative bureaucracy and its symbolic effect on citizens: A conceptual replication. Public Management Review, 19(9), 1365–1379. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2016.1195009
91.
WeaverJ. L.GarrettS. D. (1978). Sexism and racism in the American health care industry: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Health Services, 8(4), 677–703. https://doi.org/10.2190/AK0C-M9JF-1TR1-5UYF
92.
WilkinsV. M. (2007). Exploring the causal story: Gender, active representation, and bureaucratic priorities. Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(1), 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muj012
93.
WilkinsV. M.KeiserL. R. (2004). Linking passive and active representation by gender: The case of child support agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(1), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mui023
94.
WilkinsV. M.WilliamsB. N. (2008). Black or blue: Racial profiling and representative bureaucracy. Public Administration Review, 68(4), 654–664. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00905.x
95.
ZhangY. (2019). Representative bureaucracy, gender congruence, and student performance in China. International Public Management Journal, 22(2), 321–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2018.1428702
96.
ZhaoC.DowzickyP.ColbertL.RobertsS.KelzR. R. (2019). Race, gender, and language concordance in the care of surgical patients: A systematic review. Surgery, 166(5), 785–792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2019.06.012
97.
ZhuL.WalkerM. B. L. (2013). "Too much too young": Race, descriptive representation, and heterogeneous policy responses in the case of teenage childbearing. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 1(4), 528–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2013.842928
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
