How Candidates’ Age and Gender Predict Voter Preference in a Hypothetical Election

Abstract

Are preferences for political candidates influenced by how old they appear to be? Amazon Mechanical Turk workers and undergraduate students were shown photos of 93 state legislators as candidates in hypothetical elections. Other information about the candidates (e.g., party affiliation) was held constant, randomized, or not presented. For very young candidates (< 35 years old), participants favored women over men. However, participants’ intention to vote for male candidates increased with age until candidates were about 45 years old and then slightly decreased. In contrast, participants’ intention to vote for female candidates consistently decreased with candidates’ age. Perceived attractiveness and warmth accounted for some of the gender differences in the effect of candidates’ perceived age.

Keywords

age gender voting preregistered

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baron

R. M.

Kenny

D. A.

(1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. http://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173

Bates

(2005). Fitting linear mixed models in R: Using the lme4 package. R News, 5(1), 27–30. https://www.r-project.org/doc/Rnews/Rnews_2005-1.pdf

Berggren

Jordahl

Poutvaara

(2010). The looks of a winner: Beauty and electoral success. Journal of Public Economics, 94(1–2), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2009.11.002

Berinsky

A. J.

Huber

G. A.

Lenz

G. S.

(2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis, 20, 351–368. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr057

Brewer

M. B.

Lui

L. N.

(1989). The primacy of age and sex in the structure of person categories. Social Cognition, 7(3), 262–274. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1989.7.3.262

Bryk

A. S.

Raudenbush

S. W.

Congdon

(2010). HLM 7 for Windows [Computer software]. Scientific Software International.

Chiao

J. Y.

Bowman

N. E.

Gill

(2008). The political gender gap: Gender bias in facial inferences that predict voting behavior. PLOS ONE, 3(10), Article e3666. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003666

Dockterman

(2016, May 11). ACLU: The federal government is investigating sexism against directors in Hollywood. Time. http://time.com/4326519/aclu-government-sexism-female-directors-hollywood

Hayes

A. F.

Preacher

K. J.

(2010). Quantifying and testing indirect effects in simple mediation models when the constituent paths are nonlinear. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45(4), 627–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2010.498290

10.

Kuznetsova

Brockhoff

P. B.

Christensen

R. H. B.

(2014). lmerTest: Tests in linear mixed effect models (R Package Version) [Computer software]. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lmerTest

11.

McLellan

McKelvie

S. J.

(1993). Effects of age and gender on perceived facial attractiveness. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 25(1), 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0078790

12.

Millisecond. (2015). Inquisit 4 [Computer software]. https://www.millisecond.com/

13.

North

M. S.

Fiske

S. T.

(2015). Modern attitudes toward older adults in the aging world: A cross-cultural meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 141(5), 993–1021. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039469

14.

Olivola

C. Y.

Todorov

(2010). Elected in 100 milliseconds: Appearance-based trait inferences and voting. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 34, 83–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-009-0082-1

15.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

16.

R Core Team. (2017). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 3.4.0) [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://www.r-project.org/

17.

Sontag

(1972, September 23). The double standard of aging. The Saturday Review, pp. 29–38. http://www.unz.com/print/SaturdayRev-1972sep23-00029

18.

Stockemer

Sundström

(2018). Age representation in parliaments: Can institutions pave the way for the young? European Political Science Review, 10(3), 467–490. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1755773918000048

19.

Sutherland

C. A. M.

Oldmeadow

J. A.

Santos

I. M.

Towler

Burt

D. M.

Young

A. W.

(2013). Social inferences from faces: Ambient images generate a three-dimensional model. Cognition, 127(1), 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.12.001

20.

Todorov

Mandisodza

A. N.

Goren

Hall

C. C.

(2005). Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcomes. Science, 308(5728), 1623–1626. https://doi.org/308/5728/1623

21.

Whitsett

D. D.

Shoda

(2014). An approach to test for individual differences in the effects of situations without using moderator variables. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.08.008

22.

Zayas

Sridharan

Lee

R. T.

Shoda

(2019). Addressing two blind spots of commonly used experimental designs: The highly-repeated within-person approach. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(9), Article e12487. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12487

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.

0.00 MB

3.64 MB