Recent research raises doubts about whether the presence of women contesting or occupying prominent public office enhances women’s political engagement. Taking into account both gender and party congruence between politicians and constituents, the authors find that it is primarily female candidates of the same party who enhance women’s interest in politics. The stronger impact of party-congruent (over party-incongruent) female candidates can be attributed to either greater visibility or agreement on substantive issues. Party matters, but rather than obscuring the role of gender in electoral politics, it enhances our understanding of how, or under what conditions, it works.
Atkeson, Lonna Rae.2003. Not all cues are created equal: The conditional impact of female candidates on political engagement. Journal of Politics65:1040-61.
2.
Atkeson, Lonna Rae, and Nancy Carrillo.2007. More is better: The influence of collective female descriptive representation on external efficacy. Politics and Gender3 (1): 79-101.
3.
Banducci, Susan A., Todd Donovan, and Jeffrey A. Karp.2004. Minority representation, empowerment, and participation. Journal of Politics66:534-56.
4.
Barone, Michael, Grant Ujifusa, and Douglas Matthews.Multiple years. The almanac of American politics . Washington, DC: National Journal .
5.
Barreto, Matt A., Gary M. Segura, and Nathan D. Woods.2004. The mobilizing effect of majority-minority districts on Latino turnout. American Political Science Review98:65-75.
6.
Bartels, Larry M.2000. Partisanship and voting behavior, 1952- 1996. American Journal of Political Science44:35-50.
7.
Beckwith, Karen.2005. A common language of gender? Politics and Gender1 (1): 128-37.
8.
Bobo, Lawrence, and Franklin D. Gilliam .1990. Race, sociopolitical participation, and black empowerment. American Political Science Review84:377-93.
9.
Brady, Henry E.1999. Political participation. In Measures of political attitudes, ed. John P. Robinson , Phillip R. Shaver, and Lawrence S. Wrightsman, 737-801. San Diego, CA : Academic Press.
10.
Burns, Nancy.2005. Finding gender. Politics and Gender1 (1): 137-41.
11.
Burns, Nancy, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Sidney Verba.2001. The private roots of public action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12.
Bystrom, Dianne, and Lynda Lee Kaid.2002. Are women candidates transforming campaign communication? A comparison of advertising videostyles in the 1990s. In Women transforming Congress, ed. Cindy Simon Rosenthal, 146-69. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
13.
Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes.1960. The American voter. New York: Wiley.
14.
Center for American Women and Politics.2004 . The gender gap: Voting choices in presidential elections. Fact sheet, Rutgers University, Eagleton Institute of Politics, New Brunswick, NJ.
15.
Cox, Gary, and Mathew D. McCubbins.1993. Legislative leviathan: Party government in the House. Berkeley: University of California Press.
16.
Dabelko, Kirsten LaCour, and Paul Herrnson.1997. Women’s and men’s campaigns for the U.S. House of Representatives. Political Research Quarterly50:121-35.
17.
Dolan, Kathleen A.2004. Voting for women. Boulder, CO: Westview.
18.
---. 2005. Do women candidates play to gender stereotypes? Do men candidates play to women? Candidate sex and issues priorities on campaign websites. Political Research Quarterly58:31-44.
19.
---. 2006. Symbolic mobilization? The impact of candidate sex inAmerican elections. American Politics Research34:687-704.
20.
Dovi, Suzanne.2002. Preferable descriptive representatives: Will just any woman, black, or Latino do?American Political Science Review96:729-44.
21.
Fiorina, Morris P.2002. Parties and partisanship: A 40-year retrospective. Political Behavior24:93-115.
22.
Fox, Richard Logan.1997. Gender dynamics in congressional elections. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
Gay, Claudine.2002. Spirals of Trust? The effect of descriptive representation on the relationship between citizens and their government. American Journal of Political Science46:717-32.
24.
Hansen, Susan B.1997. Talking about politics: Gender and contextual effects in political proselytizing. Journal of Politics59:73-103.
25.
High-Pippert, Angela, and John Comer.1998. Female empowerment: The influence of women representing women. Women and Politics19:53-66.
26.
Huddy, Leonie, and Nayda Terkildsen .1993. Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science37:119-47.
27.
Kahn, Kim Fridkin.1996. Political consequences of being a woman. New York: Columbia University Press.
28.
Koch, Jeffrey.1997. Candidate gender and women’s psychological engagement in politics. American Politics Quarterly25:118-33.
29.
---. 2000. Do citizens apply gender stereotypes to infer candidates’ ideological orientations? Journal of Politics62:414-29.
30.
Krehbiel, Keith.1993. Where’s the party? British Journal of Political Science23:235-66.
31.
Larson, Stephanie Greco.2001. "Running as women?" A comparison of female and male Pennsylvania Assembly candidates’ campaign brochures. Women and Politics22:107-24.
32.
Lawless, Jennifer L.2004. Politics of presence? Congresswomen and symbolic representation . Political Research Quarterly57:81-99.
33.
Mansbridge, Jane.1999. Should blacks represent blacks and women represent women? A contingent "yes." Journal of Politics61 (3): 628-57.
34.
Mayhew, David R.1974. Congress: The electoral connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
35.
McDermott, Monika L.1997. Voting cues in low-information elections: Candidate gender as a social information variable in contemporary United States elections. American Journal of Political Science41:270-83.
36.
---. 1998. Race and gender cues in low-information elections. Political Research Quarterly51:895-918.
37.
Norris, Pippa.2003. The gender gap: Old challenges, new approaches. In Women and American politics: New questions, new directions, ed. Susan J. Carroll, 146-72. New York: Oxford University Press.
38.
Phillips, Anne.1995. The politics of presence. New York : Oxford University Press.
39.
Pitkin, Hanna F.1967. The concept of representation. Berkeley : University of California Press.
40.
Reingold, Beth.2008. Women as officeholders: Linking descriptive and substantive representation. In Political women and American democracy, ed. Christina Wolbrecht, Karen Beckwith, and Lisa Baldez, 128-47. New York: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Rohde, David W.1991. Parties and leaders in the postreform House. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
42.
Rosenstone, Steven J., and John Mark Hansen .1993. Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.
43.
Sanbonmatsu, Kira.2006. State elections: Where do women run? Where do women win? In Gender and elections, ed. Susan J. Carroll and Richard L. Fox, 189-214. New York: Cambridge University Press.
44.
Sapiro, Virginia, and Pamela Johnston Conover.1997. The variable gender basis of electoral politics: Gender and context in the 1992 election. British Journal of Political Science27:497-523.
45.
Schlozman, Kay Lehman.2002. Citizen participation in America: What do we know? Why do we care? In Political science: The state of the discipline , ed. Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner, 433-61. New York: Norton.
46.
Swers, Michele L.2002. The difference women make: The policy impact of women in Congress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
47.
Tate, Katherine.2003. Black faces in the mirror: African Americans and their representatives in the U.S. Congress. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
48.
Thomas, Sue.2003. The impact of women in political leadership positions . In Women and American politics: New questions, new directions , ed. Susan J. Carroll, 89-110. New York: Oxford University Press.
49.
Verba, Sidney, Kay Lehman Schlozman, and Henry E. Brady.1995. Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
50.
Wattenberg, Martin P.1996. The decline of American political parties: 1952-1994. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51.
Williams, Melissa S.1998. Voice, trust and democracy: Marginalized groups and the failings of liberal representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
