Women are greatly underrepresented in elected office. A large literature on the subject has considerably advanced our understanding of this phenomenon, but many questions remain unanswered. Using original aggregate and individual-level data, the authors explore the interplay of candidate gender, partisanship, incumbency, and campaign spending in a multimember preferential voting system. This setting allows unparalleled exploration of the heterogeneous nature of voter decision making. The authors find little evidence for an independent effect of candidate gender on voter choice. Voters do not discriminate against women even in an electoral environment that affords them this opportunity without any cost to their partisan preferences.
Achen, Christopher H.2002. Toward a new political methodology: Microfoundations and ART. Annual Reviews in Political Science5:423-50.
2.
Black, Jerome H., and Lynda Erickson.2003. Women candidates and voter bias: Do women politicians need to be better?Electoral Studies22:81-100.
3.
Borisyuk, Galina, Colin Rallings, and Michael Thrasher .2007. Women in English local government, 1973-2003: Getting selected, getting elected. Contemporary Politics13:181-99.
4.
Burrell, Barbara C.1994. A woman’s place is in the House: Campaigning for Congress in the feminist era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
5.
Carey, John M., and Matthew S. Shugart .1995. Incentives to cultivate a personal vote: A rank ordering of electoral formulas. Electoral Studies14:417-39.
6.
Carty, R. Kenneth.1980. Women in Irish politics. Canadian Journal of Political Science6:90-104.
7.
Darcy, Robert, Susan Welch, and Janet Clark.1994. Women, elections & representation . Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
8.
Dolan, Kathleen.1998. Voting for women in the "year of the woman." American Journal of Political Science42:272-93.
9.
---. 2001. Knowing versus caring: The role of affect and cognition in political perception. Political Psychology22:27-44.
10.
Engstrom, Richard L.1987. District magnitudes and the election of women to the Irish Dáil. Electoral Studies6:123-32.
11.
Fiber, Pamela, and Richard L. Fox .2002. The role of gender in open seat elections for Congress: An analysis of fund raising and vote shares, 1980-2000. Paper presented at the 2002 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, August 28-31.
12.
Fox, Richard L., and Jennifer Lawless .2004. Entering the arena? Gender and the decision to run for office. American Journal of Political Science48:264-80.
13.
Fox, Richard L., and Eric R. A.N Smith.1998. The role of candidate sex in voter decision-making. Political Psychology19:405-19.
14.
Gallagher, Michael.2003. Stability and turmoil: Analysis of the results. In How Ireland voted 2002, ed. Michael Gallagher, Michael Marsh, and Paul Mitchell, 88-118. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
15.
---. 2005. Ireland: The discreet charm of PR-STV. In The politics of electoral systems, ed. Michael Gallagher and Paul Mitchell.Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
16.
Gallagher, Michael, and Lee Komito.2005. The constituency role of Dáil deputies. In Politics in the Republic of Ireland, ed. John Coakley and Michael Gallagher.London: Routledge .
17.
Golebiowska, Ewa A.2001. Group stereotypes and political evaluation. American Politics Research29:535-65.
18.
Henig, Ruth B., and Simon Henig.2001. Women and political power: Europe since 1945. London: Routledge.
19.
Huddy, Leonie, and Nayda Terkildsen .1993a. The consequences of gender stereotypes for women candidates at different levels and types of office. Political Research Quarterly46:503-25.
20.
---. 1993b. Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science37:119-47.
21.
Kaid, Lynda Lee, Sandra L. Myers, Val Pipps, and Jan Hunter.1984. Sex role perception and televised political advertising: Comparing male and female candidates. Women and Politics4:41-53.
22.
King, David, and Richard E. Matland .2003. Sex and the Grand Old Party-An experimental investigation of the effect of candidate sex on support for a Republican candidate. American Politics Research31:595-612.
23.
Koch, Jeffrey W.1999. Candidate gender and assessment of Senate candidates. Social Science Quarterly80:84-96.
24.
---. 2002. Gender stereotypes and citizens impressions of House candidates’ ideological orientations. American Journal of Political Science46:453-62.
25.
Laver, Michael.2004. Analyzing structures of party preference in electronic voting data. Party Politics10:521-41.
26.
Laver, Michael, Yvonne Galligan, and Gemma Carney.1999. The effect of candidate gender on voting in Ireland, 1997 . Irish Political Studies14:118-22.
27.
Lawless, Jennifer, and Richard L. Fox .2005. It takes a candidate: Why women don’t run for office. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28.
LeDuc, Lawrence, Richard G. Niemi, and Pippa Norris.1996. The present and future of democratic elections. In Comparing democracies: Elections and voting in global perspective, ed. Lawrence LeDuc, Pippa Norris, and Richard G. Niemi, 1-48. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29.
Leeper, Mark Stephen.1991. The impact of prejudice on female candidates-An experimental look at voter inference. American Politics Quarterly19:248-61.
30.
Marsh, Michael.1987. Electoral evaluations of candidates in Irish elections . Irish Political Studies2:65-76.
31.
---. 2006. Party identification in Ireland: An insecure anchor for a floating party system. Electoral Studies25:489-508.
32.
---. 2007. Candidates or parties? Party Politics13:500-27.
33.
Marsh, Michael, Richard Sinnott, John Garry, and Fiachra Kennedy .2008. The Irish voter: The nature of electoral competition in the Republic of Ireland. Manchester , UK: Manchester University Press.
34.
Matland, Richard, and Deborah Dwight Brown.1992. District magnitude’s effect on female representation in US state legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly17:469-92.
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.
Rosenwasser, Shirley M., and Jana Seale.1988. Attitudes toward a hypothetical male or female presidential candidate-A research note. Political Psychology9:591-98.
38.
Rule, Wilma.1987. Electoral systems, contextual factors and women’s opportunity for election to Parliament in twenty-three democracies. Western Political Quarterly40:477-98.
39.
---. 1994. Parliaments of, by and for the people: Except for women? In Electoral systems in comparative perspective: Their impact on women and minorities, ed. Wilma Rule and Joseph F. Zimmerman, 15-30. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
40.
Sanbonmatsu, Kira.2002. Gender stereotypes and vote choice. American Journal of Political Science46:20-34.
41.
Sapiro, Virginia, and Pamela Conover.1997. The variable gender basis of electoral politics: Gender and context in the 1992 US election. British Journal of Political Science27:497-523.
42.
Seltzer, Richard A., Jody Newman, and Melissa V. Leighton .1997. Sex as a political variable . Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
43.
Shugart, Matthew S.1994. Minorities represented and unrepresented. In Electoral systems in comparative perspective: Their impact on women and minorities , ed. Wilma Rule and Joseph F. Zimmerman, 31-44. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
44.
Sinnott, R.1995. Irish voters decide: Voting behaviour in elections and referendums since 1918. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
45.
---. 2005. The rules of the electoral game. In Politics in the Republic of Ireland, ed. John Coakley and Michael Gallagher, 105-34. New York: Routledge.
46.
Smith, Eric R. A. N., and Richard L. Fox .2001. The electoral fortunes of women candidates for Congress. Political Research Quarterly54:205-21.
47.
Welch, Susan, and Don T. Studlar .1986. British public-opinion toward women in politics-A comparative perspective. Western Political Quarterly39:138-54.
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.
