Gender differences in who gets recruited by political party elites contribute to women’s underrepresentation on the ballot, but recent evidence suggests that even when women are recruited to the same extent as men, they are still less likely to be interested in seeking office. Why do men and women respond differently to invitations to seek office? We hypothesize that women view party recruitment as a weaker signal of informal support than men do. We use a survey experiment on a sample of 3,640 elected municipal officeholders—themselves prospective recruits for higher office—to test this. We find that female respondents generally believe party leaders will provide female recruits less strategic and financial support than male recruits. In other words, even when elites recruit women, women are skeptical that party leaders will use their political and social capital on their behalf. This difference may account for many women’s lukewarm responses to recruitment.
BorgattiStephen P.CrossRob. 2003. “A Relational View of Information Seeking and Learning in Social Networks.” Management Science49 (4): 432–45.
2.
BosAngela L.2015. “The Unintended Effects of Political Party Affirmative Action Policies on Female Candidates’ Nomination Chances.” Politics, Groups, and Identities3 (1): 73–93.
3.
BroockmanDavid E.2014. “Mobilizing Candidates: Political Actors Strategically Shape the Candidate Pool with Personal Appeals.” Journal of Experimental Political Science1 (2): 104–19.
4.
ButlerDaniel M.KousserThad. 2015. “How Do Public Goods Providers Play Public Goods Games?”Legislative Studies Quarterly40 (2): 211–40.
5.
CareyJohn M.ShugartMatthew Soberg. 1995. “Incentives to Cultivate a Personal Vote: A Rank Ordering of Electoral Formulas.” Electoral Studies14 (4): 417–39.
6.
CarrollSusan J.SanbonmatsuKira. 2013. More Women Can Run: Gender and Pathways to the State Legislatures. New York: Oxford University Press.
7.
CohenMartyKarolDavidNoelHansZallerJohn. 2008. The Party Decides: Presidential Nominations before and after Reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8.
CoxGary W.KatzJonathan N.1996. “Why Did the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. House Elections Grow?” American Journal of Political Science40: 478–97.
Crowder-MeyerMelody. 2013. “Gendered Recruitment without Trying: How Local Party Recruiters Affect Women’s Representation.” Politics & Gender9 (4): 390–413.
11.
DesmaraisBruce A.La RajaRaymond J.KowalMichael S.2015. “The Fates of Challengers in U.S. House Elections: The Role of Extended Party Networks in Supporting Candidates and Shaping Electoral Outcomes.” American Journal of Political Science59 (1): 194–211.
12.
DominguezCasey B. K.2011. “Does the Party Matter? Endorsements in Congressional Primaries.” Political Research Quarterly64 (3): 534–44.
13.
FisherSamuel H.IIIHerrickRebekah. 2013. “Old versus New: The Comparative Efficiency of Mail and Internet Surveys of State Legislators.“ State Politics & Policy Quarterly13 (2): 147–163.
14.
FoxRichard L.LawlessJennifer L.2010. “If Only They’d Ask: Gender, Recruitment, and Political Ambition.” The Journal of Politics72 (2): 310–26.
15.
FultonSarah A.MaestasCherie D.MaiselL. SandyStoneWalter J.2006. “The Sense of a Woman: Gender, Ambition, and the Decision to Run for Congress.” Political Research Quarterly59 (2): 235–48.
16.
GelmanAndrewKingGary. 1990. “Estimating Incumbency Advantage without Bias.” American Journal of Political Science34 (4): 1142–64.
17.
GranovetterMark. 2005. “The Impact of Social Structure on Economic Outcomes.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives19 (1): 33–50.
18.
HardenJeffrey J.2013. “Multidimensional Responsiveness: The Determinants of Legislators’ Representational Priorities.” Legislative Studies Quarterly38 (2): 155–184.
19.
HassellHans J. G.2015. “Party Control of Party Primaries: Party Influence in Nominations for the US Senate.” The Journal of Politics78 (1): 75–87.
20.
HuckshornRobert JackSpencerRobert Clark. 1971. The Politics of Defeat: Campaigning for Congress. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
21.
KamCindy D.WilkingJennifer R.ZechmeisterElizabeth J.2007. “Beyond the ‘Narrow Data Base’: Another Convenience Sample for Experimental Research.” Political Behavior29 (4): 415–40.
22.
KanthakKristinWoonJonathan. 2015. “Women Don’t Run? Election Aversion and Candidate Entry.” American Journal of Political Science59 (3): 595–612.
23.
KazeeThomas A.ThornberryMary C.1990. “Where’s the Party? Congressional Candidate Recruitment and American Party Organizations.” The Western Political Quarterly43 (1): 61–80.
24.
KousserThadLucasScottMasketSethMcGheeEric. 2015. “Kingmakers or Cheerleaders? Party Power and the Causal Effects of Endorsements.” Political Research Quarterly68 (3): 443–56.
25.
LawlessJennifer L.FoxRichard L.2010. It Still Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
MaestasCherie D.FultonSarahMaiselL. SandyStoneWalter J.2006. “When to Risk It? Institutions, Ambitions, and the Decision to Run for the U.S. House.” American Political Science Review100 (2): 195–208.
27.
MaestasCherie D.MaiselL. SandyStoneWalter J.2005. “National Party Efforts to Recruit State Legislators to Run for the U.S. House.” Legislative Studies Quarterly30 (2): 277–300.
28.
MasketSeth E.2009. No Middle Ground: How Informal Party Organizations Control Nominations and Polarize Legislatures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
29.
MayhewDavid R.1974. “Congressional Elections: The Case of the Vanishing Marginals.” Polity6: 295–317.
30.
McDonaldSteve. 2011. “What’s in the ‘Old Boys’ Network? Accessing Social Capital in Gendered and Racialized Networks.” Social Networks33 (4): 317–30.
31.
McPhersonMillerSmith-LovinLynnCookJames M.2001. “Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks.” Annual Review of Sociology27: 415–44.
NivenDavid. 1998a. “Party Elites and Women Candidates: The Shape of Bias.” Women & Politics19 (2): 57–80.
34.
NivenDavid. 1998b. The Missing Majority: The Recruitment of Women as State Legislative Candidates. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.
35.
PreeceJessica RobinsonStoddardOlga Bogach. 2015a. “Does the Message Matter? A Field Experiment on Political Party Recruitment.” Journal of Experimental Political Science2 (1): 26–35.
36.
PreeceJessica RobinsonStoddardOlga Bogach. 2015b. “Why Women Don’t Run: Experimental Evidence on Gender Differences in Political Competition Aversion.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization117:296–308.
37.
PreeceJessica RobinsonStoddardOlga BogachFisherRachel. 2016. “Run, Jane, Run! Gendered Responses to Political Party Recruitment.” Political Behavior38 (3): 561–77.
38.
RahatGideonHazanReuven Y.2001. “Candidate Selection Methods: An Analytical Framework.” Party Politics7 (3): 297–322.
39.
SanbonmatsuKira. 2006a. “Do Parties Know that ‘Women Win’? Party Leader Beliefs about Women’s Electoral Chances.” Politics & Gender2 (4): 431–50.
40.
SanbonmatsuKira. 2006b. Where Women Run: Gender and Party in the American States. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
41.
SanbonmatsuKiraCarrollSusan J.WalshDebbie. 2009. “Poised to Run: Women’s Pathways to the State Legislatures.” Center for American Women and Politics, New Brunswick.
42.
SapiroVirginia. 1982. “Private Costs of Public Commitments or Public Costs of Private Commitments? Family Roles versus Political Ambition.” American Journal of Political Science26 (2): 265–79.
43.
SharrowElizabeth A.StrolovitchDara Z.HeaneyMichael T.MasketSeth E.Forthcoming. “The Gender of Party Politics: The Conditions of Party Activists’ Support for Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton in 2008.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy. https://works.bepress.com/elizabeth_sharrow/1/download/.
44.
SilbermannRachel. 2015. “Gender Roles, Work-Life Balance, and Running for Office.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science10:123–53.
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.
