In this paper I show that two popularly cited sources of bias against female politicians contending for high-status foreign policy roles in government, the gendered costs of filling “hard” policy domains such as foreign affairs, and quota penalties, are not immutable. First, in a candidate-choice experiment fielded on real-world Pakistani legislators, I show that biases against female politicians' candidacy to foreign policy legislative committees can be significantly offset by emphasizing candidate qualification. Second, in an experiment on Pakistani social media users, increasingly considered a captive base for the misogynist takedowns of female politicians, I show how hawkishness by female Foreign Ministers helps attenuate some of the credibility challenges associated with being on a reserved seat. These findings shed light on the kinds of information that may facilitate the elevation and success of female politicians vying for foreign policy roles.
AlexanderAmy C.2012. “Change in Women’s Descriptive Representation and the Belief in Women’s Ability to Govern: A Virtuous Cycle.” Politics & Gender8 (4): 437–464.
2.
AlexanderDeborahAndersenKristi. 1993. “Gender as a Factor in the Attribution of Leadership Traits.” Political Research Quarterly46 (3): 527–545.
3.
ArmstrongBrennaBarnesTiffany D.BrienDiana Z. OTaylor-RobinsonMichelle M.. 2022. “Corruption, Accountability, and Women’s Access to Power.” The Journal of Politics84 (2): 1207–1213.
4.
ArmstrongBrennaBarnesTiffanyChibaDainaO BrienDiana Z.. 2024. “Financial Crises and the Selection and Survival of Women Finance Ministers.” American Political Science Review118 (3): 1305–1323.
5.
AuerbachAdam MichaelThachilTariq. 2018. “How Clients Select Brokers: Competition and Choice in India’s Slums.” The American Political Science Review112 (4): 775–791.
6.
BarnesTiffany D.BurchardStephanie M.. 2013. “Engendering Politics: The Impact of Descriptive Representation on Women’s Political Engagement in Sub-Saharan Africa.” Comparative Political Studies46 (7): 767–790.
7.
BarnesTiffany D.O BrienDiana Z.. 2018. “Defending the Realm: The Appointment of Female Defense Ministers Worldwide.” American Journal of Political Science62 (2): 355–368.
8.
BeamanLoriChattopadhyayRaghabendraDufloEstherPandeRohiniTopalovaPetia. 2009. “Powerful Women: Does Exposure Reduce Bias?” The Quarterly Journal of Economics124 (4): 1497–1540.
9.
BeauregardKatrine. 2017. “Quotas and Gender Gaps in Political Participation Among Established Industrial European Democracies: Distinguishing Within-And Across-Country Effects.” Political Research Quarterly70 (3): 657–672.
10.
BennettCarolynBlackmanAlexandraShalabyMarwa. 2023. “Gender Stereotypes in Autocracies: Experimental Evidence from Morocco.” Journal of Politics.
11.
CaprioliMary. 2000. “Gendered Conflict.” Journal of Peace Research37 (1): 51–68.
12.
CaprioliMaryBoyerMark A.. 2001. “Gender, Violence, and International Crisis.” Journal of Conflict Resolution45 (4): 503–518.
13.
ChengChristineTavitsMargit. 2011. “Informal Influences in Selecting Female Political Candidates.” Political Research Quarterly64 (2): 460–471.
14.
ChildsSarahKrookMona. 2009. “Analysing Women’s Substantive Representation: From Critical Mass to Critical Actors.” Government and Opposition44 (2): 125–145.
15.
ClaytonAmanda. 2015. “Women’s Political Engagement under Quota-Mandated Female Representation: Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiment.” Comparative Political Studies48 (3): 333–369.
16.
ClaytonAmanda. 2018. “Do Gender Quotas Really Reduce Bias? Evidence from a Policy Experiment in Southern Africa.” Journal of Experimental Political Science5 (3): 182–194.
17.
ClaytonAmandaJosefssonCeciliaWangVibeke. 2014. “Present without Presence? Gender, Quotas and Debate Recognition in the Ugandan Parliament.” Representation50 (3): 379–392.
18.
Davidson-SchmichLouise. 2016. Gender Quotas and Democratic Participation: Recruiting Candidates for Elective Offices in Germany. University of Michigan Press.
19.
DolanKathleen. 2014. “Gender Stereotypes, Candidate Evaluations, and Voting for Women Candidates: What Really Matters?” Political Research Quarterly67 (1): 96–107.
20.
DruckmanJames N.WarwickPaul V.. 2005. “The Missing Piece: Measuring Portfolio Salience in Western European Parliamentary Democracies.” European Journal of Political Research44 (1): 17–42.
21.
EaglyAlice H.KarauSteven J.. 2002. “Role Congruity Theory of Prejudice toward Female Leaders.” Psychological Review109 (3): 573–598.
22.
EaglyAlice H.MakhijaniMona G.KlonskyBruce G.. 1992. “Gender and the Evaluation of Leaders: A Meta-Analysis.” Psychological Bulletin111 (1): 3–22.
23.
EhrenreichBarbaraPollittKatha. 2012. “Fukuyama’s Follies: So what if Women Ruled the World?”
24.
ErlandsenMatthiasHernández-GarzaMaría FernandaSchulzCarsten-AndreasPresidentMadame. 2022. “Madame Ambassador? Women Presidents and Gender Parity in Latin America’s Diplomatic Services.” Political Research Quarterly75 (2): 425–440.
25.
Escobar-LemmonMaria C.Taylor-RobinsonMichelle M.. 2009. “Pathways to Power in Presidential Cabinets: What Are the Norms for Different Cabinet Portfolios and Do Female Appointees Conform to the Norm? A Study of 5 Presidential Democracies.”.
26.
FalkErikaKenskiKate. 2006. “Issue Saliency and Gender Stereotypes: Support for Women as Presidents in Times of War and Terrorism.” Social Science Quarterly87 (1): 1–18.
27.
FischerJoernDowdingKeithDumontPatrick. 2012. “The Duration and Durability of Cabinet Ministers.” International Political Science Review33: 505–519.
28.
FranceschetSusanPiscopoJennifer M.. 2008. “Gender Quotas and Women’s Substantive Representation: Lessons from Argentina.” Politics & Gender4 (3): 393–425.
29.
FridkinKim L.KenneyPatrick J.Serignese WoodallGina. 2008. “Bad for Men, Better for Women: The Impact of Stereotypes during Negative Campaigns.” Political Behavior31 (1): 53–77.
30.
GagliarducciStefanoPasermanM. Daniele. 2012. “Gender Interactions within Hierarchies: Evidence from the Political Arena.” The Review of Economic Studies79 (3): 1021–1052.
31.
GeisselBrigitteHustEvelin. 2005. “DemocraticMobilisationthroughQuotas: Experiencesin India and Germany.” Commonwealth & Comparative Politics43 (2): 222–244.
32.
HainmuellerJensHopkinsDanielYamamotoTeppei. 2014. “Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments.” Political Analysis22 (1): 1–30.
33.
HolmanMiryaMerollaJenniferZeichmeisterElizabeth. 2022. “The Curious Case of Theresa May and the Public that Did Not Rally: Gendered Reactions to Terrorist Attacks Can Cause Slumps Not Bumps.” American Political Science Review116 (1): 249–264.
34.
HuddyLeonieTerkildsenNayda. 1993. “The Consequences of Gender Stereotypes for Women Candidates at Different Levels and Types of Office.” Political Research Quarterly46 (3): 503–525.
35.
HumayunFahd. 2024. “Gendering Hawkishness in the War Room: Evidence from Pakistani Politicians.” Journal of Peace Research.
36.
ImamverdiyevaU.SheaP. E.. 2022. “Re-Examining Women Leaders and Military Spending.” Journal of Peace Research59 (5): 679–693.
37.
JalalzaiFarida. 2013. Shattered, Cracked, or Firmly Intact? Women and the Executive Glass Ceiling Worldwide. Oxford University Press.
38.
JervisRobert. 1998. System Effects: Complexity in Political and Social Life. Princeton University Press.
39.
JonesJennifer J.2016. “Talk like a Man? The Linguistic Styles of Hillary Clinton.” Perspectives on Politics14 (3): 625–642.
40.
KahnKim Fridkin. 1992. “Does Being Male Help? an Investigation of the Effects of Candidate Gender and Campaign Coverage on Evaluations of U.S. Senate Candidates.” The Journal of Politics54 (2): 497–517.
41.
KathleneLynClarkeSusanFoxBarbara. 1991. “Ways Women Politicians Are Making a Difference.” In Gender and Policymaking: Studies of Women in Office. Rutgers.
42.
KerevelYann. 2019. “Empowering Women? Gender Quotas and Women’s Political Careers.” Journal of Politics81 (4): 1167–1179.
43.
KhanAyeshaNaqviSana. 2020. “Dilemmas of Representation: Women in Pakistan’s Assemblies.” Asian Affairs51 (2): 286–306.
44.
KimHyun JeongKweonYesola. 2019. “Why Do Young Men Oppose Gender Quotas? Group Threat and Backlash to Legislative Gender Quotas.” Legislative Studies Quarterly47 (4): 991–1021.
45.
KittilsonMikiCaul. 2005. “In Support of Gender Quotas: Setting New Standards, Bringing Visible Gains.” Politics & Gender1 (4): 638–645.
46.
KittilsonMiki CaulSchwindt-BayerLeslie A.. 2012. The Gendered Effects of Electoral Institutions: Political Engagement and Participation. Comparative Politics Oxford University Press.
47.
KochMichael T.FultonSarah A.. 2011. “The Defense of Women: Gender, Office Holding, and National Security Policy in Established Democracies.” The Journal of Politics73 (1): 1–16.
48.
KrookMona Lena. 2009. Quotas for Women in Politics: Gender and Candidate Selection Reform Worldwide. Oxford University Press. Publication Title: Quotas for Women in Politics.
49.
KrookMona LenaO BrienDiana Z.. 2012. “All the President’s Men? The Appointment of Female Cabinet Ministers Worldwide.” Journal of Politics74 (3): 840–855.
50.
KrupnikovYannaBauerNichole M.. 2014. “The Relationship between Campaign Negativity, Gender and Campaign Context.” Political Behavior36 (1): 167–188.
51.
LawlessJennifer L.2004. “Women, War, and Winning Elections: Gender Stereotyping in the PostSeptember 11th Era.” Political Research Quarterly57 (3): 479–490.
52.
MoCecilia Hyunjung. 2015. “The Consequences of Explicit and Implicit Gender Attitudes and Candidate Quality in the Calculations of Voters.” Political Behavior37 (2): 357–395.
53.
MurrayRainbow. “Cracking the Highest Glass Ceiling: A Global Comparison of Women’s Campaigns for Executive Office.” 2010.
54.
NiklassonBirgittaTownsAnn E.. 2022. “Introduction: Approaching Gender and Ministries of Foreign Affairs.” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy17 (3): 39–369.
55.
NivenDavid. 1998. “Party Elites and Women Candidates.” Women & Politics19 (2): 57–80.
56.
O BrienDiana Z.2015. “Rising to the Top: Gender, Political Performance, and Party Leadership in Parliamentary Democracies.” American Journal of Political Science59 (4): 1022–1039.
57.
O BrienDiana Z.RickneJohanna. 2016. “Gender Quotas and Women’s Political Leadership.” American Political Science Review110 (1): 112–126.
58.
RadojevicMarco. 2022. “The Subjective Effects of Gender Quotas: Party Elites Do Not Consider “Quota Women” to Be Less Competent.”.” Politics & Gender19 (2): 349–372.
59.
ReynoldsAndrew. 1999. “Women in the Legislatures and Executives of the World: Knocking at the Highest Glass Ceiling.” World Politics51 (4): 547–572.
60.
RosenwasserShirley M.DeanNorma G.. 1989. “Gender Role and Political Office: Effects of Perceived Masculinity/Femininity of Candidate and Political Office.” Psychology of Women Quarterly13 (1): 77–85.
61.
SanbonmatsuKira. 2006. Where Women Run: Gender and Party in the American States. University of Michigan Press.
62.
Schwindt-BayerLeslie A.2006. “Still Supermadres? Gender and the Policy Priorities of Latin American Legislators.” American Journal of Political Science50 (3): 570–585.
63.
TeeleDawnKallaJoshRosenbluthFrances. 2018. “The Ties that Double Bind: Social Roles and Women’s Underrepresentation in Politics.” American Political Science Review112 (3): 525–541.
64.
WeeksAna CatalanoBaldezLisa. 2015. “Quotas and Qualifications: The Impact of Gender Quota Laws on the Qualifications of Legislators in the Italian Parliament.” European Political Science Review7 (1): 119–144.
65.
WolbrechtChristinaCampbellDavid E.. 2007. “Leading by Example: Female Members of Parliament as Political Role Models.” American Journal of Political Science51 (4): 921–939.
66.
YoonMi Yung. 2011. “More Women in the Tanzanian Legislature: Do Numbers Matter?” Journal of Contemporary African Studies29 (1): 83–98.
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.
