Female candidates sometimes are discouraged from negative campaigning because they would risk voter backlash by defying gender stereotypes. In this experiment, a negative television campaign advertisement was manipulated to control for the candidate's gender, issue content, and the character traits emphasized in the narration. The female candidate's support was not diminished because of the attack upon her opponent. The findings show that in low-information contests, female candidates are assumed to be weaker on “male” issues. However, when the female candidate used a “male” issue as the basis of an attack upon her male opponent, she was judged more competent on the issue. This suggests that negative advertising could be an effective tool to neutralize the disadvantages caused by gender stereotypes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Shanto Iyengar. 1995. Going Negative: How Political Advertisements Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.
2.
Ashmore, Richard, and Frances Del Boca. 1979. “Sex Stereotypes and Implicit Personality Theory: Towards a Cognitive-Social Psychological Conceptualization.” Sex Roles5:219-248.
3.
Brady, Henry, and Paul Sniderman. 1985. “Attitude Attribution: A Group Basis for Political Reasoning.” American Political Science Review79:1061-1078.
4.
Burrell, Barbara. 1994. A Woman's Place Is in the House Campaigning for Congress in the Feminist Era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
5.
Conover, Pamela Johnston. 1981. “Political Cues and the Perception of Candidates.” American Politics Quarterly9:427-448.
6.
Darcy, Robert, Susan Welch, and Janet Clark. 1994. Women, Elections, and Representation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
7.
Dolan, Kathleen. 1997. “Gender Differences in Support for Women Candidates: Is There a Glass Ceiling in American Politics?” Women & Politics17(2):27-41.
8.
Eagly, Alice, and Steven Karau. 2002. “Role Congruity Theory of Prejudice toward Female Leaders.” Psychological Review109:573-598.
9.
Fox, Richard, and Eric R. A. N. Smith. 1998. “The Role of Candidate Sex in Voter Decision-Making.” Political Psychology19:405-415.
10.
Huddy, Leonie, and Nayda Terkildsen. 1993a. “The Consequences of Gender Stereotypes for Women Candidates at Different Levels and Types of Office.” Political Research Quarterly46:503-525.
11.
Huddy, Leonie, and Nayda Terkildsen. 1993b. “Gender Stereotypes and Perceptions of Male and Female Candidates.” American Journal of Political Science37:119-147.
12.
Iyengar, Shanto, Nicholas Valentino, Stephen Ansolabehere, and Adam Simon. 1997. “Running as a Woman: Gender Stereotyping in Women's Campaigns.” In Women, Media, and Politics, ed. Pippa Norris. New York: Oxford University Press.
13.
Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, Paul Waldman, and Susan Sherr. 2000. “Eliminate the Negative? Categories of Analysis for Political Advertisements.” In Crowded Airwaves, eds. James Thurber, Candice Nelson, and David Dulio. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
14.
Just, Marion, Ann Crigler, Dean Alger, Timothy Cook, Montague Kern, and Darrell West. 1996. Crosstalk: Citizens, Candidates, and the Media in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15.
Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1996. The Political Consequences of Being a Woman. New York: Columbia University Press.
16.
Kahn, Kim, and Patrick Kenney. 2000. “Negative Campaigning and Knowledge of Senate Elections.” In Crowded Airwaves, eds. James Thurber, Candice Nelson, and David Dulio. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
17.
Kaid, Lynda Lee, Sandra L. Myers, Val Pipps, and Jan Hunter. 1984. “Sex Role Perceptions and Televised Political Advertising: Comparing Male and Female Candidates.” Women and Politics4(4):41-53.
18.
Kinder, Donald. 1983. “Diversity and Complexity in American Public Opinion.” In Political Science: The State of the Discipline, ed. Ada Finifter. Washington, D.C.: American Political Science Association.
19.
Lansing, Jewell. 1991. 101 Campaign Tips for Women Candidates and Their Staffs. Saratoga, CA: R & B Publishers.
20.
Lau, Richard R., and Lee Sigelman. 2000. “Effectiveness of Negative Political Advertising.” In Crowded Airwaves, eds. James Thurber, Candice Nelson, and David Dulio. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
21.
Leeper, Mark. 1991. “The Impact of Prejudice on Female Candidates: An Experimental Look at Voter Inference.” American Politics Quarterly19:248-261.
22.
Nelson, Thomas E., Zoe M. Oxley, and Rosalee A. Clawson. 1997. “Toward a Psychology of Framing Effects.” Political Behavior19(3):221-246.
23.
Nie, Norman, Sidney Verba, and John R. Petrocik. 1976. The Changing American Voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24.
Popkin, Samuel. 1991. The Reasoning Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25.
Procter, David E., William Schenck-Hamlin, and Karen Haase. 1994. “Exploring the Role of Gender in the Development of Negative Political Advertisements.” Women and Politics14(2):1-22.
26.
Sapiro, Virginia. 1981-82. “If Senator Baker Were a Woman: An Experimental Study of Candidate Images.” Political Psychology2(1):61-83.
27.
Thompson, Seth and Janie Steckenrider. 1997. “The Relative Irrelevance of Candidate Sex.” Women and Politics17(4):71-92.
28.
Trent, Judith, and Robert Friedenberg. 1995. Political Campaign Communication. Westport, CT: Praeger.
29.
Vavreck, Lynn. 2001. The reasoning voter meets the strategic candidate: Signals and specificity in campaign advertising, 1998. American Politics Research29(5):507-529.
30.
Williams, Leonard. 1998. “Voter Reaction to Women Candidates.” In Women and Elective Office: Past, Present, and Future, eds. Sue Thomas and Clyde Wilcox. New York: Oxford University Press.
