|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
American Politics Research, Vol. 34, No. 6,
687-704 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X06289155
Symbolic Mobilization?
The Impact of Candidate Sex in American Elections
Kathleen Dolan
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
The increase in the number of women candidates in American politics has raised questions about whether the presence of these women has an impact on the public by mobilizing attitudes and behaviors. Employing National Election Study data from 1990 to 2004, this work examines whether women candidates influence levels of voter attitudes and behaviors and considers the role of political party and electoral competitiveness in this symbolic mobilization. The results indicate that there is little empirical analysis to support the assumption that the presence of women candidates translates into any widespread increase in political attitudes and behaviors.
Key Words: gender • candidate evaluation • elections • political campaigns
References
- Atkeson, L. R. (2003). Not all cues are created equal: The conditional impact of female candidates on political engagement. Journal of Politics, 65, 1040-1061.[CrossRef]
- Brians, C. L. (2005). Women for women? Gender and party bias in voting for female candidates. American Politics Research, 33, 357-375.[Abstract]
- Burns, N., Scholzman, K., & Verba, S. (2001). The private roots of public action: Gender, equality, and political participation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Burrell, B. (1998). A woman’s place is in the house: Campaigning for Congress in the feminist era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
- Carroll, S. (1994). Women as candidates in American politics (2nd ed.). Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.
- Center for the American Woman and Politics. (2005). Record number of women seek seats in U.S. House; Candidate numbers at other levels don’t match record highs. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, Eagleton Institute of Politics, Center for the American Woman and Politics.
- Dabelko, K. L., & Herrnson, P. (1997). Women’s and men’s campaigns for the U.S. House of Representatives. Political Research Quarterly, 50, 121-135.
- Dodson, D. (1998). Representing women’s interests in the U.S. House of Representatives. In S. Thomas & C. Wilcox (Eds.), Women and elective office: Past, present, and future (pp. 130-149). New York: Oxford University Press
- Dolan, K. (2004). Voting for women: How the public evaluates women candidates. Boulder, CO: Westview.
- Hansen, S. (1997). Talking about politics: Gender and contextual effects on political proselytizing. Journal of Politics, 59, 73-103.[CrossRef]
- Herrnson, P., Lay, J. C., & Stokes, A. K. (2003). Women running "as women": Candidate gender, campaign issues, and voter-targeting strategies. Journal of Politics, 65, 244-255.[CrossRef]
- Kathlene, L. (1995). Alternative views of crime: Legislative policymaking in gendered terms. Journal of Politics, 57, 696-723.[CrossRef]
- Koch, J. (1997). Candidate gender and women’s psychological engagement in politics. American Politics Quarterly, 25, 118-133.
- Larson, S. G. (2001). Running as women? A comparison of female and male Pennsylvania assembly candidates’ campaign brochures. Women and Politics, 22, 107-124.[CrossRef]
- Lawless, J. (2004). Politics of presence? Congresswomen and symbolic representation. Political Research Quarterly, 57, 81-99.
- Mansbridge, J. (1999). Should Blacks represent Blacks and women represent women? A contingent "yes." Journal of Politics, 61, 628-657.[CrossRef][ISI]
- Norton, N. (2002). Transforming Congress from the inside: Women in committee. In C. S. Rosenthal (Ed.), Women transforming Congress (pp. 316-340). Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
- Reingold, B. (2000). Representing women: Sex, gender, and legislative behavior in Arizona and California. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
- Rosenstone, S., & Hansen, J. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.
- Rosenthal, C. S. (1998). When women lead. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Saint-Germain, M. (1989). Does their difference make a difference? The impact of women on public policy in the Arizona State Legislature. Social Science Quarterly, 70, 956-968.
- Sapiro, V. (1981). When are interests interesting? The problem of the representation of women. American Political Science Review, 75, 701-716.[CrossRef][ISI]
- Sapiro, V., & Conover, P. (1997). The variable gender basis of electoral politics: Gender and context in the 1992 US election. British Journal of Political Science, 27, 497-523.[CrossRef]
- Swers, M. (2002). The difference women make. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Teixeira, R. (1992). The disappearing American voter. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
- Thomas, S. (1994). How women legislate. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Thomas, S. (1998). Introduction: Women and elective office: Past, present, and future. In S. Thomas & C. Wilcox (Eds.), Women and elective office (pp. 1-14). New York: Oxford University Press.
- Tolleson-Rinehart, S. (1992). Gender consciousness and politics. New York: Routledge.
- Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic volunteerism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
K. Dolan
Is There a "Gender Affinity Effect" in American Politics?: Information, Affect, and Candidate Sex in U.S. House Elections
Political Research Quarterly,
March 1, 2008;
61(1):
79 - 89.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
