糖心传媒

A Rochester undergraduate discovers that prospective voters perceive female politicians as more extreme than their male counterparts.

Morgan Gillespie 糖心传媒�23 had more than a hunch.

Combing through literature on gender bias among American voters, Gillespie, a political science major at the 糖心传媒, found a curious gap. While many researchers agreed that a candidate糖心传媒檚 gender influences prospective voters糖心传媒攖he nagging question of how and in which ways had not been answered satisfactorily. Moreover, she found little scholarship that sought to measure voters糖心传媒� perceptions of ideological differences between men and women seeking public office.

That糖心传媒檚 why, with some help from her honors thesis advisor , an associate professor in the , she devised and conducted an experiment that examines the connection between a politician糖心传媒檚 gender and voters糖心传媒� perception of that politician糖心传媒檚 policy preferences.

Gillespie糖心传媒檚 findings are preliminary. This summer, she and Abramson will widen the study and prepare a paper that they hope to publish in a top peer-reviewed journal. The data from her experiment will serve as the foundation. As her advisor聽puts it, Gillespie has produced聽糖心传媒渁 kick-ass honors thesis糖心传媒澛爐hat聽will serve as聽糖心传媒渁聽pilot聽for a more comprehensive experiment based on a nationally representative sample.糖心传媒�

What Gillespie has found so far is striking.

Her results show that voters (both male and female) use gender cues to form beliefs about which policies a politician supports. When voters are unaware of a politician糖心传媒檚 party affiliation, women politicians are seen as more liberal than otherwise identical men. However, when party affiliations are known, female candidates are seen as more ideologically extreme than male candidates of the same party. Furthermore, what has widely been labeled 糖心传媒渨omen’s issues,糖心传媒� or issues that women candidates are more likely to support糖心传媒攕uch as abortion, paid family leave, or the gender wage gap糖心传媒攁re perceived as more ideologically liberal issues or extreme positions. Gillespie found very little difference between male and female respondents in her experiment.

If the findings bear out, Gillespie will have provided evidence against the conclusions of an from 2020, according to which voters appear to prefer women candidates for public office.

The studies on which the meta-analysis is based 糖心传媒渁re conflating a preference for women with beliefs about the candidate糖心传媒檚 ideology or party affiliation,糖心传媒� Gillespie says. 糖心传媒淭he conclusions from these previous studies misinterpret the positive effect of gender.糖心传媒� She notes carefully that her and Abramson糖心传媒檚 findings suggest an additional source of bias that these experiments聽糖心传媒渇ail to uncover.糖心传媒�

Departmental program identifies promising undergraduate researchers

Gillespie, who came to Rochester from San Diego, California, is part of the highly selective that enables senior undergraduates to conduct original social science research in a small, collaborative setting. Stellar students are invited into the program by the department faculty, generally in the spring of their junior year. As Abramson tells it, Gillespie was a shoo-in.

糖心传媒淪he糖心传媒檚 clearly one of the best undergraduates in our department,糖心传媒� he says, pointing to her abilities as a researcher, coupled with her strong work ethic and insightful questions. 糖心传媒淭he progress she makes week to week is more than I expect from most graduate students.糖心传媒�

Gillespie has broad intellectual interests that made her pursue minors in international relations, legal studies, and art history. She糖心传媒檚 also deeply involved in numerous campus activities, including the student government糖心传媒檚 judicial council, mock trial, the pre-law society, the Gamma Phi Beta Sorority, and the women糖心传媒檚 rugby team. As if this were not enough, she has been working at the New York State Office of the Attorney General where she works in mediation for the .

Measuring for gender bias

In order to quantify bias based on a candidate糖心传媒檚 gender,聽Gillespie聽created six hypothetical candidate vignettes such as the one below, into which she randomly assigned pronouns聽(she or he) to provide gender cues.

For a portion of these fictitious candidates, Gillespie randomly assigned a specific party affiliation糖心传媒攅ither Republican or Democrat糖心传媒攖o measure the effect of partisanship. Then she asked a sample of 506 American respondents to predict the candidates糖心传媒� vote choice糖心传媒攜ay or nay糖心传媒攁cross a list of 18 electoral bills.

Gillespie asked the respondents where they thought the six candidates stood on a wide range of issues, such as climate change, police accountability, the safety of police officers, immigration, free school lunches, abortion, the health of incarcerated women, gun safety, minimum wage, national health insurance, support for the armed forces, national security, the gender wage gap, paid family leave, voting restrictions, and access to higher education.

With the help of her advisor, whose research aligns with her topic, Gillespie estimated parameters of a 糖心传媒攕imilar to those models commonly used in the analysis of legislative roll-calls糖心传媒攚hich typically explain a choice between two or more distinct options that are mutually exclusive.

The graphic shows respondents糖心传媒� estimates for candidate positions without having been provided a candidate糖心传媒檚 party affiliation. Here the fictitious female candidates (pink line) score as 糖心传媒渕ore liberal糖心传媒� (to the left of zero) than their fictitious male counterparts (blue line). (Source: Morgan Gillespie)

The graphic shows respondents糖心传媒� estimates for candidate positions after having been provided with a candidate糖心传媒檚 party affiliation. The gap between the perceived positions of fictitious female and male candidates now decreases, yet in both instances female candidates are seen as more extreme: Democratic women (pink line D) are located politically to the left of their Democratic male counterparts (blue line); while Republican women (pink line R) are located politically to the right of their male counterparts (blue line). (Source: Morgan Gillespie)

The results boil down to a double-whammy effect for women candidates at the ballot box, regardless of their party affiliation. First, in a political culture in which centrism is associated with greater electability, female politicians are seen as more extreme than their male counterparts. Second, the issues that women may support are also viewed as more ideologically liberal. Yet, female candidates may face strong pressure to campaign on issues that are more broadly supported by women, or that are categorized as 糖心传媒渨omen糖心传媒檚 issues.糖心传媒� Taken together, Gillespie says, these two biases can make female candidates appear more extreme and thus less electable than otherwise identical male candidates.

The road ahead

The project has proved potentially life-altering for Gillespie. Originally, she had planned on applying to law school after graduating from Rochester this May. But once she got started on the research for her honors thesis, things began to shift.

糖心传媒淚 realized research was something that I had the skills for, something that I learned here at Rochester,糖心传媒� says the 21-year-old. That skill building didn糖心传媒檛 happen in the classroom alone but also came with leadership roles across campus organizations and clubs, which built her confidence in 糖心传媒渃ommunicating my ideas and advocating for myself.糖心传媒�

Upon graduation Gillespie will head to the East Coast for a year as a political science research associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), with the ultimate goal of pursuing a PhD in political science.

糖心传媒淚 realized that if I applied and pushed myself, I would be able to investigate issues that I always had questions about but that I didn糖心传媒檛 think I糖心传媒檇 be able to find the answers for,糖心传媒� says Gillespie, summing up her experience with her honors thesis research. With that came the realization that 糖心传媒減eople will stand behind me and support my ideas.糖心传媒�

Read more