Biased Perceptions of Women Experts in Political Media

• In Event: Elite Communication: Congress, Candidates, and Experts

Abstract

Experts play an important role in political media, helping audiences economize information processing and arrive at better informed decisions. Yet, widely held gender stereotypes present obstacles for women experts, who are generally evaluated less positively than equally qualified men across a range of fields. While audiences may view women as better equipped to handle certain feminine-stereotyped issues, Role Congruency Theory suggests that expert authority in politics may be incongruent with traditional feminine gender roles, leading to a subsequent backlash. Building upon the latter theory, I hypothesize that when cued to consider the expertise of a new source, the (in)congruency of gender-stereotyped roles will activate gender biases which increase the gap in evaluations and trust of women and men. Using unique experimental designs, I seek to assess the relationship between domain-relevant expertise and gender biases across a range of gender-stereotyped issues. I find that women experts are rewarded less for additional expertise and punished more severely for a lack of expertise, exacerbating gender-based biases. I find that this pattern is consistent across both masculine and feminine-stereotyped issues, including issues that disproportionately impact women, such as women’s health care and the gender wage gap. The addition of competing partisan cues, however, overwhelms the influence of pundit gender. The normative implications suggest women in the media often face an uphill battle to advocate for their interests on key issues that affect them, and even when they may have more direct relevant experience simply by virtue of being a woman.

Author

• Adam L Ozer, Electoral Psychology Observatory, London School of Economics