Leadership and Gender During Crises: A Survey Experiment in Chile

• In Event: Gender Stereotypes in Context: When is there a Masculine Advantage?

Abstract

Presidents often have to manage crises by making tough decisions under pressure. Men are traditionally stereotyped as more agentic, rational and cool-headed leaders (Eagly, and Carli 2007; Duerst-Lahti and Kelly 1995). Women, in contrast, have historically been viewed as more emotional, prone to hysteria, and hence more likely to buckle under pressure (Alexander and Andersen 1993; Rosenwasser and Dean 1989). Gender stereotypes such as these are generally thought to inhibit women’s ability to compete in presidential elections. No study to date has systematically investigated whether citizens actually prefer male or female presidential candidates in times of crisis.

We test the causal impact of candidate sex on citizen preferences for presidential candidates via an online survey experiment in Chile during its recent crisis. On October 6, 2019, the Chilean government raised metro prices in its capital city of Santiago, provoking a series of small-scale protests spearheaded by high-school students. Conservative President Sebastián Piñera and his cabinet initially refused to yield to protesters’ demands and used the police to repress the demonstrations. The crisis rapidly escalated to historic levels with protesters burning metro stations throughout Santiago. Chaos ensued. The government declared a state of siege on October 19, ordering the military to police the streets, and decreeing nation-wide curfews in order to contain the violence and looting. The demonstrations grew larger and more frequent, with citizens complaining not only about the metro fare but also more broadly about inequality and corruption. The crisis moreover entailed allegations of massive human rights abuses by the military and police bringing about an escalation of violence and repression. President Piñera’s popularity rating plummeted.

There are multiple reasons why Chile during this unusually intense national crisis offers a relevant setting to study citizen perceptions of leadership and candidate sex. To start, Chile was previously governed by a center-left female president, Michelle Bachelet, during two terms (2006-2010; 2014-18). Bachelet’s approval ratings varied enormously, at one point reaching record highs and at other points hitting record lows. Other ideologically diverse women have also mounted viable presidential campaigns in this country, and therefore female presidential candidates are relatively common in Chile.

Chile during this period also provides a relevant setting for this study because crisis situations should, almost by definition, be exceptional situations. Chile is traditionally known for its political stability, and the 2019-20 national crisis was highly unusual. The crisis put immense pressure on the sitting president to solve a series of urgent problems, such as violence, human rights violations, inequality, economic threats, and corruption. The crisis’s dimensional complexity enables us to test potential effects of candidates’ sex vis-a-vis distinct aspects of the crisis, each of which could be gendered.

Our main hypothesis is that, overall, Chileans indeed prefer male over female presidential candidates, and they perceive male candidates are more viable and better able to solve the crisis. However, we also expect that the impact of candidate sex differs according to whether voters are primed with potentially gendered aspects of the crisis. We specifically expect that when prompted with information about Chile’s inequality, human rights violations, and corruption, citizens actually prefer female candidates for president.

We test these propositions via a classic conjoint experiment where citizens viewed candidate profiles with the following information: candidate sex, ideology, previous experience, decision-making style (more attuned to citizens or experts’ advice), and region of origin. To measure different dependent variables, we asked respondents which candidate (1) they would vote for in a hypothetical presidential election; (2) could better solve the current crisis; (3) would more likely win a presidential election. We also measured respondents’ a priori levels of feminism, political participation before and after the crisis erupted, as well as their tendency towards populism and authoritarianism. In order to explore a possible “anti-Piñera” or “pro-Bachelet” effect, we also measure citizens’ approval ratings of former President Bachelet and incumbent President Piñera.

This study contributes to the literatures on candidate sex, vote choice, and leadership during crises.

Authors

• Carmen Le Foulon, Centro de Estudios Públicos

• Catherine Reyes-Housholder, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

• Julieta Suarez-Cao, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile