A Woman as President? Gender Attitudes and Media Exposure in the U.S. Presidential Election

• In Event: Women out Front: Activism, Engagement, and Attitudes

Short Description

This study explores the interplay of voters’ gender, attitudes toward female leaders, media exposure, and political affiliation in the 2016 United States presidential election. Presenters will share their methodology, findings, and directions for continued research.

Detailed Abstract

The 2016 US presidential election was one of the most talked-about elections in history for numerous reasons. For one, it was the first time a woman presidential candidate represented a major political party. This has reignited discussions around topics such as feminism and female leadership, focusing more attention on the issue of gender inequality. The election result subsequently sparked the 2017 Women’s March, a worldwide protest that aimed to protect women’s rights (Womensmarch.com, 2017). In addition, the media was widely criticized for letting biases control the reported content (Wolff, 2016). As reported by Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government (2016), the majority of the news reports of both candidates carried a negative connotation, and there was little mention of policy for either candidate. As a result, the 2016 presidential election presented a perfect context in which to study the effects of voters’ gender, attitudes toward female leaders, and media exposure on voter’s perceptions of the two candidates. The findings will shed light on the existing barriers to women’s ascendance to one of the highest political offices.

Political leadership is perceived as a predominately masculine occupation (e.g., White, Kruczek, Brown, & White, 1989), and as a result of this bias female politicians are often evaluated less favorably than their male counterparts (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Nonetheless, there are also advantages that are exclusive to female politicians. As suggested by Diekman and colleagues (2002), it is a common perception that a female politician will lead to the improvement of the status of women. Following this logic, a female presidential candidate is likely to elicit more support from female voters. Given the presence of this paradox, we examined how liking and perceived competence of the two candidates differ between male and female voters, as well as their general attitudes toward female leaders.

In addition, the media can easily influence a candidate’s campaign by choosing what to cover in their reports and how to frame this coverage (Tankard, 2001). Bligh, Schlehofer, Casasd, and Gaffney (2011) demonstrated that the media indeed significantly influence judgments of women politicians’ likability in an experimental setting. Many have suggested the media coverage of the 2016 presidential election mainly focused on the negative aspects or drama of the election (KHS, 2016). Thus, we also investigated the influence of media exposure on voters’ liking and perceived competence of the two major-party candidates, as well as its interplay with attitudes toward female leaders. Finally, considering political affiliation as a powerful factor that predicts voter’s voting preference and choice (e.g. Pillai & Williams, 1998), we examined the role of political affiliation in the relationship between attitudes toward female leaders and voter’s behaviors.

Four hundred and forty participants were recruited from mTurk (a crowdsourcing internet marketplace) as well as a public university in Southern California for the current study. Participants were between the ages of 18 and 69 (M= 29.53, SD = 10.61), and 53 percent were female. Political affiliation was divided among Democrat (40.2%), Republican (23.6%), and Independent (30.5%), with 5.7% as ‘other.' Participants rated their political ideology as 3.84 (SD = 1.30) on a scale of 1 = very conservative to 6 = very liberal.

Participants were invited to fill out an online survey assessing their attitudes toward female leadership, the amount of news they were exposed to, as well as perceptions of the presidential candidates from the two major parties in the 2016 election.

Results revealed that, taking political affiliation into account, although women tend to have a more positive attitude toward female leaders, there were no significant differences between men and women’s liking or perceived competence for either of the candidates. After controlling for age, gender, and political affiliation, media exposure did not explain any variation in the liking or the perceived competence for either candidate or moderate the relationship between attitudes toward female leaders and perceptions of the candidates’ likability and perceived competence. Finally, the results indicate that attitudes toward female leaders do not moderate the relationship between political affiliation and likability, perceived competence of candidates, or people’s voting behavior. The regression analysis indicated that political affiliation is the strongest predictor of voting behavior.

The findings of the current study pose interesting questions that necessitate further study. The insignificant difference between male and female voters in liking and perceived competence of the female candidate was unexpected. According to Diekman and colleagues (2002), women voters should display stronger support for a female presidential candidate because a female president symbolizes elevation of women’s status. However, as our findings suggest, although women indicated that they have a more positive attitude toward female leaders, this attitude did not translate to their actual liking or perceived competence of the female presidential candidate. One plausible explanation was media coverage. As demonstrated in previous research, media coverage and news valence can have a detrimental effect on a female politician’s campaign (Bligh et al., 2011). However, contrary to previous findings, our results show that media exposure did not have a significant influence in this sample, rejecting this potential explanation. The remaining two explanations might be more promising – political affiliation and gender congeniality.

As supported by our results, political affiliation remains one of the most critical factors determining voting behavior. This implies that voters might focus on voting for leaders who represent their political ideology instead of their political agenda or leadership skills. Additionally, gender congeniality, which refers to the match between gender roles and certain leadership roles (Eagly, Karau, & Makhijani, 1995) may also be a contributing factor. Since political leadership positions tend to be associated with masculine traits, and are, thus, gender congenial for men (e.g. White et al., 1989), women are, naturally, considered as ‘unfit’ for these roles. This prejudice explains why even though women claimed to hold a positive attitude toward female leaders, they did not necessarily consider the female presidential candidate, despite her experiences and accomplishments, as having the necessary traits (mostly masculine) to take on the tasks that a presidency entails.

Participants

• Wing Yan Lau, Claremont Graduate University

• Michelle Bligh, Claremont Graduate University

• Jeffrey Kohles, California State University San Marcos