Search

ABSTRACTExtant scholarship offers conflicting conclusions about whether female candidates emphasize feminine or masculine stereotypes in campaigns. We suggest that female candidates use both stereotypes, and do so by varying the use of these stereotypes in the visual and the verbal content of a single message. We measure how candidates vary the use of gender stereotypes in the visual and the verbal message of a single campaign ad. We predict that female candidates will pair feminine visuals with masculine verbal messages. We argue that using visuals to communicate femininity is a subtle way for female candidates to address the “double-bind” that demands female candidates display masculine competency and feminine warmth. With a unique measure, we uncover three key findings. First, female candidates have a higher probability of airing a campaign ad that incorporates feminine visuals compared to male candidates. Second, female candidates are more likely to emphasize feminine visuals relative to masculine visuals. Third, female candidates air campaign ads with a higher degree of visual-verbal conflict pairing feminine visuals with masculine verbal messages. Our research has broad implications for how female candidates overcome gendered expectations. We also show that voters receive “mixed” stereotype messages that can, potentially, affect voter decision-making.

This article examines differences in news coverage of female candidates using a media sociology framework that examines the interplay between organizational, routine, and individual levels of influence. The analyses find that national and local newspapers are more likely to write about the political qualifications of female candidates relative to male candidates, and female journalists at local newspapers are most likely to write about women’s political qualifications. Female candidates receive more feminine stereotypic coverage across newspapers, especially in all-women elections. These results uncover important differences across media organizations that affect how female candidates develop their campaign strategies and voter decision-making.

Increasing numbers of women are running for political office at the local, state, and national levels. Existing research offers unclear conclusions about whether feminine stereotypes are an electoral constraint for female candidates. An underlying assumption in this scholarship is that all types of individuals rely on similar processes to form electoral assessments of female candidates. This study tests the assumption of equitable stereotype reliance across individuals. I integrate theories from psychology about which types of individuals are most likely to use stereotypes to judge others, and consider how these determinants operate in a political context. I argue that whether an individual relies on feminine stereotypes to evaluate a female candidate depends on characteristics such as attention to politics, partisanship, and other relevant demographic characteristics. An original survey experiment identifies how individual characteristics affect whether a voter turns to feminine stereotypes when a woman runs for office. These findings are consequential because individuals who rely on feminine stereotypes are also less likely to vote for a female candidate.