Evidence of Gendered Selection Effects into Public Office: Gendered Institutions, Political Ambition, and Personality Differences
|
|
- Aileen Simmons
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Evidence of Gendered Selection Effects into Public Office: Gendered Institutions, Political Ambition, and Personality Differences Adam M. Dynes Brigham Young University Hans J.G. Hassell Cornell College Jessica R. Preece Brigham Young University Matthew R. Miles Brigham Young University-Idaho Abstract Women continue to be underrepresented in politics at every level. While previous research identifies many potential barriers for women, several recent empirical studies argue that significant aspects of the pipeline to office are, in fact, mostly gender neutral. Using surveys of the general population and elected local officials that measure Big Five personality traits, we provide evidence that the overall selection process into politics is not gender neutral. There are small baseline differences in the personality profiles of men and women in the general population; however, these small distinctions are significantly different from the larger variation we find between men and women 1) among the politically ambitious and 2) in local political office. Although we are agnostic about the meaning of the specific differences, it does appear that the trait of conscientiousness plays an important role in women s underrepresentation. More broadly, the existence of personality differences in these populations is evidence that the selection process into politics favors different kinds of women than men. In other words, the political pipeline is gendered. Word Count: 2,405 Abstract Word Count: 172
2 1 Women are underrepresented at every level of government in the United States. 1 Scholars have proposed a wide variety of reasons why elected office might be more elusive for women than for men, but they fall into roughly two broad categories: political socialization into lower levels of nascent political ambition and informal institutional barriers to officeholding. Using measures of the Big Five personality traits, we find evidence of gendered selection processes into both nascent political ambition and political office. Politically ambitious women have different personality profiles than politically ambitious men. Furthermore, female officeholders have different personality profiles than male officeholders and those differences are not the same as those found between men and women in the general population, or even among politically ambitious men and women. In other words, the path to office seems to require different personality traits for men and for women lower levels of political ambition alone cannot explain women s underrepresentation. In this brief article, we are agnostic about the meaning of the specific personality differences; our focus is on showing that these processes are, in fact, gendered that they favor different kinds of women than men. However, the content of the personality differences does provide some intriguing avenues for further study about the kinds of men and women who can successfully navigate the long pipeline to political office and the consequences for women s underrepresentation. In particular, conscientiousness seems to play contradictory role for women by differentially leading them away from political ambition but being especially necessary for them to win elections. 1 Current data on women s representation are available at Women currently hold 20% to 25% of elected offices across all levels of government, including municipal government according to our own data.
3 2 Theoretical Framework Gender scholars have examined whether women face unique challenges in the pipeline to political office. Studies consistently show that women have lower levels of nascent political ambition than men, primarily because of gendered political socialization (Lawless and Fox 2005). Studies evaluating whether specific informal election institutions present disproportionate barriers for women have a wider variety of conclusions. Candidate recruitment seems to be gendered (Crowder-Meyer 2013). But, studies of media coverage suggest that the media covers men and women mostly similarly (Hayes and Lawless 2015); fundraising may not be much of an electoral barrier for women (Barber, Butler, and Preece 2016); and voters primarily care about partisanship and incumbency (Dolan 2014). These and other null findings form the basis of the common adage that when women run, women win (Burrell 1994). Nevertheless, most gender scholars acknowledge that reality is much more complex. Female candidates may be much better than their male counterparts and/or common research approaches may be poorly suited to statistically identify the campaign barriers women face (Pearson and McGhee 2013; Fulton 2012). We address the empirical question of whether the pipeline to political office is gendered in a different way than previous studies. Instead of studying specific elements of the process, we measure whether specific stages in the process as a whole result in different kinds of men and women navigating them successfully. We do this by identifying any differences in the Big Five personality profiles of 1) politically ambitious men and women in the general population and 2) male and female elected municipal officials. We also examine rates of progressive ambition among elected municipal officials. Political socialization processes interact with gender norms in a way that is likely to result in different types of women and men developing
4 3 nascent political ambition (Lawless and Fox 2005). And officeholding requires both having political ambition and then successfully navigating any campaign selection processes that might be gendered (Dittmar 2015). Hence, tracking the distribution of personality traits by sex across these stages of the political pipeline is one way to identify whether these processes are gendered and may provide clues to the ways in which they are gendered. In theorizing about how human traits interact with the political pipeline, we utilize the five-factor model or Big Five personality traits: openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism (or its opposite, emotional stability). We do so for several reasons. First, these traits consistently emerge as dominant features of individual personality and influence the level of comfort that individuals have in different social and professional environments (McCrae and Costa 2008). Second, a large body of work has found that the Big Five are associated with a wide range of political attitudes and behaviors among voters (see Gerber et al for a review) and a new but growing literature finds that personality traits influence decision-making in office (Caprara et al. 2010; Cuhadar et al. 2016; Dietrich et al. 2012; Ramey et al. 2017). The well-established nature of the Big Five in the social sciences, including political science, makes them an ideal framework for initial analyses on how gendered institutions and socialization affect ambition and, ultimately, the traits of the men and women who represent us. Methods and Results To examine whether there are different selection processes for men and women, we examine personality traits by sex among both the general American public (using a survey of a representative sample of 1,939 American adults conducted in 2015) and elected officials (using a survey of 2,133 elected officials serving in municipal government in the U.S. conducted in
5 4 2016). Full details on the sample and methodology are available in the online appendix. In both samples, we asked a battery of questions designed to measure Big Five personality and questions measuring nascent political ambition in the general population and progressive ambition in the sample of municipal officials. Personality, Gender, and Nascent Political Ambition We begin by isolating the effect of personality on nascent political ambition for men and women in Figure 1 estimated from an ordered logit model (available in the appendix). We include personality traits as well as controls for income, education, party identification, ideology, and race. We asked respondents to characterize their interest in running for public office on a threepoint scale (no interest=80%, open to the possibility=16%, actively considering=1%). Figure 1 plots the predicted probability of a respondent saying that they are open to the possibility of running for higher office by gender and each personality trait level. Figure 1: The Effect of Personality Traits on Political Ambition in the General Population by Gender Note: 2015 Survey of US Adults. Points are the predicted probabilities from the ordered logistic regression model, bars are the 95% confidence interval. X-axis is the sd from the mean. Consistent with the idea that political socialization is gendered, we find an interaction effect between personality and gender on political ambition. Gender changes the nature of the
6 5 relationship between these traits and nascent political ambition. First, while men and women who are low in conscientiousness are similar to each other and express the highest levels of political ambition, increases in conscientiousness disproportionately decrease women s levels of nascent political ambition. A highly conscientious woman is six points less likely to be open to the possibility of running for elected office than a highly conscientious man. Second, while higher levels of agreeableness are associated with less ambition overall, that relationship is magnified among women. The influence of agreeableness on interest in running for elected office is different for men and women who score in the upper half of the distribution of agreeableness. In short, higher levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness are marked by even lower levels of nascent political ambition for women compared to men. Personality, Gender, and Selection into Office While the previous section investigated how personality and gender influence who is interested in running, this section examines whether the process of election to office has implications for the personality profiles of men and women in elected office. In other words, we are interested in finding evidence of gendered selection effects into office. Table A.7 in the appendix shows how personality traits in men and women differ in the general population versus the population of local public officials. We find that the fairly small differences between men and women in the general population are not the same as the much larger differences among men and women elected officials. Female elected officials have differentially higher levels of openness and extraversion than male elected officials compared to the general population; male elected officials have differentially higher levels of agreeableness. In other words, the overall process for obtaining political office appears to be different for men and women and reward different personality traits.
7 6 Table 1: Differences in Personality Traits between Men and Women in the General Population with Political Ambition and among Male and Female Elected Local Officials Openness Political Aspirants Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 2.02 (0.65) 2.10 (0.69) 0.08 Men 2.02 (0.60) 2.05 (0.64) Conscientiousness Political Aspirants Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 2.21 (0.60) 2.70 (0.41) 0.49* Men 2.21 (0.56) 2.56 (0.51) 0.34* 0.15* Extraversion Political Aspirants Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 1.96 (0.65) 2.00 (0.67) 0.04 Men 1.94 (0.66) 1.87 (0.68) * Agreeableness Political Aspirants Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 2.20 (0.67) 2.36 (0.49) 0.16* Men 2.11 (0.65) 2.36 (0.49) 0.25* Emotional Stability Political Aspirants Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 1.67 (0.63) 2.09 (0.68) 0.42* Men 1.85 (0.66) 2.25 (0.65) 0.40* 0.02 Note: *p<0.05, two-tailed test. Standard Deviations in parentheses. The only difference between men and women political aspirants to reach statistical significance is Emotional Stability. All differences between men and women elected officials are significant except Openness and Agreeableness. More importantly, however, we are interested in identifying the effect of the campaign selection process independent of differences in gendered ambition among men and women in the general population. Table 1 shows how personality traits in men and women differ looking only at those individuals in the general population who have the highest levels of political ambition (thus eliminating the effect of political ambition on officeholding and isolating the effects of
8 7 gendered institutional barriers). We find significant differences in how the selection process influences the personality of men and women who enter public office. 2 Politically ambitious women and men in the general population are similar in conscientiousness, but women in elected office have much higher levels of conscientiousness than men in local office. In other words, the electoral environment seems to require a significantly higher level of conscientiousness from women than from men. This is particularly interesting because, as Figure 1 shows, highly conscientious women are significantly less likely to have political ambition than conscientious men. Likewise, while politically ambitious men and women have similar levels of extraversion, women elected officials are significantly more extraverted. This suggests that aspects of the electoral environment select on extraversion much more for women than for men. Gender and Progressive Ambition among Political Officials Finally, we examine whether selection into to political office affects the differences between men and women in elected office who possess progressive political ambition. Figure 2 shows the progressive political ambition of men and women in the sample of elected officials. Consistent with prior research, men and women in our sample of elected officeholders show no differences in progressive ambition. In addition, the lack of differences in progressive ambition among women and men also hold when we asked local officials to indicate for which level of higher office they would be interested in running. Ten percent of women and 11% of men indicated interest in national office; 37 and 41%, respectively, indicated interest in state level office; while 48 and 49% indicated interest in higher local offices. The process of running and winning office is different for men and women, but results in women with nearly identical levels 2 Results are similar for individuals who were both actively considering and open to the possibility of seeking higher office.
9 8 of progressive political ambition. In other words, with women s representation, the first cuts are the deepest. Figure 2: Differences in Progressive Ambition between Men and Women among Elected Local Officials Conclusion Note: The figure shows proportion of women and men choosing each statement. Subjects were asked the following: Which of the following best characterizes your attitudes toward running for higher office in the future? Black dots indicate the mean proportion of women choosing particular response. Hollow triangles indicate the mean proportion of men choosing a response. Political scientists have studied many specific causes of women s underrepresentation in politics. In this paper, we take a very different approach we look at the cumulative effects of political socialization and electoral processes on who makes it through the political pipeline. This analysis acts as a plausibility check for existing research, which faces many empirical challenges, and identifies fruitful courses for future research. We find that there are significant differences in the personality traits of men and women who become politically ambitious and who win office. In other words, we find evidence that these selection processes are not gender neutral. This study cannot identify the precise causes of
10 9 this gender differentiation. However, some of the findings do point to a few likely candidates, many of which reinforce existing findings. Existing research identifies women s lower levels of political ambition as an important contributor to women s underrepresentation (Lawless and Fox 2005). We identify which kinds of women are less likely to be politically ambitious: those with high levels of agreeableness and high levels of conscientiousness. Interventions that account for this are more likely to be successful. At the same time, we find that women in political office have especially high levels of conscientiousness, suggesting that the socialization process into political ambition is selecting against the very women who are most likely to successfully navigate the electoral environment. We also find that female elected officials score particularly high on measures of extraversion. There are a number of potential causes for this, ranging from voter preferences to the gendered nature of social, political, and recruitment networks. More research on how extraversion interacts with gender to form candidate evaluations would be useful. Finally, our finding that there is no difference in progressive ambition among male and female elected municipal officials is also important for the study of women s underrepresentation. It highlights the significant selection effects that happen at this early stage of the pipeline to higher office. Overall, we find significant evidence that early campaign institutions are gendered and that this shapes which kinds of men and women can successfully navigate the pipeline to office above and beyond the ways in which gendered political socialization shapes who has political ambition.
11 10 References Barber, Michael, Daniel M. Butler, and Jessica Preece Gender Inequalities in Campaign Finance. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 11 (2): Burrell, Barbara A Woman s Place Is in the House: Campaigning for Congress in the Feminist Era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Caprara, Gian Vittorio, Claudio Barbaranelli, Chiara Consiglio, Laura Picconi, and Philip G Zimbardo Personalities of Politicians and Voters: Unique and Synergistic Relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84(4):849. Crowder-Meyer, Melody Ara Gendered Recruitment without Trying: How Local Party Recruiters Affect Women s Representation. Cambridge Univ Press. Cuhadar, Esra, Juliet Kaarbo, Baris Kesgin, and Binnur Ozkececi-Taner Personality or Role? Comparisons of Turkish Leaders across Different Institutional Positions. Political Psychology 38(1): Dietrich, Bryce J., Scott Lasley, Jeffery J. Mondak, Megan L. Remmel, and Joel Turner Personality and Legislative Politics: The Big Five Trait Dimensions among US State Legislators. Political Psychology 33(2): Dittmar, Kelly Navigating Gendered Terrain: Stereotypes and Strategy in Political Campaigns. Temple University Press. Dolan, Kathleen When Does Gender Matter?: Women Candidates and Gender Stereotypes in American Elections. Oxford University Press, USA. Fulton, Sarah A Running Backwards and in High Heels: The Gendered Quality Gap and Incumbent Electoral Success. Political Research Quarterly 65 (2): Gerber, Alan S., Gregory A. Huber, David Doherty, Conor M. Dowling The Big Five Personality Traits in the Political Arena. Annual Review of Political Science 14: Hayes, Danny, and Jennifer L Lawless A Non-Gendered Lens? Media, Voters, and Female Candidates in Contemporary Congressional Elections. Perspectives on Politics 13 (1): Lawless, Jennifer L., and Richard L. Fox It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don t Run for Office. Cambridge University Press. McCrae, Robert R., and Paul T. Costa The Five Factor Model of Personality. In Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, eds. Oliver P. John, Richard W. Robins, and Lawrence A. Pervin. New York: Guilford Press. Pearson, Kathryn, and Eric McGhee What It Takes to Win: Questioning Gender Neutral Outcomes in US House Elections. Politics & Gender 9 (04): Ramey, Adam J., Jonathan D. Klingler, and Gary E. Hollibaugh, Jr. More Than a Feeling: Personality, Polarization, and the Transformation of the US Congress. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
12 11 General Population Study Methodology Online Appendix (Not Intended for print publication) To collect the diverse sample of the general public, we commissioned Clear Voice Research (CVR) to conduct an online survey of American adults. CVR fielded the survey in an online platform from June 12- June 25, Although marginal demographics may not fully characterize the bias in online panels (Kennedy et al. 2016), we note in the online appendix that the demographic distributions of the participants are consistent with the demographics of traditional telephone surveys and other representative samples. A sample of 1,939 subjects was recruited by Clear Voice Research to participate in a national political study from June 15-25, Clear Voice has maintained an online panel for the last eight years that is used solely for research purposes. Participants in the panel are told that they will be invited to participate in online research surveys in exchange for various incentives. Their initial registration form collects basic fields including: name, address, postal address, gender, date of birth, and language. After completing this form, a double opt-in/confirmation is sent to the address. Only double opt-in/confirmed accounts are invited to participate in surveys. Following opt-in, panelists are asked to complete their profile so that they collect as many data points as possible, which increases their targeting abilities when they send the member survey invitations. Based on client specifications a sample is pulled in quota group formats. Simple randomization is used to give a representative sample of new and old members within the quota groups. Participants are invited via to participate in the survey. For this survey, Clear Voice sent out 51,492 invitations, 2,488 began the survey (4.8% response rate) and 1,939 (77.9%) completed the entire survey.
13 12 The demographic characteristics of these panels closely resemble that of the United States population on several important traits. Table A.1 displays the demographics of this sample compared to American Community Survey (2014), Amazon s Mechanical Turk (adapted from Berinsky, Huber and Lenz (2012)), and a more nationally representative sample, the Annenberg National Election Study Johnston, Hall-Jameison, and Mutz (2008). Amazon s Mechanical Turk is an online marketplace where people hire laborers for a variety of tasks. Since the mid-2000 s researchers have been offering people money to participate in online survey experiments through Amazon s Mechanical Turk. Recently, scholars have spent considerable effort trying to determine the quality of the samples that are usually obtained through this service (Mullinix et al. 2015). The following table shows that this sample is much more representative of the US population on key variables than samples obtained through Amazon s Mechanical Turk and largely identical to the nationally representative sample collected in the Annenberg National Election Study. Table A.1: Summary of General Population Survey Demographics Demographics CVR 2015 Survey ACS 2014 Estimates MTurk NAES 2008 Female 49.23% 50.8% 60.1% 56.62% Age (mean years) (median) Education (% completing some college) 60.31% % White 80.61% 73.8% 83.5% 79.12% Black 9.13% 12.6% 4.4% 9.67% Asian 3.2% 5.0% % Latino (a) 4.07% 16.9% - 6.3% Multi-Racial 2.27% 2.9% % Party Identification
14 13 Democrat 33.75% % 36.67% Independent 41.49% % 20.82% Republican 24.77% % 30.61% N 1, ,234 Figure A1 provides the battery of questions used to measure the personality traits of respondents to the national survey of the American public. The battery is drawn from Bem (1981). Local Public Officials Survey Methodology We also conducted a survey of elected municipal officials from across the US as part of the American Municipal Officials Survey (AMOS). The sample is similar to ones used in previous work to understand municipal officials decision-making (e.g., Butler et al. 2017), including on issues of candidate emergence (Butler and Preece 2016) since party elites look to sub-county officials for candidates for county and state offices (Crowder-Meyer 2013). Our questions concerning political ambition and personality were one of several projects in the survey. Subjects were recruited via s with a link to the survey. We sent each potential subject three s one to two weeks apart, inviting them to participate. The response rate of 17.8% was similar to other surveys of municipal officials (e.g., Butler and Dynes 2016). 3 The survey was conducted in two waves sent to two different samples of municipal officials. Invitations to the first wave were sent in May and June of 2016 to a sample of 27,862 elected mayors and legislators (e.g., city councilors, aldermen, supervisors, etc.) from 4,187 cities. The sample was compiled by a for-profit organization that gathers contact information and addresses of public officials from municipalities that have a website and a population above 10,000. The organization uses webcrawler software to identify when information changes 3 Full details of the response rate and the methodology are available in the online appendix.
15 14 on the contact pages of each city s website and then has research assistants update its contact list of officials accordingly. Unfortunately, this approach has a high error rate. Based on Qualtrics tracking, only 18,567 (or 67%) of the invitations were delivered to an active address. In addition, we looked up a sample of 832 officials in the list and found that only 44% of the addresses were accurate. 2,165 officials answered questions on the first wave of the survey, resulting in a response rate of 17.8% based on the number of accurate s in the list. 4 This rate is similar to those from other surveys of municipal officials (e.g., Butler and Dynes (2016) report a response rate of 23%). The second wave of the survey was conducted in June and July of The sample consisted of the addresses of elected mayors and city councilors (or equivalent) gathered by Daniel Butler and Adam Dynes for the 2012 and 2014 AMOS (see Butler and Dynes (2016) for more details on the samples). Excluding the addresses from the first wave resulted in a list of 29,250 s. The addresses from the 2012 AMOS were gathered in January through March of 2012 by a team of undergraduate research assistants who searched for the website of 26,566 US municipalities. The addresses from the 2014 AMOS were gathered in a similar fashion in early 2014 but excluded municipalities with a population below 3,000 due to the low percentage of small towns with websites. Given that these addresses were gathered 2 to 4 years prior to this latest survey, we knew that a large percentage of the s and names of the officials (in the case of cities that use generic accounts for each office) would no longer be accurate. Indeed, 26% of the s sent through Qualtrics were undeliverable. It is likely that many more of the addresses are no longer monitored though they remain active. 4 The 17.8% is calculated as follows: 2,165/(.4375*27,862).
16 15 With 1,500 officials participating, the response rate for the second round of the survey was 6.9%. Measures of Personality and Ambition To measure personality in the national survey we use a thirty-one adjective measure of personality shown in Figure A.1 (Bem 1981). In the municipal officials survey, we used the Big Five Iventory-10 (BFI-10) as shown in Figure A.2 (Rammstedt and John 2007). The BFI-10 uses two items per personality trait and has been shown to retain significant levels of reliability and validity compared to a 44-item measure of the Big Five (Rammstedt and John 2007, 203). However, Rammstedt and John (2007, 210) find the losses in reliability are greatest with the two-item measure of agreeableness. To mitigate this, we followed their recommendation of adding a third agreeableness item. To measure respondents nascent political ambition in the general population study we use a question from Lawless and Fox (2010). We asked them to indicate their attitude toward running for office in the future. Only 1% of our respondents reported actively considering running for public office, 16% said that they were open to the possibility of holding elective office in the future leaving 83% who reported absolutely no interest in holding elective office at any time in the future. In the sample of elected officials, we asked respondents to characterizes [their] attitudes toward running for a higher office in the future. Respondents had four options: It is something I would absolutely never do. ; I would not rule it out forever, but I currently have no interest. ; It is something I might undertake if the opportunity presented itself. ; It is something I definitely would like to undertake in the future. This is our measure of progressive ambition.
17 16 Figure A.1: Battery Used to Measure Big Five Personality Traits in National Sample The order of the items was randomized. Agreeableness is measured with items #2, 7,12,18, and 26. Conscientiousness with items #4,9,16,24, and 31. Emotional Stability with items #3,8,13, and 19. Extraversion with items #1, 6,11, 23, and 27. Openness with items #15,18,22,23,26,29 and 30.
18 Figure A.2: Battery Used to Measure Big Five Personality Traits in AMOS 17
19 18 Distribution of Personality Traits Figure A.2 provides the distribution of personality traits among men and women in the general population and the sample of local public officials. These plots provide more detail on the distribution of personality traits than what is shown in Table 1 in the text. Figure A.3: Distribution of Personality Traits by Gender in the US Population and Among Elected Municipal Officials
20 19
21 20
22 21 Full Models and Alternative Models Previous work has shown that partisan considerations play a role in the realization of progressive ambition and the likelihood that those individuals will be recruited to run for higher office (Maisel, Maestas, and Stone 2006; Hassell 2016), so we include partisanship as a control in the general population models. In addition, we include controls from Sanbonmatsu et al. s (2008) survey of Mayors and State Legislators on factors that influence gendered political ambition; the third column contains these estimates. The fourth column includes controls from the sample of elected officials that are known to influence progressive ambition. We asked municipal officials to suppose that their current office was vacant and tell us the probability that an individual with similar views as themselves would be selected to fill their seat. The variable labeled Probability current seat filled by similar candidate is the numeric (0-100) percent chance that they believe their current seat would be filled with someone like themselves. We also expect ambition to be influenced by an individual s likelihood of winning. As such, we asked them to estimate the probability that someone like themselves would win an open state legislative seat, the next highest office available to all municipal officials. The variable labeled Probability similar candidate could win state legislative seat is their numeric percent chance. We include several other control variables that might influence an elected official s willingness to seek higher office. Margin of victory is a dichotomous variable that is coded one if the elected official won their last election by less than five percent of the vote. Years in office is the number of years that the elected official has been in their current position. We asked the elected officials how long they expect to be in their current office. Anticipated length in current office is the number of years they said that they planned to remain in their current position. We also asked if their current office had term limits. Those who are forced by statute to leave their
23 22 existing position might be more likely to seek higher office. We included a dichotomous variable coded one if the elected official was selected in an election in which their party affiliation appears on the ballot and zero if it does not. In addition to the models predicting nascent political ambition among the general population, we also ran models that included additional controls using an additional battery of questions from Sanbonmatsu et al. s (2008) survey of Mayors and State Legislators about other motivations for political ambition and gender. We asked respondents to rate the importance of the following factors in their interest toward holding elective office: influence on policy, advancing a political career, increasing business contacts, increasing social contact, fulfilling their civic duty, their dedication to a candidate, the excitement of politics, their concern about a particular issue, their desire to support a political party, and their interest in serving the public. The models shown in Table A.2-A.4 shows these results. As should be clear, these results are not substantively or significantly different from the models shown in the text. 5 Table A.2: Political Ambition by Personality and Gender General Population Elected Officials Openness *** ** (0.160) (0.174) (0.045) (0.048) Extraversion *** *** *** ** (0.144) (0.158) (0.042) (0.045) Conscientiousness *** *** (0.145) (0.158) (0.059) (0.063) Agreeableness *** *** * (0.133) (0.151) (0.062) (0.066) Emotional Stability * (0.101) (0.110) (0.047) (0.050) 5 While we use these 10 factors of interest in office as controls it could also be that these factors are mediators by which personality affects ambition. As shown in the text, however, when we run the models without these controls, however, we find no substantive or significant differences.
24 23 Gender (Female) *** *** (0.137) (0.148) (0.085) (0.091) Education: Less than High School (0.591) (0.641) Education: High School * (0.193) (0.206) Education: Bachelor s Degree (0.158) (0.171) Education: Graduate Degree * (0.204) (0.217) Income (0.032) (0.035) Race: Black *** ** (0.209) (0.234) Race: Asian (0.312) (0.343) Race: Native American (0.680) (0.702) Race: Hispanic (0.299) (0.326) Race: Multi-Racial * (0.356) (0.381) Ideology: Liberal (0.171) (0.187) Ideology: Conservative (0.171) (0.185) Party ID: Democrat (0.161) (0.180) Party ID: Republican (0.189) (0.208) Influence Policy *** (0.040) Political Career *** (0.035) Business Contacts (0.036) Social Contacts (0.038) Civic Duty ** (0.035) Dedication to Candidate (0.035) Excitement of Politics ** (0.035)
25 24 Issue Concerns (0.040) Support the Party ** (0.038) Serve The Public *** (0.036) Term limits for Current Office (0.005) Won Previous Election by 5% or Less (0.136) Partisan elections * (0.008) Current seat filled with similar candidate *** (0.001) Years in Office *** (0.002) Anticipated Length in Current Office ** (0.002) Legislative spot filled with similar candidate *** N ***p <.01; **p <.05; *p <.1 (0.002) Table A.3: Political Ambition by Personality and Gender General Population Local Officials Openness * (0.215) (0.078) Conscientiousness *** (0.203) (0.093) Extraversion ** ** (0.194) (0.072) Agreeableness *** (0.187) (0.102) Emotional Stability (0.135) (0.080)
26 25 Gender (Female) (0.721) (0.679) Gender (Female) x Openness (0.352) (0.135) Gender (Female) x Conscientiousness (0.321) (0.207) Gender (Female) x Extraversion (0.320) (0.130) Gender (Female) x Agreeableness (0.297) (0.196) Gender (Female) x Emotional Stability (0.232) (0.144) Education: Less than High School (0.643) Education: High School (0.207) Education: Bachelor s Degree (0.171) Education: Graduate Degree * (0.218) Income (0.035) Race: Black ** (0.235) Race: Asian (0.343) Race: Native American (0.704) Race: Hispanic (0.326) Race: Multi-Racial (0.384) Ideology: Liberal (0.188) Ideology: Conservative (0.186) Party ID: Democrat (0.181) Party ID: Republican (0.209) Influence Policy *** (0.040) Political Career *** (0.035) Business Contacts (0.037) Social Contacts (0.039)
27 26 Civic Duty ** (0.035) Dedication to Candidate (0.035) Excitement of Politics ** (0.036) Issue Concerns (0.041) Support the Party ** (0.038) Serve the Public *** (0.036) Term limits for Current Office (0.005) Won Previous Election by 5% or Less (0.136) Partisan elections * (0.008) Current seat filled with similar candidate *** (0.001) Years in Office *** (0.002) Anticipated Length in Current Office ** (0.002) Legislative spot filled with similar candidate *** (0.002) N 1,938 2,133 * p <.1; ** p <.05; *** p <.01 Table A.4: Political Ambition by Gender Conditional on Personality (Elected Officials) Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Openness (0.063) (0.077) (0.063) (0.064) (0.064) Extraversion ** ** ** *** *** (0.071) (0.060) (0.060) (0.060) (0.060) Conscientiousness (0.083) (0.083) (0.092) (0.083) (0.083) Emotional Stability (0.067) (0.067) (0.067) (0.067) (0.079) Agreeableness * ** ** * (0.087) (0.088) (0.087) (0.101) (0.087) Gender (Female) (0.267) (0.293) (0.533) (0.443) (0.305)
28 27 Term limits for Current Office (0.005) (0.005) (0.005) (0.005) (0.005) Won Previous Election by 5% or Less (0.136) (0.136) (0.136) (0.136) (0.136) Partisan elections * * * * * (0.008) (0.008) (0.008) (0.008) (0.008) Current seat filled with similar candidate *** *** *** *** *** (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) Years in Office *** *** *** *** *** (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Anticipated Length in Current Office ** ** ** ** ** (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) Legislative spot filled with similar candidate *** *** *** *** *** Gender (Female) x Extraversion (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) (0.127) Gender (Female) x Openness (0.134) Gender (Female) x Conscientiousness (0.197) Gender (Female) x Agreeableness (0.184) Gender (Female) x Emotional Stability (0.134) N *** p <.01; ** p <.05; * p <.1
29 28 Figure A.4: The Effect of Personality Traits on Political Ambition Among Elected Officials by Gender Note: 2015 Survey of Local Elected Officials. Lines are the predicted probabilities from the ordered logistic regression model. Blue line is for females. Bars are the 85% confidence intervals following best practices for post estimation tests of statistical difference (Maghsoodloo and Huang 2010).
30 29 Figure A.5: Differences in Nascent and Progressive Ambition between Men and Women in the General Population and among Elected Local Officials Note: Proportion of women and men choosing each statement with regards to either their nascent ambition (in the case of the General Population) or progressive ambition (in the case of Elected Local Officials). In both surveys, subjects were asked the following: Which of the following best characterizes your attitudes toward funning for (higher) office in the future? Solid gray circles indicate the mean proportion of women choosing a particular response to the question. Solid black triangles indicate the mean proportion of men choosing a response. Hollow circles and triangles are predicted probability that men or women would choose each statement when controlling for other variables that may also affect ambition based on results from Tables A.5 and A.6.
31 30 Table A.5: Political Ambition by Gender Conditional on Personality (General Population). Source for Figure A.5 female = *** (0.080) educ = 2, High School (0.339) educ = 3, Some College (0.334) educ = 4, Bachelors Degree (0.338) educ = 5, Graduate Degree (0.348) income = (0.126) income = (0.130) income = (0.147) income = (0.151) income = (0.192) income = (0.244) income = (0.265) income = (0.366) income = (0.247) race = 2, Asian (0.222) race = 3, Native American (0.399) race = 4, Hispanic (0.210) race = 5, White *** (0.129) race = 6, Multi-Racial (0.244) dideo = 2, Moderate (0.106) dideo = 3, Conservative (0.118) partyid = 2, Democrat (0.135) partyid = 3, Lean-Democrat (0.142) partyid = 4, Independent (0.132) partyid = 5, Lean Republican (0.172) partyid = 6, Republican (0.159)
32 31 partyid = 7, Strong Republican (0.163) Extraversion 0.280*** (0.087) Openness 0.214** (0.096) Agreeableness *** (0.083) Conscientiousness *** (0.088) Emotional Stability (0.061) Influence Policy 0.112*** (0.022) Political Career 0.068*** (0.020) Business Contacts (0.020) Social Contacts (0.022) Civic Duty 0.039** (0.020) Dedication to Candidate (0.019) Excitement of Politics 0.048** (0.020) Issue Concerns (0.022) Support the Party ** (0.021) Serve the Public 0.082*** (0.020) Constant cut * (0.401) Constant cut *** (0.406) Observations 1,938 Standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
33 32 Table A.6: Political Ambition by Gender Conditional on Personality (Elected Officials) with Additional Controls. Source for Figure A.5 Gender (Female) = (0.063) Openness (0.032) Conscientiousness (0.041) Extraversion 0.082*** (0.030) Agreeableness (0.043) Emotional Stability (0.034) Term limits for Current Office (0.001) Won Previous Election by 5% or Less (0.088) Partisan elections *** (0.004) Anticipated Length in Current Office 0.003*** (0.001) Years in Office ** (0.001) Current seat filled with similar candidate * (0.001) Legislative spot filled with similar candidate 0.002** (0.001) Official Holds Mayoral Office ** (0.091) Mayoral Form of Gov't 0.210* (0.119) Manager Form of Gov't (0.121) Log of Population 0.089*** (0.021) % Pop. Minority 0.263* (0.143) % Pop. w/ Some College or More (0.474) Constant cut (0.315) Constant cut *** (0.317) Constant cut *** (0.319) Observations 1,682 Robust standard errors in parentheses *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
34 33 Table A.7: Differences in Personality Traits between Men and Women in the General Population and among Elected Local Officials Openness General Population Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 1.90 (0.57) 2.10 (0.69) 0.20* Men 1.93 (0.60) 2.05 (0.63) 0.12* 0.080* Difference Conscientiousness General Population Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 2.40 (0.50) 2.70 (0.44) 0.30* Men 2.28 (0.56) 2.56 (0.52) 0.28* Difference 0.12* 0.14* Extraversion General Population Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 1.85 (0.64) 2.00 (0.70) 0.15* Men 1.83 (0.66) 1.87 (0.68) * Difference * Agreeableness General Population Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 2.37 (0.57) 2.36 (0.49) Men 2.14 (0.63) 2.36 (0.49) 0.22* * Difference 0.23* 0.00 Emotional Stability General Population Elected Officials Difference Difference in Differences Women 1.73 (0.67) 2.09 (0.68) 0.36* Men 1.91 (0.66) 2.25 (0.65) 0.34* Difference -0.18* -0.16* Note: *p<0.05, two-tailed test. Standard Deviations in parentheses.
35 34 References in the Appendix Bem, SL A Manual for the Bem Sex Role Inventory. 17th ed. Palo Alto, CA: Mind Garden. Blake, Robert R., and Jane S. Mouton The New Managerial Grid. Houston: Gulf. Cann, Arnie., and William D. Siegfried Sex Stereotypes and the Leadership Role. Sex Roles 17(7-8): Gerber, Alan S, Gregory A Huber, David Doherty, and Conor M Dowling The Big Five Personality Traits in the Political Arena. Annual Review of Political Science 14: Mondak, Jeffery J Personality and the Foundations of Political Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press. Kennedy, Courtney et al Evaluating Online Nonprobability Surveys. Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center. Rammstedt, Beatrice, and Oliver P John Measuring Personality in One Minute or Less: A 10-Item Short Version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality 41 (1):
Identifying Gendered Selection Effects into Public Office: Personality, Political Ambition, and Elections
Identifying Gendered Selection Effects into Public Office: Personality, Political Ambition, and Elections Adam M. Dynes adamdynes@byu.edu Brigham Young University Hans J.G. Hassell hans.hassell@gmail.com
More informationPersonality Traits, Candidate Emergence, and Political Ambition: How Personality Affects Who Represents Us *
Personality Traits, Candidate Emergence, and Political Ambition: How Personality Affects Who Represents Us * Adam M. Dynes Brigham Young University adamdynes@byu.edu Hans J.G. Hassell Cornell College hhassell@cornellcollege.edu
More informationMaking Progress: The Latest on Women and Running for Office
Making Progress: The Latest on Women and Running for Office ANNIE S LIST THE ANNIE S LIST AGENDA FELLOWS INTRO Ashley Thomas Ari HollandBaldwin QUESTIONS 1. What is the current state of women s political
More informationOnline Appendix 1: Treatment Stimuli
Online Appendix 1: Treatment Stimuli Polarized Stimulus: 1 Electorate as Divided as Ever by Jefferson Graham (USA Today) In the aftermath of the 2012 presidential election, interviews with voters at a
More informationWhere is the Glass Made: A Self-Imposed Glass Ceiling? Why are there fewer women in politics?
University of Colorado, Boulder CU Scholar Undergraduate Honors Theses Honors Program Spring 2013 Where is the Glass Made: A Self-Imposed Glass Ceiling? Why are there fewer women in politics? Rachel Miner
More informationThe Effect of North Carolina s New Electoral Reforms on Young People of Color
A Series on Black Youth Political Engagement The Effect of North Carolina s New Electoral Reforms on Young People of Color In August 2013, North Carolina enacted one of the nation s most comprehensive
More informationBuying In: Gender and Fundraising in Congressional. Primary Elections*
Buying In: Gender and Fundraising in Congressional Primary Elections* Michael G. Miller Assistant Professor Department of Political Science Barnard College, Columbia University mgmiller@barnard.edu *Working
More informationAn Exploration of Female Political Representation: Evidence from an Experimental Web Survey. Mallory Treece Wagner
An Exploration of Female Political Representation: Evidence from an Experimental Web Survey Mallory Treece Wagner The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga WPSA April 20, 2019 Dear reader, The following
More informationPolitical Ambition: Where Are All the Women?
February 2018 Volume 56 Number 1 Article # 1FEA1 Feature Political Ambition: Where Are All the Women? Abstract Why do so few women hold elected office on local government bodies? The answer to this question
More informationExperiments in Election Reform: Voter Perceptions of Campaigns Under Preferential and Plurality Voting
Experiments in Election Reform: Voter Perceptions of Campaigns Under Preferential and Plurality Voting Caroline Tolbert, University of Iowa (caroline-tolbert@uiowa.edu) Collaborators: Todd Donovan, Western
More informationAmy Tenhouse. Incumbency Surge: Examining the 1996 Margin of Victory for U.S. House Incumbents
Amy Tenhouse Incumbency Surge: Examining the 1996 Margin of Victory for U.S. House Incumbents In 1996, the American public reelected 357 members to the United States House of Representatives; of those
More information2017 CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT
2017 CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORT PRINCIPAL AUTHORS: LONNA RAE ATKESON PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, DIRECTOR CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF VOTING, ELECTIONS AND DEMOCRACY, AND DIRECTOR INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH,
More informationPercentages of Support for Hillary Clinton by Party ID
Executive Summary The Meredith College Poll asked questions about North Carolinians views of as political leaders and whether they would vote for Hillary Clinton if she ran for president. The questions
More informationJulie Lenggenhager. The "Ideal" Female Candidate
Julie Lenggenhager The "Ideal" Female Candidate Why are there so few women elected to positions in both gubernatorial and senatorial contests? Since the ratification of the nineteenth amendment in 1920
More informationThe Center for Voting and Democracy
The Center for Voting and Democracy 6930 Carroll Ave., Suite 610 Takoma Park, MD 20912 - (301) 270-4616 (301) 270 4133 (fax) info@fairvote.org www.fairvote.org To: Commission to Ensure Integrity and Public
More informationTable A.1: Experiment Sample Distribution and National Demographic Benchmarks Latino Decisions Sample, Study 1 (%)
Online Appendix Table A.1: Experiment Sample Distribution and National Demographic Benchmarks Latino Decisions Sample, Study 1 (%) YouGov Sample, Study 2 (%) American Community Survey 2014 (%) Gender Female
More informationUnequal Recovery, Labor Market Polarization, Race, and 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Maoyong Fan and Anita Alves Pena 1
Unequal Recovery, Labor Market Polarization, Race, and 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Maoyong Fan and Anita Alves Pena 1 Abstract: Growing income inequality and labor market polarization and increasing
More informationSupporting Information for Do Perceptions of Ballot Secrecy Influence Turnout? Results from a Field Experiment
Supporting Information for Do Perceptions of Ballot Secrecy Influence Turnout? Results from a Field Experiment Alan S. Gerber Yale University Professor Department of Political Science Institution for Social
More information1. The Relationship Between Party Control, Latino CVAP and the Passage of Bills Benefitting Immigrants
The Ideological and Electoral Determinants of Laws Targeting Undocumented Migrants in the U.S. States Online Appendix In this additional methodological appendix I present some alternative model specifications
More informationVoter ID Pilot 2018 Public Opinion Survey Research. Prepared on behalf of: Bridget Williams, Alexandra Bogdan GfK Social and Strategic Research
Voter ID Pilot 2018 Public Opinion Survey Research Prepared on behalf of: Prepared by: Issue: Bridget Williams, Alexandra Bogdan GfK Social and Strategic Research Final Date: 08 August 2018 Contents 1
More informationThe Role of Gender Stereotypes in Gubernatorial Campaign Coverage
The Role of Gender Stereotypes in Gubernatorial Campaign Coverage Karen Bjerre Department of Politics, Sewanee: The University of the South, Sewanee, TN Student: bjerrkr0@sewanee.edu*, karen.bjerre@hotmail.com
More informationAMERICAN JOURNAL OF UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH VOL. 3 NO. 4 (2005)
, Partisanship and the Post Bounce: A MemoryBased Model of Post Presidential Candidate Evaluations Part II Empirical Results Justin Grimmer Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Wabash College
More informationRunning Comes Before Winning: Explaining the Gender Differential in State Legislatures
University of Connecticut OpenCommons@UConn University Scholar Projects University Scholar Program Spring 5-5-2017 Running Comes Before Winning: Explaining the Gender Differential in State Legislatures
More informationAspirant candidate behaviour and progressive political ambition
691444RAP0010.1177/2053168017691444Research & PoliticsAllen and Cutts research-article2017 Research Article Aspirant candidate behaviour and progressive political ambition Research and Politics January-March
More informationCalifornia Ballot Reform Panel Survey Page 1
CALIFORNIA BALLOT RE FORM PANEL SURVEY 2011-2012 Interview Dates: Wave One: June 14-July 1, 2011 Wave Two: December 15-January 2, 2012 Sample size Wave One: (N=1555) Wave Two: (N=1064) Margin of error
More informationConstitutional Reform in California: The Surprising Divides
Constitutional Reform in California: The Surprising Divides Mike Binder Bill Lane Center for the American West, Stanford University University of California, San Diego Tammy M. Frisby Hoover Institution
More informationPublic Election Funding, Competition, and Candidate Gender
Public Election Funding, Competition, and Candidate Gender by Timothy Werner, University of Wisconsin-Madison Kenneth R. Mayer, University of Wisconsin-Madison n 2000, Arizona and Maine implemented full
More informationTHE WORKMEN S CIRCLE SURVEY OF AMERICAN JEWS. Jews, Economic Justice & the Vote in Steven M. Cohen and Samuel Abrams
THE WORKMEN S CIRCLE SURVEY OF AMERICAN JEWS Jews, Economic Justice & the Vote in 2012 Steven M. Cohen and Samuel Abrams 1/4/2013 2 Overview Economic justice concerns were the critical consideration dividing
More informationWisconsin Economic Scorecard
RESEARCH PAPER> May 2012 Wisconsin Economic Scorecard Analysis: Determinants of Individual Opinion about the State Economy Joseph Cera Researcher Survey Center Manager The Wisconsin Economic Scorecard
More informationThe Ideological Foundations of Affective Polarization in the U.S. Electorate
703132APRXXX10.1177/1532673X17703132American Politics ResearchWebster and Abramowitz research-article2017 Article The Ideological Foundations of Affective Polarization in the U.S. Electorate American Politics
More informationMethodology. 1 State benchmarks are from the American Community Survey Three Year averages
The Choice is Yours Comparing Alternative Likely Voter Models within Probability and Non-Probability Samples By Robert Benford, Randall K Thomas, Jennifer Agiesta, Emily Swanson Likely voter models often
More informationHow Incivility in Partisan Media (De-)Polarizes. the Electorate
How Incivility in Partisan Media (De-)Polarizes the Electorate Ashley Lloyd MMSS Senior Thesis Advisor: Professor Druckman 1 Research Question: The aim of this study is to uncover how uncivil partisan
More informationSTATISTICAL GRAPHICS FOR VISUALIZING DATA
STATISTICAL GRAPHICS FOR VISUALIZING DATA Tables and Figures, I William G. Jacoby Michigan State University and ICPSR University of Illinois at Chicago October 14-15, 21 http://polisci.msu.edu/jacoby/uic/graphics
More informationSupplementary/Online Appendix for:
Supplementary/Online Appendix for: Relative Policy Support and Coincidental Representation Perspectives on Politics Peter K. Enns peterenns@cornell.edu Contents Appendix 1 Correlated Measurement Error
More informationNon-Voted Ballots and Discrimination in Florida
Non-Voted Ballots and Discrimination in Florida John R. Lott, Jr. School of Law Yale University 127 Wall Street New Haven, CT 06511 (203) 432-2366 john.lott@yale.edu revised July 15, 2001 * This paper
More informationProf. Bryan Caplan Econ 854
Prof. Bryan Caplan bcaplan@gmu.edu http://www.bcaplan.com Econ 854 Week 6: Voter Motivation, III: Miscellaneous I. Religion, Party, and Ideology A. Many observers of modern American politics think that
More informationGender preference and age at arrival among Asian immigrant women to the US
Gender preference and age at arrival among Asian immigrant women to the US Ben Ost a and Eva Dziadula b a Department of Economics, University of Illinois at Chicago, 601 South Morgan UH718 M/C144 Chicago,
More informationMichigan 14th Congressional District Democratic Primary Election Exclusive Polling Study for Fox 2 News Detroit.
Michigan 14th Congressional District Democratic Primary Election Exclusive Polling Study for Fox 2 News Detroit. Automated Poll Methodology and Statistics Aggregate Results Conducted by Foster McCollum
More informationWho Votes Now? And Does It Matter?
Who Votes Now? And Does It Matter? Jan E. Leighley University of Arizona Jonathan Nagler New York University March 7, 2007 Paper prepared for presentation at 2007 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political
More informationPractice Questions for Exam #2
Fall 2007 Page 1 Practice Questions for Exam #2 1. Suppose that we have collected a stratified random sample of 1,000 Hispanic adults and 1,000 non-hispanic adults. These respondents are asked whether
More informationCollege Voting in the 2018 Midterms: A Survey of US College Students. (Medium)
College Voting in the 2018 Midterms: A Survey of US College Students (Medium) 1 Overview: An online survey of 3,633 current college students was conducted using College Reaction s national polling infrastructure
More informationTOP TWO PRIMARY By Harry Kresky, openprimaries.org INTRODUCTION
TOP TWO PRIMARY By Harry Kresky, openprimaries.org INTRODUCTION Much of the debate about various political reforms focuses on outcomes does the reform in question bring about the desired results. There
More informationPPIC Statewide Survey Methodology
PPIC Statewide Survey Methodology Updated February 7, 2018 The PPIC Statewide Survey was inaugurated in 1998 to provide a way for Californians to express their views on important public policy issues.
More informationHow to Elect More Women: Gender and Candidate Success in a Field Experiment
How to Elect More Women: Gender and Candidate Success in a Field Experiment Christopher Karpowitz, Quin Monson, and Jessica Preece 1 Department of Political Science Brigham Young University Abstract Women
More informationResearch Statement. Jeffrey J. Harden. 2 Dissertation Research: The Dimensions of Representation
Research Statement Jeffrey J. Harden 1 Introduction My research agenda includes work in both quantitative methodology and American politics. In methodology I am broadly interested in developing and evaluating
More informationCSES Module 5 Pretest Report: Greece. August 31, 2016
CSES Module 5 Pretest Report: Greece August 31, 2016 1 Contents INTRODUCTION... 4 BACKGROUND... 4 METHODOLOGY... 4 Sample... 4 Representativeness... 4 DISTRIBUTIONS OF KEY VARIABLES... 7 ATTITUDES ABOUT
More informationHIGH POINT UNIVERSITY POLL MEMO RELEASE 9/24/2018 (UPDATE)
HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY POLL MEMO RELEASE 9/24/2018 (UPDATE) ELEMENTS Population represented Sample size Mode of data collection Type of sample (probability/nonprobability) Start and end dates of data collection
More informationNorth Carolina Races Tighten as Election Day Approaches
North Carolina Races Tighten as Election Day Approaches Likely Voters in North Carolina October 23-27, 2016 Table of Contents KEY SURVEY INSIGHTS... 1 PRESIDENTIAL RACE... 1 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ISSUES...
More informationYoung Elected Leaders are Few and Familiar
YOUNG ELECTED LEADERS PROJECT Young Elected Leaders are Few and Familiar Who Are Young Elected Leaders Overall? In 2002, the Eagleton study identified a total of 814 men and women age thirty-five and younger
More informationThe League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania et al v. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al. Nolan McCarty
The League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania et al v. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania et al. I. Introduction Nolan McCarty Susan Dod Brown Professor of Politics and Public Affairs Chair, Department of Politics
More informationUnderstanding Taiwan Independence and Its Policy Implications
Understanding Taiwan Independence and Its Policy Implications January 30, 2004 Emerson M. S. Niou Department of Political Science Duke University niou@duke.edu 1. Introduction Ever since the establishment
More informationASSIMILATION AND LANGUAGE
S U R V E Y B R I E F ASSIMILATION AND LANGUAGE March 004 ABOUT THE 00 NATIONAL SURVEY OF LATINOS In the 000 Census, some 5,06,000 people living in the United States identifi ed themselves as Hispanic/Latino.
More informationTable XX presents the corrected results of the first regression model reported in Table
Correction to Tables 2.2 and A.4 Submitted by Robert L Mermer II May 4, 2016 Table XX presents the corrected results of the first regression model reported in Table A.4 of the online appendix (the left
More informationClaire L. Adida, UC San Diego Adeline Lo, Princeton University Melina Platas Izama, New York University Abu Dhabi
The American Syrian Refugee Consensus* Claire L. Adida, UC San Diego Adeline Lo, Princeton University elina Platas Izama, New York University Abu Dhabi Working Paper 198 January 2019 The American Syrian
More informationFOR RELEASE APRIL 26, 2018
FOR RELEASE APRIL 26, 2018 FOR MEDIA OR OTHER INQUIRIES: Carroll Doherty, Director of Political Research Jocelyn Kiley, Associate Director, Research Bridget Johnson, Communications Associate 202.419.4372
More informationThe Case of the Disappearing Bias: A 2014 Update to the Gerrymandering or Geography Debate
The Case of the Disappearing Bias: A 2014 Update to the Gerrymandering or Geography Debate Nicholas Goedert Lafayette College goedertn@lafayette.edu May, 2015 ABSTRACT: This note observes that the pro-republican
More informationNH Statewide Horserace Poll
NH Statewide Horserace Poll NH Survey of Likely Voters October 26-28, 2016 N=408 Trump Leads Clinton in Final Stretch; New Hampshire U.S. Senate Race - Ayotte 49.1, Hassan 47 With just over a week to go
More informationLIBERALS PADDING LEAD IN ADVANCE OF DEBATES
www.ekospolitics.ca LIBERALS PADDING LEAD IN ADVANCE OF DEBATES [Ottawa June 3, 14] The race sees Kathleen Wynne s Liberals opening up a wider lead in advance of tonight s critical debate. Most of this
More informationResistance to Women s Political Leadership: Problems and Advocated Solutions
By Catherine M. Watuka Executive Director Women United for Social, Economic & Total Empowerment Nairobi, Kenya. Resistance to Women s Political Leadership: Problems and Advocated Solutions Abstract The
More informationFINAL RESULTS: National Voter Survey Total Sample Size: 2428, Margin of Error: ±2.0% Interview Dates: November 1-4, 2018
FINAL RESULTS: National Voter Survey Total Sample Size: 2428, Margin of Error: ±2.0% Interview Dates: November 1-4, 2018 Language: English and Spanish Respondents: Likely November 2018 voters in 72 competitive
More informationExtrapolated Versus Actual Rates of Violent Crime, California and the United States, from a 1992 Vantage Point
Figure 2.1 Extrapolated Versus Actual Rates of Violent Crime, California and the United States, from a 1992 Vantage Point Incidence per 100,000 Population 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1,000 800 600 400 200
More information1. A Republican edge in terms of self-described interest in the election. 2. Lower levels of self-described interest among younger and Latino
2 Academics use political polling as a measure about the viability of survey research can it accurately predict the result of a national election? The answer continues to be yes. There is compelling evidence
More informationNew Louisiana Run-Off Poll Shows Lead for Kennedy, Higgins, & Johnson
PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release 11/18/2016 Contact: Robert Cahaly 770-542-8170 info@trf-grp.com New Louisiana Run-Off Poll Shows Lead for, Higgins, & Johnson (Louisiana) A new Louisiana poll of likely
More informationTelephone Survey. Contents *
Telephone Survey Contents * Tables... 2 Figures... 2 Introduction... 4 Survey Questionnaire... 4 Sampling Methods... 5 Study Population... 5 Sample Size... 6 Survey Procedures... 6 Data Analysis Method...
More informationFollowing the Leader: The Impact of Presidential Campaign Visits on Legislative Support for the President's Policy Preferences
University of Colorado, Boulder CU Scholar Undergraduate Honors Theses Honors Program Spring 2011 Following the Leader: The Impact of Presidential Campaign Visits on Legislative Support for the President's
More informationRed Oak Strategic Presidential Poll
Red Oak Strategic Presidential Poll Fielded 9/1-9/2 Using Google Consumer Surveys Results, Crosstabs, and Technical Appendix 1 This document contains the full crosstab results for Red Oak Strategic s Presidential
More informationDo two parties represent the US? Clustering analysis of US public ideology survey
Do two parties represent the US? Clustering analysis of US public ideology survey Louisa Lee 1 and Siyu Zhang 2, 3 Advised by: Vicky Chuqiao Yang 1 1 Department of Engineering Sciences and Applied Mathematics,
More informationBLISS INSTITUTE 2006 GENERAL ELECTION SURVEY
BLISS INSTITUTE 2006 GENERAL ELECTION SURVEY Ray C. Bliss Institute of Applied Politics The University of Akron Executive Summary The Bliss Institute 2006 General Election Survey finds Democrat Ted Strickland
More informationNovember 2017 Toplines
November 2017 Toplines The first of its kind bi-monthly survey of racially and ethnically diverse young adults GenForward is a survey associated with the University of Chicago Interviews: 10/26-11/10/2017
More informationGeorg Lutz, Nicolas Pekari, Marina Shkapina. CSES Module 5 pre-test report, Switzerland
Georg Lutz, Nicolas Pekari, Marina Shkapina CSES Module 5 pre-test report, Switzerland Lausanne, 8.31.2016 1 Table of Contents 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Methodology 3 2 Distribution of key variables 7 2.1 Attitudes
More informationUC Davis UC Davis Previously Published Works
UC Davis UC Davis Previously Published Works Title Constitutional design and 2014 senate election outcomes Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8kx5k8zk Journal Forum (Germany), 12(4) Authors Highton,
More informationNATIONAL: 2018 HOUSE RACE STABILITY
Please attribute this information to: Monmouth University Poll West Long Branch, NJ 07764 www.monmouth.edu/polling Follow on Twitter: @MonmouthPoll Released: Friday, November 2, 2018 Contact: PATRICK MURRAY
More informationProfessor Kira Sanbonmatsu ext. 265
Professor Kira Sanbonmatsu Office: 3 rd Fl., Eagleton sanbon@rci.rutgers.edu 732-932-9384 ext. 265 Office Hours: Thurs. 3:00-4:00 p.m. Class: Thur. 12:00-2:40 p.m. and by appt. (3 rd Fl., Eagleton) Location:
More informationAmerican public has much to learn about presidential candidates issue positions, National Annenberg Election Survey shows
For Immediate Release: September 26, 2008 For more information: Kate Kenski, kkenski@email.arizona.edu Kathleen Hall Jamieson, kjamieson@asc.upenn.edu Visit: www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org American
More informationThe role of Social Cultural and Political Factors in explaining Perceived Responsiveness of Representatives in Local Government.
The role of Social Cultural and Political Factors in explaining Perceived Responsiveness of Representatives in Local Government. Master Onderzoek 2012-2013 Family Name: Jelluma Given Name: Rinse Cornelis
More informationUniversity of California, San Diego, M.A., Political Science, University of California, San Diego, B.A., Politics, Pomona College, 2007
Hans J.G. Hassell Department of Politics Cornell College 600 First St. SW Mt. Vernon, Iowa 52314-1098 Phone: (319) 895-4353 Email: hhassell@cornellcollege.edu http://people.cornellcollege.edu/hhassell/
More information2018 Florida General Election Poll
Florida Southern College Center for Polling and Policy Research 2018 Florida General Election Poll For media or other inquiries: Zachary Baumann, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Political Science Director,
More information14.11: Experiments in Political Science
14.11: Experiments in Political Science Prof. Esther Duflo May 9, 2006 Voting is a paradoxical behavior: the chance of being the pivotal voter in an election is close to zero, and yet people do vote...
More informationPRESS RELEASE October 15, 2008
PRESS RELEASE October 15, 2008 Americans Confidence in Their Leaders Declines Sharply Most agree on basic aspects of presidential leadership, but candidate preferences reveal divisions Cambridge, MA 80%
More informationCongruence in Political Parties
Descriptive Representation of Women and Ideological Congruence in Political Parties Georgia Kernell Northwestern University gkernell@northwestern.edu June 15, 2011 Abstract This paper examines the relationship
More informationU.S. Catholics split between intent to vote for Kerry and Bush.
The Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate Georgetown University Monday, April 12, 2004 U.S. Catholics split between intent to vote for Kerry and Bush. In an election year where the first Catholic
More informationOhio State University
Fake News Did Have a Significant Impact on the Vote in the 2016 Election: Original Full-Length Version with Methodological Appendix By Richard Gunther, Paul A. Beck, and Erik C. Nisbet Ohio State University
More informationSupplementary Materials A: Figures for All 7 Surveys Figure S1-A: Distribution of Predicted Probabilities of Voting in Primary Elections
Supplementary Materials (Online), Supplementary Materials A: Figures for All 7 Surveys Figure S-A: Distribution of Predicted Probabilities of Voting in Primary Elections (continued on next page) UT Republican
More informationElectoral Reform, Party Mobilization and Voter Turnout. Robert Stein, Rice University
Electoral Reform, Party Mobilization and Voter Turnout Robert Stein, Rice University stein@rice.edu Chris Owens, Texas A&M University cowens@polisci.tamu.edu Jan Leighley, Texas A&M University leighley@polisci.tamu.edu
More informationBENJAMIN HIGHTON July 2016
BENJAMIN HIGHTON July 2016 bhighton@ucdavis.edu Department of Political Science 530-752-0966 (phone) One Shields Avenue 530-752-8666 (fax) University of California http://ps.ucdavis.edu/people/bhighton
More informationPrimaries and Candidates: Examining the Influence of Primary Electorates on Candidate Ideology
Primaries and Candidates: Examining the Influence of Primary Electorates on Candidate Ideology Lindsay Nielson Bucknell University Neil Visalvanich Durham University September 24, 2015 Abstract Primary
More informationWide and growing divides in views of racial discrimination
FOR RELEASE MARCH 01, 2018 The Generation Gap in American Politics Wide and growing divides in views of racial discrimination FOR MEDIA OR OTHER INQUIRIES: Carroll Doherty, Director of Political Research
More informationChapter Four: Chamber Competitiveness, Political Polarization, and Political Parties
Chapter Four: Chamber Competitiveness, Political Polarization, and Political Parties Building off of the previous chapter in this dissertation, this chapter investigates the involvement of political parties
More informationUTS:IPPG Project Team. Project Director: Associate Professor Roberta Ryan, Director IPPG. Project Manager: Catherine Hastings, Research Officer
IPPG Project Team Project Director: Associate Professor Roberta Ryan, Director IPPG Project Manager: Catherine Hastings, Research Officer Research Assistance: Theresa Alvarez, Research Assistant Acknowledgements
More information1. One of the various ways in which parties contribute to democratic governance is by.
11 Political Parties Multiple-Choice Questions 1. One of the various ways in which parties contribute to democratic governance is by. a. dividing the electorate b. narrowing voter choice c. running candidates
More informationBOOKER V. RIVERA AND THE POWER OF CABLE NEWS OBAMA APPROVAL DOWN SLIGHTLY
For immediate release Wednesday, March 13, 2013 Contact: Krista Jenkins Office: 973.443.8390 Cell: 908.328.8967 kjenkins@fdu.edu 8 pp. BOOKER V. RIVERA AND THE POWER OF CABLE NEWS OBAMA APPROVAL DOWN SLIGHTLY
More informationELECTING CANDIDATES WITH FAIR REPRESENTATION VOTING: RANKED CHOICE VOTING AND OTHER METHODS
November 2013 ELECTING CANDIDATES WITH FAIR REPRESENTATION VOTING: RANKED CHOICE VOTING AND OTHER METHODS A voting system translates peoples' votes into seats. Because the same votes in different systems
More informationImmigration and Multiculturalism: Views from a Multicultural Prairie City
Immigration and Multiculturalism: Views from a Multicultural Prairie City Paul Gingrich Department of Sociology and Social Studies University of Regina Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian
More informationA A P I D ATA Asian American Voter Survey. Sponsored by Civic Leadership USA
A A P I D ATA 2018 Asian American Voter Survey Sponsored by Civic Leadership USA In partnership with Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance AFL-CIO (APALA), and Asian Americans Advancing Justice AAJC CONTENTS
More informationThe Emerge Difference: Effects of Encouragement by Political Organizations on Women s Political Ambition
The Emerge Difference: Effects of Encouragement by Political Organizations on Women s Political Ambition ASHLEIGH HAYES MARTIN SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY & ADMINISTRATION CAPSTONE Contents Executive Summary...
More informationAMERICAN MUSLIM VOTERS AND THE 2012 ELECTION A Demographic Profile and Survey of Attitudes
AMERICAN MUSLIM VOTERS AND THE 2012 ELECTION A Demographic Profile and Survey of Attitudes Released: October 24, 2012 Conducted by Genesis Research Associates www.genesisresearch.net Commissioned by Council
More informationOFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER. City Services Auditor 2005 Taxi Commission Survey Report
OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER City Services Auditor 2005 Taxi Commission Survey Report February 7, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS 5 I. The Survey Respondents 5 II. The Reasonableness
More informationPersonality traits and party identification over time
European Journal of Political Research 54: 197 215, 2015 197 doi: 10.1111/1475-6765.12070 Personality traits and party identification over time BERT N. BAKKER, 1 DAVID NICOLAS HOPMANN 2 & MIKAEL PERSSON
More informationAP AMERICAN GOVERNMENT STUDY GUIDE POLITICAL BELIEFS AND BEHAVIORS PUBLIC OPINION PUBLIC OPINION, THE SPECTRUM, & ISSUE TYPES DESCRIPTION
PUBLIC OPINION , THE SPECTRUM, & ISSUE TYPES IDEOLOGY THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM (LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE SPECTRUM) VALENCE ISSUES WEDGE ISSUE SALIENCY What the public thinks about a particular issue or set of
More informationClaims of bias against female candidates abound in
Articles A Non-Gendered Lens? Media, Voters, and Female Candidates in Contemporary Congressional Elections Danny Hayes and Jennifer L. Lawless Much research in the study of U.S. politics has argued that
More information