User:Ducksarethebestbird/Voting behavior/Bibliography

Bibliography

• Studlar, Donley T., et al. “Explaining the Gender Gap in Voting: A Cross-National Analysis.” Social Science Quarterly, vol. 79, no. 4, 1998, pp. 779–98. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/42863847. Accessed 12 Feb. 2023.
• Sanbonmatsu, Kira. “Gender Stereotypes and Vote Choice.” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 46, no. 1, 2002, pp. 20–34. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3088412. Accessed 12 Feb. 2023.

Atkeson, L. R. (2003). Not All Cues Are Created Equal: The Conditional Impact of Female Candidates on Political Engagement. The Journal of Politics, 65(4), 1040–1061. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00124

• This is a peer-reviewed scholarly source first published in the Journal of Politics in 2002 by The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Southern Political Science Association and written by Lonna Rae Atkeson of the University of New Mexico. Focused on the gendered aspects of political engagement, this article makes a strong argument for descriptive representation. The research examines gubernatorial and senate races and finds widespread support for the hypothesis that women citizens in states with competitive and visible female candidates increase their political engagement. Finds that political and contextual factors related to regional descriptive representation are key in evaluating the female relationship to political engagement. Useful to the Voting Behavior article as it touches on how political engagement (including voting) is gendered and needs to be looked at with a lens that accounts for contextual factors like region and role-model effects.

Chiao, J. Y., Bowman, N. E., & Gill, H. (2008). The political gender gap: gender bias in facial inferences that predict voting behavior. PloS one, 3(10), e3666. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003666

• This is a peer-reviewed scholarly source first published by PLOS ONE in 2008 by Joan Y. Chiao of Northwestern University, Nicholas E. Bowman of Northwestern University, and Harleen Gill of Smith College. Focused on the political gender gap and voting behavior, this research asks respondents to identify which fake presidential candidate they would vote for based solely on facial features. Their findings support the hypothesis that voters have a gender bias in intuitive heuristics in terms of who they vote for, specifically finding that both the gender of the voter and the candidate affect the kinds of facial impressions that predict voting behavior. These findings support the idea that gendered bias in voting is incredibly nuanced, with male candidates appearing to be more approachable and female candidates appearing to be more attractive more likely to win votes. Adding even more nuance is the finding that male respondents were more likely to vote for attractive female candidates whereas women respondents were more likely to vote for approachable male candidates. This research is valuable to the Voting Behavior article in that it demonstrates that gender bias in voting behavior is present irrespective of voter and candidate gender identity.

Ditonto, T. M., Hamilton, A. J., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2014). Gender Stereotypes, Information Search, and Voting Behavior in Political Campaigns. Political Behavior, 36(2), 335–358. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43653193

• This is a peer-reviewed scholarly source first published in Political Behavior by Springer Science and Business Media and written by Tessa Ditono, Allison J. Hamilton, and David P. Redlawsk in 2013. Focusing on the gendered nature of voter bias, this research presents mock presidential candidates to participants and finds that these respondents change the what information they seek out about candidates based on a candidate's gender, specifically looking for more “competence-related” information about female candidates than they do for male candidates, as well as more information related to "compassion” and that these factors have a significant impact on who the respondents ended up voting for. This research is valuable to the Voting Behavior article as it provides broad support for the hypothesis that the gender of a political candidate changes the way voters evaluate their political qualifications.

O’Brien, Diana Z., and Catherine Reyes-Housholder (2020). 'Women and Executive Politics', in Rudy B. Andeweg and others (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Political Executives, Oxford Handbook, 251-272.

https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198809296.013.26

• This is a peer-reviewed scholarly source published by the Oxford Handbook in 2020 and written by Dania Z. O’Brien of Washington University in St. Louis and Catherine Reyes-Housholder of Instituto de Ciencia Política of the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. The article focuses on the role of women in executive leadership roles across the globe, builds upon existing research, and makes recommendations for how the gender gap in executive politics can be improved. Generally, the article finds that women with access to educational resources and who live in societies with more egalitarian values and practices are more likely to engage in politics than those without access to education and living in societies placing value on essentialist norms and practices. This research is valuable to the Voting Behavior article as it provides meaningful context to the ways in which women may face barriers to engaging in the political process.

Studlar, D. T., McAllister, I., & Hayes, B. C. (1998). Explaining the Gender Gap in Voting: A Cross-National Analysis. Social Science Quarterly, 79(4), 779–798. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42863847

• This is a peer-reviewed scholarly source first published in Social Science Quarterly in 1998 by the University of Texas Austin by Donley T. Studiar of West Virginia University, Ian McAllister of Australian National University, and Bernadette C. Hayes of Queens University of Belfast. This article looks comparatively at how gender differences in voting behavior operate in relationship to what country voters are in based on data from election surveys taken in the United States, Australia, and Britain. The findings suggest that gender differences in Britain and Australia are more heavily tied to socioeconomic inequities and situational constraints, whereas in the United States, these differences are tied more heavily to political orientation. This research is valuable to the Voting Behavior article because it emphasizes that regional differences play a critical role in understanding how voting behavior is gendered.