Candidate Gender and Assessments of Senate Candidates

Objective. This research examines whether evidence of gender stereotypes is present in citizens' evaluations of candidates for the United States Senate. Methods. I analyze citizens' likes and dislikes toward male and female candidates for the U.S. Senate from 1988 through 1992. Results. Some evidence consistent with the findings from experimental studies on the application of gender stereotypes is found, but differences are also present. Specifically, female candidates enjoyed an advantage for their ability to handle social issues and leadership, but suffered a disadvantage with regard to their competence. Neither gender held an advantage with respect to ethics. Moreover, social issues are a more important criterion for candidate evaluation than security issues. A gendered pattern of candidate assessment is more evident among those who are highly educated. Conclusions. These findings suggest that variation in citizens' appraisals of candidates on the basis of gender may result from a gendered pattern of campaign messages and media coverage.