New research published in Political Research Quarterly sheds light on the consequences of implicit gender framing for male and female candidates for political office. The research revealed that female candidates for office are often discussed with gendered terms. These differences in news coverage, especially in races with only women candidates, might reinforce stereotypes and beliefs that women are not as qualified as men for political positions.
The underrepresentation of women in politics is a persistent issue, despite their increasing participation in the workforce and higher education. Women make up only a small percentage of elected officials at all levels of government worldwide. In the United States, women hold only 27% of seats in Congress and 30% of statewide elective executive offices.
According to the authors of the new study, one reason for this underrepresentation might be the media’s portrayal of female candidates as less qualified than their male counterparts. Women may be discouraged from running for office if they believe they will face unfair scrutiny or criticism based on gender. Moreover, voters may be less likely to support female candidates if they perceive them as less qualified than male candidates.
To address this issue, scholars have called for more research on how gender stereotypes influence news media coverage of political campaigns. Nichole Bauer and Tatum Taylor aimed to contribute to this research by exploring the differences in news coverage of female and male political candidates’ qualifications and how gender stereotypes influence news media.
The authors used a content analysis approach to analyze news articles covering political campaigns from 2018 to 2020. They selected three newspapers with different political leanings: The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal. They analyzed 9,197 articles to identify when the news articles discuss candidates and when that news coverage showcases candidates’ political, professional, academic, and feminine qualifications.
The sample for the study consisted of twelve U.S. Senate elections featuring a female candidate running against a male candidate, as well as two races with two women running against each other.
The authors developed a theoretical framework of implicit and explicit gender framing to analyze the news coverage of political candidates. Implicit gender frames subtly draw on masculine stereotypes to reinforce patriarchal power structures through their coverage of political candidates. Explicit gender frames, on the other hand, directly reference gender or sex when discussing political candidates.
Control variables were included to account for newspaper-level factors and campaign dynamics that could influence news coverage. These variables included candidate party, outlet type (national or local/regional), journalist gender, the proportion of paragraphs dedicated to each candidate in an article, and more.
Their findings revealed that women receive more coverage related to their political experience and professional qualifications (or lack thereof) than men in mixed-gender races. However, female candidates received more coverage on “feminine” qualifications, such as family and children, compared to male candidates, indicating the use of explicit gender frames.
All-female races received the highest probability of coverage on feminine qualifications relative to other race types, suggesting that explicit gender frames were more prevalent in races featuring two women candidates. In all-male races, men receive more coverage of their political experience than women do in all-female races.
The authors found that implicit gender frames are more prevalent than explicit gender frames in news coverage of candidate qualifications. Implicit gender frames are used more frequently when discussing female candidates than male candidates. For example, female candidates are more likely to be described as “emotional” or “compassionate,” while male candidates are more likely to be described as “strong” or “confident.”
The research team acknowledged some limitations to the study. First, they only analyzed news articles from three newspapers, which may not represent all news media. There was no analysis of the content of political advertisements or social media posts, which may contribute to the gendered framing of political candidates. Finally, the study does not address how voters interpret news coverage.
Bauer and Taylor present a compelling analysis of how implicit gender framing can influence voter perception. The authors argue, “The use of implicit gender frames matters because these frames can reshape the evaluative standards voters use to judge candidates. Implicit gender frames activate underlying biases that position women as lacking the qualities needed to serve in masculine gender roles more insidiously than explicit gender frames because implicit frames are harder to detect, harder to expose, and the public may not be aware that they exist at all.”
The study, “Selling them short? Differences in news coverage of female and male candidate qualifications,” was authored by Nichole Bauer and Tatum Taylor.