Does being male help? An investigation of the effect of candidate gender and campaign coverage on evaluations of U.S. Senate candidates.

Abstract

This study examines the possibility that the mass media, by covering male and female candidates differently, influence the success of female candidates. A content analysis of newspaper coverage in twenty-six U.S. Senate races shows that male and female Senate candidates are covered differently in the news. Two experiments were conducted to explore the consequences of these differences in coverage, as well as the significance of the candidates' gender, for evaluations of Senate candidates. Experimental results from both student and adult samples suggest that gender differences in coverage tend to advantage male candidates. For instance, candidates who are covered like male candidates in the news are considered more viable that candidates who are covered like female candidates. Sex stereotypes, on the other h and , tend to advantage female candidates. Female candidates are viewed as more compassionate and more honest than equivalent male candidates. The findings from this study provide support for the hypothesis that the mass media influence a woman's chances of success at the polls. Male and female candidates are covered differently in the news and these differences in coverage often produce negative assessments of women candidates. The findings from this study confirm the results of earlier media studies by demonstrating that the media play a powerful role in structuring how people think about politics and political candidates.Ph.D.Political scienceUniversity of Michiganhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/162326/1/9001653.pd