Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-15T06:03:16.264Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Digging Deeper into the Gender Gap: Gender Salience as a Moderating Factor in Political Attitudes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2017

Amanda Bittner  and
Elizabeth Goodyear-Grant
Amanda Bittner*
Affiliation:
Memorial University of Newfoundland
Elizabeth Goodyear-Grant*
Affiliation:
Queen's University
*
Department of Political Science, Science Building Room 2028, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's NL, A1B 3X9, email: abittner@mun.ca
Department of Political Studies, Mackintosh-Corry Hall, 68 University Ave., Kingston, ON K7L 3N6egg@queensu.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We know how sex (rather than gender) structures political preferences, but researchers rarely take into account the salience or importance of gender identity at the individual level. The only similar variable for which salience is commonly taken seriously is partisanship, for which direction and importance or strength are both considered imperative for measurement and analysis. While some scholars have begun to look at factors that may influence intragroup differences, such as feminism (Conover, 1988), most existing research implicitly assumes gender salience is homogenous in the population. We argue that both the content of gender identity (that is, what specifically is gender identity, as opposed to sex) as well its salience should be incorporated into analyses of how gender structures political behaviour. For some, gender simply does not motivate behaviour, and the fact that salience moderates the impact of gender on behaviour requires researchers to model accordingly. Using original data from six provincial election studies, we examine a measure of gender identity salience and find that it clarifies our understanding of gender's impact on political attitudes.

Résumé

Nous savons comment le sexe (plutôt que le genre) structure les préférences politiques, mais les chercheurs prennent rarement en compte la pertinence ou l'importance de l'identité de genre au niveau individuel. La seule variable semblable pour laquelle la pertinence est généralement prise au sérieux est la partisanerie, dont l'orientation et l'importance ou la force constituent un impératif tant aux fins de la mesure que de l'analyse. Alors que quelques chercheurs ont commencé à explorer les facteurs susceptibles d'influer sur les différences intragroupes comme le féminisme (Conover, 1988), la plupart des recherches existantes considèrent implicitement que la pertinence du genre est homogène au sein de la population. Nous soutenons qu'il importe d'intégrer aux analyses de la manière dont le genre structure le comportement politique tant le contenu de l'identité de genre (c.-à-d. ce qu'est spécifiquement l'identité de genre par opposition au sexe) que sa pertinence. Pour certains, tout simplement, le genre ne motive pas le comportement; et le fait que la pertinence atténue l'impact du genre sur le comportement impose aux chercheurs d'adapter leurs modèles en conséquence. À l'aide des données originales provenant de six études d’élections provinciales, nous examinons une mesure de la pertinence de l'identité de genre qui clarifie notre compréhension de l'impact du genre sur les attitudes politiques.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 50 , Special Issue 2: Finding Feminism , June 2017 , pp. 559 - 578
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alwin, Duane F. 1997. “Feeling Thermometers Versus 7 Point Scales: Which are Better?” Sociological Methods & Research 25 (3): 318–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alwin, Duane F. and Krosnick, John A.. 1991. “The Reliability of Attitudinal Survey Measures: The Role of Question and Respondent Attributes.” Sociological Methods & Research 20 (1): 139–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, Frank M. 1984. “Construct Validity and Error Components of Survey Measures: A Structural Modelling Approach.” Public Opinion Quarterly 48 (2): 409–42.Google Scholar
Barreto, Matt A. 2007. “¡Sí Se Puede! Latino candidates and the mobilization of Latino voters.” American Political Science Review 101 (3): 425–41.Google Scholar
Barreto, Matt. 2010. Ethnic Cues: The Role of Shared Ethnicity in Latino Political Participation. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Bartels, Larry M. 2002. “Beyond the running tally: Partisan bias in political perception.” Political Behavior 24 (2): 117–50.Google Scholar
Berelson, Bernard R., Lazarsfeld, Paul F. and McPhee, William N.. 1954. Voting: A study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Besco, Randy. 2015. “Rainbow Coalitions or Inter-minority Conflict? Racial Affinity and Diverse Minority Voters.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 48 (2): 305–28.Google Scholar
Bittner, Amanda. 2007. “The effects of information and social cleavages: Explaining issue attitudes and vote choice in Canada.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 40 (4): 935–68.Google Scholar
Blais, André, Gidengil, Elisabeth, Nadeau, Richard and Nevitte, Neil. 2001. “Measuring Party Identification: Britain, Canada, and the United States.” Political Behavior 23 (1): 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, James E. and Lalonde, Richard N. 2001. “Social identification and gender-related ideology in women and men.” British Journal of Social Psychology 40 (1): 59–77.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip E., Miller, Warren E. and Stokes, Donald E.. 1960. The American Voter. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Clarke, Harold D., Jenson, Jane, LeDuc, Lawrence and Pammett, Jon. 1980. Political Choice in Canada. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.Google Scholar
Connell, Raewyn W. 1995. Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Connell, Raewyn W. and Messerschmidt, James W.. 2005. “Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept.” Gender and Society 19: 829–59.Google Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston. 1988. “Feminists and the gender gap.” Journal of Politics 50 (4): 985–1010.Google Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston and Sapiro, Virginia. 1993. “Gender, Feminist Consciousness, and War.” American Journal of Political Science 37 (3): 1079–99.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert Alan. 1956. A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dawson, Michael C. 1994. Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African American Politics. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Dawson, Michael C. 2001. Black Visions: The Roots of Contemporary African-American Political Ideologies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Google Scholar
Dunning, Thad and Harrison, Lauren. 2010. “Cross-cutting Cleavages and Ethnic Voting: An Experimental Study of Cousinage in Mali.” American Political Science Review 104 (1): 21–39.Google Scholar
Esmer, Yilmaz and Pettersson, Thorleif. 2007. “The Effects of Religion and Religiosity on Voting Behavior.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior, ed. Dalton, Russell J. and Klingemann, Hans-Dieter. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Everitt, Joanna. 1998a. “Public Opinion and Social Movements: The Women's Movement and the Gender Gap in Canada.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 31 (4): 743–65.Google Scholar
Everitt, Joanna. 1998b. “The Gender Gap in Canada: Now You See It, Now You Don't.” Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 35 (2): 191–219.Google Scholar
Gidengil, Elisabeth, Blais, André, Nadeau, Richard and Nevitte, Neil. 2003. “Women to the Left? Gender Differences in Political Beliefs and Policy Preferences.” In Gender and Electoral Representation in Canada. eds. Tremblay, Manon and Trimble, Linda. Don Mills ON: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gidengil, Elisabeth, Hennigar, Matthew, Blais, André and Nevitte, Neil. 2005. “Explaining the Gender Gap in Support for the New Right: The Case of Canada.” Comparative Political Studies 38 (10): 1–25.Google Scholar
Gidengil, Elisabeth. 2007. “Beyond the Gender Gap.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 40 (4): 815–31.Google Scholar
Gilens, Martin. 1988. ‘‘Gender and Support for Reagan: A Comprehensive Model of Presidential Approval.’’ American Journal of Political Science 32 (1): 19–49.Google Scholar
Goodyear-Grant, Elizabeth, and Croskill, Julie. 2011. “Gender Affinity Effects in Vote Choice in Westminster Systems: Assessing ‘Flexible’ Voters in Canada.” Politics & Gender 7: 223–50.Google Scholar
Goodyear-Grant, Elizabeth and Tolley, Erin. 2015. “Supporting One of Their Own? Explaining Race and Gender Affinity in Vote Choice.” Paper presented at the annual conference of the European Consortium for Political Research. University of Montreal, Aug. 26–29.Google Scholar
Gurin, Patricia. 1985. “Women's gender consciousness.” Public Opinion Quarterly 49 (2): 143–63.Google Scholar
Hiebert, Daniel. 2015. Ethnocultural Minority Enclaves in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. Institute for Research on Public Policy. Montreal. http://irpp.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/study-no52.pdf (May 1, 2016)Google Scholar
Huddy, Leone. 2013 “Translating Group Identity into Political Cohesion and Commitment.” https://www.surrey.ac.uk/politics/research/researchareasofstaff/isppsummeracademy/instructors%20/leonie_huddy.htm (March 20, 2017)Google Scholar
Huddy, Leone and Carey, Tony E.. 2009. “Group politics redux: Race and gender in the 2008 Democratic presidential primaries.” Politics & Gender 5 (1): 81–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddy, Leone, Neely, Francis, and Lafay, Marilyn. 2000. “The polls—trends: Support for the women's movement.” Public Opinion Quarterly 64 (3): 309–50.Google Scholar
Hutchings, Vincent L. and Valentino, Nicholas A.. 2004. “The Centrality of Race in American Politics.” Annual Review of Political Science 7: 383–408.Google Scholar
Jennings, Kent. “Preface.” In The Politics of the Gender Gap: The Social Construction of Political Influence. ed. Carol Mueller. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1988.Google Scholar
Johnston, Richard. 1992. “Party Identification Measures in the Anglo-American Democracies: A National Survey Experiment.” American Journal of Political Science 36 (2): 542–59.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, Karen M. and Petrocik, Jon R.. 1999. “The Changing Politics of American Men: Understanding the Sources of the Gender Gap.” American Journal of Political Science 43 (3): 864–87.Google Scholar
Layman, Geoffrey C. 2001. The great divide: Religious and cultural conflict in American party politics. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lazarsfeld, Paul F., Berelson, Bernard and Gaudet, Hazel. 1944. The People's Choice: How the Voter Makes Up His Mind in a Presidential Campaign. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lien, Pei-Te. 1998. “Does the Gender Gap in Political Attitudes and Behavior Vary Across Racial Groups?” Political Research Quarterly 51 (4): 869–94.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin and Rokkan, Stein. 1967. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments.” In Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives, ed. Lipset, Seymour Martin and Rokkan, Stein. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Milan, Anne, Maheux, Helene, and Chui, Tina. 2010. “A portrait of couples in mixed unions.” Statistics Canada. Ottawa: Minister of Industry. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-008-x/2010001/article/11143-eng.htm (May 1, 2016).Google Scholar
Milbrath, Lester W. 1981. “Political Participation.” In The Handbook of Political Behavior, ed. Long, Samuel L.. vol 4. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Sapiro, Virginia. 2003. “Theorizing Gender in Political Psychology Research.” In Handbook of Political Psychology. eds., Sears, David O., Huddy, Leonie, and Jervis, Robert, 601–636. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schaffner, Brian F. 2011. “Racial Salience and the Obama Vote.” Political Psychology 32 (6): 963–88.Google Scholar
Sears, David O. and Huddy, Leone. 1990. “On the origins of political disunity among women.” In Women, Politics and Change, ed. Tilly, Louise A. and Gurin, Patricia. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Robert and Mahajan, Harpreet. 1986. “Gender Differences in Policy Preferences: A Summary of Trends from the 1960s to the 1980s.” Public Opinion Quarterly 50 (1): 42–61.Google Scholar
Sidanius, James, Levin, Shana, Van Laar, Colette and Sears, David O.. 2008. The diversity challenge. Social identity and intergroup relations on the college campus. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Tajfel, Henri. 1981. Human groups and social categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tate, Katherine. 1994. From protest to politics: The new black voters in American elections. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, S.E. and Fiske, S.T.. 1978. “Salience, Attention, and Attribution: Top of the Head Phenomena.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 11 (December): 249–88.Google Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher. 2005. “On the Salience of Political Issues: The Problem with ‘Most Important Problem.’” Electoral Studies 24 (4): 555–79.Google Scholar