MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gender differences in politician persistence and incumbency advantage

2023· article· en· W4378188805 on OpenAlex
Mélyne Nzabonimpa

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Political Economy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographic economicsPersistence (discontinuity)Percentage pointPoliticsPolitical scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I analyze the difference in the persistence of men and women after an electoral loss and in their incumbency advantage, using data from the Canadian Municipal Elections Database. I find strong deterrence and incumbency effects among both men and women, but no evidence of a significant gender heterogeneity. Men are 14.9 to 16.6 percentage points less likely to re-enter politics after an electoral loss, while women are 11.8 to 14.3 percentage points less likely to do so. Moreover, incumbent male candidates are 5.8 percentage points more likely to win the next election, while female candidates are 5.6 percentage points more likely to win again. The findings have important implications for program and policy development at the municipal and provincial levels, and assist in the understanding of the roles played by political and electoral institutions in shaping elections’ outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it