MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401845516 · doi:10.1177/1532673x241276420

Do Voters Punish Women Politicians More?

2024· article· en· W4401845516 on OpenAlexaff
Semra Sevi, Charles Crabtree, André Blais

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Politics Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical sciencePolitical economyPoliticsPublic administrationSocial psychologyPsychologySociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite a rich literature on gender stereotypes, few studies consider whether voters reward/punish women politicians differently than their men counterparts for their policy records. To study this question, we conducted a conjoint survey experiment with a quota-based nationally representative sample of 1495 American citizens. The experiment focuses on electing one of two hypothetical councillors (keeping their political experience constant) to become a mayor. We find that voters do not penalize women politicians more for breaking campaign promises. In fact, they are at least as likely to reward women politicians for keeping their promises compared to men politicians. This is true across genders and political parties.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Politics ResearchSame topicGender Politics and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207