Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-5d6d958fb5-w6vhv Total loading time: 0.664 Render date: 2022-11-27T15:17:47.387Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

The Ties That Double Bind: Social Roles and Women's Underrepresentation in Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2018

University of Pennsylvania
University of California, Berkeley
Yale University
Dawn Langan Teele is a Janice and Julian Bers Assistant Professor in the Social Sciences, University of Pennsylvania, 208 S. 37th St., Room 217, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6215, (412) 400-9578 (
Joshua Kalla is a Ph.D. Student, University of California, Berkeley, 210 Barrows Hall #1950, Berkeley, CA 94720-1950, (412) 860-9271 (
Frances Rosenbluth is a Damon Wells Professor of Political Science, Yale University,, 115 Prospect St., 3rd floor, New Haven, CT 06511, (203) 432-5256 (


This paper theorizes three forms of bias that might limit women's representation: outright hostility, double standards, and a double bind whereby desired traits present bigger burdens for women than men. We examine these forms of bias using conjoint experiments derived from several original surveys—a population survey of American voters and two rounds of surveys of American public officials. We find no evidence of outright discrimination or of double standards. All else equal, most groups of respondents prefer female candidates, and evaluate men and women with identical profiles similarly. But on closer inspection, all is not equal. Across the board, elites and voters prefer candidates with traditional household profiles such as being married and having children, resulting in a double bind for many women. So long as social expectations about women's familial commitments cut against the demands of a full-time political career, women are likely to remain underrepresented in politics.

Research Article
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2018 

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.)


For thoughtful feedback on earlier drafts we would like to thank Diana O'Brien, Dan Hopkins, Dominik Hangartner, Jas Sekhon, Jake Bowers, Simon Chauchard, Øyvind Skorge, Timothy Besley, Kira Sanbonmatsu, Teppei Yamamoto, participants at the PSPE research lunch at the London School of Economics, conference attendees at the University of Zurich and 2015 APSA, and Columbia University. For research assistance we thank Casey Libonate and Alex Dadgar. Supplementary material for this paper is available in the Appendix in the online edition. This research was approved by the Yale University Human Subjects Committee (IRB Protocol #1405013934) and University of California, Berkeley Committee for Protection of Human Subjects (CPHS Protocol #2014-09-6668). Support for this research was provided by the Yale University Institution for Social and Policy Studies, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, the Women in Parliaments Global Forum, and Time Sharing Experiments in the Social Sciences (TESS). Some of the data were collected by Time-sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences, NSF Grant 0818839, Jeremy Freese and James Druckman, Principal Investigators.

Replication files are available at the American Political Science Review Dataverse:



Alexander, Deborah, and Andersen, Kristi. 1993. “Gender as a Factor in the Attribution of Leadership Traits.” Political Research Quarterly 46 (3): 527–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, Peter, Cutts, David, and Campbell, Rosie. 2016. “Measuring the Quality of Politicians Elected by Gender Quotas—Are They Any Different?Political Studies 64 (1): 143–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggers, Andrew C., Vivyan, Nick, and Wagner, Markus. 2018. “Corruption, Accountability, and Gender: Do Female Politicians Face Higher Standards in Public Life?Journal of Politics 80 (1): 321–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anzia, Sarah F., and Berry, Christopher R.. 2011. “The Jackie (and Jill) Robinson Effect: Why Do Congresswomen Outperform Congressmen?American Journal of Political Science 55 (3): 478–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arceneaux, Kevin. 2001. “The “Gender Gap” in State Legislative Representation: New Data to Tackle an Old Question.” Political Research Quarterly 54 (1): 143–60.Google Scholar
Barber, Michael, Butler, Daniel, and Preece, Jessica. 2016. “Gender Inequalities in Campaign Finance.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 11: 219–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, Tiffany, and Beauliu, Emily. 2014. “Gender Stereotypes and Corruption: How Candidates Affect Perceptions of Election Fraud,” Politics & Gender 10 (3): 365–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, Tiffany D., Beaulieu, Emily, and Saxton, Gregory W.. Forthcoming. “Sex and Corruption: How Sexism Shapes Voters’ Responses to Scandal.” Politics, Groups, and Identities.Google Scholar
Bauer, Nichole M. 2015. “Emotional, Sensitive, and Unfit for Office: Gender Stereotype Activation and Support for Female Candidates.” Political Psychology 36 (6): 691708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Nichole. 2017.“The Effects of Counterstereotypic Gender Strategies on Candidate Evaluations.” Political Psychology. 38 (2): 279–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernhard, Rachel. 2017. “Wearing the Pants: The Role of Gendered Leadership Styles in Candidate Evaluations.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Becker, Gary. 1957. The Economics of Discrimination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Bertrand, Marianne, Kamenica, Emir, and Pan, Jessica. 2015. “Gender Identity and Relative Income Within Households.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 130 (2): 571614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertrand, Marianne and Duflo, Esther. 2017. “Field Experiments on Discrimination.” In Handbook of Field Experiments. Vol. 1. eds. Duflo, Esther and Banerjee, Abhijit. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 309–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besley, Timothy, and Coate, Stephen, 1997, “An Economic Model of Representative Democracy.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 112 (1): 85114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besley, Timothy, Folke, Olle, Persson, Torsten, and Rickne, Johanna. 2017. “Gender Quotas and the Crisis of the Mediocre Man: Theory and Evidence from Sweden,” American Economic Review 107 (8): 2204–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, Suzanne M. 2006. “Mothers and daughters “do,” fathers “don't do” family: Gender and generational bonds.” Journal of Marriage and Family 68 (4): 812816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bianchi, Suzanne M., Sayer, Liana C., Milkie, Melissa A., and Robinson, John P.. 2012. “Housework: Who Did, Does or Will Do It, and How Much Does It Matter?"Social Forces 91 (1): 5563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blakemore, Erin. 2016. “Why Britain's New Prime Minister Wasn't Elected,” The Smithsonian. Scholar
Bonica, Adam. 2017. “Professional Networks, Early Fundraising, and Electoral Success.” Election Law Journal 16 (1): 153–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bos, Angela L. 2011. “Out of Control: Delegates' Information Sources and Perceptions of Female Candidates.” Political Communication 28 (1): 87109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Box-Steffensmeier, Janet M., de Boef, Suzanna, and Lin, Tse-Min. 2004. “The Dynamics of the Partisan Gender Gap.” American Political Science Review 98 (3): 515–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broockman, David E., Carnes, Nicholas, Crowder-Meyer, Melody, and Skovron, Christopher. 2017. “Having Their Cake and Eating It, Too: (Why) Local Party Leaders Prefer Nominating Extreme Candidates.” Working paper. Accessible at Scholar
Broockman, David E., and Skovron, Christopher. 2018. “Bias in Perceptions of Public Opinion among Political Elites.” American Political Science Review, 1–22.Google Scholar
Brooks, Deborah J. 2013. He Runs, She Runs: Why Gender Stereotypes Do Not Harm Women Candidates. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Burden, Barry, Ono, Yoshikuni, and Yamada, Masahiro. 2017. “Reassessing Public Support for a Female President.” Journal of Politics 79 (3): 1073–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrell, Barbara C. 1985. “Women's and Men's Campaigns for The U.S. House of Representatives, 1972–1982 A Finance Gap?American Politics Research 13 (3): 251–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrell, Barbara C. A. 1994. Woman's Place is in the House: Campaigning for Congress in the Feminist Era. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Bursztyn, Leonardo, Fujiwara, Thomas, and Pallais, Amanda. 2017. “Acting Wife: Marriage Market Incentives and Labor Market Investments.” American Economic Review 107 (11): 3288–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Rosie, and Childs, Sarah. 2014. “Parents in Parliament: Where's Mum?The Political Quarterly 85 (4): 487–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Rosie, Cowley, Philip, Vivyan, Nick, and Wagner, Markus. 2016. “Legislator Dissent as a Valence Signal.” British Journal of Political Science, FirstView published, 1–24.Google Scholar
Carnes, Nicholas. 2016. “Why Are There So Few Working-Class People in Political Office? Evidence from State Legislatures.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 4 (1): 84109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, Susan J. 1994. Women as Candidates in American Politics, 2nd ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, Susan J., and Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2013. More Women Can Run: Gender and Pathways to the State Legislatures. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, Susan, and Schreiber, Ronnee. 1997. “Media Coverage of Women in the 103rd Congress,” in Women, Media, and Politics, ed. Pippa Norris. New York: Oxford University Press, 131–48.Google Scholar
Clayton, Amanda. 2015. “Female Leadership, Electoral Gender Quotas and Women's Political Engagement: Evidence from a Randomized Policy Experiment.” Comparative Political Studies 48 (3): 333–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayton, Amanda, Robinson, Amanda, Johnson, Martha, and Muriaas, Ragnhild. 2017. “How Voters Evaluate Women Candidates: Experimental and Qualitative Evidence from Malawi.” Working paper. Accessible at Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody. 2017. “Barber, Bus Driver, Childcare Provider, Candidate? Uncovering the gendered development of political ambition among ordinary Americans.” Paper presented at Midwestern Political Science Association Conference.Google Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody and Cooperman, Rosalyn. Forthcoming. “Can't Buy Them Love: How Party Culture among Donors Contributes to the Party Gap in Women's Representation.” Journal of PoliticsGoogle Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody, and Lauderdale, Benjamin E.. 2014. “A Partisan Gap in the Supply of Female Potential Candidates in the United States.” Research & Politics 1 (1): 17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darcy, Robert, Welch, Susan, and Clark, Janet. 1994. Women, Elections & Representation. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Deason, Grace, Greenlee, Jill S., and Langner, Carrie A.. 2015. “Mothers on the Campaign Trail: Implications of Politicized Motherhood for Women in Politics.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 3 (1): 133–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dittmar, Kelly. 2015. Navigating Gendered Terrain: Stereotypes and Strategy in Statewide Races. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Dolan, Kathleen. 2004. “The impact of candidate sex on evaluations of candidates for the US House of Representatives.” Social Science Quarterly 85 (1): 206217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolan, Kathleen. 2008. “Is There a ‘Gender Affinity Effect’ in American Politics? Information, Affect, and Candidate Sex in U.S House Elections.” Political Research Quarterly 61 (1): 7989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolan, Kathleen. 2014. “Gender Stereotypes, Candidate Evaluations, and Voting for Women Candidates: What Really Matters?Political Research Quarterly 67 (1): 96107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dolan, Kathleen, and Ford, Lynne E.. 1997. “Change and Continuity among Women State Legislators: Evidence from Three Decades.” Political Research Quarterly 50 (1), 137–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, Jamie N., and Kam, Cindy D.. 2011. “Students as Experimental Participants: A Defense of the ‘Narrow Data Base’.” In Handbook of Experimental Political Science, eds. Druckman, James N., Green, Donald P., Kuklinski, James H., and Lupia, Arthur. New York: Cambridge University Press, 4157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folke, Olle, and Rickne, Johanna. 2017. All the Single Ladies: Job Promotions and the Durability of Marriage. Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Annual Conference.Google Scholar
Fox, Richard L. 1997. Gender Dynamics in Congressional Elections. Thousand Oaks, CA: SageCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Richard L. 2013. “Congressional Elections: Where are We on the Road to Gender Parity?” In Gender and Elections: Shaping the Future of American Politics, 3rd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fox, Richard L., and Lawless, Jennifer L.. 2004. “Entering the arena? Gender and the decision to run for office.” American Journal of Political Science 48 (2): 264–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Richard L., and Lawless, Jennifer L.. 2011. “Gendered Perceptions and Political Candidacies: A Central Barrier to Women's Equality in Electoral Politicsm.” American Journal of Political Science 55: 5973.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Richard L., and Lawless, Jennifer L.. 2014. “Uncovering the origins of the gender gap in political ambition.” American Political Science Review 108 (3): 499519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franceschet, Susan, Krook, Mona Lena, and Piscopo, Jennifer, eds. 2012. The Impact of Gender Quotas. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frechette, Guillaume, Maniquet, Francois, and Morelli, Massimo. 2008. “Incumbents' Interests and Gender Quotas.” American Journal of Political Science 52 (4): 891909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulton, Sarah A. 2012. “Running Backwards and in High Heels: The Gendered Quality Gap and Incumbent Electoral Success.” Political Research Quarterly 65 (2): 303–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulton, Sarah, Maestas, Cherie D., Maisel, L. Sandy, and Stone, Walter J.. 2006. “The Sense of a Woman: Gender, Ambition, and the Decision to Run for Congress.” Political Research Quarterly 59 (2): 235–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaddie, Ronald K., and Bullock, Charles S.. 1997. “Structural and elite features in open seat and special US House elections: Is there a sexual bias?.” Political Research Quarterly 50 (2): 459–68.Google Scholar
Gay, Claudine, and Tate, Katherine. 1998. “Doubly Bound: The Impact of Gender and Race on the Politics of Black Women.” Political Psychology 19 (1): 169–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gay, Claudine. 2004. “Putting race in context: Identifying the environmental determinants of Black racial attitudes.” American Political Science Review 98 (4): 547–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gimenez, Alejandra Teresita, Karpowitz, Christopher F., Monson, J. Quin, and Preece, Jessica Robinson. 2017. “Selection Effects and Self-Presentation: How the Double Bind Strangles Women's Representation.” Paper presented at the Midwest Political Science Association Conference.Google Scholar
Glick, Peter, Zion, Cari, and Nelson, Cynthia. 1988. “What Mediates Sex Discrimination in Hiring Decisions?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55 (2): 178–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goggin, Stephen N. 2017. “Personal politicians: Biographies of congressional candidates and their strategic campaign presentation.” Working paper. Accessible at Scholar
Goldberg, Abbie E., Smith, JuliAnna Z., and Perry-Jenkins, Maureen. 2012. “The Division of Labor in Lesbian, Gay, and Heterosexual New Adoptive Parents.” Journal of Marriage and Family 74 (4): 812–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groves, Robert M., Couper, Mick P., Presser, Stanley, Singer, Eleanor, Tourangeau, Roger, Acosta, Giorgina Piani, and Nelson, Lindsay. 2006. “Experiments in Producing Nonresponse Bias.” Public Opinion Quarterly 70 (5): 720–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hainmueller, Jens, Hopkins, Daniel J., and Yamamoto, Teppei. 2014. “Causal inference in conjoint analysis: understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments.” Political Analysis 22 (1): 130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hainmueller, Jens, Hangartner, Dominik, and Yamamoto, Teppei. 2015. “Validating Vignette and Conjoint Survey Experiments against Real-world Behavior.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112: 2395–400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, Seth J. 2015. “Institution of Nomination and the Policy Ideology of Primary Electorates.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 10 (4): 461–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holman, Mirya R., Merolla, Jennifer L., and Zechmeister, Elizabeth J.. 2016. “Terrorist Threat, Male Stereotypes, and Candidate Evaluations.” Political Research Quarterly 69 (1): 134–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hook, Jennifer. 2017. “Women's Housework: New Tests of Time and Money.” Journal of Marriage and Family 79 (1): 179–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inglehart, Ronald, and Norris, Pippa, 2000. “The Developmental Theory of the Gender Voting Gap: Women's and Men's Voting Behavior in Comparative Perspective.” International Political Science Review 21 (4): 441–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and Rosenbluth, Frances. 2006. “The Political Economy of Gender: Explaining Cross-National Variation in the Gender Division of Labor and the Gender Voting Gap.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (1): 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and Rosenbluth, Frances. 2010. Women, Work, and Politics: The Political Economy of Gender Inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Gary. C. 2012. “The Electoral Origins of Polarized Politics: Evidence from the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study.” American Behavioral Scientist 56 (12): 1612–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jalalzai, Farida. 2018. “A Comparative Assessment of Hillary Clinton's 2016 Presidential Race.” Socius 4: 2378023117732441.Google Scholar
Jamieson, Kathleen Hall. 1995. Beyond the Double Bind: Women and Leadership. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Shannon. 2007. “A woman's work is never done.” Political Research Quarterly 60 (2): 230–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeydel, Alana, and Taylor, Andrew J.. 2003. “Are Women Legislators Less Effective? Evidence from the US House in the 103rd-105th Congress.” Political Research Quarterly 56 (1): 1927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Junn, Jane. 2017. “The Trump Majority: White Womanhood and the Making of Female Voters in the U.S.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 5 (2). 343–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, Kim F., and Goldenberg, Edie N.. 1991. “Women candidates in the news: An examination of gender differences in US Senate campaign coverage.” Public Opinion Quarterly 55 (2): 180–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, Kim. 1996. The Political Consequences of Being a Woman. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Kahn, Kim F. 1992. “Does being male help? An investigation of the effects of candidate gender and campaign coverage on evaluations of US Senate candidates.” Journal of Politics 54 (2): 497517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalla, Joshua L., Rosenbluth, Frances McCall, and Teele, Dawn. 2018. “Are You My Mentor? A Field Experiment on Gender, Ethnicity, and Political Self Starters.” Journal of Politics 80 (1): 337–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kanthak, Kris, and Woon, Jonathan. 2014. Women Don't Run? Election Aversion and Candidate Entry. American Journal of Political Science 59 (3): 595612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karpowitz, Christopher F., Quin Monson, J., and Preece, Jessica Robinson. 2017. “How to elect more women: Gender and candidate success in a field experiment.” American Journal of Political Science 61 (4): 927943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keeter, S., Kennedy, C., Dimock, M., Best, J., and Craighill, P.. 2006. “Gauging the Impact of Growing Nonresponse on Estimates from a National RDD Telephone Survey.” Public Opinion Quarterly 70 (5): 759–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenworthy, Lane, and Malami, Melissa. 1999. “Gender inequality in political representation: A worldwide comparative analysis.” Social Forces 78 (1): 235–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, David C., and Matland, Richard E.. 2003. “Sex and the grand old party: An experimental investigation of the effect of candidate sex on support for a Republican candidate.” American Politics Research 31 (6): 595612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kittilson, Miki C., and Fridkin, Kim. 2008. “Gender, candidate portrayals and election campaigns: A comparative perspective.” Politics & Gender 4 (3): 371–92.Google Scholar
Kittilson, Miki C., and Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie A.. 2012. The gendered effects of electoral institutions: Political engagement and participation. New York, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Koch, Jeffrey. 2000. “Do Citizens Apply Gender Stereotypes to Infer Candidates Ideological Orientation?Journal of Politics 62 (2): 414–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, Jeffrey. 2002. “Gender Stereotypes and Citizens’ Impressions of House Candidates’ Ideological Orientation.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (2): 453–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krupnikov, Yanna, and Bauer, Nichole. 2014. “The Relationship Between Campaign Negativity, Gender and Campaign Context.” Political Behavior 36 (1): 167–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krupnikov, Yanna, Piston, Spencer, and Bauer, Nichole. 2016. “Saving Face: Identifying Voter Responses to Black and Female Candidates.” Political Psychology 37 (2): 253–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunovich, Sheri, and Paxton, Pamela. 2005. “Pathways to Power: The Role of Political Parties in Women's National Political Representation,” American Journal of Sociology 111 (2): 505–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer L. 2015. “Female Candidates and Legislators.” Annual Review of Political Science, 18: 349–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer L. and Fox, Richard L.. 2004. Why Don't Women Run for Office? A Brown University Policy Report (Providence: Taubman Center for Public Policy). Accessible at Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer L., and Fox, Richard L.. 2010. It Still Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don't Run for Office. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawless, Jennifer L., and Pearson, Kathryn. 2008. “The Primary Reason for Women's Underrepresentation? Reevaluating the Conventional Wisdom.” The Journal of Politics 70 (1): 6782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacNell, L., Driscoll, A., and Hunt, A. N.. 2015. “What's in a Name: Exposing Gender Bias in Student Ratings of teaching.” Innovative Higher Education 40 (4): 291303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermott, Monika L. 1997. “Voting Cues in Low-Information Elections: Candidate Gender as a Social Information Variable in Contemporary United States Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 41 (1): 270–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milkman, Katherine L., Akinola, Modupe, and Chugh, Dolly. 2015. “What happens before? A field experiment exploring how pay and representation differentially shape bias on the pathway into organizations.” Journal of Applied Psychology 100 (6): 16781712.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milyo, Jeffrey, and Schosberg, Samantha. 2000. “Gender Bias and Selection Bias in House Elections.” Public Choice 105 (1), 4159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mo, Hyunjung Cecilia. 2015. “The Consequences of Explicit and Implicit Gender Attitudes and Candidate Quality in the Calculations of Voters.” Political Behavior 37: 357–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moncrief, Gary F., Squire, Peverill, and Jewell, Malcolm E.. 2001. Who Runs for the Legislature? Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Montgomery, Jacob, Nyhan, Brendan, and Torres, Michelle. Forthcoming, “How Conditioning on Post-treatment Variables Can Ruin Your experiment and What To Do About It.” American Journal of Political Science. Scholar
Moss-Racusin, Corinne A., Dovidio, John F., Brescoll, Victoria L., Graham, Mark J., and Handelsman, Jo. 2012. “Science Faculty's Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109: 16474–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murray, Rainbow. 2014. “Quotas for Men: Reframing Gender Quotas as a Means of Improving Representation for All.” American Political Science Review 108 (3): 520–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niven, David. 1998. “Party Elites and Women Candidates: The Shape of Bias.” Women & Politics 19: 5780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Brien, Diana Z., and Rickne, Johanna. 2016. “Gender Quotas and Women's Political Leadership.” American Political Science Review 110 (1): 112–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1989. Justice, Gender, and the Family. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Palmer, Barbara, and Simon, Dennis. 2006. Breaking the political glass ceiling: Women and congressional elections. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Paris, Celia, and Feder, Daniel. 2016. “Candidate Qualifications as Cues for Competence.” Working paper. Paper presented at Midwest Political Science Association Conference.Google Scholar
Paxton, Pamela, and Kunovich, Sheri. 2003. “Women's Political Representation: The Importance of Ideology.” Social Forces 82: 87113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philpot, Tasha S., and Walton, Hanes. 2007. “One of Our Own: Black Female Candidates and the Voters Who Support Them.American Journal of Political Science 51 (1): 4962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preece, Jessica R., Stoddard, Olga B., and Fisher, Rachel. 2016. “Run, Jane, Run! Gendered Responses to Political Party Recruitment.” Political Behavior 38 (3): 561–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quaranta, Mario, and Dotti Sani, Giulia M.. Forthcoming. “Left Behind? Gender Gaps in Political Engagement Over the Life Course in Twenty-Seven European CountriesSocial Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society. Scholar
Raines, Thomas, Goodwin, Matthew, and Cutts, David. 2017. “The Future of Europe Comparing Public and Elite Attitudes,” European Programme, Chatham House, Retrieved July 1, 2017. Scholar
Rasmussen, Jorgen. 1981. “Female Political Career Patterns & Leadership Disabilities in Britain: The Crucial Role of Gatekeepers in Regulating Entry to the Political Elite.” Polity 13 (4): 600–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, Cindy Simon. 1998. When Women Lead: Integrative Leadership in State Legislatures. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rule, Wilma. 1981. “Why women don't run: The critical contextual factors in women's legislative recruitment.” Western Political Quarterly 34 (1): 6077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2002. “Gender Stereotypes and Vote Choice.” American Journal of Political Science 46 (1): 2034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2006. “Do Parties Know That 'Women Win'? Party Leader Beliefs about Women's Electoral Chances.” Politics & Gender 2 (4): 431–50.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, Kira, and Dolan, Kathleen. 2009. “Do Gender Stereotypes Transcend Party?Political Research Quarterly 62 (3): 485–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapiro, Virginia, and Conover, Pamelo Johnston. 1997. “The Variable Gender Basis of Electoral Politics: Gender and Context in the 1992 US Election.” British Journal of Political Science 27 (4): 497523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie A. 2010. Political Power and Women's Representation in Latin America. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shames, Shauna L. 2017. Out of the Running: Why Millennials Reject Political Careers and Why it Matters. New York: New York University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silbermann, Rachel. 2015. “Gender roles, work-life balance, and running for office.” Quarterly Journal of Political Science 10 (2): 123–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seltzer, Richard, Newman, Jody, and Leighton, Melissa V.. 1997. Sex as a Political Variable: Women as Candidates and Voters in U.S. Elections. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
Streb, Matthew J., Burrell, Barbara, Frederick, Brian, and Genovese, Michael A.. 2008. “Social Desirability Effects and Support for a Female American President.” Public Opinion Quarterly 72 (1): 7689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strezhnev, Anton, Hainmueller, Jens, Hopkins, Daniel J., and Yamamoto, Teppei. 2014. Conjoint Survey Design Tool, Version 1.3.Google Scholar
Studlar, Donley T., and McAllister, Ian. 1991. “Political recruitment to the Australian legislature: toward an explanation of women's electoral disadvantages.” Western Political Quarterly 44 (2): 467–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Paul, Morin, Rich, Cohn, D'Vera, Clark, April, and Wang, Wendy. 2008. A Paradox in Public Attitudes: Men or Women: Who's the Better LeaderPew Research Center.Google Scholar
Thomsen, Danielle M. Forthcoming. “Ideology and Gender in U.S. House Elections.” Political Behavior.Google Scholar
Thomsen, Danielle M. 2015. “Why So Few (Republican) Women? Explaining the Partisan Imbalance of Women in the U.S. Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 40 (2): 295323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomsen, Danielle M. 2017. Opting Out of Congress: Partisan Polarization and the Decline of Moderate Candidatess. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomsen, Danielle M. and Swers, Michele L.. 2017. “Which Women Can Run? Gender, Partisanship, and Candidate Donor Networks.” Political Research Quarterly 70 (2): 449463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, Susan. 1977. “Women as political animals? A test of some explanations for male-female political participation differences.” American Journal of Political Science 21 (4): 711730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Welch, Susan, Ambrosius, Margery M., Clark, Janet, and Darcy, Robert. 1985. “The Effect of Candidate Gender on Electoral Outcomes in State Legislative Races. The Western Political Quarterly 38: 464–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zipp, John F., and Plutzer, Eric. 1985. “Gender Differences in Voting for Female Candidates: Evidence from the 1982 Election.” Public Opinion Quarterly 49 (2): 179–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Teele et al. Dataset

Supplementary material: PDF

Teele et al. supplementary material 1

Online Appendix

Download Teele et al. supplementary material 1(PDF)
PDF 503 KB
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The Ties That Double Bind: Social Roles and Women's Underrepresentation in Politics
Available formats

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

The Ties That Double Bind: Social Roles and Women's Underrepresentation in Politics
Available formats

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

The Ties That Double Bind: Social Roles and Women's Underrepresentation in Politics
Available formats

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *