Lloren, Anouk and Rosset, Jan 2017. Gendered policy preferences? Candidates’ views on political issues in a comparative perspective. Comparative European Politics, Vol. 15, Issue. 6, p. 944.
Trantidis, Aris 2017. The problem of constitutional legitimation: what the debate on electoral quotas tells us about the legitimacy of decision-making rules in constitutional choice. Constitutional Political Economy, Vol. 28, Issue. 2, p. 195.
Campbell, Rosie and Heath, Oliver 2017. Do Women Vote for Women Candidates? Attitudes toward Descriptive Representation and Voting Behavior in the 2010 British Election. Politics & Gender, Vol. 13, Issue. 02, p. 209.
Trantidis, Aris 2016. Is Age a Case for Electoral Quotas? A Benchmark for Affirmative Action in Politics. Representation, Vol. 52, Issue. 2-3, p. 149.
Campbell, Rosie and Childs, Sarah 2015. ‘To the left, to the right’. Party Politics, Vol. 21, Issue. 4, p. 626.
Campbell, Rosie and Lovenduski, Joni 2015. What Should MPs Do? Public and Parliamentarians' Views Compared. Parliamentary Affairs, Vol. 68, Issue. 4, p. 690.
Allen, Nicholas and Sarmiento-Mirwaldt, Katja 2015. ‘In it together’? The political consequences of perceived discommunions of interest in British politics. Research & Politics, Vol. 2, Issue. 2, p. 205316801558756.
Rodríguez-Garcia, María Jesus 2015. Local women’s coalitions: Critical actors and substantive representation in Spanish municipalities. European Journal of Women's Studies, Vol. 22, Issue. 2, p. 223.
Romero, Karolyne and Kerstenetzky, Celia Lessa 2015. Entre o altruísmo e o familismo: a agenda parlamentar feminina e as políticas família-trabalho (Brasil, 2003-2013). Revista Brasileira de Ciência Política, Issue. 18, p. 119.
MURRAY, RAINBOW 2014. Quotas for Men: Reframing Gender Quotas as a Means of Improving Representation for All. American Political Science Review, Vol. 108, Issue. 03, p. 520.
Campbell, Rosie and Cowley, Philip 2014. The representation of women in politics, addressing the supply side: Public attitudes to job-sharing parliamentarians. British Politics, Vol. 9, Issue. 4, p. 430.
Cowley, Philip 2013. Why not ask the audience? Understanding the public's representational priorities. British Politics, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, p. 138.
Brouard, Sylvain Kerrouche, Eric Deiss-Helbig, Elisa and Costa, Olivier 2013. From Theory to Practice: Citizens’ Attitudes about Representation in France. The Journal of Legislative Studies, Vol. 19, Issue. 2, p. 178.
Sawer, Marian 2012. What makes the substantive representation of women possible in a Westminster parliament? The story of RU486 in Australia. International Political Science Review, Vol. 33, Issue. 3, p. 320.
O'Flynn, Ian and Russell, David 2011. Should Peace Agreements Recognize Women?. Ethnopolitics, Vol. 10, Issue. 1, p. 35.
Childs, Sarah Webb, Paul and Marthaler, Sally 2010. Constituting and Substantively Representing Women: Applying New Approaches to a UK Case Study. Politics & Gender, Vol. 6, Issue. 02, p. 199.
This article analyses the relationship between the representatives and the represented by comparing elite and mass attitudes to gender equality and women’s representation in Britain. In so doing, the authors take up arguments in the recent theoretical literature on representation that question the value of empirical research of Pitkin’s distinction between substantive and descriptive representation. They argue that if men and women have different attitudes at the mass level, which are reproduced amongst political elites, then the numerical under-representation of women may have negative implications for women’s substantive representation. The analysis is conducted on the British Election Study (BES) and the British Representation Study (BRS) series.
1 Phillips Anne, The Politics of Presence (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995); Mansbridge Jane, ‘Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women: A Contingent “Yes” ’, Journal of Politics, 61 (1999), 628–657; Wängnerud Lena, ‘Testing the Politics of Presence: Women’s Representation in the Swedish Riksdag’, Scandinavian Political Studies, 23 (2000), 67–91; Bratton Kathleen and Leonard Ray, ‘Descriptive Representation, Policy Outcomes and Municipal Day-Care Coverage in Norway’, American Journal of Political Science, 47 (2002), 428–437; Dovi Suzanne, ‘Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Will Just Any Woman, Black or Latino Do?’ Journal of Theoretical Politics, 12 (2000), 113–124; Weldon Laurel, ‘Beyond Bodies: Institutional Sources of Representation for Women in Democratic Policy Making’, Journal of Politics, 64 (2002), 1153–1174; Mansbridge Jane, ‘Rethinking Representation’, American Political Science Review, 97 (2003), 515–528; Lovenduski Joni, Feminizing Politics (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005); Schwindt-Bayer Leslie and Mishler William, ‘An Integrated Model of Women’s Representation’, Journal of Politics, 67 (2005), 407–428; Celis Karen, Childs Sarah, Kantola Johanna and Krook Mona Lena, ‘Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation’, Representation, 44 (2008), 99–110; Dovi Suzanne, ‘Theorizing Women’s Representation in the United States’, Politics and Gender, 3 (2007), 297–319.
2 See Carroll Susan and Zerrilli Linda, ‘Feminist Challenges to Political Science’, in Ada Finifter, ed., Political Science: The State of The Discipline (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), pp. 55–76; Celis , Childs , Kantola and Krook , ‘Rethinking Women’s Substantive Representation’; MacKay Fiona, ‘Gender and Political Representation in the UK: The State of the Discipline’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6 (2004), 99–120; Lovenduski Joni, ‘Gendering Research in Political Science’, Annual Review of Political Science, 1 (1998), 333–356, for an extensive discussion of this literature and its impact on the wider discipline.
3 Representation is formal or authorized where the representative is legally empowered to act for another; descriptive where the representative stands for a group by virtue of sharing similar characteristics such as race, gender, ethnicity or residence; symbolic where a leader or symbol such as a flag stands for national ideas; and substantive where the representative seeks to advance a group’s policy preferences and interests.
4 Pitkin Hannah, The Concept of Representation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), p. 209.
5 Schwindt-Bayer and Mishler , in ‘An Integrated Model of Women’s Representation’, argue that much of the research in this area is flawed because researchers fail to include all of the elements of representation described by Pitkin. We acknowledge this deficit and see our research as addressing a small necessary precondition that concerns one of the relationships that facilitates representation that should be considered alongside institutional/formal and symbolic representation.
6 Mansbridge , ‘Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women’.
7 Pitkin , The Concept of Representation.
8 Mansbridge , ‘Rethinking Representation’.
9 Phillips , The Politics of Presence.
10 Childs Sarah, ‘Hitting the Target: Are Labour Women MPs “Acting For” Women?’ Journal of Theoretical Politics, 12 (2000), 113–124; Childs Sarah, New Labour’s Women MPs: Women Representing Women (London: Routledge, 2004); Lovenduski , Feminizing Politics; Diaz Mercedes Mateo, Representing Women? Female Legislators in West European Parliaments (Colchester, Essex: ECPR Press, 2005).
11 Norris Pippa, ‘Conservative Attitudes in Recent British Elections: An Emerging Gender Gap?’ Journal of Theoretical Politics, 12 (2000), 113–124; Norris Pippa and Lovenduski Joni, Political Recruitment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995); Lovenduski Joni and Norris Pippa, ‘Westminster Women: The Politics of Presence’, Political Studies, 51 (2003), 84–102; Kittlison Miki Caul, Challenging Parties, Changing Parliaments (Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2006).
12 ‘[T]he role model argument, the justice argument, the trust argument, the legitimacy argument, the transformative argument and the overlooked interests argument’ (Dovi , ‘Theorizing Women’s Representation in the United States’, p. 307).
13 Phillips Anne, ‘Democracy and Representation: Or, Why Should it Matter Who Our Representatives Are?’ in Anne Phillips, ed., Feminism and Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 224–240.
14 Dovi , ‘Theorizing Women’s Representation in the United States’.
15 Dovi , ‘Theorizing Women’s Representation in the United States’, p. 309.
16 Weldon , ‘Beyond Bodies: Institutional Sources of Representation for Women in Democratic Policy Making’, p. 1156.
17 Mansbridge , ‘Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women’.
18 Such interaction might take place with other women in the legislature and/or the women’s movement.
19 Tolleson-Rinehart Sue, Gender Consciousness and Politics (London: Routledge, 1992).
20 Diamond Irene and Hartsock Nancy, ‘Beyond Interests in Politics: A Comment on Virgina Sapiro’s “When are Interests interesting? The Problem of Political Representation of Women” ’, American Political Science Review, 75 (1981), 717–721; Sapiro Virginia, ‘Research Frontier Essay: When are Interests Interesting? The Problem of Political Representation of Women’, American Political Science Review, 75 (1981), 701–716; Tolleson-Rinehart , Gender Consciousness and Politics; Wängnerud, ‘Testing the Politics of Presence’.
21 The potential dangers of making essentialist claims about the differences between men and women have been a major source of debate between feminists. In general, equality feminists have preferred a theoretical approach to gender difference that emphasizes the social construction of gender and denies that there are any innate or ‘essential’ differences between men’s and women’s psychologies (see Dovi , ‘Preferable Descriptive Representatives’; Dovi , ‘Theorizing Women’s Representation in the United States’).
22 Dovi , ‘Theorizing Women’s Representation in the United States’, p. 311.
23 Dovi , ‘Theorizing Women’s Representation in the United States’, p. 314.
24 We define sex as the biologically based dichotomous distinction between women and men and consider gender to be the socially constructed ideas about women and men that underlie attitudinal and behavioural differences among and between them. The need to use both concepts together is argued in Lovenduski Joni, ‘Gendering Research in Political Science’, Annual Review of Political Science, 1 (1998), 333–356.
25 Mansbridge , ‘Rethinking Representation’.
26 Young Lisa, Feminists and Party Politics (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2000); Dovi , ‘Theorizing Women’s Representation in the United States’.
27 Converse Phillip, ‘The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics’, in David Apter, ed., Ideology and Discontent (New York: The Free Press, 1964), pp. 206–261; Fleishman John, ‘Attitude Organisation in the General Public: Evidence for a Biodimensional Structure’, Social Forces, 67 (1988), 159–183; Zaller John, The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
28 Converse , ‘The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics’.
29 Feldman Stanley, ‘Structure and Consistency in Public Opinion: The Role of Core Beliefs and Values’, American Journal of Political Science, 32 (1988), 416–440; Fleishman , ‘Attitude Organisation in the General Public’.
30 Inglehart Ronald, The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western Publics (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1977); Evans Geoffrey, Heath Anthony and Lalljee Mansur, ‘Measuring Left–Right and Libertarian–Authoritarian Values in the British Electorate’, British Journal of Political Science, 47 (1996), 94–112.
31 Inglehart , The Silent Revolution; De Graaf Norval and Evans Geoffrey, ‘Why are the Young More Postmaterialist? A Cross-National Analysis of Individual and Contextual Influences on Postmaterial Values’, Comparative Political Studies, 28 (1996), 608–635.
32 Inglehart , The Silent Revolution.
33 Norris Pippa, ‘Gender: A Gender Generation Gap?’ in Geoffrey Evans and Pippa Norris, eds, Critical Elections: British Parties and Voters in Long-Term Perspective (London: Sage, 1999), pp. 146–163.
34 Davis Nancy and Robinson Robert, ‘Men’s and Women’s Consciousness of Gender Inequality: Austria, West Germany, Great Britain and the United States’, American Sociological Review, 56 (1991), 72–84; Banaszak Lee Ann and Plutzer Eric, ‘Contextual Determinants of Feminist Attitudes: National and Subnational Influences in Western Europe’, American Political Science Review, 87 (1993), 147–157; Banaszak Lee Ann and Plutzer Eric, ‘The Social Bases of Feminism in the European Community’, Public Opinion Quarterly, 57 (1993), 29–53.
35 Inglehart Ronald and Norris Pippa. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).
36 Hayes Bernadette, ‘Gender, Feminism and Electoral Behaviour in Britain’; Electoral Studies, 16 (1997), 203–216.
37 Hayes , ‘Gender, Feminism and Electoral Behaviour in Britain’, p. 207.
38 Campbell Rosie, ‘Gender, Ideology and Issue Preference: Is There Such a Thing as Political Women’s Interest in Britain?’ British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 6 (2004), 20–46; Campbell Rosie, Gender and the Vote in Britain (Colchester, Essex: ECPR Press, 2006).
39 Lovenduski , Feminizing Politics; Lovenduski and Norris, ‘Westminster Women’.
40 Lena Wängnerud’s Swedish study finds congruence between the attitudes of women representatives and women members of the electorate but no such study currently exists for Britain (Wängnerud , ‘Testing the Politics of Presence’).
41 Miller Warren and Stokes Donald, ‘Constituency Influence in Congress’, American Political Science Review, 57 (1963), 45–56; Gross Donald, ‘Representative Styles and Legislative Behavior’, Western Political Quarterly, 31 (1978), 359–371; Alpert Eugene, ‘A Reconceptualisation of Representational Role Theory’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 4 (1979), 587–603; Weissberg Robert, ‘Assessing Legislator–Constituency Policy Agreement’, Legislative Studies Quarterly, 4 (1979), 605–622.
42 Dalton Russell, ‘Political Parties and Political Representation’, Comparative Political Studies, 18 (1985), 267–299.
43 Page Benjamin and Shapiro Robert, ‘Effects of Public Opinion on Policy’, American Political Science Review, 77, (1983), 175–190.
44 McDonald Michael, Mendes Silvia and Budge Ian, ‘What Are Elections For? Conferring the Median Mandate’, British Journal of Political Science, 34 (2004), 1–26.
45 Achen Christopher, ‘Measuring Representation’, American Journal of Political Science, 22 (1978), 475–510.
46 The British Election Study (BES) was conducted by David Sanders, Paul Whiteley, Harold Clarke and Marianne Stewart and was funded by the ESRC.
47 The BRS 2005 was conducted by Joni Lovenduski, Sarah Childs and Rosie Campbell and was funded by the Nuffield Foundation (SGS/01180/G). The 1992, 1997 and 2001 BRSs were conducted by Joni Lovenduski and Pippa Norris.
48 The full question wording is: ‘Now we would like your views on some of the general changes that have been taking place in Britain over the last few years. For each of these changes you can say whether you feel it has 1) Gone much too far 2) Gone a little too far 3) Is about right 4) Not gone quite far enough 5) Not gone nearly far enough. Now, using one of the answers on this card, how do you feel about attempts to ensure equality for women?’ Responses are coded from 1 to 5 as described above; we argue that a higher number indicates a more feminist response.
49 Norris , ‘Gender: A Gender Generation Gap?’; Campbell , ‘Gender, Ideology and Issue Preference’; Campbell, Gender and the Vote in Britain.
50 Banaszak Ann Lee and Plutzer Eric, ‘Contextual Determinants of Feminist Attitudes: National and Subnational Influences in Western Europe’, American Political Science Review, 87 (1993), 147–157.
51 We use the ordinal regression (PLUM) function in SPSS, which is an ordered probit procedure, based upon McCullagh Peter, ‘Regression Models for Ordinal Data’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B 42 (1980), 109–142, when the dependent variable is polytomous, i.e. neither binary nor interval, and OLS regression would be inappropriate.
52 The BRS series contains a panel of repeated sampling of a small number of MPs and candidates who have completed more than one survey for the same seat. There will also be a small number of candidates who are difficult to identify who have completed the survey several times when standing for election in different constituencies. The final group of respondents are those who have completed the survey only once. In order to create a large pooled dataset, we would need to isolate the respondents who have completed only one survey and disregard the rest. This is technically rather complicated and would involve removing some of the MPs who are a valuable element of the sample.
53 The 1983 BES contains a similar question but the coding is not in keeping with the other years. Responses for the other years range from ‘Gone much too far’, ‘Gone a little too far’, ‘About right’, ‘Not quite far enough’ to ‘Not nearly far enough’.
54 The British Election Studies Information System website was used for question searches and amalgamating the data (see www.besis.org).
55 The difference appears to be a cohort effect rather than a function of particular points in time, because a similar pattern is evident within individual surveys.
56 The complete question wording was: ‘Now we would like your views on some of the general changes that have been taking place in Britain over the last few years. For each of these changes you can say whether you feel it has 1) Gone much too far 2) Gone a little too far 3) Is about right 4) Not gone quite far enough 5) Not gone nearly far enough. Now, using one of the answers on this card, how do you feel about attempts to ensure equality for women?’
57 Sue Tolleson-Rinehart found a similar pattern in the US electorate where housewives were the least feminist in their attitudes (Tolleson-Rinehart , Gender Consciousness and Politics).
58 The descriptive analysis is available from the BRS website: http://www.bbk.ac.uk/polsoc/research/projects/british-representation-study.
59 The responses to the two statements, ‘Women MPs better represent women’s interests than do male MPs’ and ‘Women need to get more involved in politics to solve problems that concern them’, were recoded so that 1 = disagree strongly, 2 = disagree, 3 = neither, 4 = agree and 5 = agree strongly.
60 Factor analysis should be conducted upon interval data. However, Kim and Mueller argue that factor analysis can be used on ordinal data if there is no reason to think that the ordinal values do not seriously distort the true underlying interval scaling (see Kim Jae-On and Mueller Charles, Factor Analysis: Statistical Methods and Practical Issue (Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications, 1978), pp. 74–75.
61 The SPSS output is available from http://www.bbk.ac.uk/polsoc/research/projects/british-representation-study.
62 There was no measure of respondents’ attitudes to equality guarantees or gender quotas; instead, we only have access to the vaguer notion of desirability without reference to mechanisms that might bring about more women MPs.
63 Data provided by Ron Johnston. Population density is used in the analysis as a measure of urban/rural location.
64 Census ward level data of population density were used here.
65 See fn. 52.
66 Lovenduski , Feminizing Politics.
67 However, not all quotas constitute equality guarantees. Those that guarantee the selection but not the election of women representatives remain examples of equality promotion (Lovenduski, Feminizing Politics).
68 Lovenduski , Feminizing Politics.
69 Significant at the 0.001 level (ANOVA).
70 The full range of tables are available from http://www.bbk.ac.uk/polsoc/research/projects/british-representation-study
71 The two factors were combined together to make an equality promotion scale. Cronbach’s alpha for 2001 was 0.571, and for 2005 it was 0.602.
72 The sex difference was significant at the 0.001 level (ANOVA).
73 Converse , ‘The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics’; Nie Norman and Andersen Kristi, ‘Mass Belief Systems Revisited’, Journal of Politics, 36 (1974), 540–591; Fleishman , ‘Attitude Organisation in the General Public’; Zaller, The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion.
74 Thus, we find evidence that the trends identified by Norris and Inglehart are at work in Britain (see Inglehart and Norris , Rising Tide).
75 Childs Sarah and Krook Mona Lena, ‘Should Feminists Give up on Critical Mass? A Contingent “Yes” ’, Politics and Gender, 2 (2006), 522–530.
76 Childs Sarah, Lovenduski Joni and Campbell Rosie, Women at the Top (London: Hansard, 2005).
* Campbell and Lovenduski: School of Politics and Sociology, Birkbeck College, University of London; and Childs: Department of Politics, University of Bristol (email: firstname.lastname@example.org). The authors are grateful to Pippa Norris for her continuing support of the British Representation Study and for her advice on its development, to Richard Topf for his help with the British Election Studies Information System (www.besis.org), and to Ron Johnston for his help with providing, and explaining how to use, certain statistical data. We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers and editors of the British Journal of Political Science for comments on earlier versions.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.
Full text views reflects the number of PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.
* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 24th November 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.