Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-5bvrz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T18:42:20.360Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

EXPECTATIONS, GENDER BIAS AND BANK OF JAPAN COMMUNICATION: DO THE JAPANESE TRUST FEMALE CENTRAL BANKERS?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2025

Cristina Bodea*
Affiliation:
Michigan State University, Department of Political Science, East Lansing, MI, USA
Masaaki Higashijima
Affiliation:
University of Tokyo, Institute of Social Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Andrew Kerner
Affiliation:
Michigan State University, Department of Political Science, East Lansing, MI, USA
*
Corresponding author: Cristina Bodea; Email: bodeaana@msu.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

To be effective, central bankers must project expertise and an anti-inflation commitment. However, those attributes are usually male-coded, which may undermine female central bankers. We assess gender bias using a survey experiment fielded in Japan in September 2022, when, for the first time in decades, the Bank of Japan appeared to struggle with inflation. We exposed individuals to simplified Bank of Japan communication and randomly assigned attribution to male (Mr. Adachi) or female (Ms. Nakagawa) Policy Board members. Respondents trusted the Bank of Japan less and were more sceptical of its capacity to handle inflation when Ms. Nakagawa represented it.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of National Institute Economic Review
Figure 0

Table 1. Descriptive statistics

Figure 1

Table 2. OLS regressions

Figure 2

Table 3. Treatment uptake %, by treatment group

Figure 3

Table 4. Treatment effects regressions