Issue saliency and gender stereotypes: Support for women as presidents in times of war and terrorism

Erika Falk, Kate Kenski

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

52 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective. This article examines how issue saliency affects the public's perceptions of whether a man or a woman would make a better president when considering the most important problem facing the nation. Method. The study uses telephone survey data of adults in the United States collected by the Annenberg Public Policy Center in September 2003. Multinominial logistic regression models were conducted to parse out the effects of issue saliency on presidential gender preference while taking demographic characteristics and party identification into account. Results. People who said that terrorism, homeland security, and/or U.S. involvement in Iraq was the most important problem racing the nation were more likely to say that a man would do a better job handling the issue as president. Conclusion. This study finds that issue saliency affects presidential gender preference above and beyond demographic and party identification variables.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-18
Number of pages18
JournalSocial Science Quarterly
Volume87
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2006

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Issue saliency and gender stereotypes: Support for women as presidents in times of war and terrorism'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this