Gender in Experimental Elections

Last registered on October 23, 2024
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Gender in Experimental Elections
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0006653
Initial registration date
October 22, 2020

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
October 26, 2020, 8:19 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
October 23, 2024, 4:38 PM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Country
United States of America
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Panu Poutvaara
Affiliation
LMU Munich and ifo Institute
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Name
Andreas Graefe
PI Affiliation
Macromedia University
Contact Investigator

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2020-10-23
End date
2020-11-30
Keywords
Electoral, Gender
Additional Keywords
Voting
JEL code(s)
D72, J16
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
We study the role of the candidates' gender as a cue for voting in the United States in a low-informational setting. In this setting, voters can observe candidates' gender from headshots but have no additional information about the candidates. Our conjecture is that
(a) Democrats of either gender are more likely to vote for women than Republicans of the same gender
(b) those supporting Biden of either gender are more likely to vote for a female candidate than those supporting Trump of the same gender
(c) men tend to support male candidates more often than women
(d) women tend to support female candidates more often than men.
Additionally, we study how confident respondents are in their choices in experimental elections, as well as to what extent respondent confidence in their choice depends on the appearance gap between the two candidates. In this respect, our conjectures are:
(e) Republicans are, on average, more certain in their choice than Democrats,
(f) Trump supporters are, on average, more certain in their choice than Biden supporters,
(g) Republicans are, on average, more likely to choose better-looking candidates than Democrats,
(h) Trump supporters are, on average, more likely to choose better-looking candidate than Biden supporters,
…at least when it comes to choices between two candidates of the same gender.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Graefe, Andreas and Panu Poutvaara. 2024. "Gender in Experimental Elections." AEA RCT Registry. October 23. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.6653-2.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Each respondent is shown pairs of randomly selected photos. They are then asked which person they would vote for as a member of the House of Representatives if they would have to decide based on photos only, or if they would rather abstain.
Intervention (Hidden)
Intervention Start Date
2020-10-23
Intervention End Date
2020-10-30

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Our primary interest is the share of female candidates selected in experimental elections that include one female and one male candidate, excluding experimental pairs in which the respondent would abstain.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
The level of confidence that respondents have in their choice, as well as how candidates' performance in experimental elections relates to the candidates’ average looks.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Each respondent is shown 99 pairs of randomly selected photos, so that each pair depicts with equal probability (0.25) (a) two males, (b) two females, (c) one female and one male, and (d) one male and one female. They are then asked which person they would vote for as a member of the House of Representatives if they would have to decide based on photos only, or if they would rather abstain. The order in which the different combinations are shown is randomized. To ensure that American respondents do not know the candidates in photos, we use photos of MEPs, collected from the European Parliament’s web site. Subsequently, the respondent is asked a number of background questions, including their party identification and which candidate they would like to see elected as the president. We use Amazon MTurk to recruit the respondents.
Experimental Design Details
(1) We use "Premium Qualifications" to select one third of respondents so that they are listed having "US Political Affiliation - Conservative" and one third of respondents so that they are listed having "US Political Affiliation - Liberal". For the remaining one third of respondents, the only criterion is that they live in the United States.
(2) The scale that we use in our survey is the following:
definitely the person on the left; the person on the left; most probably the person on the left; most probably the person on the right; the person on the right; definitely the person on the right.
We also allow answers “Abstain from voting” and “Prefer not to answer”.
(3) We use beauty evaluations that were collected in 2016 for the article:
Berggren, N., Jordahl, H., Poutvaara, P., 2017. The right look: Conservative politicians look better and voters reward it. Journal of Public Economics 146, 79–86.
Randomization Method
Computer program. The survey is programmed using https://www.soscisurvey.de/
Randomization Unit
Randomization takes place at two levels for each respondent. First, we randomize for each pair of photos, whether it depicts two females, two males, one female on the left and one male on the right or one male on the left and one female on the right. Then, we randomly select the photos of the chosen gender to be shown.
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
360 respondents
Sample size: planned number of observations
360 respondents are invited to make choices in 99 experimental elections. If everyone replies to all choices, we have 35,640 observations.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
360 respondents are invited to make choices in 99 experimental elections. If everyone replies, this gives us 35,640 observations. The expected number of evaluations that include one female and one male candidate is 17,820, and the expected number of observations of choices between two female or two male candidates is also 17,820.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Ethics Commission, Department of Economics, University of Munich
IRB Approval Date
2020-10-05
IRB Approval Number
2020-09
Analysis Plan

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
October 27, 2020, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
October 27, 2020, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
436 respondents
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
43,164 experimental elections.
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
No
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Abstract
Women are severely underrepresented in American politics, especially among Republicans. This underrepresentation may result from women being less willing to run for office, from voter bias against women, or from political structures that make it more difficult for women to compete. Here we show how support for female candidates varies by voters’ party affiliation and gender. We conducted experimental elections in which participants made their vote choices based solely on politicians’ faces. When choosing between female and male candidates, Democrats, and especially Democratic women, preferred female candidates, while Republicans were equally likely to choose female and male candidates. These patterns held after controlling for respondents’ education, age, and political knowledge, and for candidates’ age, attractiveness, and perceived conservatism. Our findings suggest that voter bias against women cannot explain women’s underrepresentation. On the contrary, American voters appear ready to further narrow the gender gap in politics.
Citation
Poutvaara, Panu and Graefe, Andreas. (2024). Do Americans Favor Female or Male Politicians? Evidence from Experimental Elections. CESifo Working Paper No. 11414.
URL
https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp11414.pdf

Reports & Other Materials