Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T07:14:54.116Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Does the Message Matter? A Field Experiment on Political Party Recruitment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2015

Jessica Robinson Preece  and
Olga Bogach Stoddard
Jessica Robinson Preece
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA; e-mail: [email protected]
Olga Bogach Stoddard
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA; e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Do men and women respond to various party recruitment messages similarly? Working with the Utah County Republican Party, we designed a field experiment in which we invited over 11,600 male and female party activists to attend a free, party-sponsored “Prospective Candidate Information Seminar” by randomizing different invitation messages. We found that women were half as likely as men to respond to recruitment—log on to the seminar website for more information, register for the seminar, and attend the seminar. While we found some suggestive evidence about what recruitment messages may particularly motivate women or men vis-à-vis a control message, our findings are inconclusive because of a low response rate. This first attempt to experimentally test gendered reactions to recruitment in a sample of active party supporters provides a valuable baseline for future research.

Keywords

Field experimentgenderpolitical ambitionpolitical participation
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Experimental Political Science , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , Spring 2015 , pp. 26 - 35
Copyright
Copyright © The Experimental Research Section of the American Political Science Association 2015 

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Broockman, David. 2014. “Mobilizing Candidates: Political Actors Strategically Shape the Candidate Pool with Personal Appeals.” Journal of Experimental Political Science 1 (2).Google Scholar
Cardy, E. A. 2005. “An Experimental Field Study of the GOTV and Persuasion Effects of Partisan Direct Mail and Phone Calls.” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 601 (1): 28–40.Google Scholar
Carroll, Susan, and Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2013. More Women Can Run: Gender and Pathways to the State Legislatures. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowder-Meyer, Melody. 2013. “Gendered Recruitment Without Trying: How Local Party Recruiters Affect Women's Representation.” Politics & Gender 9 (4): 390–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fox, R., and Lawless, Jennifer. 2010. “If Only They’d Ask: Gender, Recruitment, and Political Ambition.” The Journal of Politics 72 (2): 310–26.Google Scholar
Gerber, A. S., and Green, D. P.. 2000. “The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment.” American Political Science Review 94 (3): 653–63.Google Scholar
Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., and Green, M.. 2003. “Partisan Mail and Voter Turnout: Results from Randomized Field Experiments.” Electoral Studies 22 (4): 563–79.Google Scholar
Grose, C. R. 2014. “Field Experimental Work on Political Institutions.” Annual Review of Political Science 17: 355–70.Google Scholar
Hennings, V. M. 2011. “Civic Selves: Gender, Candidate Training Programs, and Envisioning Political Participation”. Doctoral diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
Kanthak, K., and Woon, J.. Forthcoming. “Women Don't Run? Election Aversion and Candidate Entry”. American Journal of Political Science.Google Scholar
Lawless, J., and Fox, R.. 2010. It Still Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don't Run for Office. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, J. M., and Krosnick, J. A.. 2004. “Threat as a Motivator of Political Activism: A Field Experiment.” Political Psychology 25 (4): 507–23.Google Scholar
Niven, D. 1998. “Party Elites and Women Candidates: The Shape of Bias.” Women and Politics 19 (2): 57–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preece, J., and Stoddard, O.. 2014. “Run Jane Run! Gender Gap in Responses to Party Recruitment”. Working Paper.Google Scholar
Rozell, M. J. 2008. “Helping Women Run and Win: Feminist Groups, Candidate Recruitment and Training.” Women and Politics 12 (3): 101–16.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, K. 2006. Where Women Run: Gender and Party in the American States. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, K. Forthcoming. “Electing Women of Color: The Role of Campaign Trainings.” Journal of Women, Politics and Policy. Google Scholar
Sanbonmatsu, K., Carroll, S. J., and Walsh, D.. 2009. Poised to Run: Women's Pathways to the State Legislatures. New Brunswick, Canada: Center for American Women and Politics.Google Scholar
Sweet-Cushman, J. 2014. “Evaluating Gender Differences in Psychological Evaluations of Electoral Risk.” Working Paper.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Preece and Stoddard supplementary material

Appendix

Download Preece and Stoddard supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 1.3 MB