Are Women Politicians Kind and Competent? Disentangling Stereotype Incongruity in Candidate Evaluations

Abstract

Academia and political campaigners conventionally cast gender stereotypes as an electoral liability for women in politics. Incongruent stereotype expectations place women in a double-bind where they either fail the social demands of political leadership or they breach gender norms related to femininity—with potential backlash due to stereotype violation in both cases. Two decades of research offer conflicting conclusions regarding the role of stereotype incongruity in candidate evaluations and its electoral consequences for women in politics. This paper theoretically revisits and empirically tests core assumptions of stereotype incongruity as a driver of gender biases in political communication. In a series of four online survey experiments, this study examines incongruity in trait expectations (study 1), trait inferences (studies 2 and 3), and trait evaluations (study 4). Results show that voters expect and infer incongruity in candidate traits for women and men politicians only in few but notable cases. Moreover, voters punish candidates of both gender groups similarly for displaying stereotypically undesirable traits but reward female politicians more strongly for displaying desirable communal traits. The findings have important implications for the understanding of persistent biases that women face in electoral politics.