Which ingroup, when? Effects of gender, partisanship, veteran status, and evaluator identities on candidate evaluations. Issue 2 (15th March 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hardy, Molly M.; Coker, Calvin R.; Funk, Michelle E.; Warner, Benjamin R.
• Is Part Of: Communication quarterly. Volume 67:Issue 2(2019)
• Page Start: 199
• Page End: 220
• Publication Date: 2019-03-15
• Subjects: women candidates -- United States Senate -- veteran cues -- gender and politics; Communication -- Periodicals; 302.205
• DOI: 10.1080/01463373.2019.1573201
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0146-3373

Abstract

Abstract : Military service is acknowledged as one of many elements voters use to evaluate candidates, but it has primarily been studied as a univariate element of a candidate's biography. This project experimentally manipulates veteran status, gender, and partisanship as potentially interactive heuristics for evaluation of a hypothetical candidate specifically regarding military issues. We found an almost universal benefit enjoyed by veterans over civilians regardless of whether the candidate was a member of the participant's partisan ingroup or outgroup. We also found little evidence of a gender penalty, and even a benefit for women candidates who were veterans, though this benefit was restricted to evaluations from Republican women. We also found that Democratic respondents assigned a penalty to outgroup veteran men candidates. We explain these nuanced findings in the context of moderation by gender mis/alignment between participant and candidate. Implications of the study are offered.