IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tuf/tuftec/9809.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gender Bias and Selection Bias in House Elections

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey Milyo

    ()

  • Samanth Schosberg

Abstract

We demonstrate that female incumbents are of higher average candidate quality than male incumbents. This quality difference is the result of barriers to entry faced by potential female candidates, although the observed effects of this quality differential on vote share are partially masked by the fact that female incumbents are also more likely to be opposed or to be opposed by high quality challengers. Using data from House elections for 1984-92, we estimate that the gender-based differential in candidate quality yields an extra six percentage points of vote share for female incumbents. Copyright 2000 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey Milyo & Samanth Schosberg, 1998. "Gender Bias and Selection Bias in House Elections," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 9809, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
  • Handle: RePEc:tuf:tuftec:9809
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ase.tufts.edu/econ/papers/9809.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ferreira, Fernando & Gyourko, Joseph, 2014. "Does gender matter for political leadership? The case of U.S. mayors," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 24-39.
    2. Amy King & Andrew Leigh, 2010. "Bias at the Ballot Box? Testing Whether Candidates' Gender Affects Their Vote," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(2), pages 324-343.
    3. Bonomy Genny & Brosio Giorgio & Di Tommaso Maria Laura, 2006. "How Italian electors react to gender quotas? A random utility model of voting behaviour," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 200609, University of Turin.
    4. Terra, Rafael & Mattos, Enlinson, 2017. "Accountability and yardstick competition in the public provision of education," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 15-30.
    5. Anastasopoulos, Lefteris, 2016. "Estimating the gender penalty in House of Representative elections using a regression discontinuity design," MPRA Paper 71297, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. repec:bla:econom:v:84:y:2017:i:335:p:454-479 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. David Stadelmann & Marco Portmann & Reiner Eichenberger, 2012. "Do Female Representatives Adhere More Closely to Citizens’ Preferences Than Male Representatives?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2012-02, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    8. Dino Falaschetti, 2012. "A Sex Difference in Risk Taking and Promotions in Hierarchies: Evidence from Females in Legislatures," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(3), pages 477-502.
    9. Thomas Bassetti & Filippo Pavesi, 2017. "Electoral Contributions And The Cost Of Unpopularity," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(4), pages 1771-1791, October.
    10. Paulo Júlio & José Tavares, 2017. "The Good, the Bad and the Different: Can Gender Quotas Raise the Quality of Politicians?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 84(335), pages 454-479, July.
    11. David Yu, 1998. "Rational Bubbles Under Diverse Information," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 9816, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    12. Brian Frederick & Matthew J. Streb, 2008. "Women Running for Judge: The Impact of Sex on Candidate Success in State Intermediate Appellate Court Elections," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(4), pages 937-954.
    13. David Yu, 1998. "Two Equivalence Theorems For Government Finance," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 9817, Department of Economics, Tufts University.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tuf:tuftec:9809. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Marcus Weir). General contact details of provider: http://ase.tufts.edu/economics .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.