Sit Still, Talk Pretty: Partisan Differences Among Women Candidates’ Campaign Appeals

References

• Auter, Zachary J., and Jeffrey A. Fine. 2016. “Negative Campaigning in the Social Media Age: Attack Advertising on Facebook.” Political Behavior 38 (4):999–1020. doi:10.1007/s11109-016-9346-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Averill, James R. 1983. ”Studies on Anger and Aggression: Implications for Theories of Emotion.” American psychologist 38 (11): 1145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes, Tiffany D., and Erin C. Cassese. 2017. “American Party Women: A Look at the Gender Gap Within Parties.” Political Research Quarterly 70 (1):127–41. doi:10.1177/1065912916675738.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauer, Nichole M. 2015. ”Emotional, Sensitive, and Unfit for Office? Gender Stereotype Activation and Support Female Candidates.”. Political Psychology 36 (6): 691–708.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauer, Nichole M., and Martina Santia. 2021. “Going Feminine: Identifying How and When Female Candidates Emphasize Feminine and Masculine Traits on the Campaign Trail.” Political Research Quarterly 75 (3):691–705. doi:10.1177/10659129211020257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernhard, William, and Tracy Sulkin. 2018. Legislative style. University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brader, Ted. 2006. Campaigning for Hearts and Minds: How Emotional Appeals in Political Ads Work. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brader, Ted, Eric W. Groenendyk, and Nicholas A. Valentino. 2010 April 22–25. “Fight or flight? When political threats arouse public anger and fear.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Bratton, Kathleen A., and Kerry L. Haynie. 1999. “Agenda Setting and Legislative Success in State Legislatures: The Effects of Gender and Race.” The Journal of Politics 61 (3):658–79. doi:10.2307/2647822.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bronstein, Jenny. 2013. “Like Me! Analyzing the 2012 Presidential Candidates Facebook Pages.”Online Information Review 37 (2): 173–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunel, Frédéric F., and Michelle R. Nelson. 2000. “Explaining Gendered Responses to “Help-self” and “Help-others” Charity Ad Appeals: The Mediating Role of World-Views.” Journal of Advertising 29 (3): 15–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bystrom, Dianne. 2006. Gender and Campaign Communication: TV Ads, Web Sites, and Media Coverage. Working paper. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3nh303r0.
   Google Scholar
• Carpinella, Colleen, and Nichole M. Bauer. 2021. “A Visual Analysis of Gender Stereotypes in Campaign Advertising.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 9 (2):369–86. doi:10.1080/21565503.2019.1637353.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cormack, Lindsey. 2016. “Gender and Vote Revelation Strategy in the United States Congress.” Journal of Gender Studies 25 (6):626–40. doi:10.1080/09589236.2015.1078228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cryer, Jennifer. 2019. ”Navigating Identity in Campaign Messaging: The Influence of Race & gender on strategy in US Congressional Elections.” 2019 National Conference of Black Political Scientists (NCOBPS) Annual Meeting.
   Google Scholar
• Dolan, Kathleen. 2014. “Gender Stereotypes, Candidate Evaluations, and Voting for Women Candidates: What Really Matters?” Political Research Quarterly 67 (1):96–107. doi:10.1177/1065912913487949.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elder, Laurel. 2012. “The Partisan Gap Among Women State Legislators.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 33 (1):65–85. doi:10.1080/1554477X.2012.640609.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, Heather K., Victoria Cordova, and Savannah Sipole. 2014. “Twitter Style: An Analysis of How House Candidates Used Twitter in Their 2012 Campaigns.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (2):454–62. doi:10.1017/S1049096514000389.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, Heather K., Jessica Habib, Danielle Litzen, Bryan San Jose, and Ashlee Ziegenbein. 2019. “Awkward Independents: What are Third-Party Candidates Doing on Twitter?” PS: Political Science & Politics 52 (1):1–6. doi:10.1017/S1049096518001087.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, Heather K., and Jennifer Hayes Clark. 2016. ““You Tweet Like a girl!” How Female Candidates Campaign on Twitter.” American Politics Research 44 (2): 326–352. doi:10.1177/1532673X15597747.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, Heather K., Sean Smith, Alexis Gonzalez, and Kayla Strouse. 2017. “Mudslinging on Twitter During the 2014 Election.” Social Media and Society 3 (2):2056305117704408. doi:10.1177/2056305117704408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fowler, Erika Franklin, and Travis N. Ridout. 2013. “Negative, Angry, and Ubiquitous: Political Advertising in 2012.” The Forum 10 (4):51–61. doi:10.1515/forum-2013-0004.
   Google Scholar
• Frederick, Brian. 2009. “Are Female House Members Still More Liberal in a Polarized Era? The Conditional Nature of the Relationship Between Descriptive and Substantive Representation.” Congress & the Presidency 36 (2):181–202. doi:10.1080/07343460902948097.
   Google Scholar
• Fridkin, Kim, and Sarah Allen Gershon. 2021. “Nothing More Than Feelings? How Emotions Affect Attitude Change During the 2016 General Election Debates.” Political Communication 38 (4):370–87. doi:10.1080/10584609.2020.1784325.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fridkin, Kim, Patrick J. Kenney, and Amanda Wintersieck. 2015. “Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire: How Fact-Checking Influences citizens’ Reactions to Negative Advertising.” Political Communication 32 (1):127–51. doi:10.1080/10584609.2014.914613.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fridkin, Kim, and Patrick J. Kenny. 2014. “Different Portraits, Different Leaders? Gender Differences in U.S. Senators' Presentation of Self.” In Women and Elective Office: Past, Present, and Future, 3rd. ed., eds. Sue Thomas and Clyde Wilcox. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 126-44.
   Google Scholar
• Gainous, Jason, and Kevin M. Wagner. 2013. Tweeting to Power: The Social Media Revolution in American Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gerodimos, Roman, and Jákup Justinussen. 2015. “Obama’s 2012 Facebook Campaign: Political Communication in the Age of the Like Button.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics 12 (2):113–32. doi:10.1080/19331681.2014.982266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gershon, Sarah Allen. 2008. “Communicating Female and Minority Interests Online: A Study of Web Site Issue Discussion Among Female, Latino, and African American Members of Congress.” The International Journal of Press/politics 13 (2):120–40. doi:10.1177/1940161208315741.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gervais, Bryan T. 2017. “More Than Mimicry? The Role of Anger in Uncivil Reactions to Elite Political Incivility.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 29 (3):384–405. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edw010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gervais, Bryan T., Heather K. Evans, and Annelise Russell. 2020. “Fear and Loathing on Twitter: Exploring Negative Rhetoric in Tweets During the 2018 Midterm Election.” In The Roads to Congress 2018, eds. Sean D. Foreman, Marcia L. Godwin, and Walter Clark Wilson. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 31–52.
   Google Scholar
• Gervais, Bryan T., and Irwin L. Morris. 2018. Reactionary Republicanism: How the Tea Party in the House Paved the Way for Trump’s Victory. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gilens, Martin. 2001. “Political Ignorance and Collective Policy Preferences.” The American Political Science Review 95 (2):379–96. doi:10.1017/S0003055401002222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grimmer, Justin, and Brandon M. Stewart. 2013. “Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts.” Political Analysis 21 (3):267–97. doi:10.1093/pan/mps028.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gross, Kimberly. 2008. “Framing Persuasive Appeals: Episodic and Thematic Framing, Emotional Response, and Policy Opinion.” Political Psychology 29 (2):169–92. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00622.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halperin, Eran, Daphna Canetti, and Shaul Kimhi. 2012. “In Love with Hatred: Rethinking the Role Hatred Plays in Shaping Political Behavior.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 42 (9):2231–56. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00938.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hassell, Hans JG, and Kelly R. Oeltjenbruns. 2016. “When to Attack: The Trajectory of Congressional Campaign Negativity.” American Politics Research 44 (2):222–46. doi:10.1177/1532673X15589613.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heidbreder, Brianne, and Katherine Felix Scheurer. 2013. “Gender and the Gubernatorial Agenda.” State and Local Government Review 45 (1):3–13. doi:10.1177/0160323X12463945.
   Google Scholar
• Herrnson, Paul S., J. Celeste Lay, and Atiya Kai Stokes. 2003. “Women Running ‘As women’: Candidate Gender, Campaign Issues, and Voter-Targeting Strategies.” The Journal of Politics 65 (1):244–55. doi:10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holman, Mirya R. 2010. “Sex and the City: Female Leaders and Spending on Social Welfare Programs in US Municipalities.” Journal of Urban Affairs 36 (4):701–15. doi:10.1111/juaf.12066.
   Google Scholar
• Hua, Whitney, and Mary Macdonald. 2020. Speaking and Leading with Negativity: The Strategic Use of Negative Sentiment in US Congressional Messages. Working paper.
   Google Scholar
• Huddy, Leonie, and Nayda Terkildsen. 1993. “Gender Stereotypes and the Perception of Male and Female Candidates.” American Journal of Political Science 37 (1):119–47. doi:10.2307/2111526.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1993. “Gender Differences in Campaign Messages: The Political Advertisements of Men and Women Candidates for US Senate.” Political Research Quarterly 46 (3):481–502. doi:10.1177/106591299304600303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1994. “Does Gender Make a Difference? An Experimental Examination of Sex Stereotypes and Press Patterns in Statewide Campaigns.” American Journal of Political Science 38 (1):162–95. doi:10.2307/2111340.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn, Kim Fridkin, and Ann Gordon. 1997. “How Women Campaign for the US Senate.” In Women, Media, and Politics, ed. Pippa Norris. New York: Oxford University Press, 59–76.
   Google Scholar
• Kahn, Kim Fridkin, and Patrick J. Kenney. 1999. The Spectacle of US Senate Campaigns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
   Google Scholar
• Kathlene, Lyn. 1994. “Power and Influence in State Legislative Policymaking: The Interaction of Gender and Position in Committee Hearing Debates.” The American Political Science Review 88 (3):560–76. doi:10.2307/2944795.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemp, Elyria, Pamela A. Kennett-Hensel, and Jeremy Kees. 2013. “Pulling on the Heartstrings: Examining the Effects of Emotions and Gender in Persuasive Appeals.” Journal of Advertising 42 (1):69–79. doi:10.1080/00913367.2012.749084.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer, Adam DI. 2012. “The Spread of Emotion via Facebook.” Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Austin.
   Google Scholar
• Kramer, Adam DI, Jamie E. Guillory, and Jeffrey T. Hancock. 2014. “Experimental Evidence of Massive-Scale Emotional Contagion Through Social Networks.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111 (24): 8788–90.
   Google Scholar
• Krupnikov, Yanna, and Nichole M. Bauer. 2014. “The relationship between campaign negativity, gender and campaign context.” Political Behavior 36 (1):167–88. doi:10.1007/s11109-013-9221-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau, Richard R., and Gerald M. Pomper. 2004. Negative Campaigning: An Analysis of US Senate Elections. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, Shin Haeng, and Tae Yun Lim. 2019. “Connective Action and Affective Language: Computational Text Analysis of Facebook Comments on Social Movements in South Korea.” International Journal of Communication 13: 2960–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loughran, Tim, and Bill McDonald. 2011. “When Is a Liability Not a Liability? Textual Analysis, Dictionaries, and 10-Ks.” The Journal of finance 66 (1):35–65. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2010.01625.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macdonald, Maggie, Annelise Russell, and Whitney Hua. 2023. “Congressional Cue-taking on Social Media: Negative Sentiment and Constituent Engagement.” PS: Political Science & Politics 56 (2):201–06. doi:10.1017/S1049096522001299.
   Google Scholar
• MacKuen, Michael, Jennifer Wolak, Luke Keele, and George E. Marcus. 2010. “Civic engagements: Resolute partisanship or reflective deliberation.” American Journal of Political Science 54 (2):440–58. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00440.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magin, Melanie, Nicole Podschuweit, Jörg Haßler, and Uta Russmann. 2017. “Campaigning in the fourth age of political communication. A multi-method study on the use of Facebook by German and Austrian parties in the 2013 national election campaigns.” Information, Communication & Society 20 (11):1698–719. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2016.1254269.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcus, George E. 2003. “The psychology of emotion and politics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Psychology, eds. Leonie Huddy, David O. Sears, and Jack S. Levy. New York: Oxford University Press, 182–221.
   Google Scholar
• Marcus, George E., and Michael B. MacKuen. 1993. “Anxiety, enthusiasm, and the vote: The emotional underpinnings of learning and involvement during presidential campaigns.” The American Political Science Review 87 (3):672–85. doi:10.2307/2938743.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marquart, Franziska, Andreas C. Goldberg, Erika J. van Elsas, Anna Brosius, and Claes H. de Vreese. 2019. “Knowing is not loving: Media effects on knowledge about and attitudes toward the EU.” Journal of European Integration 41 (5):641–55. doi:10.1080/07036337.2018.1546302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGregor, Shannon C. 2018. “Personalization, social media, and voting: Effects of candidate self-personalization on vote intention.” New Media & Society 20 (3):1139–60. doi:10.1177/1461444816686103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGregor, Shannon C., Regina G. Lawrence, and Arielle Cardona. 2017. ”Personalization, gender, and social media: Gubernatorial candidates’ social media strategies.”Information, Communication & Society 20 (2): 264–83.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGregor, S. C., and C. J. Vargo. 2017. “Election-Related Talk and Agenda Setting-Effects on.“ 1 (1): 44–62.
   Google Scholar
• ”Measuring Success: Women in the 2020 Elections”. The Center for American Women and Politics. https://womenrun.rutgers.edu/2020-report/
   Google Scholar
• Meeks, Lindsey. 2016. “Gendered styles, gendered differences: Candidates’ use of personalization and interactivity on Twitter.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics 13 (4):295–310. doi:10.1080/19331681.2016.1160268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mia, Costa, and Brian F. Schaffner. 2018. ”How Gender Conditions the Way Citizens Evaluate and Engage with Their Representatives.” Political Research Quarterly 71 (1): 46–58.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohammad, Saif M., and Peter D. Turney. 2013. “Crowdsourcing a word–emotion association lexicon.” Computational Intelligence 29 (3):436–65. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8640.2012.00460.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborn, Tracy L. 2012. How Women Represent Women: Political Parties, Gender and Representation in the State Legislatures. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, Newly, and Mingxiao Sui. 2019. “I Can Feel What You Feel: Emotion Exchanges in Twitter Conversations between Candidates and the Public.” Journal of Political Marketing 21 (2):175–95. doi:10.1080/15377857.2019.1684419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, David A.M., and Paul A. Djupe. 2005. “When primary campaigns go negative: The determinants of campaign negativity.” Political Research Quarterly 58 (1):45–54. doi:10.1177/106591290505800104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proctor, David E., William J. Schenck-Hamlin, and Karen A. Haase. 1994. “Exploring the role of gender in the development on negative political advertisements.” Women & Politics 14 (2):1–22. doi:10.1080/1554477X.1994.9970698.
   Google Scholar
• Redlawsk, David P., Andrew J.W. Civettini, and Richard R. Lau. 2007. “Affective intelligence and voting: Information processing and learning in a campaign.” In The Affect Effect: Dynamics of Emotion in Political Thinking and Behavior, eds. Russell Neuman, George E. Marcus, Ann N. Crigler, and Michael MacKuen. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 152–79.
   Google Scholar
• Reingold, Beth, and Jessica Harrell. 2010. “The impact of descriptive representation on women’s political engagement: Does party matter?.” Political Research Quarterly 63 (2):280–94. doi:10.1177/1065912908330346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ridout, Travis N., and Kathleen Searles. 2011. “It’s my campaign, I’ll cry if I want to: How and when campaigns use emotional appeals.” Political Psychology 32 (3):439–58. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00819.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell, Annelise. 2021a. Tweeting is Leading: How Senators Communicate and Represent in the Age of Twitter. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, Annelise. 2021b. “Minority Opposition and Asymmetric Parties? Senators’ Partisan Rhetoric on Twitter.” Political Research Quarterly 74 (3):615–27. doi:10.1177/1065912920921239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell, Annelise, Maggie MacDonald, and Whitney Hua. 2023. “Constrained Communication and Negativity Bias: Gendered Emotional Appeals on Facebook.” Accepted Journal of Women, Politics, and Policy.
   Google Scholar
• Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2002. “Gender stereotypes and vote choice.” American journal of political science 46 (1):20–34. doi:10.2307/3088412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sapiro, Virginia, Katherine Cramer Walsh, Patricia Strach, and Valerie Hennings. 2011. “Gender, context, and television advertising: A comprehensive analysis of 2000 and 2002 House races.” Political research quarterly 64 (1):107–19. doi:10.1177/1065912909343583.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlozman, Kay Lehman, Nancy Burns, Sidney Verba, and Jesse Donahue. 1995. “Gender and citizen participation: Is there a different voice?.” American journal of political science 39 (2):267–93. doi:10.2307/2111613.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stier, Sebastian, Arnim Bleier, Haiko Lietz, and Markus Strohmaier. 2018. “Election campaigning on social media: Politicians, audiences, and the mediation of political communication on Facebook and Twitter.” Political Communication 35 (1):50–74. doi:10.1080/10584609.2017.1334728.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomsen, Danielle M. 2015. “Why so few (Republican) women? Explaining the partisan imbalance of women in the US Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 40 (2):295–323. doi:10.1111/lsq.12075.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trent, Judith S., and Teresa Sabourin. 1993. “Sex still counts: Women’s use of televised advertising during the decade of the 80‘s.” Journal of Applied Communication Research 21 (1):21–40. doi:10.1080/00909889309365353.
   Google Scholar
• Valentino, Nicholas A., Ted Brader, Eric W. Groenendyk, Krysha Gregorowicz, and Vincent L. Hutchings. 2011. “Election Night’s Alright for Fighting: The Role of Emotions in Political Participation.” The journal of politics 73 (1):156–70. doi:10.1017/S0022381610000939.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, Kevin M., Jason Gainous, and Mirya R. Holman. 2017. “I am woman, hear me tweet! Gender differences in Twitter use among congressional candidates.” Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 38 (4):430–55. doi:10.1080/1554477X.2016.1268871.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, Christopher. 2013. “Emotions, campaigns, and political participation.” Political Research Quarterly 66 (2):414–28. doi:10.1177/1065912912449697.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windett, Jason Harold. 2014. “Gendered campaign strategies in US elections.” American Politics Research 42 (4):628–55. doi:10.1177/1532673X13507101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolak, Jennifer. 2015. “Candidate gender and the political engagement of women and men.” American Politics Research 43 (5):872–96. doi:10.1177/1532673X14547228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolbrecht, Christina, and David E. Campbell. 2017. “Role Models Revisited: Youth, Novelty, and the Impact of Female Candidates.” Politics, Groups, and Identities 5 (3):418–34. doi:10.1080/21565503.2016.1268179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar