A role congruity perspective on prejudice toward Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin

Sarah J. Gervais, Amy L. Hillard

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Scopus citations

Abstract

This research compares prejudice toward female politicians Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin through the lens of role congruity theory. We measured participants' evaluations of stereotypicality, competence, warmth, and voting likelihood. Consistent with hypotheses, Clinton was evaluated as less stereotypically feminine and less warm than Palin, whereas Palin was evaluated as less competent than Clinton. Furthermore, participant gender, benevolent sexism, hostile sexism, and political orientation predicted differential voting likelihood for Clinton and Palin. Implications for role congruity, ambivalent sexism, and female politicians are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)221-240
Number of pages20
JournalAnalyses of Social Issues and Public Policy
Volume11
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2011

    Fingerprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this