Hearts or Minds? Men, Women and Candidate Evaluations in the 2005 British General Election Dr. Rosie Campbell (Birkbeck) Kristi Winters (Essex)

Hearts or Minds? Men, Women and Candidate Evaluations in the 2005 British General Election

Dr. Rosie Campbell (Birkbeck) Kristi Winters (Essex)

Media portrayal “Blair has lost women's hearts and minds - and their

votes” (Telegraph 30.09.04) “The end of the affair” (The Guardian 08.06.04) “Why all sorts of women fell out of love with New

Labour” (The Guardian 06.05.05) “We ask Blair: can you turn women on?” (Mirror.co.uk

15.04.05). ICM polls put women’s support for Labour one point

above men’s Media speculation about the reactions of men and

women to leaders are commonplace but rarely subject to rigorous testing

The following analysis comes from:

Evidence from focus groups The British Election Studies (BES) of

1997, 2001 and 2005 Our purpose is to assess whether

there is evidence to support the creation of gendered models of leadership evaluation

The Focus Groups Focus group results as exploratory and for

hypothesis generation, therefore any findings cannot be used to make firm inferences about the wider British electorate

Six focus groups were conducted the week preceding the general election*

Took place in London and Colchester, Essex

*Project funded by the British Academy grant number 40355

The Focus Groups Divided by sex and age Men’s groups

Men under 40

Men of mixed age

Men over 40 Women groups

Women under 40

Women of mixed ageWomen under 40

The Focus Groups Participants were recruited by email and by paper flyer

All potential participants completed a brief questionnaire about their personal details

Stratified sampling techniques were used to obtain a mix of educational, occupation and ethnic backgrounds

Participants were paid a nominal fee to encourage a broader range of backgrounds

Sampling did not yield a representative sample of the British public but a broadly similar group of men and women, thus permitting comparisons by sex

Same questions were asked in each of the groups following a pre-designed interview schedule

The Focus Groups Several areas of interest were explored.

The candidate assessment component, designed to discover whether men and women talk about political leaders in the same way

Candidate evaluation literature has developed a number of different schema that individuals might employ (Miller 1986; Stokes 1966) based on:

personal characteristics and appearances, perceived competence or integrity or policy positions or ideological commitments

The focus group research attempted to establish whether the same schema could be applied to men and women.

General discussion

Respondents often mentioned leaders without prompting.

Comments about Tony Blair were generally negative and few comments were made about the other party leaders.

Candidate assessment component Photographs of each of the three main

party leaders were distributed Looked at each individual, silently

brainstorm the words that came to mind and to write them down

Asked to circle or star those words which would be important when deciding for whom to vote

In the brainstorming session respondents were often surprised that they had attributed positive characteristics to Tony Blair

Analysis

Four main themes were developed out of the language men and women used to describe political leaders: Personal assessments Competence assessments Trust assessments Mentioning political policies

Extracts of Women’s Responses to Tony Blair’s photo

Spin Untrustworthy EvangelicalSold-out the party Managerial No

philosophyUntrustworthy Presidential Trying too hard Teeth suspiciously white Leadership qualities Dictator ControllingQuick witted Knowledgeable PracticalPreachy Statesman-like Well-meaningReliable Pragmatic PracticalWeasel Liar No principlesPresident

Extracts of Men’s Responses to Tony Blair’Confident Let down LiarCompetent Strong WeaselLiar No principles PresidentGood politician Persuasive StubbornHard working Charismatic TraitorYuppie-barrister Religionist ThatcheriteSmarmy Slick Confident Looks intelligent Criminal – Iraq

Trying to please everyoneCapable and serious leader however I feel betrayed by his

stance in the war on Iraq

Men’s assessment of Tony

Blair

(out of 28 participants)

Women’s assessment of Tony Blair


Personal positive: 13 men (46%)

Personal negative: 22 men (79%)

Competent: 8 men (29%)

Incompetent: 1 man (> 1%)

Trust positive: 4 men (14%)

Trust negative: 12 men (43%)

Policy positive: 1 man (> 1%)

Policy negative: 4 men (14%)

Policy neutral: 1 man (> 1%)

Personal positive: 11 women (35%)

Personal negative: 22 women (71%)

Competent: 9 women (29%)

Incompetent: 2 women (> 1%)

Trust positive: 2 women (> 1%)

Trust negative: 19 women (61%)

Policy positive: 0 women (0%)

Policy negative: 2 women (> 1%)

Policy neutral: 1 woman (> 1%)

Results for Tony Blair High number of negative comments Rated his competence in a very

positive light. Nearly 30 percent of participants

made positive comments about his competence – the highest among all three political leaders – while fewer than 1 percent described him as incompetent.

Follow up discussion ‘I have got liar for Blair, weasel, no principles and

running as fugitive. Interestingly, I have also got presidential and that is the only thing I have circled out of the three, because - I said this before- I think he is an incredibly clever man. Clever in the image he portrays, what he taps into his style, the fact that he doesn't say.’

‘And Blair, out of the three - I mean I hate to say this because I agree with everything you've got to say about the war and everybody despises him - but there is something very presidential about him and statesman like. I think he plays that well.’

‘And you had a surprise too? What was that? Yeah, because I've just got too many nice comments about Tony Blair!’

Extract of Women’s Responses to Michael Howard’s Photo

Unfortunate manner SmugCalculating

Sound-bite policies Insincere EstablishmentA bit dull Calm QuietReserved Hypocrite AmbitiousUnprincipled Scaremonger CareeristSmarmy bloke Tactician

He isn’t as honest as Major or as funny as MaggieI’ll blame him if Labour winsAppeals to the lowest common denominatorNon-inclusive in politics – directed against some elementsTwo-faced on the surface-could be nice underneath

Extract of Men’s Responses to Michael Howard’s Photo

Racist Right-wing DraconianThatcherite Ineffective Washed-upPolitician Smarmy Sly Conniving Despot Hidden agendaDeceptive Vapid TaintedTimewarp Reactionary Single-issueThatcher Loser Quick off the markGood leader Save the pound

Trying to change a party Tough on spending

Men’s assessment of Michael

Howard


Women’s assessment of Michael Howard




Competent: 1 man (> 1%)

Incompetent: 4 men (14%)

Trust positive: 1 man (> 1%)

Trust negative: 10 men (36%)

Policy positive: 3 men (11%)

Policy negative: 4 men (14%)

Policy neutral: 2 men (> 1%)




Incompetent: 2 women (> 1%)

Trust positive: 1 woman (> 1%)


Policy positive: 1 woman (> 1%)

Policy negative: 5 women (16%)

Policy neutral: 1 woman (> 1%)

Results and Follow up discussion

Many of the responses to Michael Howard associated him with the past.

‘Whereas with Michael Howard on the other hand, it seems like him out of a eighties movie or something’ and

‘And Howard is... he is the minister of unemployment in the nasty party.’

Extract of Women’s Responses to Charles Kennedy’s PhotoWishy washy Entertainer Good on the Iraq

war Human/humane Candid Plausible Well meaning Common sense Boring Direct Inclusive Almost

believeableSeems honestly keen Decent bloke Warm Friendly ApproachableCuddly Dodgy drunk uncle Passive

No hope because of electoral systemMore respectful of electorateSounds as if he speaks from understanding, not from a scriptFinancial realistic, not promising unachieveableCan probably put up shelves but can he run the country? Could have a good conversation down the pub

.

Extract of Men’s Responses to Charles Kennedy’s PhotoDrunk In the wrong job Bum face Politician Alternative option Slow Not clear what to do Sleepy Cuddly Nice but weak Ineffective GingerFluffy A bit boring Ineffectual Unorganised No charisma Hard-

workingResourceful Human IrrelevantUnsuccessful Friendly Thwarted

Good intentions but weak Potential changeDoes not inspire confidenceUnrealistic politicsNo leadership skills

Men’s assessment of

Charles Kennedy


Women’s assessment of Charles Kennedy




Competent: 2 man (7%)

Incompetent: 16 men (57%)

Trust positive: 2 men (7%)

Trust negative: 1 man (3%)

Policy positive: 0 men (0%)

Policy negative: 1 man (3%)

Policy neutral: 1 man (3%)




Incompetent: 9 women (29%)

Trust positive: 7 women (23%)


Policy positive: 5 women (16%)

Policy negative: 0 women (0%)

Policy neutral: 1 woman (1%)

Results and follow up discussion Charles Kennedy assessments are the only ones to

show any indications of gender differences in candidate assessments.

Differences in personal assessments and competence assessments.

Responses to Charles Kennedy seemed to reflect recent media reporting. He was commonly referred to as drunk or dozy:

‘And Kennedy I just think is a guy to go to the pub with, have a couple of pints.’

‘I put drunk.’ ‘And I look and Kennedy appears sleepy too, you

know?’

Conclusions NO indication that women were more likely than men to

have a personal or emotional based evaluation schema than men

One instance out of three provides an indication that men and women may evaluate candidates in different ways it was situational and not systematic

Both men and women used personal, competence, trust and issue based criteria for evaluating candidates

Overall differences between men and women’s description of the leaders were minimal

Documents

Hearts or Minds? Men, Women and Candidate Evaluations in the 2005 British General Election Dr. Rosie Campbell (Birkbeck) Kristi Winters (Essex)