Balancing ambition and gender among decision makers

Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science

Volumn 614, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 56-73

  Larimer, Christopher W ^a   Hannagan, Rebecca J ^b   Smith, Kevin B ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA   (United States)

^b NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

Ambition; Big man; Gender; Representation

Indexed keywords

EID: 35348904560     PISSN: 00027162     EISSN: 15523349     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0002716207305272     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Alexander, Deborah, and Kristi Anderson. 1993. Gender as a factor in the attribution of leadership traits. Political Research Quarterly 46: 527-45.
2. Ammeter, Anthony P., Ceasar Douglas, William L. Gardner, Wayne A. Hochwarter, and Gerald R. Ferris. 2002. Toward a political theory of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly 13: 751-96.
3. Bartels, Larry M. 2002. The impact of candidate traits in American presidential elections. In Leaders' personalities and the outcomes of democratic elections, ed. Anthony King. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Boehm, Christopher. 1993. Egalitarian behavior and reverse dominance hierarchy. Current Anthropology 34: 227-54.
5. - -. 1997. Egalitarianism and political intelligence. In Machiavellian intelligence II: Extensions and evaluations, ed. Andrew Whiten and Richard W. Byrne. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. - -. 1999. Hierarchy in the forest: The evolution of egalitarian behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7. Buss, David M. 1996. Sexual conflict: Evolutionary insights into feminism and the "battle of the sexes." In Sex, power, conflict, ed. David M. Buss and Neil M. Malamuth. New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Campbell, Anne. 2002. A mind of her own: The evolutionary psychology of women. New York: Oxford University Press.
9. Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes. 1960. The American voter. New York: Wiley.
10. Cornog, Evan. 2004. The power and the story: How the crafted presidential narrative has determined political success from George Washington to George W. Bush. New York: Penguin.
11. Eagly, Alice H. 1995. The science and politics of comparing women and men. American Psychologist 50: 145-58.
12. Ehrenhalt, Alan. 1992. The United States of ambition: Politicians, power, and the pursuit of office. New York: Times Books.
13. Erdal, David, and Andrew Whiten. 1994. On human egalitarianism: An evolutionary product of Machiavellian status escalation? Current Anthropology 35: 175-83.
14. - -. 1996. Egalitarianism and Machiavellian intelligence in human evolution. In Modeling the early human mind, ed. Paul Mellars and Kathleen Gibson. McDonald Institute Monograph. Cambridge, UK: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
15. Ferree, Myra, Judith Lorber, and Beth Hess. 1999. Introduction. In Revisioning gender, ed. Myra Ferree, Judith Lorber, and Beth Hess. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16. Funk, Carolyn L. 1996. Understanding trait inferences in candidate images. In Research in micropolitics, ed. Michael X. Delli Carpini, Leonie Huddy, and Robert Y. Shapiro. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
17. - -. 1999. Bringing the candidate into models of candidate evaluation. Journal of Politics 61: 700-720.
18. Hibbing, John R., and John R. Alford. 2004. Accepting authoritative decisions: Humans as wary cooperators. American Journal of Political Science 48: 62-76.
19. Hibbing, John R., and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse. 1995. Congress as public enemy: Public attitudes toward American political institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. - -. 2002. Stealth democracy: Americans' belief about how government should work. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21. Huddy, Leonie, and Nayda Terkildsen. 1993. Gender stereotypes and the perception of male and female candidates. American Journal of Political Science 37: 119-47.
22. Kennedy, Carole. 2003. Gender difference in committee decision-making: Process and outputs in an experimental setting. Women and Politics 25: 27-45.
23. Kinder, Donald R. 1986. Presidential character revisited. In Political cognition: The 19th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, ed. Richard R. Lau and David O. Sears. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
24. Kinder, Donald R., Mark D. Peters, Robert P. Abelson, and Susan T. Fiske. 1980. Presidential prototypes. Political Behavior 2: 315-37.
25. King, Anthony. 2002. Do leaders' personalities really matter? In Leaders' personalities and the outcomes of democratic elections, ed. Anthony King. New York: Oxford University Press.
26. Knauft, Bruce. 1994. Reply to Erdal and Whiten. Current Anthropology 35: 181-82.
27. Lau, Richard R. 1986. Political schemata, candidate evaluations, and voting behavior. In Political cognition: The 19th Annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, ed. Richard R. Lau and David O. Sears. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
28. Machiavelli, Niccolo. 1515 / 2004. The prince. Edited by Quentin Skinner, and Russell Price. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Madison, James. 1788 / 2003. Federalist no. 51: The structure of the government must furnish the proper checks and balances between the different departments. In The federalist papers, ed. Clinton Rossiter. New York: Signet Classics.
30. Maestas, Cherie. 2003. The incentive to listen: Progressive ambition, resources, and opinion monitoring among state legislators. Journal of Politics 65: 439-56.
31. Miller, Arthur H., Martin P. Wattenberg, and Oksana Malanchuk. 1986. Schematic assessments of presidential candidates. American Political Science Review 80: 521-40.
32. Miller, Warren E., and J. Merrill Shanks. 1996. The new American voter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
33. Pinker, Steven. 1997. How the mind works. New York: Norton.
34. Pratto, Felicia. 1996. Sexual politics: The gender gap in the bedroom, the cupboard, and the cabinet. In Sex, power, and conflict: Evolutionary and feminist perspectives, ed. David M. Buss and Neil M. Malamuth. New York: Oxford University Press.
35. Rahn, Wendy M., John H. Aldrich, Eugene Borgida, and John L. Sullivan. 1990. A social-cognitive model of candidate appraisal. In Information and democratic processes, ed. John A. Ferejohn and James H. Kuklinski. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
36. Ridgeway, Cecilia, and Lynn Smith-Lovin, 1999. The gender system and interaction. Annual Review of Sociology 25: 191-216.
37. Ridley, Matt. 2003. Nature via nurture: Genes, experience, and what makes us human. New York: HarperCollins.
38. Rosenthal, Cindy Simon. 1998. When women lead: Integrative leadership in state legislatures. New York: Oxford University Press.
39. Sanbonmatsu, Kira. 2002. Gender stereotypes and vote choice. American Journal of Political Science 46: 20-34.
40. Schlesinger, Joseph A. 1966. Ambition and politics: Political careers in the United States Senate. Chicago: Rand NcNally.
41. Shapiro, Virginia. 2003. Theorizing gender in political psychology research. In The Oxford handbook of political psychology, ed. David O. Sears, Leonie Huddy, and Robert Jervis. New York: Oxford University Press.
42. Stokes, Donald E. 1966. Some dynamic elements of contests for the presidency. American Political Science Review 60: 19-28.
43. Tyler, Tom R. 2000. Social justice: Outcome and procedure. International Journal of Psychology 35: 117-25.
44. Tyler, Tom R., and E.A. Lind 1992. A relational model of authority in groups. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 25: 115-91.
45. Van Vugt, Mark, Sarah F. Jepson, Claire M. Hart, and David De Cremer. 2004. Autocratic leadership in social dilemmas: A threat to group stability. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 40: 1-13.
46. Witt, Linda, Karen Paget, and Glenna Matthews. 1995. Running as a woman: Gender and power in American politics. New York: Free Press.