Hostile Sexism and the 2016 Presidential Election

Ann L. Owen, Andrew Wei
{"title":"Hostile Sexism and the 2016 Presidential Election","authors":"Ann L. Owen, Andrew Wei","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3543724","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We use Google Trends data over the 2004-2015 period to identify hostile sexism and examine its effect on support for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 general election. An area’s sexist search volume is a significant negative predictor of Clinton’s two-party vote share. Although we find no evidence that hostile sexism was more prevalent among conservative and less educated whites prior to the election, we do find evidence that it had a larger impact in areas with this demographic. We argue that demographic groups targeted by Trump may have been more receptive to his rhetoric. Our main contribution to the literature is showing that sexism had a politically consequential effect. We calculate that sexism cost Clinton 2.6 percentage points of her two-party vote share. In state-level simulations that are made possible by our use of Google Trends data, we show that Clinton would have won an additional 190 electoral college votes if every state had the same level of sexism as the least sexist state.","PeriodicalId":365899,"journal":{"name":"Political Behavior: Voting & Public Opinion eJournal","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Behavior: Voting & Public Opinion eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3543724","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

We use Google Trends data over the 2004-2015 period to identify hostile sexism and examine its effect on support for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 general election. An area’s sexist search volume is a significant negative predictor of Clinton’s two-party vote share. Although we find no evidence that hostile sexism was more prevalent among conservative and less educated whites prior to the election, we do find evidence that it had a larger impact in areas with this demographic. We argue that demographic groups targeted by Trump may have been more receptive to his rhetoric. Our main contribution to the literature is showing that sexism had a politically consequential effect. We calculate that sexism cost Clinton 2.6 percentage points of her two-party vote share. In state-level simulations that are made possible by our use of Google Trends data, we show that Clinton would have won an additional 190 electoral college votes if every state had the same level of sexism as the least sexist state.
敌意性别歧视与2016年总统大选
我们使用2004-2015年期间的谷歌趋势数据来识别敌意性别歧视,并研究其在2016年大选中对希拉里·克林顿(Hillary Clinton)支持率的影响。一个地区的性别歧视搜索量是克林顿两党选票份额的显著负面预测指标。尽管我们没有发现任何证据表明,在大选前,敌对的性别歧视在保守派和受教育程度较低的白人中更为普遍,但我们确实发现了证据,表明它在这一人口结构的地区产生了更大的影响。我们认为,特朗普针对的人口群体可能更容易接受他的言论。我们对文献的主要贡献是表明性别歧视具有政治后果。根据我们的计算,性别歧视让克林顿的两党得票率下降了2.6个百分点。在我们利用谷歌趋势数据进行的州级模拟中,我们显示,如果每个州的性别歧视程度与性别歧视最少的州相同,克林顿将赢得额外的190张选举人票。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信