Individual Differences In Pyschological Evaluations Of Electoral Risk: Furthering The Explanation Of The Gender Gap In Candidate Emergence

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN PYSCHOLOGICAL EVALUATIONS INELECTORAL RISK: FURTHERING THE EXPLANATION OF THEGENDER GAP IN CANDIDATE EMERGENCEbyJENNIE SWEET-CUSHMANMay 2014Advisor: Dr. Ewa GolebiowskaMajor: Political ScienceDegree: Doctor of PhilosophyDespite decades of movement towards gender parity in other aspects of American society(e.g. education, business), women remain significantly underrepresented in the political realm.Electoral bias against women cannot be blamed; when women run, women win. However, womendon't seek political office in high numbers. This project builds on previous examinations of thegender gap in political ambition by proposing that a contributing factor to the likelihood someonewill seek political office is their perception of electoral risk. While there have been no studies ofgender-based differences in psychological response to electoral risk, differences in risk assessmenthave been documented between the genders in a host of other domains. The theoretical frameworkdeveloped in this study suggests that these differences are rooted, in part, in biological differencesbetween men and women that have evolved to make men more risk prone and women more riskaverse in political power seeking. Specifically, it is hypothesized that women, as in other realms, are more apt to perceive anelectoral environment as being risky. Three components of electoral risk are considered: the levelof office, the cost of running, and the probability of winning. This research examines the