Third, it notes remaining imbalances in reporting, notably in terms of the gender stereotypes usedby journalists.Dunaway et al.(2013) is one of the largest studies, including over 10,000 news stories. It focuseson the content of coverage in election with female candidates, compared with all-male races, andfinds that the former tend to be more focused on traits rather than issues.Lühiste and Banducci(2016) is another large study, relying on the 2009 European Election Study’s Media Content Data,with candidate level data on media coverage from 25 European Union member states. It finds a smallbut persistent gender gap in the amount of coverage, robust to controlling for candidate viability.Hayes and Lawless(2015) focuses on the US, with data on 4,748 news stories in 342 districts, for atotal of 108 female and 555 male candidates. It finds almost no gender gap in coverage, neither forfrequency nor for the traits emphasized in the stories

Early studies noted a significant bias in coverage against women (Kahn and Goldenberg,1991;Kahn,1994a). However, a decrease in bias was noted as early as the 1990s: “Analyzing statewidecampaigns in 1994, I find much smaller coverage differences than in studies relying on pre-1990data” (Smith,1997, 71). Later studies find that the bias keep getting smaller, while uncoveringmore subtle ways in which coverage disadvantages women

There is a relatively large literature on how female candidates are portrayed in the media, relative tomen. Studies have focused on two main aspects: first, attention (e.g., the number of stories men-tioning a candidate) and second, content (how a candidate is portrayed). When looking at content,studies typically differentiate among several categories, such as issues, horse race, and candidatetraits.

Third, always relying on structural topic models, we search for the usage of gender stereotypes inthe media coverage of the election by assuming a large number of topics. Across 100 topics, elevencould be conceivably seen as linked to stereotypes; however, the connection with stereotypes is veryloose. Moreover, only two of these eleven topics correlate with mentions of male or female politi-cians. Ultimately, only one topic can plausibly be understood in terms of gender stereotypes.

Second, we rely on hand-coded classifications for a subset of articles to investigate how theprevalence of the topics of media coverage correlates with the gender of the candidates mentionedin the texts. We find that none of the main themes that characterized the coverage of the campaignhas a clear gendered dimension

First, we focus on media attention. The unit of analysis in this part is the candidate and thedependent variable the number of times he or she was mentioned in newspaper articles during thecampaign. We find a significant gender bias, except for incumbents.

Consistent with social role theory, male faces are considered more attractive and dominant if they consist of mature facial features (e.g., thick eyebrows, square face, large chins) that are typically associated with physical strength and assertiveness. By contrast, female faces are considered more attractive and affiliative when they consist of immature or ‘baby-faced’ facial features (e.g., thin eyebrows, round face, small chins), which are considered perceptually congruent with the social conception of women as less physically strong and assertive but instead more nurturing and interpersonally sensitive relative to men [6, 12]. Thus, societal expectations about ideal social roles for men and women can influence whom people infer as attractive, dominant and approachable based solely on their facial appearance.

n addition to impacting how people evaluate faces, gender affects different facets of leadership, including how people lead and whether or not leaders are perceived as effective. For example, female leaders are more likely to adopt a transformational (e.g., innovative and mentor-like) style of leadership while male leaders are more likely to engage in transactional (e.g., exchange-like) and laissez-faire (e.g., relaxed) styles of leadership [17].

Gender affects how people perceive and evaluate facial appearance [6, 7]. Cultural stereotypes about appropriate social roles for men and women can impact the kinds of facial features that signal attractiveness [6-8], dominance [6, 9] and affiliation or approachability [9] in male and female faces. According to social role theory, men are expected by society to be strong and assertive whereas women are expected to be nurturing and sensitive in interpersonal contexts

For instance, recent evidence has shown that people’s impressions of the competence of a political candidate based solely on their facial appearance predict the outcomes of recent U.S. congressional elections [4]. Another recent study showed that differences in facial shape alone between candidates are predictive of who will win or lose an election [5]. Despite the considerable emphasis placed in political elections on educating voters about policy stances that distinguish political candidates and their political parties, voters are as likely to rely on what a candidate looks like as what a candidate stands for when deciding how to cast their votes.

Throughout human history, men have occupied the highest echelons of political power in governments around the world. In recent modern elections, people are more likely than ever before to vote for a woman for highest political offices [1]. Yet from 1960-2002, only 44 women have held their country’s highest political office and only 17 of these women served as their nation’s President [2]. In 2006, women served as the head of government in only seven countries [3].

Showing emotions is seen, on balance, as being more harmful than helpful to both men and women. Still, more say this hurts female leaders than male leaders.

An attribute that’s viewed as more helpful to women than to men is being physically attractive. Six-in-ten adults say this helps women get ahead in politics, and an even higher share say it helps women succeed in business. Fewer say being attractive is helpful to men.

When asked whether certain personal traits or characteristics would mostly help or mostly hurt men and women seeking to succeed in business or in politics, about seven-in-ten adults say being assertive and ambitious would mostly help a man’s chances in both realms. Closer to half see these traits as helpful to women who are trying to get to the top. In fact, about a quarter say being assertive and ambitious mostly hurts a woman’s chances of getting ahead in politics and business.

The public doesn’t see either gender as having a significant advantage over the other in handling several key policy issues. On immigration, gun policy, the economy and the budget deficit, majorities of Americans say there’s no difference between male and female political leaders in their abilities.

Among the traits Americans see as most essential to being a good business leader – creating a safe and respectful workplace and being honest and ethical – higher shares point to women as having the upper hand rather than men

Among those who do see a difference, however, women are perceived to be stronger in most areas in both politics and business. Being compassionate and empathetic and being able to work out compromises are prominent examples of this.

Among Republicans, men and women have substantially different views on this issue. Roughly a third of Republican men (32%) who see a gender gap in leadership styles say men have the better approach, while only 6% say women have a better approach. Republican women are more evenly split: Among those who say men and women are basically different, 15% say women have a better approach and 18% say men do.

Again, views on this differ significantly by gender. Women are more likely than men to see a gender difference in leadership styles (

A majority of Americans (57%) think men and women in top positions in business and politics are basically different when it comes to their leadership styles; 43% say they are basically the same.

In turn, men (31%) are more likely than women (23%) to say women simply aren’t as interested in holding top leadership positions in politics.

About six-in-ten say a major reason why women are underrepresented in high political offices and top executive positions in business is that women have to do more to prove themselves than men.

Majorities of both men and women say it is easier for men to get top leadership positions in politics and business, but this view is particularly prevalent among women. About three-quarters of women say it is easier for men to get elected to high political offices and to get top executive positions in business (74% each), compared with about six-in-ten men who say the same.

Two-thirds of Americans say it is generally easier for men to get elected to high political offices (67%); just 5% say it is easier for women, and 27% say there is not much difference.

Still, many Americans are skeptical that women will ever be able to overcome the obstacles keeping them from achieving gender parity in business and political leadership. About half (48%) say men will continue to hold more high political offices in the future, even as more women run for office, and a similar share (46%) say men will continue to hold more top executive positions in business, even as more women move into management roles.

Men’s views do not differ as much by age – younger men are no more likely than older men to say that there are too few women in top leadership positions in politics or business, that discrimination is holding women back, or that it’s easier for men to get top positions than it is for women.

Majorities of women across age groups say there are too few women in high political offices and in top executive business positions and that it’s generally easier for men to get these positions, but these views are more prevalent among women younger than 50.

Among Democrats, majorities of women and men say there are too few women in political and business leadership positions, but this view is even more pronounced among women.

By 20 percentage points, Republican women are more likely than their male counterparts to say there are too few women in high political offices

Overall, the public sees benefits to female leadership. Majorities say having more women in top positions in business and government would improve the quality of life at least somewhat for all Americans (69%) and for women (77%) and men (57%) specifically. Women are far more likely than men to say having more women in top leadership positions would be beneficial.

Looking specifically at corporate leadership, 43% say women are better at creating a safe and respectful workplace; 52% say there is no difference, while just 5% say men are better at this.

Still, there are areas where the public sees female leaders as having an advantage. In both business and politics, majorities say women are better than men when it comes to being compassionate and empathetic, and substantial shares say women are better at working out compromises and standing up for what they believe in.

The survey also finds that Americans largely see men and women as equally capable when it comes to some key qualities and behaviors that are essential for leadership, even as a majority (57%) say men and women in top positions in business and politics tend to have different leadership styles.

Despite the surge of female candidates this year, women are increasingly doubtful that voters are ready to elect more female leaders.

To a large degree, these gender gaps persist within parties. Among Republicans and Democrats, women are more likely than men to say there are too few women in political and corporate leadership positions, and there are substantial gender differences, particularly among Republicans, in views on the obstacles holding women back from these positions.

About seven-in-ten women say there are too few women in high political offices and in top executive business positions; about half of men say the same. And women are far more likely than men to see structural barriers and uneven expectations holding women back from these positions.

Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents are more than twice as likely as Republicans and those who lean Republican to say there are too few women in high political offices (79% vs. 33%). And while 64% of Democrats say gender discrimination is a major reason why women are underrepresented in these positions, only 30% of Republicans agree.

a majority of Americans say they would like to see more women in top leadership positions – not only in politics, but also in the corporate world – according to a new Pew Research Center survey. But most say men still have an easier path to the top and that women have to do more to prove their worth. And the public is skeptical that the country will ever achieve gender parity in politics or in business.