Richard Fox - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Richard Fox

$Research paper thumbnail of If Only They\u27d Ask: Gender, Recruitment, and Political Ambition$

The Forum, 2018

From the moment Donald Trump took the oath of office, women’s political engagement skyrocketed. T... more From the moment Donald Trump took the oath of office, women’s political engagement skyrocketed. This groundswell of activism almost immediately led to widespread reporting that Trump’s victory was inspiring a large new crop of female candidates across the country. We rely on a May 2017 national survey of “potential candidates” and the 2018 midterm election results to assess whether this “Trump Effect” materialized. Our analysis uncovers some evidence for it. Democrats – especially women – held very negative feelings toward Trump, and those feelings generated heightened political interest and activity during the 2018 election cycle. That activism, however, was not accompanied by a broad scale surge in women’s interest in running for office. In fact, the overall gender gap in political ambition today is quite similar to the gap we’ve uncovered throughout the last 20 years. Notably, though, about one quarter of the Democratic women who expressed interest in running for office first sta...

Revista Brasileira de Ciência Política, 2012

Há um vazio importante na pesquisa sobre a sub-representação das mulheres em cargos eletivos, rel... more Há um vazio importante na pesquisa sobre a sub-representação das mulheres em cargos eletivos, relacionado à decisão inicial de concorrer. Com base em dados de nosso Citizen Political Ambition Study, a primeira pesquisa nacional de grande escala sobre candidatos potenciais, examinamos o processo pelo qual mulheres e homens surgem como candidatos a cargos eletivos. Nossa conclusão é de que mulheres que têm as mesmas características pessoais e credenciais profissionais dos homens expressam níveis significativamente inferiores de ambição política para ocupar esses cargos. Dois fatores explicam essa lacuna de gênero: primeiro, as mulheres têm probabilidades bem menores do que os homens de ser incentivadas a concorrer; segundo, elas têm probabilidades bem menores do que os homens de se considerar qualificadas para concorrer. Nossas conclusões colocam em questão as principais explicações teóricas para a sub-representação numérica das mulheres e indicam que, em função de vestígios da social...

American Political Science Review, 2014

Based on survey responses from a national random sample of nearly 4,000 high school and college s... more Based on survey responses from a national random sample of nearly 4,000 high school and college students, we uncover a dramatic gender gap in political ambition. This finding serves as striking evidence that the gap is present well before women and men enter the professions from which most candidates emerge. We then use political socialization—which we gauge through a myriad of socializing agents and early life experiences—as a lens through which to explain the individual-level differences we uncover. Our analysis reveals that parental encouragement, politicized educational and peer experiences, participation in competitive activities, and a sense of self-confidence propel young people's interest in running for office. But on each of these dimensions, women, particularly once they are in college, are at a disadvantage. By identifying when and why gender differences in interest in running for office materialize, we begin to uncover the origins of the gender gap in political ambit...

The Journal of Politics, 2014

Based on data from the 2011 Citizen Political Ambition Study-a national survey of nearly 4,000 ''... more Based on data from the 2011 Citizen Political Ambition Study-a national survey of nearly 4,000 ''potential candidates'' for all levels of office-we provide the first thorough analysis of the manner in which traditional family arrangements affect the initial decision to run for office. Our findings reveal that traditional family dynamics do not account for the gender gap in political ambition. Neither marital and parental status, nor the division of labor pertaining to household tasks and child care, predicts potential candidates' political ambition. This is not to downplay the fact that the gender gap in political ambition remains substantial and static or that traditional family roles affect whether women make it into the candidate eligibility pool in the first place. But it is to suggest that family arrangements are not a primary factor explaining why female potential candidates exhibit lower levels of political ambition than do men. Because women remain less likely than men to exhibit political ambition even in the face of stringent controls, the lack of explanatory power conferred by family arrangements highlights that other barriers to women's emergence as candidates clearly merit continued investigation.

The Journal of Politics, 2010

Based on data from the second wave of the Citizen Political Ambition Panel Study-our national sur... more Based on data from the second wave of the Citizen Political Ambition Panel Study-our national survey of more than 2,000 ''potential candidates'' in 2008-we provide the first thorough analysis of the manner in which gender interacts with political recruitment in the candidate eligibility pool. Our findings are striking. Highly qualified and politically well-connected women from both major political parties are less likely than similarly situated men to be recruited to run for public office by all types of political actors. They are less likely than men to be recruited intensely. And they are less likely than men to be recruited by multiple sources. Although we paint a picture of a political recruitment process that seems to suppress women's inclusion, we also offer the first evidence of the significant headway women's organizations are making in their efforts to mitigate the recruitment gap, especially among Democrats. These findings are critically important because women's recruitment disadvantage depresses their political ambition and ultimately hinders their emergence as candidates. Patriarchy is the structural and ideological system that perpetuates the privileging of masculinity. .. Legislatures, political parties, museums, newspapers, theater companies, television networks, religious organizations, corporations, and courts. .. derive from the presumption that what is masculine is most deserving of reward, promotion, admiration, [and] emulation. (2004, 4-5) Indeed, scholars have identified, to varying degrees, this type of masculinized ethos within all three if only they'd ask: gender, recruitment, and political ambition

American Journal of Political Science, 2010

Based on the second wave of the Citizen Political Ambition Panel Study, we provide the first thor... more Based on the second wave of the Citizen Political Ambition Panel Study, we provide the first thorough analysis of how gender affects women and men's efficacy to run for office. Our findings reveal that, despite comparable credentials, backgrounds, and experiences, accomplished women are substantially less likely than similarly situated men to perceive themselves as qualified to seek office. Importantly, women and men rely on the same factors when evaluating themselves as candidates, but women are less likely than men to believe they meet these criteria. Not only are women more likely than men to doubt that they have skills and traits necessary for electoral politics, but they are also more likely to doubt their abilities to engage in campaign mechanics. These findings are critical because the perceptual differences we uncover account for much of the gender gap in potential candidates' self-efficacy and ultimately hinder women's prospects for political equality. A s of the 1970s, women occupied almost no major elective positions in U.S. political institutions. Ella Grasso, a Democrat from Connecticut, and Dixie Lee Ray, a Democrat from Washington, served as the only two women elected governor throughout the decade. Not until 1978 did Kansas Republican Nancy Kassebaum become the first woman elected to the Senate in her own right. By 1979, women comprised fewer than 5% of the seats in the U.S. House of Representatives, and only about 10% of state legislative positions across the country. Although women's numeric representation is not quite as grave today, a striking gender imbalance persists. When the 111 th Congress convened in January 2009, 83% of its members were men. Men occupy the governor's mansion in 44 of the 50 states, and they run City Hall in 93 of the 100 largest cities across the country. At least as important as women's continued underrepresentation in U.S. politics is evidence that points to stagnation in the numbers of women holding state and federal office. Since 2000, the number of women elected to state legisla

American Journal of Political Science, 2005

In this article, we develop the concept of nascent political ambition and offer the first empiric... more In this article, we develop the concept of nascent political ambition and offer the first empirical assessment of potential candidates' initial interest in seeking elective office. Our analysis is based on the Citizen Political Ambition Study—our national survey of nearly 3,800 individuals in the four professions that most frequently precede a career in politics. We find that a general sense of efficacy as a candidate, as well as a politicized upbringing, motivate well‐situated potential candidates' inclinations to run for office. Alternatively, status as a member of a group historically excluded from politics depresses the likelihood of considering a candidacy. These findings shed light not only on the prospects for political representation and democratic legitimacy in the United States, but also the means by which to study candidate emergence and conceptualize political ambition.

The Journal of Politics, 2011

Considering a candidacy for public office involves pondering the courageous step of going before ... more Considering a candidacy for public office involves pondering the courageous step of going before an electorate and facing potential examination, scrutiny, and rejection. Anyone who contemplates running for office, therefore, must answer a series of questions. Is the time right to inject my family into the political arena? Where am I in terms of my professional goals? Do I know enough about the issues and the political system to run for office? Am I in sync with my potential constituents on the issues that matter most? Have electoral gatekeepers indicated support for my foray into politics? Do I really want to take part in a political process that is so often associated with self-interest, corruption, and cynicism? In short, a variety of personal, professional, and political circumstances-circumstances that often change over time-undoubtedly affect the extent to which someone considers entering the electoral arena.

xtensive research shows that when women run for office, they perform just as well as men. Yet wom... more xtensive research shows that when women run for office, they perform just as well as men. Yet women remain severely underrepresented in our political institutions. In this report, we argue that the fundamental reason for women's under-representation is that they do not run for office. There is a substantial gender gap in political ambition; men tend to have it, and women don't. E

Legislative Studies Quarterly, 2001

A critical void in the research on women's underrepresentation in elective office is an analysis ... more A critical void in the research on women's underrepresentation in elective office is an analysis of the initial decision to run for office. Based on data from our Citizen Political Ambition Study, the first large-scale national survey of potential candidates, we examine the process by which women and men emerge as candidates for public office. We find that women who share the same personal characteristics and professional credentials as men express significantly lower levels of political ambition to hold elective office. Two factors explain this gender gap: first, women are far less likely than men to be encouraged to run for office; second, women are significantly less likely than men to view themselves as qualified to run. Our findings call into question the leading theoretical explanations for women's numeric underrepresentation and indicate that, because of vestiges of traditional sex-role socialization, prospects for gender parity in U.S. political institutions are less promising than conventional explanations suggest.

Women & Politics, 2003

A leading explanation for the small number of women in top elective positions is that not enough ... more A leading explanation for the small number of women in top elective positions is that not enough women comprise the pool of candidates generally considered "eligible" to run for political office. This explanation assumes that once more women excel in the areas of law and business, the leading occupations preceding a career in politics, the disparity between the number of women and men serving in elected positions will dissipate. Despite the fact that studies of the initial decision to run for office are critically important in evaluating women's slow movement into elected positions, almost no empirical work examines the initial decision to seek office. This article, which examines the attitudes of over 200 women and men from the pool of potential candidates in New York State, offers a first look at some of the ways in which gender may interact with the initial decision to run for office. Ultimately, we argue that the "eligibility pool" explanation may not fully take into account the manner in which the continued prevalence of traditional sex-role socialization affects the initial decision to enter the political arena. We find that traditional family structures and historically socialized gender roles may continue to discourage women from seeking public office. These findings reinforce the notion that broad patterns of sex-role socialization continue to impede women from full inclusion in the electoral process.

American Journal of Political Science, 2004

Shaping the Future of American Politics, 2013