flowchart TB
Resumen
Importante
El trabajo se beneficia del uso de la asignación aleatoria de cuotas de género para puestos de liderazgo en los consejos de aldeas indias para mostrar que la exposición previa a una líder femenina se asocia con ganancias electorales para las mujeres. Después de diez años de cuotas, las mujeres tienen más probabilidades de postularse y ganar cargos electos en los consejos que requieren tener una consejera principal en las dos elecciones anteriores. El documento proporciona evidencia experimental y de encuestas sobre un canal de influencia: los cambios en las actitudes de los votantes. La exposición previa a una consejera principal mejora las percepciones de la eficacia de las líderes femeninas y debilita los estereotipos sobre los roles de género en las esferas pública y doméstica.
Nota
Si bien la reserva no hace que los varones aldeanos sean más comprensivos con la idea de las líderes femeninas, los resultados de IAT y de discurso y viñetas sugieren que los hace más propensos a asociar a las mujeres con el liderazgo y mejora su evaluación de la eficacia de las mujeres líderes.
Las viñetas, el discurso y el IAT sugieren que la discriminación estadística contra las mujeres y los estereotipos de los hombres con actividades de liderazgo desaparecen relativamente rápido, es decir, dentro del primer ciclo de reserva: dos años después de que se les exigió por primera vez elegir a una mujer, cuando se les presentó “Con la misma información sobre la acción de un líder, los aldeanos consideran que un líder masculino y una líder femenina son igualmente capaces”.
El trabajo dice que subestimaron la reacción en la medida en que el conocimiento de la política de reservas induce a las personas que aún no han tenido reservas femeninas de Pradhan a volverse más negativas hacia las mujeres. Las normas sociales que militan contra el liderazgo femenino, combinadas con personas del mismo género , también podría explicar la ausencia de resultados consistentes en las actitudes explícitas e implícitas de las aldeanas.
Encuentran evidencia de que los partidos son estratégicos y presentan más candidatas mujeres en los GP que están reservados para las mujeres Pradhans. Si los partidos reconocen la necesidad de encontrar candidatas femeninas adecuadas en Pradhan en un tercio de todos los GP en cada elección, entonces pueden alentar a las mujeres electas de Pradhan a identificar y orientar a las candidatas.
Chattopadhyay y Duflo (2004) muestran que es más probable que las mujeres asistan y hablen durante las reuniones de la aldea con las médicas de cabecera.
Resumen automático
El documento ‘powerfulwomen.pdf’ contiene 8108 palabras y se centra principalmente en female, reserved, women, pradhan, leaders, gps, male, reservation, pradhans, results. El texto exhibe un tono predominantemente positive. Los temas clave que surgen del análisis incluyen female leaders, female pradhans, gps reserved, reserved reserved, female pradhan. Las palabras que más contribuyen al sentimiento positivo son effectiveness, significant, good, important, consistent, mientras que las que más contribuyen al sentimiento negativo son bias, discrimination, regression, errors, deviation.
Resumen visual del documento
El documento 'powerfulwomen.pdf' contiene 8108 palabras y se centra principalmente en female, reserved, women, pradhan, leaders, gps, male, reservation, pradhans, results. El texto exhibe un tono predominantemente positive. Los temas clave que surgen del análisis incluyen female leaders, female pradhans, reserved gps, female pradhan, reserved 1998. Las palabras que más contribuyen al sentimiento positivo son effectiveness, significant, good, important, consistent, mientras que las que más contribuyen al sentimiento negativo son bias, discrimination, regression, errors, deviation. Las principales oraciones del documento son: Table VI
Perception of Female Effectiveness as Leaders: Experimental Evidence (Speech and Vignettes)
Average effect
Male Female
(1) (2)
Panel A
Female Pradhan -0.054 -0.035
(0.027) (0.031)
Female Pradhan * ever reserved 0.091 0.024
(0.036) (0.038)
Test: female Pradhan + female Pradhan * ever reserved 0.038 -0.011
(0.023) (0.022)
Panel B
Female Pradhan * only reserved 2003 0.112 -0.001
(0.047) (0.048)
Female Pradhan * reserved 1998 & 2003 0.092 0.052
(0.062) (0.060)
Female Pradhan * only reserved 1998 0.073 0.035
(0.046) (0.045)
Test: FP* 2003 = FP* (both 1998 and 2003) = FP* 1998 [p value] 0.774 0.652
Notes:
1 The outcome variables are averages across all questions in speech and vignettes: "Is Pradhan effective?," "Cares
about villagers' welfare?," in the speech and vignettes; "Did Pradhan address villagers satisfactorily?," "Will
Pradhan allocate BPL cards well?," "Will Pradhan get resources by lobbying?," "Will Pradhan collect villagers'
share well?" and "Will Village approves Pradhan's budget?" in the speech; and "Agree with Pradhan" and "Would
vote for Pradhan" in the vignettes. | Table VII
Explicit and Implicit Preferences for Female Leaders
IAT (D-measure of bias against females) Feeling ladder
Leadership/domestic and Male/female names Male/female politician Male versus female
male/female and good/bad and good/bad Pradhan
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Panel A
Ever reserved -0.076 0.021 -0.004 -0.007 0.014 -0.023 0.208 0.099
(0.032) (0.041) (0.031) (0.043) (0.037) (0.038) (0.112) (0.110)
Panel B
Only reserved 2003 -0.090 0.112 -0.023 0.005 0.024 -0.004 0.271 0.088
(0.041) (0.053) (0.045) (0.051) (0.051) (0.049) (0.158) (0.145)
Reserved 1998 and 2003 -0.023 -0.098 0.016 0.035 0.036 -0.011 0.063 0.053
(0.052) (0.075) (0.041) (0.074) (0.057) (0.056) (0.159) (0.152)
Only reserved 1998 -0.098 -0.022 0.001 -0.061 -0.012 -0.050 0.240 0.139
(0.042) (0.051) (0.045) (0.052) (0.048) (0.051) (0.150) (0.140)
Test: 2003 = both 1998 and 2003 = 1998 [p value] 0.402 0.021 0.756 0.316 0.704 0.709 0.560 0.875
Never reserved sample:
Mean 0.110 0.150 0.134 -0.157 0.093 -0.079 1.446 0.560
Standard deviation (0.340) (0.384) (0.425) (0.418) (0.452) (0.441) (2.655) (2.572)
N 477 357 510 408 554 510 3511 3671
Notes:
1 The outcome variables are: the difference in average response latencies between the stereotypical and non-stereotypical block in the IAT divided by the standard deviation of latencies (IAT D-
measure in Columns ((1)-(6)) and the differences in the ranking between male and female Pradhans on a scale of 1-10 (Columns (7)-(8)). | Table III
2003 and 2008 Electoral Outcomes
Pradhans Contestants Winners
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
Only reserved 1998 0.027 0.056 -0.003 -0.009 0.015 0.002
(0.023) (0.031) (0.011) (0.011) (0.020) (0.019)
Only reserved 2003 0.003 -0.007 0.000
(0.026) (0.011) (0.018)
Only reserved once (either 2003 or 1998) 0.031 -0.004 0.012
(0.022) (0.008) (0.013)
Reserved 1998 and 2003 0.076 0.079 0.037 0.036 0.057 0.057
(0.041) (0.041) (0.014) (0.014) (0.032) (0.030)
Test: Equality of reservation indicators [p values] 0.157 0.253 0.009 0.006 0.224 0.127
Year of election 2003 2008 2003 & 2008 2003 2008 2003 & 2008 2003 2008 2003 & 2008
Never reserved sample:
Mean 0.092 0.109 0.099 0.076 0.049 0.066 0.083 0.049 0.071
Standard deviation (0.290) (0.312) (0.299) (0.265) (0.216) (0.248) (0.276) (0.217) (0.257)
N 870 875 1745 3880 3431 7311 1425 1191 2616
Notes:
1 Columns (1)-(3) show regressions based on Pradhan apointments in GPs not currently reserved for women Pradhans, and columns (4)-(9) are based on GP election results for Ward Councilor seats
not currently reserved for women. | In the 2008 Panchayat elections, the third since the reservation
policy was implemented, more women were elected ward councilors and Pradhans in GPs that had
been reserved for women in the last two elections.31 The results provide striking evidence that
while ten years of exposure to women leaders may not have changed voters’ stated preference for
male leaders, by giving voters a chance to learn about the effectiveness of women leaders, they have
effectively improved women’s access to political office. | Table IV
Evaluation of Actual Pradhan: Average Effect
Male Female
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Only reserved 2003 -0.197 -0.139 -0.210 -0.152 -0.075 -0.012 -0.076 -0.015
(0.058) (0.063) (0.058) (0.063) (0.060) (0.061) (0.060) (0.062)
Reserved 1998 and 2003 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.011 -0.006 0.010 -0.004 0.011
(0.072) (0.083) (0.072) (0.083) (0.050) (0.057) (0.050) (0.057)
Only reserved 1998 0.001 -0.010 0.003 -0.009 0.037 0.018 0.040 0.021
(0.056) (0.057) (0.056) (0.056) (0.054) (0.052) (0.054) (0.052)
With pradhan characteristics controls N Y N Y N Y N Y
With pradhan action controls N N Y Y N N Y Y
Test: 2003 = both 1998 and 2003 = 1998 [p value] 0.008 0.124 0.004 0.080 0.216 0.904 0.191 0.866
Test: 2003 = both 1998 and 2003 [p value] 0.012 0.084 0.009 0.065 0.301 0.736 0.285 0.686
N 6642 6642 6642 6642 6568 6568 6568 6568
Notes:
1 The outcome variable averages across four questions: "Is Pradhan effective," and Did Pradhan: "Look after village needs"; "Look after your needs"; and "Make BPL lists
well."
2 All regressions include: (i) Block fixed effects (ii) Individual controls: age, age squared, household size, religion, caste dummies (for scheduled caste, scheduled tribe and
other backward caste), years of education, a wealth index (based on a principal component analaysis using household assets) and dummy for land ownership (iii) Village
controls: all variables in Table I (iv) Survey year and surveyor gender indicator.. Un análisis comparativo entre la palabra más positiva ('effectiveness') y la más negativa ('bias') se muestra en el gráfico adjunto.
NULL
Parsing text into sentences and tokens...DONE
Calculating pairwise sentence similarities...DONE
Applying LexRank...DONE
Formatting Output...DONE
LexRank Summary:
Table VI
Perception of Female Effectiveness as Leaders: Experimental Evidence (Speech and Vignettes)
Average effect
Male Female
(1) (2)
Panel A
Female Pradhan -0.054 -0.035
(0.027) (0.031)
Female Pradhan * ever reserved 0.091 0.024
(0.036) (0.038)
Test: female Pradhan + female Pradhan * ever reserved 0.038 -0.011
(0.023) (0.022)
Panel B
Female Pradhan * only reserved 2003 0.112 -0.001
(0.047) (0.048)
Female Pradhan * reserved 1998 & 2003 0.092 0.052
(0.062) (0.060)
Female Pradhan * only reserved 1998 0.073 0.035
(0.046) (0.045)
Test: FP* 2003 = FP* (both 1998 and 2003) = FP* 1998 [p value] 0.774 0.652
Notes:
1 The outcome variables are averages across all questions in speech and vignettes: "Is Pradhan effective?," "Cares
about villagers' welfare?," in the speech and vignettes; "Did Pradhan address villagers satisfactorily?," "Will
Pradhan allocate BPL cards well?," "Will Pradhan get resources by lobbying?," "Will Pradhan collect villagers'
share well?" and "Will Village approves Pradhan's budget?" in the speech; and "Agree with Pradhan" and "Would
vote for Pradhan" in the vignettes.
Table VII
Explicit and Implicit Preferences for Female Leaders
IAT (D-measure of bias against females) Feeling ladder
Leadership/domestic and Male/female names Male/female politician Male versus female
male/female and good/bad and good/bad Pradhan
Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Panel A
Ever reserved -0.076 0.021 -0.004 -0.007 0.014 -0.023 0.208 0.099
(0.032) (0.041) (0.031) (0.043) (0.037) (0.038) (0.112) (0.110)
Panel B
Only reserved 2003 -0.090 0.112 -0.023 0.005 0.024 -0.004 0.271 0.088
(0.041) (0.053) (0.045) (0.051) (0.051) (0.049) (0.158) (0.145)
Reserved 1998 and 2003 -0.023 -0.098 0.016 0.035 0.036 -0.011 0.063 0.053
(0.052) (0.075) (0.041) (0.074) (0.057) (0.056) (0.159) (0.152)
Only reserved 1998 -0.098 -0.022 0.001 -0.061 -0.012 -0.050 0.240 0.139
(0.042) (0.051) (0.045) (0.052) (0.048) (0.051) (0.150) (0.140)
Test: 2003 = both 1998 and 2003 = 1998 [p value] 0.402 0.021 0.756 0.316 0.704 0.709 0.560 0.875
Never reserved sample:
Mean 0.110 0.150 0.134 -0.157 0.093 -0.079 1.446 0.560
Standard deviation (0.340) (0.384) (0.425) (0.418) (0.452) (0.441) (2.655) (2.572)
N 477 357 510 408 554 510 3511 3671
Notes:
1 The outcome variables are: the difference in average response latencies between the stereotypical and non-stereotypical block in the IAT divided by the standard deviation of latencies (IAT D-
measure in Columns ((1)-(6)) and the differences in the ranking between male and female Pradhans on a scale of 1-10 (Columns (7)-(8)).
Table III
2003 and 2008 Electoral Outcomes
Pradhans Contestants Winners
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
Only reserved 1998 0.027 0.056 -0.003 -0.009 0.015 0.002
(0.023) (0.031) (0.011) (0.011) (0.020) (0.019)
Only reserved 2003 0.003 -0.007 0.000
(0.026) (0.011) (0.018)
Only reserved once (either 2003 or 1998) 0.031 -0.004 0.012
(0.022) (0.008) (0.013)
Reserved 1998 and 2003 0.076 0.079 0.037 0.036 0.057 0.057
(0.041) (0.041) (0.014) (0.014) (0.032) (0.030)
Test: Equality of reservation indicators [p values] 0.157 0.253 0.009 0.006 0.224 0.127
Year of election 2003 2008 2003 & 2008 2003 2008 2003 & 2008 2003 2008 2003 & 2008
Never reserved sample:
Mean 0.092 0.109 0.099 0.076 0.049 0.066 0.083 0.049 0.071
Standard deviation (0.290) (0.312) (0.299) (0.265) (0.216) (0.248) (0.276) (0.217) (0.257)
N 870 875 1745 3880 3431 7311 1425 1191 2616
Notes:
1 Columns (1)-(3) show regressions based on Pradhan apointments in GPs not currently reserved for women Pradhans, and columns (4)-(9) are based on GP election results for Ward Councilor seats
not currently reserved for women.
In the 2008 Panchayat elections, the third since the reservation
policy was implemented, more women were elected ward councilors and Pradhans in GPs that had
been reserved for women in the last two elections.31 The results provide striking evidence that
while ten years of exposure to women leaders may not have changed voters’ stated preference for
male leaders, by giving voters a chance to learn about the effectiveness of women leaders, they have
effectively improved women’s access to political office.
Table IV
Evaluation of Actual Pradhan: Average Effect
Male Female
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Only reserved 2003 -0.197 -0.139 -0.210 -0.152 -0.075 -0.012 -0.076 -0.015
(0.058) (0.063) (0.058) (0.063) (0.060) (0.061) (0.060) (0.062)
Reserved 1998 and 2003 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.011 -0.006 0.010 -0.004 0.011
(0.072) (0.083) (0.072) (0.083) (0.050) (0.057) (0.050) (0.057)
Only reserved 1998 0.001 -0.010 0.003 -0.009 0.037 0.018 0.040 0.021
(0.056) (0.057) (0.056) (0.056) (0.054) (0.052) (0.054) (0.052)
With pradhan characteristics controls N Y N Y N Y N Y
With pradhan action controls N N Y Y N N Y Y
Test: 2003 = both 1998 and 2003 = 1998 [p value] 0.008 0.124 0.004 0.080 0.216 0.904 0.191 0.866
Test: 2003 = both 1998 and 2003 [p value] 0.012 0.084 0.009 0.065 0.301 0.736 0.285 0.686
N 6642 6642 6642 6642 6568 6568 6568 6568
Notes:
1 The outcome variable averages across four questions: "Is Pradhan effective," and Did Pradhan: "Look after village needs"; "Look after your needs"; and "Make BPL lists
well."
2 All regressions include: (i) Block fixed effects (ii) Individual controls: age, age squared, household size, religion, caste dummies (for scheduled caste, scheduled tribe and
other backward caste), years of education, a wealth index (based on a principal component analaysis using household assets) and dummy for land ownership (iii) Village
controls: all variables in Table I (iv) Survey year and surveyor gender indicator.Reutilización
Cómo citar
BibTeX
@online{robano2024,
author = {Robano, Virginia},
title = {Resumen del artículo Powerful Women: Does Exposure Reduce
Bias?},
date = {2024-04-12},
url = {https://ceibal-fichas-genero-stem.netlify.app/posts/powerful women/},
langid = {es}
}
Por favor, cita este trabajo como:
Robano, Virginia. 2024. “Resumen del artículo Powerful Women: Does
Exposure Reduce Bias?” April 12, 2024. https://ceibal-fichas-genero-stem.netlify.app/posts/powerful
women/.