Hearts or Minds? Men, Women and Candidate Evaluations in the 2005 British General Election

1. Hearts or Minds? Men, Women and Candidate Evaluations in the 2005 British General Election Dr. Rosie Campbell (Birkbeck) Kristi Winters (Essex)

2. Media portrayal • “Blair has lost women's hearts and minds - and their votes” (Telegraph 30.09.04) • “The end of the affair” (The Guardian 08.06.04) • “Why all sorts of women fell out of love with New Labour” (The Guardian 06.05.05) • “We ask Blair: can you turn women on?” (Mirror.co.uk 15.04.05). • ICM polls put women’s support for Labour one point above men’s • Media speculation about the reactions of men and women to leaders are commonplace but rarely subject to rigorous testing

3. The following analysis comes from: • Evidence from focus groups • The British Election Studies (BES) of 1997, 2001 and 2005 • Our purpose is to assess whether there is evidence to support the creation of gendered models of leadership evaluation

4. The Focus Groups • Focus group results as exploratory and for hypothesis generation, therefore any findings cannot be used to make firm inferences about the wider British electorate • Six focus groups were conducted the week preceding the general election* • Took place in London and Colchester, Essex *Project funded by the British Academy grant number 40355

5. The Focus Groups • Divided by sex and age • Men’s groups Men under 40 Men of mixed age Men over 40 • Women groups Women under 40 Women of mixed age Women under 40

6. The Focus Groups • Participants were recruited by email and by paper flyer • All potential participants completed a brief questionnaire about their personal details • Stratified sampling techniques were used to obtain a mix of educational, occupation and ethnic backgrounds • Participants were paid a nominal fee to encourage a broader range of backgrounds • Sampling did not yield a representative sample of the British public but a broadly similar group of men and women, thus permitting comparisons by sex • Same questions were asked in each of the groups following a pre-designed interview schedule

7. The Focus Groups • Several areas of interest were explored. • The candidate assessment component, designed to discover whether men and women talk about political leaders in the same way • Candidate evaluation literature has developed a number of different schema that individuals might employ (Miller 1986; Stokes 1966) based on: • personal characteristics and appearances, • perceived competence or integrity or • policy positions or ideological commitments • The focus group research attempted to establish whether the same schema could be applied to men and women.

8. General discussion • Respondents often mentioned leaders without prompting. • Comments about Tony Blair were generally negative and few comments were made about the other party leaders.

9. Candidate assessment component • Photographs of each of the three main party leaders were distributed • Looked at each individual, silently brainstorm the words that came to mind and to write them down • Asked to circle or star those words which would be important when deciding for whom to vote • In the brainstorming session respondents were often surprised that they had attributed positive characteristics to Tony Blair

10. Analysis • Four main themes were developed out of the language men and women used to describe political leaders: • Personal assessments • Competence assessments • Trust assessments • Mentioning political policies

11. Extracts of Women’s Responses to Tony Blair’s photo Spin Untrustworthy Evangelical Sold-out the party Managerial No philosophy Untrustworthy Presidential Trying too hard Teeth suspiciously white Leadership qualities Dictator Controlling Quick witted Knowledgeable Practical Preachy Statesman-like Well-meaning Reliable Pragmatic Practical Weasel Liar No principles President

12. Extracts of Men’s Responses to Tony Blair’ Confident Let down Liar Competent Strong Weasel Liar No principles President Good politician Persuasive Stubborn Hard working Charismatic Traitor Yuppie-barrister Religionist Thatcherite Smarmy Slick Confident Looks intelligent Criminal – Iraq Trying to please everyone Capable and serious leader however I feel betrayed by his stance in the war on Iraq

14. Results for Tony Blair • High number of negative comments • Rated his competence in a very positive light. • Nearly 30 percent of participants made positive comments about his competence – the highest among all three political leaders – while fewer than 1 percent described him as incompetent.

15. Follow up discussion • ‘I have got liar for Blair, weasel, no principles and running as fugitive. Interestingly, I have also got presidential and that is the only thing I have circled out of the three, because - I said this before- I think he is an incredibly clever man. Clever in the image he portrays, what he taps into his style, the fact that he doesn't say.’ • ‘And Blair, out of the three - I mean I hate to say this because I agree with everything you've got to say about the war and everybody despises him - but there is something very presidential about him and statesman like. I think he plays that well.’ • ‘And you had a surprise too? What was that? Yeah, because I've just got too many nice comments about Tony Blair!’

16. Extract of Women’s Responses to Michael Howard’s Photo Unfortunate manner Smug Calculating Sound-bite policies Insincere Establishment A bit dull Calm Quiet Reserved Hypocrite Ambitious Unprincipled Scaremonger Careerist Smarmy bloke Tactician He isn’t as honest as Major or as funny as Maggie I’ll blame him if Labour wins Appeals to the lowest common denominator Non-inclusive in politics – directed against some elements Two-faced on the surface-could be nice underneath

17. Extract of Men’s Responses to Michael Howard’s Photo Racist Right-wing Draconian Thatcherite Ineffective Washed-up Politician Smarmy Sly Conniving Despot Hidden agenda Deceptive Vapid Tainted Timewarp Reactionary Single-issue Thatcher Loser Quick off the mark Good leader Save the pound Trying to change a party Tough on spending

19. Results and Follow up discussion • Many of the responses to Michael Howard associated him with the past. • ‘Whereas with Michael Howard on the other hand, it seems like him out of a eighties movie or something’ and • ‘And Howard is... he is the minister of unemployment in the nasty party.’

20. Extract of Women’s Responses to Charles Kennedy’s Photo Wishy washy Entertainer Good on the Iraq war Human/humane Candid Plausible Well meaning Common sense Boring Direct Inclusive Almost believeable Seems honestly keen Decent bloke Warm Friendly Approachable Cuddly Dodgy drunk uncle Passive No hope because of electoral system More respectful of electorate Sounds as if he speaks from understanding, not from a script Financial realistic, not promising unachieveable Can probably put up shelves but can he run the country? Could have a good conversation down the pub

21. Extract of Men’s Responses to Charles Kennedy’s Photo Drunk In the wrong job Bum face Politician Alternative option Slow Not clear what to do Sleepy Cuddly Nice but weak Ineffective Ginger Fluffy A bit boring Ineffectual Unorganised No charisma Hard-working Resourceful Human Irrelevant Unsuccessful Friendly Thwarted Good intentions but weak Potential change Does not inspire confidence Unrealistic politics No leadership skills

23. Results and follow up discussion • Charles Kennedy assessments are the only ones to show any indications of gender differences in candidate assessments. • Differences in personal assessments and competence assessments. • Responses to Charles Kennedy seemed to reflect recent media reporting. He was commonly referred to as drunk or dozy: • ‘And Kennedy I just think is a guy to go to the pub with, have a couple of pints.’ • ‘I put drunk.’ • ‘And I look and Kennedy appears sleepy too, you know?’

24. Conclusions • NO indication that women were more likely than men to have a personal or emotional based evaluation schema than men • One instance out of three provides an indication that men and women may evaluate candidates in different ways it was situational and not systematic • Both men and women used personal, competence, trust and issue based criteria for evaluating candidates • Overall differences between men and women’s description of the leaders were minimal