2016/10/18 by Eelco Harteveld, Elisabeth Ivarsflaten · 168 citations
Psychology · Social Sciences · #Electoral Systems and Political Participation #Gender Politics and Representation #Government (linguistics) #Immigration #Law #Normative #Political economy #Political science #Politics #Populism, Right-Wing Movements #Prejudice (legal term) #Psychology #Social psychology #Sociology #Voting
paper · open access · doi:10.1017/s0007123415000745
published in British Journal of Political Science 48(2), 369-384 (Cambridge University Press)
openalex publication_date 2016/10/18 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01
Radical Right Parties (RRPs) consistently attract more male than female voters. Puzzlingly, there is no equally consistent gender difference in policy preferences on the main issues of these parties – immigration and minority integration policies. Indeed, in some countries, for instance the UK, women have as restrictive immigration policy preferences as men, but are still less likely to vote for RRPs. This article proposes a novel answer to this gender gap puzzle that emphasizes the normative conflicts about prejudice and discrimination that surround RRPs across Europe. It uses representative survey data to show, for the first time, that women are more likely than men to be motivated to control prejudice, and that this difference in motivations has political consequences. More specifically, the study demonstrates that the higher prevalence of internal motivation to control prejudice among women accounts for the gender gap in voting for RRPs that become trapped in conflicts over discrimination and prejudice. Voting patterns for RPPs that have been able to defuse normative concerns about prejudice, such as the Progress Party currently in government in Norway, are different.