Revising Role Congruity Theory: Understanding Bias toward Women Politicians in Latin America

Gender role congruity theory states that, because men dominate politics, politics is associated with masculine traits, and that congruity gives an electoral advantage to men (vs. women) who run for office. While gender role congruity theory has been extensively studied in the U.S. context, its applicability to other regions of the world has been given scant consideration. To study how bias against women candidates manifests in a distinct set of contexts, I assess the theory in four Latin-American countries. The results support the first premise of role congruity theory: there is congruity between the stereotypical profile of political leadership and politicians who are men, and an incongruity between leadership and women candidates. However, contrary to the second premise: this incongruity benefits women politicians. Latin American publics assess women as better political leaders than men. I posit that one factor that might explain this scenario is the presence of women in the public space. I find evidence that high evaluations of women candidates stem from an idealization of women in politics. Actually experiencing the leadership of a women President and identifying a real women politician negatively affects how individuals evaluate abstract women candidates.