Debunking the quality gap myth: women, youths and immigrants do not need to be more loyal to run for office

Does the underrepresentation of women, young people, and immigrants in politics stem more from supply-side or demand-side factors? Earlier studies have suggested a ‘quality gap’ between candidates from politically underrepresented groups compared to those from privileged groups, leaning towards demand-side explanations. More recent research, however, does not find evidence that party selectors harbor outright biases against aspirants from politically marginalized social groups. To establish the extent to which party-led recruitment practices play a part in shaping the existing imbalances in descriptive representation, it is essential to investigate whether political parties apply their candidate selection criteria differently for aspirants from different social groups. In this paper, we zoom in on loyalty to the party line and examine whether more loyalty is expected from aspirants belonging to politically underrepresented groups. Using original conjoint experiment data from Sweden, we find no evidence that Swedish party selectors expect aspirants representing different political outgroups to demonstrate greater loyalty to be considered as desirable candidates. We do, however, find that women selectors demand more loyalty from all the aspirants. This suggests that the norms governing the political workplace might have a stronger effect on members of political outgroups, thus accounting for the observed quality gaps. These findings are crucial components in our ongoing effort to unravel the complexities obstructing more equitable political representation.