Incumbents often serve as critical gatekeepers in the recruitment of new candidates and may even designate their successors upon retirement. Some existing research indicates that the gender of gatekeepers is likely to affect the recruitment of female candidates, a dynamic of particular concern in countries like Japan, where political offices are predominantly held by men. However, it remains unclear whether the underrepresentation of women stems from male incumbents actively discriminating against female candidates during the recruitment process. Through a survey experiment involving over 7,000 elected local politicians in Japan, we examine gender biases in the successor selection process and attitudes toward female candidacy. Contrary to our expectations, the results reveal that local politicians, irrespective of their own gender, are more inclined to nominate women over men as their successors. They also believe that these female candidates would receive support from their local constituencies. These findings suggest that the selection practices of incumbents may not significantly contribute to the underrepresentation of women in politics.

Existing research suggests that ethnoracial majority voters favor coethnic candidates over those from ethnoracial minorities due to stereotypical inferences about policy positions based on ethnic group and shared group identity. This study examines whether coethnic bias can be mitigated when ethnic minority candidates adopt policy positions favorable to ethnoracial majorities and share a common group identity with them. We conducted a pre-registered survey experiment with Japanese voters, using vignettes that varied a hypothetical candidate’s origin, name, and migrant policy proposals. Our findings indicate that ethnoracial majority respondents do not necessarily disfavor ethnic minority candidates. Furthermore, policy positions and shared identity do not mitigate candidate preferences. However, this null result is driven by heterogeneous responses to the candidates’ ethnic origins based on perceived threats. Voters who perceive higher threats from ethnoracial minorities are more likely to negatively evaluate ethnic minority candidates, whereas those perceiving lower threats tend to evaluate them positively.

Data and code to replicate results reported in "Too Young to Run? Voter Evaluations of the Age of Candidates." Abstract: Why do elected officials tend to be much older than most of their constituents? To understand the mechanisms behind the underrepresentation of young people in public office, we conducted two novel survey experiments in Japan. We asked voters in these experiments to evaluate the photos of hypothetical candidates while altering candidates’ faces using age regression and progression software. Contrary to the observed age demographics of politicians, the voters in our experiments strongly disliked older candidates but viewed younger and middle-aged candidates as equally favorable. Voters saw young candidates as less experienced but also more likely to focus on many policy issues over a longer period, including education, childcare, climate change, anti-corruption measures, and multiculturalism. Young voters especially liked young candidates, suggesting that greater youth turnout could increase youth representation. Conversely, elderly candidates were universally panned, seen as the least competent, least likely to focus on most policy issues, and least electable. Voter biases thus do not seem to be a driving factor behind the shortage of young politicians. To the contrary, voters appear perfectly willing to cast their ballots for young candidates.

Previous studies have shown that people oppose refugee resettlement more strongly after being exposed to frames that depict refugees as threatening. However, all people may not perceive such threats the same way. Based on contact theory, we hypothesize that the treatment effects of threatening frames on people's opposition to refugee resettlement are conditional on their contact experience with foreign-national residents. The results of our pre-registered experiment in Japan indicate that exposure to threatening information does not change attitudes toward refugee resettlement among those living in municipalities where the number of foreign-national residents is rapidly <i>increasing</i>. Combined with the analyses of other subjective measures of contact with foreigners, some suggestive patterns emerge that natives with conscious and <i>positive</i> interactions with outgroup members may be unaffected by anti-refugee rhetoric and threatening frames.

Replication files associated with the paper: “Why Do Citizens Prefer High-Skilled Immigrants to Low-Skilled Immigrants? Identifying Causal Mechanisms of Immigration Preferences with a Survey Experiment.”

The striking under-representation of women in Japan has been partly attributed to gender stereotypes and prejudice toward female leadership among voters. We examine whether and to what extent candidates get rewarded or punished when they deviate from the behavioral expectations associated with their gender roles and images. Our conjoint experiment results in Japan demonstrate that not only are female candidates disadvantaged compared to their male counterparts, but also that they could lose support when they diverge from gender-based behavioral expectations. Our findings suggest that female candidates face a difficult dilemma in that they must weigh the cost of losing support for failing to conform to gender-based expectations, against the general loss of support they would incur for conforming to these expectations.

Replication Data for: "The Contingent Effects of Candidate Sex on Voter Choice"

Replication materials for "Reassessing Public Support for a Female President"