Tiffany D. Barnes, Charles Crabtree, Akitaka Matsuo, Yoshikuni Ono, Journal of Politics, April 2024

How do candidates use emotive language during elections? This study finds that women candidates are disproportionately penalised for using negative language – which limits the strategies at their disposal.

Leveraging approximately 165,000 tweets from 2,662 UK general election candidates, the study shows that women are more positive and less negative than men, regardless of their government/incumbent status.

Sentiment analysis of over a million replies indicates that women may avoid negativity because they are disproportionately penalised for negative emoting – garnering more negative replies and fewer likes than men. Together, these findings suggest women are not simply socialised to be more positive, but also, they are strategically motivated to behave in gender-typical ways to appeal to voters and avoid backlash on the campaign trail.

“Not all candidates … benefit equally from emotive language. Women challengers and opposition members may face a double bind during campaigns, making it less likely that they benefit from negative emoting. Men are stereotyped as tough and aggressive, while women are expected to be compassionate, gentle, and likable … Even when critiques are delivered without incivility, negative emoting can reduce perceived warmth and likability; thus, the same negative emoting that can aid men may trigger backlash for women.”