The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
All Male Panels? Representation and Democratic Legitimacy
Abstract
What does women's presence in political decision‐making bodies signal to citizens? Do these signals differ based on the body's policy decisions? And do women and men respond to women's presence similarly? Though scholars have demonstrated the substantive and symbolic benefits of women's representation, little work has examined how women's presence affects citizens' perceptions of democratic legitimacy. We test the relationship between representation and legitimacy beliefs through survey experiments on a nationally representative sample of U.S. citizens. First, we find that women's equal presence legitimizes decisions that go against women's interests. We show suggestive evidence that this effect is particularly pronounced among men, who tend to hold less certain views on women's rights. Second, across decision outcomes and issue areas, women's equal presence legitimizes decision‐making processes and confers institutional trust and acquiescence. These findings add new theoretical insights into how, when, and for whom inclusive representation increases perceptions of democratic legitimacy.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988) · Critical Issues in Social Justice · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-2115-4 · Cited by 6,585 · cited 1×
“…in (or influence over) public decision making–such as through direct voting, expert decision making, and deliberation—shapes these beliefs (e.g., De Fine Licht et al. 2014; Esaiasson, Gilljam, and Persson 2012; Esaiasson et al. 2016; Lind and Tyler 1988; Persson, Esaiasson, and Gilljam 2013).”
BackgroundFenichel Pitkin, H. (1967) · doi:10.1525/9780520340503 · Cited by 5,162
Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk
Berinsky, A. J., Huber, G. A., & Lenz, G. S. (2012) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpr057 · Cited by 4,008
Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent "Yes"
Mansbridge, J. (1999) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.2307/2647821 · Cited by 2,939
Psychological Perspectives on Legitimacy and Legitimation
Tyler, T. R. (2006) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190038 · Cited by 2,381
A Framework for Political Analysis.
Rogow, A. A., & Easton, D. (1966) · Midwest Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2108792 · Cited by 1,467
Phillips, A. (1998) · Democracy · doi:10.1093/0198294158.001.0001 · Cited by 1,395
Powerful Women: Does Exposure Reduce Bias? *
Beaman, L., Chattopadhyay, R., Duflo, E., Pande, R., & Topalova, P. (2009) · Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/qjec.2009.124.4.1497 · Cited by 1,060
The Concept of Representation in Contemporary Democratic Theory
Urbinati, N., & Warren, M. E. (2008) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.053006.190533 · Cited by 956
Cited by
BOS, A. L., GREENLEE, J. S., HOLMAN, M. R., OXLEY, Z. M., & LAY, J. C. (2022) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055421001027 · Cited by 250
Public Perceptions of Women’s Inclusion and Feelings of Political Efficacy
STAUFFER, K. E. (2021) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055421000678 · Cited by 117
Metadata
- Authors
- Clayton, A., O'Brien, D. Z., & Piscopo, J. M.
- Venue
- American Journal of Political Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-09-25
- Volume
- 63
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 113-129
- ISSN
- 0092-5853 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5907
- OpenAlex
- W2893278434
- Cited by
- 322
- References
- 49
- FWCI
- 46.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: All Male Panels? Representation and Democratic Legitimacy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/ajps.12391
- The paper
- Clayton, A., O'Brien, D. Z., & Piscopo, J. M. (2019). All Male Panels? Representation and Democratic Legitimacy. American Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12391
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.