Our paper explores to what extent male and female candidates differ in their campaign strategies. Some studies (e.g. Hernson, Lay and Stokes 2005; Larson 2001) have shown that gender matters for the issues political candidates address during their campaigns. Little, if anything, is however known about the extent to which male and female candidates use different strategies during their campaigns. The conclusion of previous research (e.g. Thomas 1992) that female MPs tend to focus more on constituency work than their male counterparts, might suggest that female MPs are inclined to run their campaign more locally and through face to face contacts with constituents than men. If male and female candidates are indeed found to use different campaign strategies, does that matter for their prospects of being elected? In other words, do differences in campaign strategy explain gender differences in the likelihood to get elected? Or does gender interact with campaign strategy, which would indicate that “successful” strategies are different for male and female candidates? To answer our research questions, we draw on the 2005-2013 Comparative Candidates Survey (CCS). The survey compiles comparable political candidate data from Australia, Canada, and 12 European countries (Austria, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, and Switzerland), allowing us to investigate possible cross-national differences in gender and campaign strategies. To analyse the data, we make use of multivariate Logit and Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression analysis. The paper contributes to the existing literature on gender and representation by exploring gender differences in campaign strategies and the consequences in terms of being elected of different campaign strategies among male and female candidates.
