Does beauty matter in politics?

Does beauty matter in
politics?
Doc. Niclas Berggren, Ph.D.
Research Institute of Industrial Economics (IFN) and
Department of Institutional Economics (KIE), University of Economics in Prague
Good looking children and adults
Judged more positively
Treated better by others
Better self-perception
Exhibit more positive behaviors
and traits
Sources:
Eagly et al. (1991);
Langlois et al. (2000)
Beauty premium in the US labor market
Looks
Wage adjusted for
other determinants
Women
Men
Above
average
8%
4%
Average
0
0
Below
average
-4%
-13%
Source: Hamermesh (2011). Beauty Pays.
The beauty difference in wages is comparable to the effect of:
• 1.5 years of schooling
• 5 years of labor market experience
• Working in a unionized workplace
In experiments, attractive people are
Believed to play more
cooperatively
Trusted more
Given higher offers
Paid more for same productivity (due to
confidence and better social skills or due to
preferences of “employers”)
The psychology of beauty
• Agreement on what constitutes human beauty, and
especially human ugliness, is formed very early in
life—probably during infancy.
• Beautiful faces are associated with:
– Symmetry
– Youthfulness
“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”
• Yes, but there is still much agreement:
“The meta-analyses showed that, both within and
across cultures, people agreed about who is and is
not attractive.” (Langlois et al. 2000)
Beauty in politics
Judged more positively
Treated better by others
Exhibit more positive behaviors
and traits
My own research
• How is the success of political candidats in
elections affected by their beauty?
• In other words: Is there a beauty premium in the
political market, as in the labor market?
• Look at Finland.
Source: Berggren, Jordahl & Poutvaara (2010). ”The Looks of a Winner:
Beauty and Electoral Success.” Journal of Public Economics.
Institutional facts about Finland
• Proportional electoral system with multi-member
districts.
• Each party has a list of candidates in each district;
each voter must choose one candidate on one list.
• More equal gender distribution in votes and
parliamentary seats than in most countries.
• Parliamentary and municipal elections.
The Internet survey
• 1,929 photos (52 percent male candidates and 48
female)
• 2,772 non-Finnish respondents
• Most respondents from the United States (859),
Sweden (850), France (261) and Germany (220)
• 66 percent men and 34 women
• 46 percent students
Internet survey: Photos used by Finnish
parties evaluated by foreign respondents
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Our results
• Beautiful candidates are more successful.
• Sucess = vote share (number of personal votes /
average votes) on a list
• Control for competence, trustworthiness, gender,
age, occupation, education.
Our results
• National election: +1 beauty  +20% votes
• Municipal election: +1 beauty  +17% votes
Candidate appearance in elections
• Positive effect of beauty or perceived competence
on votes established in several countries:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Australia
Brazil
Finland
France
Germany
Japan
Mexico
Switzerland
USA
Does this matter politically?
• Difficult to say if and how the looks of
politicians influence the quality of political
decisions.
• However, beauty and beauty premia could
differ between left and right politicians.
New study: Beauty on the left and right
• Does beauty (and competence) differ?
– Look at several countries: Finland, Australia, France, Sweden
and the US.
• Do beauty premia differ?
– That is, does the way electoral success depends on beauty
differ between left and right?
– Look at Finland, with our own, better data.
Source: Berggren, Jordahl and Poutvaara (2013). ”The Right Look:
Conservative Politicians Look Better and Voters Reward It”. Unpublished.
Perceptions of female candidates,
parliamentary election
5
4,5
4
P<0.01
P<0.01
3,5
Left female
candidates
Right female
candidades
3
2,5
2
1,5
1
Beauty
Competence
Perceptions of male candidates,
parliamentary election
5
4,5
P<0.01
4
3,5
P<0.01
Left male
candidates
Right male
candidates
3
2,5
2
1,5
1
Beauty
Competence
Party differences
• In Finland, right candidates look better and more
competent than left candidates
• This is not explained by
– Political orientation of the respondents
– Differences between Swedish and US respondents
– What candidates wear
– The quality of the photographs
The pattern is general
Beauty
advantage of
right candidates
Competence
advantage of
right candidates
Australia, House of
Representatives
32%***
n.a.
Finland, municipal
46%***
27%***
Finland, parliamentary
35%***
48%***
France, parliamentary
n.a.
59%***
Sweden, MPs
20%
41%***
USA, gubernatorial
n.a.
19%**
USA, Senate
n.a.
10%
* P<0.1. ** P<0.05, *** P<0.01
Do beauty premia differ?
• Does a given beauty level lead to more votes for
candidates on the right?
• Yes – in low-information (municipal) elections).
Our results
• National election: +1 beauty  +21% votes for left
and right candidates
• Municipal elections: +1 beauty  +16% votes for left
candidates and 31% votes for right candidates –
double effect!
Municipal
elections
Parliamentary
election
Voter information in Finland
• Municipal election: low-information
–
–
–
–
First stage
Few professional politicians
Posters and newspaper ads
Low campaign spending
• Parliamentary election: high-information
–
–
–
–
Second stage
Many professional politicians
Radio and tv ads
High campaign spending
Explanations?
• Why do politicians on the right look better?
• Why is beauty valued in politics?
• Why does beauty give more votes on the right (in
low-information elections)?
– But note that left candidates also benefit from beauty and
equally much in national elections!
Why do politicians on the right look
better?
• Beautiful people could be conservative to a
higher degree
– Self-interest: make more money  gain from the right
– View the world as just: they achieve higher social
status, are treated better throughout life and are
happier  do not see a need for leftist policies.
– Self-reported attractiveness negatively related to
egalitarianism.
– US adolescents: beauty and conservatism positively
related among men (but not among women).
• Larger beauty premium may attract goodlooking candidates to the right
Why is beauty valued in politics?
• Both voters on the left and on the right value
beauty in candidates.
• Two possible explanations:
– Beautiful people are perceived as more socially competent –
which enables them to get more things done.
– Voters like looking at beautiful candidates.
Why does beauty give more votes on the
right (in low-information elections)?
• Beauty as a cue for non-egalitarianism
– Low information: do not know much about candidates.
– Attractiveness and non-egalitarianism positively related
(Price at al. 2011)
– People are able to distinguish left and right candidates by
looking at their faces (Rule and Ambady 2010)
• Voters on the right do not
– associate beauty more with competence
– have a stronger appreciation of beauty.
Conclusions
• Beauty gives electoral success.
• Candidates on the right look better in all studied
countries: Australia, Finland, France, Sweden and
the United States.
• This is likely to tilt electoral outcomes and politics to
the right.
Conclusions (cont.)
• Voters prefer beauty and competent looks in
general, but they also use beauty as a cue for
conservatism in low-information elections.
• Increased importance of television and the internet
as well as increased political mobility of voters may
have improved the electoral chances of the right.
Why is this important?
• It gives us deeper insights about how political
processes (and indeed human beings) work.
• Not everything in politics is about facts or values:
people also matter. Not least their beauty.
• This enables us to ask: Is this a good or bad thing?
– Good: Cues may be good approximations of quality.
– Bad: May disfavor the competent and ugly and systematically
favor one political side.
• Institutional implications:
– Electoral system: proportional vs. majoritarian.
– List system: candidate vs. party choice.
• Beauty is a serious issue – but also an enjoyable
one to study!