Influencing Elite Opinion on Gender Equality through Framing: A Survey Experiment of Elite Support for Corporate Board Gender Quotas

Abstract

This article contributes to both the scholarly debates on the controversies over gender quotas and the body of knowledge on framing effects through an investigation of whether national elites, individuals in top positions across 10 sectors of Norwegian society, are susceptible to positive framing of corporate board gender quotas (CBQs). Elites are thought to be more resistant to framing, and their predispositions are found to be stronger and more consistent than those of the general public. However, few, if any, studies have empirically investigated framing effects on national elites. We report on an experiment embedded in a comprehensive survey of Norwegian national elites. The results clearly indicate that elites are susceptible to framing. When exposed to frames highlighting both male dominance among the business elite and the success of CBQs in achieving gender balance on corporate boards, elites were significantly more likely to support gender quotas. Framing effects were primarily found among men, not women, and contrary to expectation, effects were stronger among the business elite. Thus, we should direct our attention to how the framing of issues also influences key stakeholders, and policy makers should consider opposition to gender equality measures as something that has the propensity to change.

Elites on Equality: Room for Gender Balance and Ethnic Diversity in Leadership Positions?

“…This pattern of less support also applies to police and judiciary, politics and state administration, however the relationships are not strong. Especially for the strongly male-dominated business elite, this finding fits into a larger picture of this elite group being comparatively less supportive of gender equality policies (Teigen et al, 2019;Teigen and Karlsen, 2020).…”

“…To the extent that the lack of gender balance and ethnic diversity in leadership are caused by institutionalized practices such as network recruitment and discrimination, elite beliefs in this reality have a strong bearing on their will to implement measures to increase diversity in top positions. This is an important finding as the beliefs and attitudes of elites are found to change over time (Teigen et al, 2019) and also by the framing of an issue (Teigen and Karlsen, 2020). Consequently, a knowledge-based public discourse on the reasons for categorical inequalities may prove to be important for future support of ameliorative measures.…”

“…Second, we investigate whether the relationship between causes and solutions varies by the underrepresented group in question. To the extent that elite research has focused on perceptions of inequality at all, the literature has predominately focused on gender inequalities and the perpetuation of male dominance (Teigen et al, 2019;Teigen and Karlsen, 2020;Teigen and Wängnerud, 2009;Vianello and Moore, 2000;Wängnerud and Niklasson, 2006). By systematically comparing how elite groups explain the lack of both gender balance and ethnic diversity, we take into account that a growing share of the population in Western countries, including Norway, is non-white, and respond to a recent call to include a broader perspective on inequality in elite research (Khan, 2012, 373).…”

How perceptions and information about women’s descriptive representation affect support for positive action measures

“…Future research could usefully explore in greater detail why – as our analyses showed – receiving the correct information matters for those who overestimate women’s support, while it has little effect among the uninformed citizens and none among those who underestimate women’s representation. Furthermore, work by Teigen and Karlsen (2020) suggests that a positive framing of information increases support for quotas. Therefore, it would be interesting to explore whether the provided information about the current level of representation has different effects on support for quotas dependent on the framing of the information.…”

“…The available public opinion literature has shown that support for gender quotas is quite mixed across nations, but tends to be relatively low (Barnes and Córdova, 2016; Beauregard, 2018; Bolzendahl and Coffé, 2020; Keenan and McElroy, 2017). Although quotas have been introduced in many countries, they are often considered as controversial (Bacchi, 2006; Teigen and Karlsen, 2020). Therefore, understanding public support is important for the legitimacy and effectiveness of quotas, and more generally positive action measures (Page and Shapiro, 1983).…”