Gendered views on immigration policy stances? The case of Japan

Abstract Studies in political science have revealed that voters evaluate candidates’ policy platforms based on gendered views, where women are expected to handle issues such as education well, while men are perceived to be better at issues such as national security. However, the extent to which voters’ views are gendered on immigration policy is less known, as existing theories offer varying interpretations of whether this issue is more aligned with the feminine or masculine stereotype. This paper empirically examines gendered evaluations of immigration policy platforms by conducting a survey experiment in Japan. Our experimental vignette presents a hypothetical candidate who is affiliated with a traditionally anti-immigration party but supports expanding immigration. We manipulate the gender of the candidate and the gendered framing of the position, and examine their interaction effects on attitudes to the candidate. Our experimental results show that the respondents do not evaluate the candidate based on gender and its interaction with the framing of the policy, suggesting that gender bias in voter evaluations may not be as severe as the literature expects in the immigration policy area.