IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/canjec/v58y2025i1p97-108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the empirical validity of “Gendered reactions to terrorist attacks can cause slumps not bumps” (Holman et al. 2022)

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Jetter
  • Kieran Stockley

Abstract

M. R. Holman, J. L. Merolla and A. Zechmeister (2022) propose women (compared to men) political leaders experience significant drops in public approval ratings after a transnational terrorist attack. After documenting how survey‐based evaluations of then‐Prime Minister Theresa May suffered after the 2017 Manchester Arena attack, Holman et al. (2022) assemble a country–quarter level panel database to explore the generality of their hypothesis. They report evidence suggesting women (compared to men) leaders systematically experience decreased public approval rates after major transnational terrorist attacks (p$$ p $$‐value of 0.020). We find that result disappears once any of the following adjustments is implemented: (i) excluding election quarter covariates (p=0.104$$ p=0.104 $$), (ii) correcting objective coding errors in the election quarter covariates (p=0.058$$ p=0.058 $$), (iii) excluding the May–Manchester observation (p=0.098$$ p=0.098 $$) or (iv) clustering standard errors at the country level (p=0.558$$ p=0.558 $$). Exploring all 25$$ {2}^5 $$ combinations of the five control groups Holman et al. (2022) incorporate in their specification, none of them clears the 5% threshold of statistical significance once the corrected election quarter variables are employed. We conclude that the empirical evidence does not provide sufficient support for Holman et al.'s (2022) abstract claim that “conventional theory on rally events requires revision: women leaders cannot count on rallies following major terrorist attacks.” De la validité empirique de l'hypothèse avancée dans l'article « Gendered reactions to terrorist attacks can cause slumps not bumps » (Holman et coll., 2022). Mirya R. Holman, Jennifer L. Merolla et Elizabeth J. Zechmeister (2002) proposent que les dirigeantes (par rapport aux dirigeants) politiques voient leur cote d'approbation publique baisser de façon considérable après un attentat terroriste transnational. Après avoir décrit la façon dont les évaluations par sondage de Theresa May, alors première ministre, ont souffert après l'attentat au Manchester Arena en 2017, les autrices assemblent une base de données trimestrielles recueillies au moyen d'un panel à l'échelon du pays afin d'explorer la généralité de leur hypothèse. Elles font état de données probantes indiquant que les dirigeantes (par rapport aux dirigeants) connaissent systématiquement des taux d'approbation publique inférieurs après des attaques terroristes transnationales majeures (valeur p de 0,020). Nous constatons que ce résultat disparaît lorsque l'un des ajustements suivants est mis en œCuvre : (i) exclusion des covariables du trimestre électoral (p = 0,104); (ii) correction des erreurs de codage objectives dans les covariables du trimestre électoral (p = 0,058); (iii) exclusion de l'observation de l'attaque perpétrée à Manchester au mois de mai (p = 0,098); (iv) regroupement des erreurs‐types à l'échelon du pays (p = 0,558). En explorant les 25 combinaisons des cinq groupes témoins que les autrices intègrent à leurs spécifications, aucune d'entre elles ne franchit le seuil de 5 % de signification statistique une fois que les variables corrigées des trimestres électoraux sont employées. Nous concluons que les données probantes empiriques n'étayent pas suffisamment l'affirmation du résumé des autrices selon laquelle « la théorie conventionnelle sur les rassemblements doit être révisée : les dirigeantes ne peuvent pas compter sur des rassemblements à la suite d'attaques terroristes majeures ».

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Jetter & Kieran Stockley, 2025. "On the empirical validity of “Gendered reactions to terrorist attacks can cause slumps not bumps” (Holman et al. 2022)," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(1), pages 97-108, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:58:y:2025:i:1:p:97-108
    DOI: 10.1111/caje.12692
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12692
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/caje.12692?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:58:y:2025:i:1:p:97-108. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5982 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.