The Emotional Tightrope

When a female leader appears to lack feeling, she might be labeled an ice queen; if she cries, she’s too sensitive. Politicians like Hillary Clinton walk this fine line daily, seeking to project a balance of warmth and competence.

In The Leadership Quarterly, Yale psychologist Victoria L. Brescoll reports that participants in a study were more likely to judge a hypothetical leader’s decisions as “emotional” and to question the leader’s qualifications if the leader was female. At the same time, women in the public eye are expected to be warm and feminine, research suggests. The challenge for female candidates, according to Susan J. Carroll, a political scientist at Rutgers University, is that for them, “emotion is seen as counter to rationality.”

One way women can manage this bind is by showing “counter-stereotypic qualities”—essentially, emphasizing their toughness—says University of Alabama political scientist Nichole M. Bauer, who recently studied how people react to character descriptions of fake female candidates. Many women in the political limelight, such as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, speak in a forceful and controlled way so as to come across as “passionate, not emotional,” Carroll says. Yet Bauer’s research also indicates that acting tough reflects positively on female candidates only among voters in their own party.

Clinton’s presidential campaign seems to be pursuing a best-of-both-worlds strategy: She brandishes her leadership credentials, Carroll says, but she’s also focused on “showing her human side,” talking about her grandchildren, laughing, and striving to achieve balance in voters’ eyes.