21U C R UN D E R G R A D U A T ERE S E A R C HJO U R N A LThe 2008 Presidential Election Gender Gap:The Effects of Prejudicial Attitudes on Voting IntentionsVernyta Moore, Carolyn B. MurrayContributor: Arpi FestekjianDepartment of PsychologyUniversity of California, RiversideVernyta Moore is a graduatingsenior with a major in Psychology.Her research interests include theenhancement and maintenance ofphysical, psychological (mentaland emotional), social andspiritual well-being and function-ing of individuals, families, smallgroups and communities. She iscurrently completing her Honorsthesis for the Upper DivisionUniversity Honors Program. Herthesis examines prejudicedattitudes, focusing on the effect ofgender and voting intentions. Sheintends to pursue her research ingraduate school. She is verygrateful for her faculty mentor andmother, both of whom have shownconsiderable commitment, supportand sacrifice.A U T H O RVernyta MoorePsychologyA B S T R A C TCarolyn B. MurrayDepartment of PsychologyVernyta Moore returned to school after an extended tenure within the jobmarket. She came back as a mature student, with her mind focused on beinga stellar student. She has accomplished this goal as an UCR Honors student,Psi Chi member (The National Honor Society in Psychology) and a memberof several other honor societies, and a nearly perfect GPA. It has been a pleasure to mentorMs. Moore who selected part of my data set on the 2008 Presidential Election thatexamined correlates of voter preference. She worked diligently compiling a literaturereview, writing the paper, and helping one of my graduate students, Arpi Festekjian, toconduct the analyses. At each step in this process she showed insight offering a sophisti-cated synopsis of the findings, and other interesting provisos. The evidence supported herthesis that there were distinct differences in racial attitudes, social economic status, andgender between those who planned to vote for now President Barack Obama, and thosewho planned to vote for Senator John McCain. These findings indicate that people mayvote for a candidate for other reasons than his or her stand on the issues, and offers insightinto why some voters have a preference for candidates who do not support their self-interests.F A C U L T Y M E N T O RThis study examined data from a larger survey that assessed a variety of questionsconcerning politics, ethnic prejudice, and perceptions of the 2008 election. The majorhypotheses predicted that individuals who score high on the Social Dominance Orientation(SDO) scale (a measure of support for a stratified hierarchical society) and those who scorehigh on the Quick Discrimination Index (QDI) scale (a measure of prejudicial cognitiveand affective attitudes toward diversity) would both be more likely to plan to vote forMcCain than for Obama. In contrast, participants who score low on both these measureswould be more likely planning to vote for Obama. It was also predicted that males, incontrast to females, would be higher in SDO and QDI, and be more likely to plan to votefor McCain. Two hundred thirty-seven respondents (82 males, 155 females) participated inthe study, which was conducted approximately two weeks before the election. Overall, thepredictions were partially supported. A two-way ANOVA indicated that those planning tovote for McCain displayed significantly more prejudicial bias than those planning to votefor Obama. Also as predicted males scored higher on SDO and QDI and were more likelyplanning to vote for McCain than were females. The results are discussed in terms of theactual voting patterns in the 2008 election.THE 2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION GENDER GAP: THE EFFECTS OF PREJUDICIAL ATTITUDES ON VOTING INTENTIONSVernyta MooreINTRODUCTIONElecting a president is a very important decision for anation, especially when threats of terrorism andeconomic decline are prevalent. Choosing the bestcandidate to represent the interest of the United Statesis imperative for a healthy economy and peacefulrelations with other nations. Even though the economyand foreign policy emerged as major themes in the2008 election campaign, individual psychologicaldifferences may have influenced the choices made for apresidential candidate. The present study used theSocial Dominance Orientation (SDO) and the QuickDiscrimination Index (QDI) to predict election prefer-ences. The Social Dominance Orientation scalemeasures political and social attitudes and individualpreferences for hierarchical social systems (Sidanius,Pratto, Martin, & Stallworth, 1991). The QuickDiscrimination Index measures attitudes towards racialdiversity and equality (Ponterotto, Burkard, Rieger, &Grieger, 1995).Ponterotto and Pederson (1993) proposed that sinceracial identity is correlated with prejudiced attitudes,and groups tend to adopt the social attitudes of theirgroup, ingroups are more likely to maintain theiradvantages by adopting ideologies and social structuresthat promote prejudiced attitudes and social inequality.Consistent findings on ingroup bias show that membersfavor their own group (Hewstone, Rubin, & Willis,2002). Research investigating SDO reports that it iscongruent with social stratification, suggesting thathigh status group beliefs about inequality function asan ingroup bias (Jost & Thompson, 2000), and notonly as a general predisposition toward social hierar-chies (Schmitt, Branscombe, & Kappen, 2003).An example that is relevant to the present study is thefact that Caucasians, the highest hierarchical statusgroup in the United States, are more likely to voteRepublican, support hierarchy-enhancing ideologies(e.g., prison industry), and oppose hierarchy-attenu-ating ideologies (e.g., affirmative action).Liu, Huang, and McFedries (2007) report that highSDO is related to American support of violence againstother countries. Fear of terrorism follows the rationalethat powerful authorities are needed for protectionagainst threats to the country, and thus, high statusvoters would be more likely to vote for McCain, whostrongly supported the war in Iraq.Electing Obama to the most powerful position in theUnited States would be perceived as an approval ofhierarchy attenuating ideologies, because he is amember of a minority group, and because he supportspolicies such as universal health coverage for children(The Associated Press, June 3, 2008). Therefore, it notsurprising high status group members (e.g., Whites)tended to vote for McCain. On the other hand,