This article asks whether voter bias helps explain the near absence of politicians who are publicly HIV-positive. Using original nationally representative survey experiments in the United States, the United Kingdom and New Zealand, the authors estimate how voters respond to hypothetical candidates with HIV and explore explanations for any observed penalty.
Data and methods
The study uses original, nationally representative survey experiments conducted in three countries. The abstract identifies the United States, the United Kingdom and New Zealand as the study settings and describes experiment-based measurement of voter evaluations of candidates with HIV.
Main findings
Across the three countries, voters penalize candidates with HIV by roughly 10–12 percentage points. The authors report that this bias is linked to prejudice, concerns about electability, and moral judgments that frame candidates as responsible for their HIV-positive status. The abstract emphasizes that such voter bias may contribute to the lack of descriptive representation for people with HIV.
nationally representative survey experiments 10–12 percentage point penalty prejudice, electability concerns, moral judgments
- Study countries: United States; United Kingdom; New Zealand.
- Reported mechanisms: prejudice, electability concerns, and moral judgments about responsibility.
