1. Indeed, evidence shows that female politicians are more likely to represent women's interests by taking up issues such as equal pay and discrimination far more often than men are, regardless of party affiliation (e.g., Carroll 2001 Carroll, Susan J., ed. 2001. The Impact of Women in Public Office, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. ed [Google Scholar]).

2. While some claim persuasion is less common than priming in political campaigns (e.g., Berelson, Lazarsfeld, and McPhee 1954 Berelson, Bernard R., Lazarsfeld, Paul F. and McPhee, William N. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.  [Google Scholar]; Chong and Druckman 2007 Chong, Dennis and Druckman, James N. 2007. “Framing Theory.”. Annual Review of Political Science, 10: 85–101. [Crossref] , [Google Scholar]), persuasion still occurs and can affect voters (e.g., Bartels 2006 Bartels, Larry. 2006. “Priming and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns”. In Capturing Campaign Effects, Edited by: Henry, E., Brady and Richard Johnston. 78–112. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Ineds [Google Scholar]).

3. The first names are equal in age perception, intellect, and attractiveness (Kasof 1993 Kasof, Joseph. 1993. “Sex Bias in the Naming of Stimulus Persons.”. Psychological Bulletin, 113(1): 140–63. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]).

4. Because of the obvious overlap between party and gender stereotypes, I chose issues that were more likely to be owned by gender rather than party, based on Petrocik's (1996) Kahn, Kim Fridkin. 1996. The Political Consequences of Being a Woman: How Stereotypes Influence the Conduct and Consequences of Political Campaigns, New York, NY: Columbia University Press.  [Google Scholar] findings of Democrat- and Republican-owned issues.

5. To improve the believability of the site, I also added endorsements and text about the candidate. On the site with male-stereotypical issues, I highlighted the candidate's leadership qualities. Male legislators, local men, and a men's group endorsed the candidate. On the site with female-stereotypical issues, I highlighted the candidate's trait of empathy and manipulated the endorsements.

6. Indeed, in 2007, eight percent of adults had visited a candidate's Web site; in the 2008 campaign, 13 percent visited the presidential candidates’ Web sites for news. These numbers have been increasing (Kohut, Doherty, et al. 2008 Kohut, Andrew, Doherty, Carroll, Dimock, Michael and Keeter, Scott. 2008. High Marks for the Campaign, a High Bar for Obama, Washington, DC: PEW Research Center for the People and the Press.  [Google Scholar]; Kohut, Keeter, et al. 2008 Kohut, Andrew, Doherty, Carroll, Dimock, Michael and Keeter, Scott. 2008. High Marks for the Campaign, a High Bar for Obama, Washington, DC: PEW Research Center for the People and the Press.  [Google Scholar]).

7. There was no overall effect of candidate sex or strategy on vote choice. Participants were no more likely to vote for the female or the male candidate, t (185) = 0.98, p = 0.33. Participants were no more likely to choose the candidate with the congruent strategy over the incongruent strategy, t (185) = .98, p = .33. Finally, I used a simple ANOVA test and found that the interaction between the two factors was not significant, F (1,183) = 1.12, p = 0.29.

8. It could be that male-stereotypical issues are more important than female-stereotypical issues. However, the results of a within-subjects t test comparing the average importance of female-stereotypical and male-stereotypical issues indicated that female-stereotypical issues (M = 3.79) were rated as significantly more important than male-stereotypical issues (M = 3.64), t (185) = 3.03, p = 0.003). This finding did not differ by the candidate's strategy or gender.

9. These results are without standard deviations because I combine two categories and the program provides probabilities for each dependent variable category.