To this point we have stressed two longitudinal theories for the growth in women’s
representation over time: gender salience (appearing in the Year of the Woman), and political
context. Combining these two theories leads to four possible theoretical trajectories of women’s
political representation in US states. In this section we illustrate how our theoretical arguments
combine to produce different trajectories of growth in women’s political representation.
Model 1: Linear growth across time
If neither gender salience nor political context is important, then the growth of women’s
political representation over time may be conceptionalized as a linear process. Figure 1
represents such a model that assumes general linear growth over time. Across the observation
period, the growth in women’s political representation stays constant at its historic rate. We may
view the linear model as representing a null hypothesis.
FIGURE 1 ABOUT HERE
Model 2: Gender salience, but no political context
Alternatively, the elections of 1992 and the influence of gender salience may have
mattered for women’s political representation, but not a multi-year political context process.
Specifically, if the increased attention by the media, politicians, and the voting public in a gender
salient year fuels women’s entrance into politics, then we should observe a substantial jump in
women’s political numbers in that year. Yet, if this surge of women into politics is related to
gender salience and not context, the Year of the Woman may not mark the beginning of an
increasing flow of women into statehouses. To test this theoretical model, we can compare the
growth of women in state legislatures before, during, and after the Year of the Woman. Figure 2
presents the expected pattern of growth in women’s political representation in state legislatures if
1992, as a gender-salient year, created a one-time increase in the rate of growth.
FIGURE 2 ABOUT HERE
Model 3: Political context, but no gender salience
Political context, as a multi-election process, may be the only factor that matters for
women’s trajectory of growth. Under such a process, women’s success in 1992 would be related
to the political context in which women ran and not to gender salience. In 1992, the United
9
Convention