The Political Glass Cliff: When Ethnic, Racial and Immigration Minority Participants Choose Minority Candidates for Hard-To-Win Seats

Abstract

Atypical political candidates, such as those from ethnic, racial and immigration (ERI) minorities (vs. majority), are more likely to be chosen for hard-to-win seats than easy-to-win seats, a phenomenon known as the political glass cliff. This research aimed to uncover how the ERI status of decision makers played a role in this process. We hypothesised the emergence of a glass cliff pattern, that is, the preference for an ERI minority candidate over an ERI majority candidate for a hard-to-win seat, particularly among ERI minority participants, which are likely to perceive greater electoral potential in the ERI minority candidate compared to majority participants. Across two scenario-based experiments (Study 1: N = 264; Study 2: N = 375), ERI minority and majority participants played the role of political party leaders and made decisions regarding candidate nominations either in easy-to-win or in hard-to-win electoral districts. In Study 1, ERI minority participants, but not ERI majority participants, were more likely to choose an ERI minority (vs. majority) candidate for hard-to-win seats. Moreover, ERI minority participants made stronger attributions of change potential, competence and communion to ERI minority (vs. majority) candidates, suggesting that intra-minority solidarity could play a role in their choice. Although this result did not replicate in Study 2, exploratory analyses revealed a consistent glass cliff pattern among ERI minority men in both studies. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement.